The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer; October 17, 2007

. . . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .

. .. .. . . . . .. Aaron also. Major funding for the news hour with Jim Lehrer is provided by. Every day, it seems, talk of oil, energy, the environment. Where are the answers? Right now, we're producing clean, renewable, geothermal energy, generating enough energy to power 7 million homes. Imagine that, an oil company as part of the solution. This is the power of human energy. The new AT&T. Pacific Life.

The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation, working to solve social and environmental problems at home and around the world. And with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. And this program was made possible by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. And by contributions to your PBS station from viewers like you, thank you. The Turkish Parliament today overwhelmingly approved a possible invasion of Northern Iraq. The offensive would target Kurdish rebels who staged attacks inside Turkey. The vote came, as President Bush held a news conference in Washington. He said it is not in Turkey's interest to take military action. There's a better way to deal with the issue than having the Turks send massive troops into the country.

Massive additional troops into the country. What I'm telling you is, is that there's a lot of dialogue going on and that's positive. We are actively involved with the Turks and the Iraqis to try apartheid arrangement and will continue to dialogue and with the Turks. Before the vote, Iraqi Prime Minister Al Maliki called the Turkish Prime Minister. Maliki said his government also wants to stop the rebel raids and he called for further talks. We'll have more on the story right after the news summary. Seeing Democrats in the U.S. House pulled back today from supporting a resolution on Armenian genocide. The proposal has infuriated Turkey. Its government denies there was any systematic attempt to kill a million and a half Armenians in 1915. And today, Democrat John Mirtha of Pennsylvania said Speaker Pelosi underestimated the opposition in her own ranks. I think that the members of convinced her, I think, I must have had 25-30 members of Democrats come to me yesterday and say, you know, very agitated about this coming to the floor right

now. They have gotten a message. So I would say if we were to run today, it wouldn't pass. Speaker Pelosi has been a strong supporter of the resolution. She said today, there is still reason for the House to vote, but she made no promises. Instead she said, whether those who have been advocating it want to go to that place remains to be seen. The U.S. military today announced the death of another American soldier in Iraq at May 23 killed so far in October. And the Associated Press reported a U.S. Army brigade will leave Diala Province in December. It's the first major step in cutting back the surge of American forces to Iraq. The nominee for U.S. Attorney General insisted today the president has no power to order torture in terror cases. Michael Mukaze faced questioning at a Senate confirmation hearing. He said a 2002 Justice Department memo that authorized torture was worse than a sin. It was a mistake.

Mukaze is expected to win confirmation easily and will have more on the story later in the program tonight. The battle over government surveillance in terror cases he did up today in the House. Democrats brought up a bill called the Restore Act. It expands court oversight of wiretapping. Republicans warn the red tape would hinder efforts to track down terror suspects. Much of the debate focused on the risk of eavesdropping on American citizens. The Restore Act does absolutely nothing to block or hinder the efforts of our intelligence community. And remember, on the other side, I'm going to come down here and comment that it is hampering our intelligence or efforts. Quite the contrary. It enhances their ability to do their jobs effectively and ensures the integrity of their efforts. Osama bin Laden calls the United States. We should know it. If Osama bin Laden calls and turns out to be a call that didn't matter, there are ways

to minimize that in all likelihood if Osama bin Laden called, it wouldn't be a matter that we shouldn't know about. You know, if he calls to order a pizza and says, deliver the pizza to cave 56 in Borobora, that's something we ought to know at that minute. We should not have to go back to go to court to monitor these calls just in case they call somebody in the United States. President Bush threatened to veto the bill unless major changes are made. And late in the day, Democratic leaders were forced to pull it from the floor as the opposition mounted. The Senate version is due to be introduced tomorrow. The Dalai Lama received the U.S. Congressional Gold Medal today. It's the highest civilian honor Congress can bestow. The exiled Buddhist monk appealed again for China to grant autonomy to his homeland of Tibet. The ceremony was held in the rotunda of the U.S. capital. China sharply criticized the award, but President Bush defended it, saying he supports

religious freedom. We'll have more on this story later in the program tonight. Pope Benedict XVI, named 23 new Roman Catholic Cardinals today, they included two Americans, Archbishop Daniel De Nardo of Galveston, Houston, in Texas, and Archbishop John Foley, a veteran Vatican official. He currently leads a lay group on the rights of the church in the Holy Land. The Pope also named the patriarch of Baghdad today to be a Cardinal. Next year's increase in Social Security payments will be just 2.3 percent. That announcement today affects some 54 million Americans. It means the average retiree will get an extra $24 a month starting in January. The annual cost of living adjustment is the smallest since 2004. In economic news, oil prices eased a bit, but the government reported consumer inflation was more than expected in September. And construction of new homes was the lowest in 14 years.

