The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer

JIM LEHRER: Good evening. I'm Jim Lehrer. On the NewsHour tonight Betty Ann Bowser reports on the racial violence in Cincinnati, Ohio; Gwen Ifill asks some philosophical tax-day questions about taxes; Simon Marks and Terence Smith update the storm over control of a television network in Russia; and Jack Hamman covers the return from China of the spy plane's 24 crew members. It all follows our summary of the news this Monday.

NEWS SUMMARY

JIM LEHRER: The mayor of Cincinnati lifted a city-wide curfew today. It was imposed last week to halt three days of racial rioting. The trouble started after a white police officer shot and killed an unarmed black man. Today, the mayor praised community leaders of both races for helping to restore calm. And he announced a special commission would work to improve jobs and education for black residents.

MAYOR CHARLES LUKEN: Cincinnati does not stand alone in those problems. I want to emphasize that. But Cincinnati... Cincinnati, because unfortunately of what has happened, has an opportunity to become a leader in the nation in making important changes. And maybe one day people are going to come to Cincinnati and they're going to ask, how did you do it?

JIM LEHRER: Black leaders at today's news conference supported the plan, but they also said they'd be watching closely to make sure there's action.

ROSS LOVE: Most of all, we need clear evidence that this commission's recommendations will be implemented promptly. Community confidence and support will come from the quality and diversity of the people who participate on the commission and the oversight responsibility they must be given to see that the recommendations are implemented successfully. This can't be another commission that writes another report that simply gathers dust.

JIM LEHRER: In Washington today, a White House spokesman said President Bush supported the police, but was also "sensitive" to the problems that sparked the unrest. We'll have more on this story right after the News Summary. Israeli planes attacked a Syrian radar station deep inside Lebanon today, killing three Syrians. It was the first time in nearly 20 years that Israel had targeted such a major Syrian outpost. And it came after Hezbollah guerrillas killed an Israeli soldier Saturday along the Lebanese border. In Beirut, the U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon said the guerrillas must be reined in.

DAVID SATTERFIELD: We have made the point for months now that deliberate, provocative attacks across the border in South Lebanon can only have the effect of creating an escalation. We hope this message is understood. We hope such provocative attacks cease now. It is certainly not in the interests of Lebanon or Syria for a continuation of this pattern of activity.

JIM LEHRER: Israel's defense minister said the air raid into Lebanon showed his government would hold Syria responsible for guerrilla actions. But Syria's foreign minister warned Israel would "pay a heavy price". The U.S. Supreme Court today upheld a federal law ensuring access to abortion clinics. Some anti-abortion activists in New Jersey wanted it tossed out as unconstitutional. The high court rejected that argument without comment. Also, it refused to void Aldrich Ames' guilty plea to spying for the Soviet Union. The former CIA officer argued prosecutors coerced him into the plea. He's serving a life sentence. Two regional banks based in North Carolina will merge to become the fourth largest in the country. First Union announced today it's buying Wachovia for about $13 billion in stock. The new firm will take the Wachovia name. The announcement said some 7,000 jobs will be cut over the next three years, half of them through attrition. The Pulitzer prizes for 2001 were announced today. Among the winners were novelist Michael Chabon for his fictional work, "The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay"; Herbert P. Bix for his non- fiction book, "Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan"; David Levering Lewis for his biography, "W.E.B. Dubois: The Fight for Equality and the American century"; David Auburn for his play "Proof"; and Stephen Dunn for his book of poetry, "Different Hours". In journalism, winners included the Portland "Oregonian", the "New York Times", the "Chicago Tribune", the "Wall Street Journal" and the "Miami Herald". And that's it for the News Summary tonight. Now it's on to the troubles of Cincinnati; some big picture questions about taxes; the struggle over a Russian television network; and the spy plane crew comes home.

FOCUS - CITY ON THE EDGE

JIM LEHRER: Betty Ann Bowser has the Cincinnati story.

DEMONSTRATORS: No justice. No peace.

BETTY ANN BOWSER: There hadn't been anything like this since 1968, when Martin Luther King was assassinated. But over the weekend, hundreds of police and Ohio State troopers were out on the streets in Cincinnati dressed in riot gear, guns pointed at demonstrators.

SPOKESMAN: Put thegun down.

BETTY ANN BOWSER: The protests were over the shooting death of an unarmed black youth killed by a white policeman in this neighborhood ten days ago. He was the 15th black man killed by Cincinnati police since 1995. At this intersection, the protestors said, without provocation, police opened fire on them with bean bags filled with rubber bullets.

SPOKESPERSON: They were just standing there holding up the sign and....

SPOKESMAN: Come over here. They've got bruises. Her bruises are horrible. She got shot in the back of the neck and she got shot in the back of her ribs over here.

SPOKESPERSON: She can't move.

SPOKESMAN: They just started randomly shooting down the streets. They were 5- and 6-year-old kids right at the front of the intersection and the policemen rolled up to the scene and just started shooting.

DEMONSTRATOR: We're tired. We're tired. We're dying.

DEMONSTRATOR: They are shooting innocent kids out here. It don't make sense.

