The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

MR. LEHRER: Good evening. Leading the news this Tuesday, a new president and prime minister were chosen in Romania after the bodies of Nicolae Ceausescu and his wife were shown on Romanian television. In Panama, U.S. forces captured another 400 pro-Noriega troops. We'll have the details in our News Summary in a moment. Charlayne Hunter-Gault is in New York tonight. Charlayne.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: After the News Summary we go first to the legal and diplomatic wrangling on the fate of Gen. Manuel Noriega. We get the views of former ambassador to Panama Ambler Moss and international law professor Barry Carter. Then it's on to the second in our series of looks back at the '80s. Tonight we get the views of five young people who came of age during the decade. And finally we have a Jim Fisher essay on one man's science. NEWS SUMMARY

MR. LEHRER: A new president was named in Romania today. He is 59 year old Ion Iliescu. Iliescu is a former top Communist Party official. He was demoted a few years ago for speaking out against the former dictator, Nicolae Ceausescu. A new prime minister and other cabinet officials were also chosen. Romanian television today showed evidence that Ceausescu and his wife had, indeed been executed. We have a report from Bucharest by Paul Davies of Independent Television News.

MR. DAVIES: Just one week ago, he was an all powerful tyrant. Here like a common criminal Nicolae Ceausescu is unceremoniously bundled from an armored car making his last journey before his execution. Romanian television showed these pictures early this morning a short time after they announced that the deposed president had been shot dead by a firing squad. The 71 year old former leader is seen undergoing a statutory medical test. This remarkable scene is said to have been filmed yesterday just before the president's trial, these pictures the first hard proof that President Ceausescu was, in fact, a prisoner of the new regime. His 70 year old wife, Elena Ceausescu, is also seen. She faced similar charges to her husband and is said to have met the same fate. The couple appeared remarkably relaxed, considering the fact they'd been jointly charged with genocide, the murder of 60,000 Romanians. The newscaster told viewers that the TV technicians wanted to show proof that the president had been executed but were being stopped by senior bureaucrats within the TV center. Television Free Romania then played the country's new national anthem. On 15 separate occasions viewers were told to stay tuned to see how the power struggle turned out. Behind the scenes, there were heated exchanges, the television staff protesting at the censorship from above. "It's just like the bad old days," one said. In a small scale reproduction of last week's revolution, the soldiers protecting the TV center became involved, backing those demanding that evidence of the president's death be shown to the world. And this afternoon the TV station showed the crumpled forms of two bodies at the foot of a bullet ridden wall, one clearly that of Romania's former dictator.

MR. LEHRER: The Soviet News Agency Tass reported today that gun fire could still be heard in the town of Tmisoaro in Western Romania. It said members of Ceausescu's security force were attempting to flee the city. It said they were randomly shooting at people in the streets. Charlayne.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Mikhail Gorbachev has decided to go to Lithuania to voice his opposition to that republic's decision to break from the Soviet Communist Party. Lithuania's party declared itself independent last week. The Soviet leadership held a special session today to discuss the matter. Mr. Gorbachev said Lithuania's Communist Party had no right to take the action but he reportedly called for maximum restraint in dealing with the situation. He's expected to make his visit there in the next few days.

MR. LEHRER: In Panama, U.S. forces captured another 400 pro- Noriega troops. The Noriega supporters were taken Monday in airborne assaults West of Panama City. U.S. officials continued talks with the Vatican over the fate of Manuel Noriega. He took refuge in the Vatican Embassy in Panama City Sunday. White House Spokesman Marlin Fitzwater said the Bush administration has told the Vatican very directly of its desire to see Noriega turned over to U.S. authorities. Fitzwater said U.S. troops would continue to ring the Vatican Embassy as long as Noriega remained inside. U.S. combat forces pushed West through the Panamanian countryside today. Pentagon spokesman Pete Williams said the troops were searching for more Noriega loyalists.

PETE WILLIAMS, Pentagon Spokesman: U.S. troops are moving West in several operations to check the countryside. They are meeting with very little resistance. In fact, one of the things that impressed Sec. Cheney on his visit to Panama was learning that Panamanian citizens are coming up to our soldiers there, turning in their weapons and telling U.S. soldiers where some of the large weapons caches are.