On Wall Street today, the Dow Jones industrial average lost 20 points to close at 13,892, then Aztec rose more than 28 points to close above 2792. And that's it for the news summary tonight, now the Turkey border problem. From UK's he confirmation hearings, a medal for the Dalai Lama, and something new in Baltimore Music. Judy Woodruff has our Turkey story. Despite a warning from President Bush, the Turkish Parliament voted overwhelmingly to authorize Turkish troops to take the fight against Kurdish rebels into Iran. It gives Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan a year's authority to send troops across the border. It passed 507 to 19, with only Kurdish deputies voting no. The rebels are members of the Kurdistan Workers Party, or PKK.

The nationalist group has been fighting for an autonomous region in southeastern Turkey for more than 20 years. The Turkish government accuses the Kurdish leaders who are now running northern Iraq of giving sanctuary to the PKK rebels and allowing them to launch attacks from Iraq into Turkey. But Kurdish leaders in Iraq deny this charge. For their part, the rebels vowed to fight. The head of the PKK in Iraq told Al Jazeera, Turkey is preparing for an attack, then we have to resist. Things along the border have mounted in recent weeks. Turks have shelled PKK strongholds in Iraq and have been increasing their military presence near the border. 13 Turkish troops were killed last week in a PKK raid. Iraq insists it has been trying to stem the PKK and is calling for diplomacy. One day after Iraq dispatched Vice President Tarik Al-Hashimi to Ankara to appeal for

more time, Iraqi President Jalal Talabani occurred, advocated a U.S.-led multilateral solution. He spoke in Paris. We hope that the wisdom of our friends, Prime Minister Erdogan, will be so active that there will be no military intervention, and we Iraqi government, and Qursar Israel government are ready to cooperate with Turkish authorities. The parliament's vote came amid rising Turkish anger at a resolution approved last week by a U.S. House committee, labeling mass killings of Armenians by the Ottoman Turks 100 years ago as genocide. Prime Minister Erdogan has rejected that label, and President Bush warned again today that the pro-Arminian moves threaten to destabilize the U.S. war in Iraq. Turkey provides a crucial supply route for U.S. troops.

About 24,000 of the 160,000 U.S. troops, who are stationed in Iraq, are in the north. They could be caught in the crossfire if and when the Turkish military decides to cross the border. For more on Turkey's vote today, we get two views. Boulan Al-Ariza is a senior associate and director of Turkish studies at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Peter Galbraith has been an advisor to Kurdish leaders in Iraq. He is senior diplomatic fellow at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, and he was ambassador to Croatia during the Clinton administration. Gentlemen, good to have both of you with us. We appreciate it. Mr. Al-Ariza, do you first vote in the Turkish parliament today? Why so lopsided? Well, because the governing party, the justice and development party, the Turkish acronym, and the two main opposition parties agreed on the need to pass this resolution, responding

to the escalation of attacks by the PKK, and the only ones who posed it were the ethnic Kurdish MPs belonging to the small democratic society party. And I think that reflects the attitude of the majority of the Turks. So the Turkish public is behind this? Oh, very much so. The non-Kurdish, we should say, Turkish public, or what, 85 percent? The Kurdish population inside Turkey is about 15 to 20 million out of 75 million. So think that reflects the percentage that you mentioned. So now that this has happened, the authority has been granted. How likely do you think the Turkish military is to go across the border after the rebels? Well, both the prime minister yesterday and the chief of staff on a visit to Rome emphasized that this does not mean automatic use of the right or the ability to engage in a cross-border operation.

It would not have been done without the authorization being given by the Turkish parliament. That's what the constitution mandates. But nonetheless, it is something that everyone did not want to do, and he was forced the prime minister. He was forced to do this because of the recent escalation of violence and the attitude of the public. I think it's his hope to be able to control events. So as he said, he won't have to use it. Ambassador Galbraith, how do you see the likelihood of the Turkish military actually making good on this authority they knew him? Well, the issue is what kind of cross-border operation they launch. With in fact, they launch a cross-border attack on what they say are the PKK camps. These are remote mountainous areas. I don't think it will have much of an impact. It may not do much good, but it won't have much of an adverse impact on Turkey either. And so I think that is much more possible. A full-scale attack into Iraqi Kurdistan would have disastrous consequences for the Iraqi Kurds who run the one stable part of Iraq.