BETTY ANN BOWSER: What had been a peaceful demonstration suddenly turned angry.

DEMONSTRATOR: (using bullhorn) Let us march. Let us march....

BETTY ANN BOWSER: Even the group's own monitors had trouble restoring control.

DEMONSTRATOR: Let them have the reason. Let them do it. We're here....

DEMONSTRATOR: Wait, wait.

BETTY ANN BOWSER: Several hundred people turned their march toward the city's police headquarters. They called for Police Chief Tom Streicher to come out. He did. But Streicher refused to meet their demands that he suspend the police who fired the beanbags, pending an investigation. And although no one was hurt, no one was arrested, these are the kinds of tense confrontations that have peppered the streets over the last ten days, leaving leaders in both the black and white communities wondering, "how did it come to this?" The trouble started the night of April 7, when 19-year-old Timothy Thomas was killed in this alley in an impoverished neighborhood called "Over the Rhine," a name given the area during its old German immigrant days. Police had chased Thomas because he had 14 outstanding warrants, mostly minor traffic infractions. Several were citations for not wearing a seatbelt. Thomas was unarmed. For two days the city's power structure, made up mostly of white men, held news conferences, but the black community was unhappy with explanations from city hall for Thomas's shooting death. On Monday night, African Americans took over the city council meeting. Several hours later, rioting broke out. There was looting, with property damage mounting into the millions. 125 state troopers were called in to help the Cincinnati police get control of the streets. Then, on Thursday, after a white policeman was injured by a sniper, Mayor Charles Luken declared a state of emergency and imposed a dusk to dawn curfew.

MAYOR CHARLES LUKEN: Ladies and gentlemen, a police officer was shot last night. Because of his safety vest or his belt buckle he is alive today. That's where we are. In certain neighborhoods of this city, gunfire went off. Gunfire went off like you might hear in Beirut or some other place. It is dangerous, and it is getting more dangerous. And people have got to speak with one mind, with one mind, clearly that it's going to stop. And that is the extent of the message that we have today. That's it.

BETTY ANN BOWSER: As the curfew went into effect, police stopped and arrested anyone who did not have what they believed to be a legitimate reason to be outside. There were charges that the curfew was selectively enforced, that it was only imposed in poor blackneighborhoods, a charge police adamantly denied.

MAN SPEAKING: You shed your blood for Cincinnati; you shed your blood for every one of us.

BETTY ANN BOWSER: On Saturday, Thomas was laid to rest in a high profile service that brought Ohio Governor Bob Taft, Mayor Luken, and major national black leaders to town.

MINISTER JAMIL MUHAMMAD: 15 times, 16 times, 17 times; how many times and how many of us who have not been killed have been brutalized, have been shot, have been beaten, have been hassled, have been jostled and cajoled by the police department in the city of Cincinnati -- all in the name of the maintenance of order? No, something is wrong. Something is sadly amiss.

DEMONSTRATORS: We're ready.

BETTY ANN BOWSER: During and after the funeral, hundreds of protestors marched through the neighborhood where Thomas was killed.

DEMONSTRATOR: We want the police to know they don't have a license to kill.

DEMONSTRATOR: This is my son, this is my son; I'm scared. I am worried what is going to happen to him; he might stand in the light too long.

BETTY ANN BOWSER: Many of the city's police officers think they've been unfairly portrayed as killers.

KEITH FANGMAN: FOP, this is Keith Fangman.

BETTY ANN BOWSER: Fraternal Order of Police President Keith Fangman is especially upset when critics cite the 15 black men killed by Cincinnati police since 1995. He says an important piece of information gets left out.

OFFICER KEITH FANGMAN: 12 of those 15 involved suspects who were armed with deadly weapons. Of those twelve that were armed with deadly weapons, I believe approximately nine of them were armed with handguns in which they physically fired their guns at our officers - or they pointed their guns at our officers prior to our officers ever firing back.

BETTY ANN BOWSER: And Fangman denies charges that the police department has engaged in racial profiling. Last month, the ACLU and community church leaders filed a lawsuit against the city alleging racial profiling

OFFICER KEITH FANGMAN: Absolutely not. I get very, very concerned when those accusations are made. This department has made it clear that racial profiling will not be tolerated. This police union has made it clear that we will not tolerate unlawful traffic stops based on race. If you have a white officer that works in a predominantly black neighborhood like Over the Rhine, or Evandale here in Cincinnati, I guarantee you - you count their statistics every year - and we do keep track of statistics when we pull people over - I guarantee you 90%-95% of their traffic stops will be black motorists. Now, there are some in the black community that say, "see, 95% of that white officer's traffic stops are blacks; surely that means he's engaging in racial profiling." No it doesn't. It means he is working a black neighborhood.

BETTY ANN BOWSER: Officer Scotty Johnson, President of the Black Sentinels, the African American police organization, is in sharp disagreement with Fangman.

OFFICER SCOTTY JOHNSON: We've got complaints on top of complaints about doctors, attorneys, dentists, police officers being stopped and harassed.

BETTY ANN BOWSER: Because they're black?

OFFICER SCOTTY JOHNSON: Because they're black. We've got a racial profiling suit now here in the city, and you'll hear racial profiling is not a problem here in Cincinnati, and that's quite the contrary. We have a problem with how we perceive black males here in Cincinnati and across the country when it comes to law enforcement.

BETTY ANN BOWSER: But the recent unrest in Cincinnati isn't just about policing,and it didn't just spring up overnight. Many leaders say anger and frustration over the lack of economic development in black neighborhoods has been growing for years. Unemployment in Over the Rhine is better than 50%. Everywhere there are abandoned buildings, and the streets are filled with trash. Councilman Jim Tarbell has lived in Over the Rhine since 1971.

JIM TARBELL: We just spent a half billion dollars on a football stadium. You know, where is it? It is on the river. The river is a beautiful place already. It doesn't need a half-billion football stadium for eight games a year while Rome burns up here this week, literally. We could have spent - what is 1% of half a billion-that would be $5 million, wouldn't it -- $ 5 million -- a scant 1% of what they spent down there and made a humongous difference up here.

WOMAN: Damon Lynch

BETTY ANN BOWSER: Rev. Damon lynch agrees. His New Prospect Baptist Church is a major force in Over the Rhine. And he sees the city's traditional white all male power structure as part of the problem.

REV. DAMON LYNCH: We have the corporate headquarters of major Fortune 500 companies are here. And they really run the city. You have political leaders who listen to the corporate entities, and so most of development, most of the money that is spent is spent at the corporate whim. There's a sense here that the African-American community is under growing siege. There is a siege mentality in the sense that we feel we're being boxed in. And so that brings about the anger. What you feel here I think is anger, despair is giving way to anger and real frustration.

BETTY ANN BOWSER: None of Cincinnati's white leaders has publicly defended the city's record on race relations. In fact, most, like Mayor Luken, have said Cincinnati needs to deal with its problems head on.

MAYOR CHARLES LUKEN: We are a city that is divided; we are a city that needs healing.

BETTY ANN BOWSER: And Chamber of Commerce President Michael Fisher says the business community needs to do more.

MICHAEL FISHER: The vast majority of these companies have made very concerted efforts in their diversity programs, have made significant efforts in their minority supplier development programs. But I think the results say in the last week or so we're not really where we need to be, so we really need to redouble our efforts in those kinds of areas.

BETTY ANN BOWSER: Lynch and other black leaders agree.

REV. DAMON LYNCH: In the places of power in our city, usually the board room is made up of all-white males for the most part, who don't think and have no need to think about anybody else in our society, about any diversity. Last summer, major restaurants in our downtown city closed their doors when 150,000 people of color came to town. Every summer we have a jazz festival here and, 13 restaurants closed their doors to 150,000 people. Of course, the community, we boycotted. We got up in arms, and it's an indication of how things work here.

BETTY ANN BOWSER: On Easter Sunday, ministers in black churches all over the city, led by Lynch, demanded the city fathers to do something about to promote diversity in everyday life in Cincinnati.

REV. DAMON LYNCH: As bad as it may be that the violence took place, if it had not burned, no changes would have taken place.

SPOKESMAN: We got the victory.

BETTY ANN BOWSER: Cincinnati may have a long way to go before it can claim victory over its racial problems, but events of the past ten days have shown the African American community has power and is learning how to use it for change.

JIM LEHRER: The mayor today announced a commission to examine race relations in Cincinnati and earlier, he has asked the Justice Department to investigate the practices and training of the police department.

FOCUS - TAXING QUESTIONS

JIM LEHRER: This was tax deadline day in America, the perfect day for some taxing questions from Gwen Ifill.

GWEN IFILL: Every year in the middle of April, the great national tax debate lands on kitchen tables across America; a debate not just about tax cuts, but about who pays, how much, and why. We pose those questions to four taxpayers. Amy Gutmann is a professor of politics at Princeton University. Walter Williams chairs the Economics Department at George Mason University in Virginia. Father Robert Sirico heads the Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty in Grand Rapids, Michigan. And Benjamin Barber teaches political philosophy at Rutgers University. Benjamin Barber, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes is quoted as saying that taxes are what we pay for a civilized society. What about that?

BENJAMIN BARBER: Well it's even more than that, because taxation is emblematic of what it means for Americans to be constituted as a people. The prologue to our Constitution talks about establishing a more perfect union, securing a common defense, promoting the general welfare, and we need the wherewithal to do that. We need the wherewithal to be a citizenry and a common people and to do the work together. And taxation is, in fact, how we commit resources to constituting ourselves as a citizenship, as a "we," as a national republic that does things together. And citizens really pool their resources, pay their taxes, and thereby do work together.

GWEN IFILL: Professor Williams, how would you respond if Justice Holmes were to come back and say this to you?

WALTER WILLIAMS: Well, I would respond that we've gone far beyond that. That is, the average taxpayer works from January 1 until May 8 to pay federal, state and local taxes, going on five months out of the year. Now, he does not have the rights to decide how the fruits of his labor will be used. Right now, the federal government, two-thirds of the federal budget is not authorized by the United States constitution. James Madison said in the Federalist Paper 45, he said that the powers left with the federal government are few and defined, those left with the people and the states are many and indefinite. And we've gone far beyond that.