It will also have disastrous consequences for Turkey. What do you mean by disastrous consequences? Be a little more specific. With regard first to Turkey, what do you mean? Well, it would do great damage to U.S. Turkish relations. After all, Iraq is the signature project of the Bush administration. The Iraqi Kurdistan is the only success in the country, it's stable, pro-Western, aspiring to be democratic. There are 160,000 American troops in Iraq. Nobody in the Bush administration or any other Americans going to appreciate Turkey bringing instability to that area. So there would be a strong reaction, possibility of congressional sanctions. It would do probably a repurable damage to Turkey's chances of joining the European Union. And the Turkish military might find itself bogged down fighting the Kurdish – Peshmerga, the Kurdistan military, who would be a very formidable adversary.

They're more than 100,000 of them operating on their own territory. And even in the worst case, it could lead to a new insurrection in Southeast Turkey where there's great sympathy for their Iraqi Kurdish brethren. Do you see the consequences the same way, Mr. Alariz? Not exactly. I mean, we have to remember that the two main Kurdish parties, the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan led by Mr. Telabani, who's now the President of Iraq, and the Kurdish Democratic Party, Mr. Barzani, who's the President of the Kurdish regional government, both cooperated with the Turks when they previously intervened in the North Iraq to actually fight the PKK. This was during the days of Saddam Hussein. When the Kurds were very much looking to Turkey for support and to maintain a good relationship, not least, the no-fly zone that was being imposed by U.S. and the British planes firing out of the base of India. So it's not a given that the Peshmerga's would fight the Turks if they were to engage in cross-border operations, not least because they ought to understand, because in the past

record, that this is something that's in the middle, because that's been in the middle of the Turkish interest requiring the Turkish information in the past. Well, you raised one of the questions I was going to ask, and that is the relationship between the Kurdish government in northern Iraq and these PKK rebels, separatists, rebels who've been attacking the Turkish troops. Why hasn't that Kurdish government in northern Iraq been able to reign them in? It's a good question. And I think Peter might be able to answer that better than me. But the issue here is one that ought to be dealt with before. Right to the beginning of the war, and this really is an offshoot of the Iraq unintended consequences of the Iraq war. Before the war started, the Turks made it very clear to the U.S. that in the event of the decapitation of the Saddam regime, there may well be an aggravation of the security threat to them from the PKK based in northern Iraq. And what is in fact happened is that the Kurdish regional government, which the Turkish government does not recognize, has been allowing them to function out of northern Iraq, and the

U.S. military, which has been based in Iraq, has not been willing to move against them, notwithstanding all the requests that the Turks have made, and here is where we are. So does that help explain Ambassador Galbraith why this has happened? These increasing attacks by these Kurdish, the PKK rebels? Partly. But first, I'd just like to make clear, there's no disagreement between Billion and myself about the consequences of a Turkish cross-border operation. If it is limited and is going to the PKK areas, then I don't think it's going to have a very severe adverse consequences in Iraqi Kurdistan or on relations with the United States. And do you think that's likely that kind of a limited? I think if there is a military operation, it will be limited. I think a full-scale invasion is unlikely precisely because the consequences would be so severe for the U.S. for Turkey, for Iraqi Kurdistan. And the Turkish government has been – and military have really been quite pragmatic about

the developments in Iraqi Kurdistan. They do have a legitimate concern about the PKK, although I would say that they tend to blame much on the PKK and on operating out bases in northern Iraq that may in fact originate in Turkey or may not be PKK, but that said there clearly is an issue there. Now the question you posed is why hasn't the Iraqi Kurdistan government done anything about it? And there are two reasons. First, the terrain is very remote and mountainous. And the Iraqi Kurds don't have the military resources to get up there. Second, they did fight on the Turkish side against the PKK in the 1990s. They took 2,500 casualties. Nobody in the Iraqi Kurdistan wants to repeat that experience. And as Iraqi Kurdistan becomes more democratic, it becomes politically less popular for the government to take military action against fellow Kurds or to accept the losses to

their own forces that would be involved in doing that. And finally, to both of you, the effect of all of this on the war in Iraq does this have a material effect on whatever the outcome may be. Sure. And this is being the most stable part of Iraq, as President Bush and other administration officials have said. The event that we have a conflict in the North between the Turks and the PKK or the Peshmerga is joining in on the side of the PKK and the Peshmerga and the Peshmerga is plus the PKK. That would be a very negative development, because there are enough problems in Iraq. Even if it's the limited opposition? Even if it would distract people's attention from what's happening and also at a broader level, the Turks have been talking about restricting the use of angelic airbase, which Secretary Gates has said is so important in the resupply of Iraq. That was not directly related to the Turkish Kurdish tensions, but the – I'm any genocide resolution that was approved.

So there are many aspects of the U.S. Turkish relationship that tie to each other. And frankly, in escalation of the situation, the deterioration is something that nobody ought to want. And finally, Ambassador Galbraith, the effect on Iraq, anything to add to what Mr. Al-Risa just said? I think he has it basically right. A limited intervention, and my view, would be a distraction. Something that ended up – that ended up bringing clashes between the Turkish army and the Kurdish Peshmerga or the Kurdistan army, because – which would only take place frankly if the Turkish army penetrated into major population areas, that would be profoundly destabilizing. It would disrupt U.S. Turkish relations, which are already at a record low. And if it then affected Turkey's willingness to cooperate with the resupply of U.S. forces in Iraq, this could have a major adverse impact on the Iraq war.

And that's likely not just to anger the administration, but to anger the American people. And so you'll find both Turks and Americans angry at each other. And it's a really sad state of affairs given what had been a very close alliance just seven years ago. Well, we hear you both, gentlemen. We thank you for being with us, Ambassador Peter Galbraith, and Mr. Boulan Al-Risa. It's good to have you both with us. We appreciate it. Good to be with you. Next, Mukeshi at the bat, news air congressional correspondent Kwami Holman, reports. He's hearing about a nomination, but the hearings were also about accountability. Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Lehi made clear today's hearing was as much about former Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez as it was about the man hoping to succeed him. New York Democrat Chuck Schumer agreed. Our investigation this year demonstrated the department's prior leadership, sorely lacked

credibility, competence, independence against that backdrop, and with only 14 months left, the department does not now need a series of bold initiatives, rather it needs steady leadership. This is, we might say, a rebuilding year. It was Senator Schumer who recommended to President Bush that nominating Michael Mukeshi, a retired federal judge from New York, could be the first step in that rebuilding process. And so, senators grilled Mukeshi on several controversies that marked Gonzales' tenure, most concerning national security and the president's war on terror. Mukeshi immediately tried to assuage their concerns. By protecting civil liberties and people's confidence that those liberties are protected is a part of protecting national security, just as is the gathering of intelligence, to defend us from those who believe it is their duty to make war on us.

But several senators still wanted specific answers, Lehi asked about the 2002 memo signed by then Assistant Attorney General Jay Bibi that authorized harsh interrogation tactics. Do you believe that the president has the authority under any circumstances to exercise a so-called commander-in-chief override and immunize acts of torture as a Bibi memo argued? Torture is unlawful under the laws of this country. The president has said that in an executive order, but beyond all of those legal restrictions. We don't torture not simply because it's against this or that law or against this or that treaty. It is not what this country is about, it is not what this country stands for, it's antithetical to everything this country stands for. The Bibi memo to paraphrase a French diplomat was worse than a sin, it was a mistake. It was unnecessary.

Mukazi later responded to a question from Illinois Democrat Dick Durban as to whether the president could override a congressional statute banning torture. I would like some clarification on that if you would, please. There have been statutes that Congress has passed that every president since the time they were passed has taken the view are unconstitutional in that they encroach on the president's power, the president's authority, the most notable among them at least to me, the one that comes to mind is the war power resolution. We all know that it's there. We all know that every president since the time it was passed has taken the view that it is unconstitutional and will not be obeyed. Mercifully, we have never come to a test of that and I hope we will never come to a test of that. Each branch has understood that push can't come to shove on certain issues that we have to try to work it out in the way people work things out in a democratic society such

that not everybody gets everything they want and sometimes both sides walk away saying it could have beat him but we don't have to find out who could have beaten him. Russ Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin, pressed Mukaze on the president's terrorist surveillance program using domestic wiretaps which Feingold believes violated the law. When we met a few weeks ago, I asked about your view of the legality of the NSA's warrantless wiretapping program as described by the president. You said that you were quote agnostic, unquote, about whether the president can authorize violations of a statutory criminal prohibition. The reason for my expression of agnosticism and I thought it concerned the terrorist surveillance program was that I am not familiar with that program, I can't possibly be familiar with that program and for me to make a categorical statement with regard to that program one way

or the other I think would be enormously irresponsible. Kansas Republican Sam Brownback wanted assurances Mukaze would enforce current intelligence gathering laws. He questioned Mukaze about a recent federal court ruling against provisions of the Patriot Act. In September 26th, District Judge and Oregon struck down two provisions of the Patriot Act dealing with searches and intelligence gathering and I'm sure you followed the various legal rulings on provisions of intelligence gathering in the Patriot Act. What's your response to this ruling and how would you deal with it as Attorney General? I've not looked at the ruling in detail but the one thing I know about my own rulings as District Judge is that they are only as durable as the time it takes to get them to the sector to the circuit and I assume without knowing that that decision will be appealed to the Ninth Circuit if necessary to the Supreme Court and that the word of a District