GWEN IFILL: Professor Gutmann, have we gone far beyond that?

AMY GUTMANN: No, I don't think we've gone far beyond that, although it's a very controversial issue and none of us particularly enjoy paying our taxes-- at least nobody I've met, recently. But I think it is the case that taxes are essential to the public morality of a democratic society. Without taxes, we wouldn't have a justice system, we wouldn't have an educational system, we wouldn't have environmental protection, we wouldn't have a host of things that we, the people, want. And we can't have them just by individually deciding upon our charitable causes. So I think it's very important that American Revolution was made in the name of no taxation without representation, not in the name of no taxation or no taxation only for the most minimal purposes.

GWEN IFILL: Father Sirico, here in Washington when we debate taxes lately it's all been about President Bush's tax cut. Today, as on other days, he came out and keeps repeating his mantra, which is, "this is the people's money." What is your response to that?

REV. ROBERT SIRICO: Well, there's an ancient tradition to private property. Thou shalt not steal is an indication that the people have the right to what they produce. When you get to high levels of taxation now approaching almost half of the income that people produce, you incite rebellion. You've heard reports of people rebelling against taxes and the IRS breaking down in terms of their surveying of that. I don't think it's a question of tax or no tax, but what belongs to God and what belongs to Caesar is the real question. I take Dr. Williams' point to heart that when you go beyond the constitutional limits and you kind of have a self- perpetuating bureaucracy and where the mentality is that the normative society is the governmental sector, you have some real problems: Civil problems and moral problems.

GWEN IFILL: So what are you suggesting, that the private sector should be the one taking responsibility for these roles that the government has taken on to itself?

REV. ROBERT SIRICO: I think that needs are best met at the most local level of their existence. This in my tradition is called the principle of subsidiary. So I think that first, people who are close and have a certain proximity to problems know best how to raise the money, whether that's through local forms of taxation or charitable endeavors. But what I'm challenging here is the pervasive notion that the normative culture of society is set by the state, by the bureaucratic or the political sector. And I think that's the thing that needs to be questioned at that level.

GWEN IFILL: Walter Williams you're nodding.

WALTER WILLIAMS: Well, I think that one of the things that... One of our guests said, Barber said that the federal government has all these responsibilities. But James Madison... We'll all agree that James Madison is the father of the Constitution, and in 1792, Congress appropriated $15,000 to help some French refugees. And James Madison said-and I'm virtually quoting him-- he says, "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article in the Constitution that authorizes Congress to spend the money of their constituents for the purposes of benevolence." And two-thirds of what the federal government spends money on is an activity where they take the rightful property of one American and give it to another American to whom it does not belong.

GWEN IFILL: What do you define as benevolence, and what do you define as the common good?

WALTER WILLIAMS: The Constitution here is very specific on it. That is, there is Article I, Section 8 that lists 21 things that Congress can spend money on. And for the... for benevolence, you know, giving people... whether it's to bail out farmers, bail out the banks, bail out the poor people, that's what two-thirds of the federal budget is spent on, taking one Americans' earnings and giving it to another American. As Father Sirico said, in the Bible it says thou shall not steal. When God gave most Moses the Ten Commandments, he did not mean that thou shalt not steal unless you have a majority vote.

GWEN IFILL: Amy Gutmann, is the Constitution being flouted here?

AMY GUTMANN: Taxation is not stealing. We're not rendering unto Caesar, we're rendering unto a democratic system of government. And I think there is no evidence that we're close-- the ordinary taxpayer, that is-- to a revolt against the idea that we should be funding such causes as education for our children. The Education for All Handicapped Children's Act is just an enormously expensive cause. And if the federal government doesn't pay for it, as it doesn't, then it follows on local and state officials and taxpayers to pay for it through their local and state taxes, which we cannot forget also get paid on this very sacrosanct day. If I earn $60,000 a year, I have to ask two questions on taxes: One is, what is my fair share compared to someone who earns $600,000 a year or someone who inherits $6 million a year? And the other is, what public purposes do I think are worth funding? Now, just asking those questions can give us a sense of why taxes are so controversial. But their being controversial is not an argument against our wanting to live in a society where children are cared for, environment is safe, where we can drink water without fearing that we're going to be poisoned over our lifetime.

GWEN IFILL: Let me interrupt to ask you another follow-up question. We've lost Benjamin Barber for the moment so you get this one too. Is it possible that the government's role is not to be a social safety net; that being a social safety net inhibits people from doing for themselves or taking care of themselves?

AMY GUTMANN: Yes, it is possible. That's one of the reasons we have a debate over taxes. But remind ourselves that this debate is over what kind of society we want to live in as individuals, whether we're rich or poor. And therefore, we have to ask ourselves, do we want to live in a society where people like some of our friends and neighbors and children do not have a safety net below which to fall, but they only rely on the charity of other people?

GWEN IFILL: Father Sirico, how about that? Is this an economic question or a moral question?