Judge, although persuasive and obviously dispositive in the case before that judge is hardly ever the last word on any subject. The ranking Republican on the committee, Pennsylvania's Arlen Spector asked if Mukaze believed that detainees held at Guantanamo Bay should be granted habeas corpus rights, the ability to challenge their detention in a U.S. court. The Supreme Court will hear arguments on that issue in December. Is there any justification for interpreting the constitutional right to habeas corpus in a narrower way than the statutory right? Senator, that, as I understand it, that question and related questions are squarely before the court in Bloomington and I'm going to have to do to carry into into judge Mukaze, you were punting now. That's right because I'm going to have to do what I was told to do when I was a kid

was to have to watch my mouth about this. Wisconsin Democrat Herb Cole followed. Are you prepared to recommend to the president that we closed Guantanamo? I think I'm prepared to say that we need to get the best advice and the best ideas that we can and act responsibly with the goal of closing it down because it's hurting us. That I'm prepared to say and I think as regards to this president, I think I'd be preaching to the converted. I think he understands that. I think he said that he understands that Guantanamo has hurt us. Cole also asked Mukaze about those firings of nine U.S. attorneys last year, which many Democrats charged were for political reasons. How will you ensure that politics plays no role, that there is no appearance that politics plays a role in cases brought by the Justice Department? Any call to a line assistant or to a United States attorney from a political person relating to a case is to be cut and curtailed and that person, that caller is to be referred to

a few, very few people that the Justice Department can take calls from elected officials. Regardless of that, hiring is going to be based solely on competence, and ability, and dedication, and not based on whether somebody's got an R or a D next to their name. I stir it. U.K.C. We'll take another round of questions tomorrow. However, Chairman Lehi already has said he expects Mukaze to win easy confirmation. Now a day of honor for the Dalai Lama. Ray Suarez begins our coverage with a look at what happened today in Washington. Equal parts, spiritual figure, and international sensation. The Dalai Lama came to the U.S. Capitol today to receive Congress's highest honor. President Roosevelt gave the Dalai Lama a gold watch.

Today, President Bush will get him the Congressional Gold Medal. President Bush joined leaders of both houses, in celebrating the life and work of the 72-year-old Tibetan Buddhist leader. Tenzin Yazzo is the 14th Dalai Lama, a position of paramount religious importance to Tibet's Buddhists, who traces its lineage to the 14th century. Today he spoke of his mission to promote nonviolence and religious understanding in the 21st century. It is a conviction in these values that gives me powerful motivation to promote basic human values. The Dalai Lama has lived in exile since 1959, mostly in neighboring India. China has ruled Tibet since invading the mountain nation in 1951. The Dalai Lama received the 1989 Nobel Peace Prize and remains spiritual leader to Tibet's six million Buddhists and millions more worldwide.

But amid the pomp came an important dissenting opinion. The decision by Congress to honor the Dalai Lama, supported by President Bush, has enraged China. The Dalai Lama said China ought not fear him, but rather work with him to resolve tensions. Sometimes, Chinese excuse us, the we are instrument of western anti-Chinese forces. I don't think. To you, my American friends, I appeal to you to make every effort to seek ways to help convince the Chinese leadership of my sincerity and help make our dialogue process move forward. In deference to Chinese sensibilities, a meeting at the White House yesterday between the president, the first lady, and the Dalai Lama was neither photographed nor held in the Oval Office.

At a press conference this morning, the president defended the award, the recipient, and his own participation. I told the Chinese president, president, who, that I was going to go to the ceremony. I was, I brought it up. And I said, I'm going because I want to honor this man. I have consistently told the Chinese that religious freedom is in their nation's interest. I don't think it's going to damage severely damaged relations. Matter of fact, I don't think it ever damages relations when the American president talks about, you know, religious tolerance and religious freedom is good for a nation. The Dalai Lama will visit Georgia and Indiana during the remainder of the week before returning home. Now a different look at this day's events, as they were seen in China, our report comes from Lindsey Hillson of Independent Television News. The Tiananmen Square, China says they're free to practice their religion, but not to follow the Dalai Lama. Their tour guide wasn't happy when we asked what he thought of the Congressional Medal. Around the corner, in the Tibet Room of the Great Hall of the People, a delegation from

the Tibet Communist Party was discussing President Fujian Tao's speech at the party Congress. They're also not happy about the visit. Do you know what? Yes. Dalai Lama is someone who doesn't love his motherland and splits his country. Then he's welcomed by certain countries and receives medals. We're very angry. This is a rude interference in China's internal affairs. We strongly oppose this, where fear is. Nothing makes the Chinese government quite as angry as the reverence in which the Dalai Lama is held in much of the rest of the world. Now they're in a position to make that anger felt. The American and European governments see China's cooperation as essential when it comes to issues like Burma, Darfur, or Iran, for the Chinese are trying to show it won't come for free.

To express their displeasure, the Foreign Ministry has pulled out of a meeting on Iran. This move by the United States is very harmful to the sino-American relations. We hope that the United States will take into consideration of the general relationship between the two countries, but I'm sure that such a move by the U.S. side will be detrimental to the battle of the relationship. It's banned, but Tibetan children wear the Dalai Lama's image. Amnesty International says four Tibetan teenagers in Gansu province have been detained and tortured for writing independent slogans, some cases are blown out of all proportion on purpose by Dalai Lama, they're misinterpreted, they distort the situation into bed, they exaggerate in fabricate cases into bed, dawn over the Tibetan capital, the faithful carrier giant image of the Buddha from a monastery.

Chinese officials accuse the Dalai Lama of being a politician in monks clothing, but many Tibetan Buddhists are proud of the Dalai Lama's global image. For more on the Dalai Lama, as both an iconic spiritual figure and a political lightning rod, we turn to Robert Thurman, professor of Indo Tibetan Buddhist studies at Columbia University, he's been a student and friend of the Dalai Lama for decades. And Ming Wan, professor of government and politics and director of the global affairs program at George Mason University, he was born in Beijing and is now a U.S. citizen in Professor Wan, we are furious, a damage to U.S.-China relationships. Why this really, really strong reaction from the Chinese over this ceremony and metal? Well, the Chinese government is always concerned about what they consider to be the international ization of the Tibetan issue because they consider Tibet to be China's eternal affair. And this is also a particularly sensitive moment, the Chinese Communist Party is having

the 17th Party Congress right now. And this is a situation when different factions, a position themselves for greater influence and it's very easy for hotliners to use very harsh rhetoric and you are now going to see moderates defending the Dalai Lama. And that at the same time, even though the rhetoric is very harsh, but we in the Chinese government, we begin to see some change, some moderate voice about the importance of a religion to Chinese modernization and whether Tibetan Buddhism can make a significant contribution to that process. Well, in Communist Party, Lingo, he's often referred to as a splitist, literally a separatist who wants to take Tibet back to independence. Do you see the leader of an independence movement? Well, the Chinese government used to call him that. And right now, you know, there was change, last year, for example, in the private conversation, the negotiation between the Chinese and the Tibetans, the Chinese government did acknowledge that his Holiness was not seeking independence.

This year, their tone has changed somewhat. But there's clearly voice within the Chinese government who essentially understands better the Tibetan issue. The problem is that the hardliners are essentially having stronger voice now, at this particular moment. Well, how Professor Thurman has the Dalai Lama's attitude toward Tibet and what he wants to see for his homeland changed over the years since his exile? I don't think it's changed, Ray. I think that he consistently has said that the problem with Tibet is not his problem. People often try to put it in terms of can the Dalai Lama go home or not go home as if he had a problem. He's actually quite happy wherever he has his that type of guy. But his problem is that the Tibetan people do not feel well treated. They felt very persecuted for 25, 30 years. And now they feel colonized and marginalized and overwhelmed by a vast influx of Chinese settlers. And so that's always his concern. It's really, and he left Tibet finally to be able to be a spokesperson for those people

since he wasn't heard by the Chinese government from within the in China. So his attitude has not changed. The change of the early talk about restoring Tibet's traditional and historic independence is only because he learned more about the world system. And also he saw China itself changing. So he realized that there was no way really to go in that direction, even though historically Tibet had been independent before being invaded in 1951, as you said on your show. That's clarifying what he was to Tibet. Strictly a spiritual leader, a monarch, a head of state. No, no. He always was a head of state. And since about 1654, a 1642 rather, the fifth Dalai Lama was crowned as head of state at the request of the Tibetan nobles who had been warring for about a century. It was right around the time of the end of the 100 years war in Europe and that they decided they had enough fighting, enough warlords.

However they would let a religious figure run the country along the model of the previous time when the Sakyalama had been the head of the country under the Mongol Empire. And so that happened at that time and since then they more or less demilitarized and they had a fairly peaceful time under 300 years of the Dalai Lama or so. And then in the 20th century, this will we know what happened is China moved in. The nationalist Chinese claimed Tibet but they never had a foot in Tibet actually. But then the Mao of course came in in 1951. And so the Dalai Lama at first was just going historically. This is a country that is invaded since the UN was founded and borders were declared sacrosanct and therefore we won our country back. But he began to realize that they might do better working with the Chinese constitution with after Mao and being a genuinely autonomous region within China and have China respected its own provisions and its own constitution about how you're not supposed to settle too many Chinese or Han Chinese settlers within any of the ethnic minority regions.