REV. ROBERT SIRICO: I think it's both an economic and a moral question. I think the fact that people produce money involves a moral question, and what is left out of the equation... Dr. Gutmann says that she has not met anybody who likes to pay taxes, but we all want all of these things. I mean, it is a problem. When the government goes beyond its just role, what ends up happening isn't just that this money is taken and not used for the purposes that people decide are best and that they know about best, but all kinds of disincentives are put in place. And it kills the civilizing impulse and the philanthropic impulse of people. We know that people are very generous, especially when they know that there is a need. No one is debating here whether or not there should be taxes, much less that the poor should be taken care of or what they should we should live in a civilized order. The question is how we go about that. And I suggest when we begin to approach confiscatory levels of taxation, that this is a moral injustice and economic folly.

GWEN IFILL: If I was listening right, Professor Williams, you were making exactly the argument that it's confiscatory and that this is not a question of how much, but that the government should have no role at all.

WALTER WILLIAMS: Wait, no. In the Constitution Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, it lists the things the government should do. I agree 100%, and I think we all should pay our right share. Now, there are safety net problems. There are people who are poor and people who have various problems, but that's... Charity should take care of that. Look, Americans, we Americans should be very proud of ourselves, that is, we do... we're the most generous people on the face of the earth. We do 85% of all world giving. And this has been true since Alexis de Tocqueville came here in 1840 and wrote "Democracy in America." And he went back to France saying, you know, those Americans just love committees. Somebody's barn gets burned down and they have a committee. Somebody gets widowed and they have a committee. We have to ask ourselves -- we've been a nation since 1787. Now we didn't have the welfare state until 1936 at the beginning. What happened to poor people? They weren't dying in the streets. What happened to old people - they weren't dying in the streets.

GWEN IFILL: What about education? A federal role or a government role for education is not spelled out in the Constitution.

WALTER WILLIAMS: That is absolutely right. I don't think the federal government should have anything to do with education. By the way, what has happened to education since the federal government has gotten involved with it? That is since 1962, and when we got a Department of Education, education in America started going down the rat hole.

GWEN IFILL: Professor Gutmann, a chance to respond?

AMY GUTMANN: Taxation funds education not only at the federal but at the local and state levels. We have children who through no fault of their own have parents who can't afford to give them an adequate education -- children who are handicapped. If the federal government requires that all handicapped children get a decent education, the federal government should share the burden of funding that with local communities who cannot possibly afford it, and who will not actually be able to educate all children well unless the tax burden is fairly distributed. And quite the contrary to what some people say about charity, people are more likely to give to charity if they feel that taxation is fairly distributed among taxpayers. And people are more generous when they think that they're better-off fellow citizens are being required to pay their fair share. Now there's a big debate over exactly what the fair share is. But as we saw with the inheritance tax debate, many people who were very well off think it was fairer that the federal government take a percentage of those... the inheritance that their children would otherwise get. This is not a matter of confiscatory taxation. It is a matter of furthering the public welfare through a representative democratic system.

GWEN IFILL: We're going to have to leave the conversation here for tonight. We apologize to Benjamin Barber. We had technical difficulties and lost that signal from New Jersey. Thank you all for joining us.

JIM LEHRER: Still to come on the NewsHour tonight, the struggle over a television network in Russia; and a special homecoming.

UPDATE - TAKEOVER

JIM LEHRER: Now, the uncertain future of Russia's independent television network. Our update begins with this report by special correspondent Simon Marks.

SIMON MARKS: After weeks of tension behind the scenes, the showdown over Russia's only national independent television station played itself out on Saturday morning. Viewers watching the news on NTV found themselves witnessing the news. Without warning, representatives of Gazprom, Russia's state-owned gas company, had forced their way into NTV's headquarters, located on the eighth floor of the sprawling complex that also houses the country's other two national networks, both state-owned and loyal to the government. Staff arriving for work were told their offices and studios were off-limits unless they signed an oath of loyalty to NTV's new managers. After seven years working for Russia's most vibrant journalistic enterprise, many refused and signed letters of resignation instead. A new team of security guards was installed to ensure the takeover was complete. NTV's anchors, correspondents, producers and technicians left the building, many of them carrying publicity photographs of themselves that had once proudly hung in the network's corridors. By 10:00 in the morning, NTV was back on air-- from the same studios, with the same logo, but with a team of anchors and journalists loyal to Gazprom, which claims a controlling stake in NTV after prematurely calling in loans made to the station's management. A change in tone was evident. The newscast's lead story focused on Russia's Easter celebrations. And last night, in place of its flagship Sunday talk show, the network aired a musical comedy instead. Those journalists remaining loyal to NTV's old management decamped to the studios of a small sister cable network. There they broadcast the story of their demise, but only to the network's small number of subscribers in 69 cities, not the national audience that had been available to them on NTV. After working around the clock, they succeeded in producing a rough-and-ready edition of the Sunday talk show that had previously been required viewing over on NTV. Yevgeny Kiselev, formerly NTV's general director and chief correspondent, a man often described as Russia's Walter Cronkite, was caught unawares by the Gazprom takeover. For the past two weeks, he's led a rearguard action aimed at preventing Gazprom from seizing control of the network. Large demonstrations in support of Kiselev and his team followed a board meeting at which Gazprom claimed it had won a controlling stake in the network-- a move that still faces legal challenges in Moscow. On Friday, Kiselev flew to Spain. There he was meeting NTV's founder, Vladimir Gussinsky, who fled to Spain after the Russian government charged him with embezzlement. Mr. Gussinsky was once one of the most powerful men in Russia, his media empire commanding huge influence and prestige in the Yeltsin era. But since last year, it's been the target, first of commando raids, then of a government-led onslaught over still-unproven financial irregularities, an onslaught Mr. Gussinsky insists is politically motivated and aimed at silencing a stable of media holdings often critical of the Putin administration.

YEVGENY KISELEV: We really did not believe that the other side is going to attempt a hostile takeover with the use of force. And we were sitting for a whole day discussing different alternatives.

SIMON MARKS: By the time Kiselev returned to Moscow, the takeover was complete. At the studios of NTV, some of the staff who had decided to work on with the new management expressed cautious optimism that they would be allowed to work unmolested. But across the street, those journalists who had refused to work for the station's new owners vowed that they would fight on to keep freedom of speech alive. It's still not clear where the former NTV staff will find a permanent home. They've been offered the chance to work at TV6, a network owned by Boris Berezovsky, another Yeltsin-era magnate living in exile. Mr. Berezovsky and Mr. Gussinsky have not had friendly relations in the past, but both find themselves out of work in the Kremlin, and they could team up to keep at least one media thorn in President Vladimir Putin's side. But even if that plan works, and programs like the satirical puppet show, "Kukly," which poked weekly fun at the Russian government, do return to the air, TV6 does not enjoy national coverage and may never command the influence of NTV. It was that influence, derived from the network's unstinting coverage of the first war in the breakaway region of Chechnya, that made NTV such a potent political force. Nevertheless, both the Russian government and Gazprom deny that thisweekend's events have anything to do with politics. They maintain it's simply a business affair that reflects the normal workings of the free market in Russia. Boris Jordan is now running NTV on behalf of Gazprom, the state- run utility that offered to underwrite the television network's loans in the late 1990s. Those loans enabled NTV to weather Russia's financial storms, but when Gazprom called them in earlier this year -- claiming NTV's finances were in turmoil and that the money was being frittered away on corporate yachts and luxury housing-- it threw the network's future into doubt. Last week, Mr. Jordan, an American of Russian descent who's worked in Moscow for nearly a decade, maintained that Gazprom sought a civilized outcome to the standoff. Today in Moscow, Mr. Jordan told the NewsHour he changed his mind because he heard on Friday that the staff were stripping NTV of its assets.

BORIS JORDAN: The company owes money to everyone on the planet. It owes money to its employees, it owes money to its producers, it owes money to banks, it owes money to everyone. The company has not been paying its debts. It's got current debts outstanding of over $100 million.

SIMON MARKS: Mr. Jordan insists that he will preserve NTV as a free voice in Russia and that there will be no change in editorial policy.

BORIS JORDAN: Maybe this is an ambitious goal, but I would like NTV to look like ABC, NBC, CBS or Fox. That would be my goal. A real national network of independent broadcasting, independent journalism, with professional product. It's an ambitious goal, but it is one I am certainly going to try and do.

SIMON MARKS: But many liberals in Moscow believe that the managers appointed by Gazprom, like the government to which the utility reports, cannot be trusted to make good on their word. The Russian government has had virtually nothing to say about the weekend's events. President Putin was making a visit to the breakaway region of Chechnya when the drama unfolded in Moscow. Last week, after talks with German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, the Russian insisted NTV's future was nothing to do with him.

YEVGENY KISELEV: It's clear as bright sky to everyone in this country that this is a political situation. And those who are saying it has nothing to do with politics, it's just business - well -- let it stay on their conscience.

SIMON MARKS: At NTV's headquarters tonight, the remaining publicity photographs of the network's former stars were being unceremoniously removed from the walls by the station's new managers. The network that changed the face of Russian television is still on the air, but many observers will be watching to see whether the final credits are rolling on its pugnacious, groundbreaking programming.

JIM LEHRER: Our media correspondent Terence Smith takes it from there.

TERENCE SMITH: Joining us to further discuss Russia and the fate of NTV are Michael McFaul, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and the author of a new book, "Russia's Unfinished Revolution." And Ellen Mickiewicz, a professor at Duke University and the author of "Changing Channels: Television and the Struggle for Power in Russia."

Welcome to you both.

TERENCE SMITH: Michael McFaul, put this in perspective for us -- in terms of its meaning for free expression in Vladimir Putin's Russia.

MICHAEL McFAUL: Well, I think looking back on the last ten, even fifteen years, I would go back to the Gorbachev era, this has to be one of the greatest setbacks for democracy in Russia that I've witnessed. The book you just described "Russian's Unfinished Revolution" is about the attempt to build democracy in Russia and the institutions of democracy. And when I ended the book a year ago I said the one big achievement was a free and independent press. That now seems to have ended as well.

TERENCE SMITH: Is it your impression that it will necessarily be an arm now of the government, NTV?