And so therefore protect the very delicate ecosystem of Tibet which is very high altitude and it really only suited for Tibetan lifestyle and by damaging it by putting in cities and too many people. So under that light he has pledged and he is sincere that he wishes to campaign amongst his country people and not all the Tibetans agree with it and actually in spite of his tremendous authority but he will campaign amongst his people to have them elect to voluntarily legitimize China's control of Tibet rather than just invade, occupy and annex as it has been so far. And he is the best person for them to make that deal with if they would just relax on the rhetoric. In fact, as we heard, there has been change, there has been flux yet this ferocious reaction anyway. It is China ready to meet the Dalai Lama halfway. Well, the Dalai Lama has been talking about the middle way of solution, it's a genuine autonomy.

He has been talking on different occasions so the Chinese government leader has hurt him. He is still concerned from their perspective, the Dalai Lama has a hidden agenda. And by the way, that's why his Holiness we're talking about, genuine autonomy is now going to be the stepping stone to our independence. Because he was addressing part of the Chinese concern. And part of these problem is lack of trust and the Dalai Lama taught about this himself. He's hoping to bridge that gap between the two sides. But right now, on the Chinese side, there is a clear concern that he does using all these international publicity to video the bounds. He's true at the end of his independence. Professor Thurman, this Buddhist monk is often seen in the glare of flash bulbs, getting in and out of cars with people opening the door. Yes, his personal popularity has increased, has it put the Tibetan issue into the shade, has China's hold on the place strengthened even while their exile leader has become a more

popular for us? Right, right. Chinese hold has strengthened and strengthened, of course, and then China in general has strengthened and strengthened and more power to them. And the Dalai Lama doesn't wish them any ill at all. He wants to be their good friend, actually, genuinely. He was born in an area of Tibet that is right in the border of China, in his household. He spoke Chinese as a youth. So he'd be right in the edge there with the Tibetans called Amdo and the Chinese called Qinghai, is where he was born. And so he has no animus at all about China. And actually, the Tibetan invasion and the terrible struggles and suffering, the one million people probably killed half by famine, half by class struggle under the Maoist Syria's social upheaval situation that they would do, and that is his long pass. And now, things could be settled very easily, and I feel that China would gain tremendously world appreciation if they themselves would meet with him.

In a way, this trust issue that Professor Wang mentions, which I think is very correct, would only probably be bridged if the leadership of China felt strong in themselves, among themselves, between hardliners and moderates, to personally meet the Dalai Lama. It doesn't have to be in Beijing. He could be at some other place. But if they met him, anybody who meets the Dalai Lama realizes he has no hidden thing. His cards are all on the table. As they said, he's Mr. Compassion, as Nancy Pelosi said. Even the Republican minority whip said this man stands for peace for compassion, everyone was saying that. So I think it's a matter of, and Asia diplomacy is like that. It's a person-to-person face-to-face, and that's what they need. Professor Generalman, thank you both. Thank you. Finally, tonight, a conductor making music and history, Jeffrey Brown has our report. Marin Alsop has appeared with some of the world's leading orchestras for many years now.

Exciting and charismatic performer, she's in great demand. And as the new music director of the Baltimore Symphony Orchestra, the simple fact that she is a she, not my strobe, but my straw, Alsop is making history as the first woman to hit a major American orchestra, as traditionally defined by budget size and other factors. She's been around music as long as she can remember. Both parents played in the orchestra of the New York City Ballet. She began piano at age two, violin at age five. And she was nine when her parents took her to see a concert led by Leonard Bernstein, and her world changed. See, this was the problem. I was getting yelled at. I played violin by then, and I was getting yelled at for trying to lead the orchestra from the back of the second violin. So I saw this guy, and I thought, wait a minute, he's not getting into trouble. See?

That was my baby. We were going to get in trouble for trying to lead from that. From the way back in the second violin. When you're hands on the back of the second violin, then I saw Bernstein, and he was having the time of his life, and nobody was yelling at him. And I thought, ah, that's what I could do. In 1989, Bernstein became an actual mentor when Alsop won a prestigious conducting fellowship at the Tanglewood Music Center. Step up here for me. Okay. Nice. Okay. So tell me. What is it like to stand here in front of 100 musicians? What are you trying to do? My responsibility as the conductor is to be the messenger, really, for the composer. So I'm trying to bring the notes on the page to life. I mean, it's a little bit like being what I imagine being a director would be. You know, you have this vision of what the playwright wants, and then you have to somehow get your actors to express that. To do that, a conductor needs an orchestra, of course, as a young woman trying to make her way, Alsop started her own, the Concordia New York City.