MICHAEL McFAUL: I don't think there's any question about it. Listening to Mr. Jordan speak there, my question to him was, would be, if you weren't going to change editorial policy, then why did it change in just the last 48 hours? I just watched NTV's news program before coming to your program and it has a very different flavor, a very different tone. They're covering very different kinds of news today. So I don't think there's any question about it. This is about politics, not about economics.

TERENCE SMITH: Different in terms of hewing to what you might describe as a party line?

MICHAEL McFAUL: Well, without question in Russia today, the number-one news story in Russia was the NTV takeover or the NTV transfer of ownership, whatever you want to call it. It was not the top of the news today on NTV.

TERENCE SMITH: How direct a role does this, Michael McFaul, does this suggest Vladimir Putin has played in a development like this?

MICHAEL McFAUL: Well, a year ago I would have given them the benefit of the doubt. In fact I wrote a piece called "Indifferent to Democracy" about Mr. Putin's attitudes towards democracy. But this episode and the way it played out, there's no doubt about it, that he was about it, he was involved behind it from day one. When it comes right down to it, he doesn't like criticism and NTV criticized him and so he muffled that criticism today.

TERENCE SMITH: Ellen Mickiewicz, we've been having difficulty with the audio. Can you hear me?

ELLEN MICKIEWICZ: Yes, that's fine.

TODD ZYWICKI: You too watched NTV I believe earlier today.

ELLEN MICKIEWICZ: Two editions.

TERENCE SMITH: And did you notice a difference as well?

ELLEN MICKIEWICZ: Oh, it's night and day.

TERENCE SMITH: Really?

ELLEN MICKIEWICZ: Yeah. It's not as professional. It's boring. It's very, very tame. And most importantly when they did cover NTV at all, it had nothing from the other side; that is, the NTV side. It was merely a voiceover and pictures.

TERENCE SMITH: Ellen Mickiewicz, we know that Ted Turner and George Soros, two American investors, expressed an interest earlier in investing in NTV or in television in Russia. Does that seem practical or sensible to you at this point?

ELLEN MICKIEWICZ: I think the problem here is, what is there of value? What's left? And where is it? And also, how likely is it that Gazprom will sell some shares, which the Turner-Soros consortium would require and at what price? The more this goes on, the more Gazprom takes over and essentially ruins the network, the less worth it has.

TERENCE SMITH: Of course, Ellen Mickiewicz, the requirement of Ted Turner and George Soros was a guarantee of independence. Does that seem realistic?

ELLEN MICKIEWICZ: I don't think that any business arrangement can guarantee independence. I don't think that's really an issue here for investment. I think that certainly they wanted to feel comfortable that their overall values were shared, that there would be transparency, it would be run like a normal business. And they are certainly not at that point now.

TERENCE SMITH: Michael McFaul, what are the implications for the United States in this? I mean, what could or should the Bush administration do about it?

MICHAEL McFAUL: Well, speaking today it's too late to try to get guarantee from Mr. Putin about allowing the western investors to come in. I don't think there's any chance that they're going to come in now. I do think we need to speak out strongly about this issue because we have an interest in democracy in Russia. A democratic Russia will be more friendly and more sympathetic to our interests around the world than a non-democratic Russia. And immediately, most immediately, we can take action. We can begin to increase our funding programs for non-governmental, independent media in Russia today. We have some very effective programs, especially in the regions of Russia that already exist. My suggestion would be to double or triple those budgets right away, send a signal that we take this very seriously.

TERENCE SMITH: Ellen Mickiewicz, what does it say to you that this action was taken after President Putin heard from both the German chancellor and the U.S. Secretary of State expressing their concern about NTV?

ELLEN MICKIEWICZ: I think there is a very limited role that the U.S. can or should or any other country for that matter can or should play internally in the communications systems of Russia. I think it is extremely central to national identity, and I don't think it will work. Putin was certainly sending that message. And, by the way, I think on the horizon there's a still more worrisome issue, which again makes us doubt that this thing with NTV is purely economic, and that is that the tax police today are reported to... and the tax police were those people with masks we saw in the film... that they're after that cable THT affiliate of NTV. Let me just say that I have a rather different notion, I think, of what the United States should be doing. I think Michael's point is well taken -- within limits. But I think we should recognize that as this dries up, this alternative source of information through NTV, that the Russian people will have fewer sources of information, simply, to compare and contrast as they're very good at doing. And therefore, there may have to be other ways of making American policy or American interests known, much wider perhaps movement of citizens, more and wider exchanges, so that there are other ways that people can learn.

TERENCE SMITH: Michael McFaul, very briefly, what are the chances that the government in Russia will allow another independent voice to arise on television?

MICHAEL McFAUL: I'm not very optimistic -- already today, as Ellen just said, they are going after this very small, tiny cable station going through their books, looking for indictments. They're taking it very seriously. They tried the soft way. They thought they could cover up and do this in a very legal way. Now it's going to an autocratic way in shutting down the media.

TERENCE SMITH: So the trend signs are all in one direction. Thank you both very much.

JIM LEHRER: Now, the uncertain future of Russia's independent television network. Our update begins with this report by special correspondent Simon Marks.