From there, her career grew. She's led the Correo Festival of Contemporary Music in California since 1991. At age 36, she became head of the Colorado Symphony and served there for 12 years. Now at 51, she's taken over in Baltimore. As music directors, she programs concerts and oversees hiring, among much else. She is in all ways the public face of the orchestra, and she's breaking a long-standing barrier. We have these sort of archetypal images of what people should look like. And the maestro is older, white, you know, sort of graying slightly graying hair, maybe wearing an ascot, you know, coat over the shoulders, perhaps an accent. I mean, I don't really fit any of those criteria, so I think we all have to get over our preconceptions and perhaps this will help. Every gesture I make is hopefully conveying a musical idea, but there are obstacles that

I have to overcome because there's a way that society interprets a gesture from a woman, whereas the same gesture from a man is interpreted differently. So, for example, if I come out and I want a big sound from the brass and I really give it to me, you know, and I'm two over the top, you know, usually I'm called a word that I can't say, you know, because I'm two, you mean, it's just two, you know, two, two. I can, you're appearing too strong. Exactly, but if a guy comes out and does that, wow, you know, he's taking charge. Society may see gender differences, but musicians insist that male or female, it's a conductor's ability to communicate that matters most. It's almost a primordial thing that it is an actual learned response. They have this enormous animal effect on an orchestra and great conductors can turn an

orchestra into tremendous beasts at any time. The main focus that we're looking for is how they interpret the music, how they can express and feel the music, and it's interesting because some conductors talk a lot, some conductors never say a word, but they communicate through their body. At the rehearsal for their first official concert together, all something the musicians worked on symphony number five by Gustav Mahler, the great Austrian composer and conductor who died in 1911. They also worked on their own developing relationship. You know, just these were charts, I feel a little bit like everyone has a different vision of how they should go. If you can just let go and let me take this walk away, that would be extremely helpful. I was watching the rehearsal today, and there were a couple of points where it seemed like you weren't quite getting what you wanted. There was a point where you said, you said, let me guide you more or lean on. You can lean on me.

Right. You don't have to get to know each other, and they have to, I think, go through a number of concerts with me, with different repertoire, to feel that they can really let go and be safe in a way, and I'm trying to reassure them that, you know, it's okay to lean on me and try, you know, you can't. This is a thing. You can't demand trust. It's something that grows. Success won't come easily. The Baltimore Symphony, like others around the country, has faced serious budget and morale problems. Even the announcement of all sorts of appointments two years ago was met with an embarrassing public dispute between the musicians and management. But today, all signs look up, the financial picture is better, and musicians and conductors seem in sync. The orchestra just released its first recording in eight years, the violinist Joshua Bell, in a performance of the red violin concerto by John Corleano, one of today's leading composers. The orchestra has also established a presence on iTunes and on XM satellite radio.

The nowness of classical music, in fact, is something all soft wants to emphasize. In a typical concert, you'll program the work of a contemporary composer alongside an acknowledged master that her opening concert was John Adams, along with Mollum. All soft continues to mentor the next generation of conductors, here with 25-year-old Joey Young. She's established a special fellowship for young women. All of this, of course, is aimed at bringing classical music into the 21st century. You have said that trying to bring the excitement of the orchestra to the public is a bit like trying to make your grandparents hip, is it where I think you put it? It's a great line, but it's a tough sell sometimes. The orchestras do a very, very good job of being involved in education, but I want to move it to a new level, and have it be really more participatory, more engaging, more hooked

into the technology of today. You're not imagining that you could ever reach a mass audience, I guess. Well, why not? Sure. Why not? Yeah. I mean, I don't really, to me, it doesn't really matter how many people, but that everyone feels, oh, that's my symphony, I can go there. You know, some people feel that they're not welcome or that they haven't had this experience of going into the concert hall. I want to get rid of that. And again, the major developments of this day, the Turkish Parliament overwhelmingly

approved a possible invasion of northern Iraq to attack Kurdish rebels. They need Democrats in the U.S. House pulled back from supporting a resolution on Armenian genocide and Attorney General nominee Michael Mukazi insisted that President has no power to order torture in terror cases. We'll see you online and again here tomorrow evening. I'm Jim Lara, thank you, and good night. Major funding for the news hour with Jim Lara is provided by... Now headquarters is wherever you are, with AT&T data, video voice, and now wireless, all working together to create a new world of mobility. Welcome to the new AT&T, the world delivered.

Pacific Life. Chevron. The Atlantic Philanthropies. Deal with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. This program was made possible by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and by contributions to your PBS station from viewers like you. Thank you. And purchase video of the news hour with Jim Lara.

Number one, 866-678-News. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you.