FINALLY - HOMECOMING

JIM LEHRER: Finally tonight, the return of the 24 crew members of the American spy plane, who were held by the Chinese for 11 days. They came back to their base at Whidbey Island, Washington this weekend. Jack Hamann of KCTS-Seattle reports. (Cheers and applause)

JACK HAMANN: It had been 14 days since their crippled surveillance plane made an emergency landing at a Chinese airfield. On Saturday, 24 crewmembers walked into the embrace of their wives, children, siblings and parents. (Cheers and applause)

LIEUTENANT J.G. JEFFREY VIGNERY: I don't think any of us had any idea what kind of welcoming we would receive from the United States. And I think all of us can't thank you enough for all of this. And I just want to say "thank you."

JACK HAMANN: Safe on the ground at their home base at Whidbey Island Naval air station, crewmembers were permitted to share many of the details of their ordeal. The pilot and mission commander, Lt. Shane Osborn, recounted on ABC's "This Week" the difficult landing onto an airfield on Hainan Island.

LIEUTENANT SHANE OSBORN: We rolled almost inverted -- about 130 degrees angle of bank and in a steep dive, uncontrolled, and my number one engine was torn apart, the propeller was torn apart, and I also lost my nose cone, which also put holes in my pressure bulk head, so there was quite a bit of air noise. My air speed indication, I lost that, and I also had a hole in my aileron. So there was a question for quite a while of whether or not we would be able to live through this. And once I got the plane wings level about 7,500 feet later, I called for a bail-out and I figured at least some of the people in back would be able to get out of this. About 10,000 feet or so, I talked with my other pilot, Lieutenant Honeck and the senior engineer, senior chief mellows, and we decided that we might be able to land it. But I went ahead and I went through the ditching checklist because I thought I might have to put it in the water, because I didn't know if it was going to hold together or not, because I was worried about that propeller flying off.

JACK HAMANN: Lieutenant Patrick Honeck, the co-pilot and second in command, thought his damaged aircraft would plunge into the South China Sea.

LIEUTENANT PATRICK HONECK: I think everybody on the crew felt that way initially. There was definitely a moment in time where, you know, we were all just kind of in shock and didn't believe what was going on. But once we were able to put that behind us and fall back on our training, pretty much just made it happen. Didn't really have time to think too much about "what if" anymore.

PETTY OFFICER JEREMY CRANDALL: All I can say is it's scary. I said at the time I thought, "hey, I'm 20 years old. I've had a good life," you know. I love my family. I said my prayers. But we had a we had a great pilot. Lt. Osborn saved all of our lives. All the crew members owe our lives to lt. Osborn. He pulled it out, and he saved us.

JACK HAMANN: One of the aircraft's four propellers was damaged and the plane became dangerously unstable. Lt. J.G. Regina Kauffman, the navigator, decided that the plane should try to land on Hainan Island.

LIEUTENANT J.G. REGINA KAUFFMAN: It was the closest airfield, and I just naturally headed us in that direction once pilot started getting the plane under control.

REPORTER: Were you surprised to see how much damage there was to the aircraft when you got out?

LIEUTENANT J.G. REGINA KAUFFMAN: When I got out, I was.

JACK HAMANN: Some crewmembers endured long interrogations, lasting up to five hours. They were often asked to apologize for their collision with a Chinese fighter jet.

REPORTER: How did you reply when they asked you to apologize?

LIEUTENANT J.G. RICHARD PAYNE: We stuck with the... By the time they had gotten around to requesting apologies, we had spoken with General Sealock, the defense attach , and they had told us what President Bush's response had been, and we used his same words.

JACK HAMANN: The entire crew was reported in good health, with few complaints about the spartan food and accommodations while in Chinese custody.

PETTY OFFICER JEREMY CRANDALL: We talked to each other, we played cards, stuff like that, anything to keep up the spirits, you know, and we never let anybody get down. If they started getting a little down, we just picked them back up and we moved on.

JACK HAMANN: Within hours of his release last week, cyrptologic technician Josef Edmunds had just one thing in mind.

PETTY OFFICER JOSEF EDMUNDS: I had actually been thinking about proposing for quite a while. I decided I want to wait for the perfect moment. Well, still... Sometimes the perfect moment doesn't come. When we hit the deck, I turned to a very, very close friend of mine, somebody who helped me through this whole ordeal, and I said, "that's it. I'm getting married as soon as I get back." I called her from Guam. I guess I was captured on TV.

JACK HAMANN: On Sunday, several crew members returned to a normal routine, one that included, for some, Easter Sunday worship. Beginning today, yellow ribbons and balloons throughout town will be taken down, and the 24 crewmembers will each begin a 30-day vacation with their families.

RECAP

JIM LEHRER: Again, the major stories of this Monday: The mayor of Cincinnati lifted a city-wide curfew imposed last week to halt three days of racial rioting. And Israeli warplanes attacked a Syrian radar station deep inside Lebanon to retaliate for guerrilla attacks. We'll see you online and again here tomorrow evening. I'm Jim Lehrer. Thank you and good night.