MR. LEHRER: A former commander of the Panamanian defense forces in Cherekee Province appeared in a Miami court today. Lt. Col. Luis Delside was indicted in February along with Noriega. Delside surrendered to U.S. forces in Panama Saturday and was turned over to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. In Miami, the U.S. Attorney said Delside was one of Noriega's right hand men. His defense attorney told reporters his client was innocent of the drug charges.

KENNETH SWARTZ, Defense Attorney: He voluntarily surrendered to the authorities, actually to the United States Army. He told his troops not to fire, not to engage in any combat, to turn their arms in, he didn't want any more bloodshed, it was his desire to surrender to the forces and to come here to faces these charges and that was the reason why he's here. His superior, the general, is not here. Mr. Delside did not turn himself into any foreign country. He's here to face these charges because he is innocent.

MR. LEHRER: In Washington, the Justice Department announced it would freeze Noriega's overseas assets. A Department spokesman said Noriega had shipped over $10 million in illegal drug money from Panama to bank accounts in a half a dozen European countries.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Israel today launched two attacks against military bases of the Lebanese Communist Party in Lebanon. Israeli officials said the bases were used to launch attacks against its Christian allies in Lebanon. Nine people were killed and twenty- six wounded. The Israelis suffered no casualties.

MR. LEHRER: There are two deaths to report here tonight. Former Major League Baseball Player and Manager Billy Martin died in a traffic accident last night near his farm in Port Crain, New York. Martin played second base for the New York Yankees and then served five terms as manager of the team. He was best known for his arguments with umpires and even his own players. He was 61 years old. Writer Samuel Beckett was buried today in Paris. He died Friday of respiratory failure in a Paris nursing home. Beckett was a playwright, poet and novelist. He was best known for his play, "Waiting for Godot," about two tramps waiting for a man who never arrives. He won the Nobel Prize for literature in 1969. He was 83 years old.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Still ahead, the fate of Panama's General Noriega, a youthful look at the 80's, and a Jim Fisher essay. FOCUS - CUSTODY BATTLE

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: We go first to the ongoing story in Panama. Our focus is on the continuing diplomatic deadlock over the fate of General Manuel Noriega. The ousted dictator remains in the Vatican Embassy in Panama City after receiving asslym there on Christmas Eve. U.S. authorities have demanded that Noriega be turned over to stand trial in the U.S. on drug charges. But so far the vatican has refused. The Embassy continues to be surrounded by well armed American Troops who reportedly will arrest Noriega if he leaves the Embassy grounds. But Sec. of Defense Richard Cheney said yesterday in Panama that additional Military measures to remove Noriega from the Embassy are out of question for the moment.

DICK CHENEY, Sec. of Defense: It is U.S. policy that we would like to have Mr. Noriega in order to return him to the United States for trial. That hasn't changed. The U.S. military did it's job. They ran Mr. Noriega to ground. Obviously everybody knows where he is now. At this point the diplomats and the lawyers have taken over and they are working on the problem.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: We'll explore the diplomatic and legal options available to Noriega, the Vatican and the United States with practitioners from both fields. Ambler Moss served as the U.S. Ambassador to Panama from 1978 until 1982. He's now dean of the Graduate School of International Study at the University of Miami in Florida. e joins us from Miami, and Barry Carter is a Professor Law at Georgetown University Law School in Washington D.C. and a specialist in International law. First to you, Amb. Moss, the U.S. has demanded in what as being reported as extraordinarily tough terms that the Vatican turn Noriega over to the United States. Can you speculate on what that means?

AMBLER MOSS, Former U.S. Amb., Panama: I think just making the strongest kind of diplomatic demand. Demanding that he be turned over and I think that this is a necessary part of the action that the U.S. will be going through.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: How do you suppose they're making that demand. I mean, if you had to guess at what kind of diplomatic talk is going on right now.

AMB. MOSS: I think probably directly with the Holy Sea at Vatican City and as we've seen to a certain extent on the spot simply asking the Vatican Representative, the Papal Nuncio in Panama to hand him over.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Mr. Carter, are there rules of international law that would compel the Vatican to turn Noriega over to the United States?

BARRY CARTER, International Lawyer: No. Quite the contrary. The rules aren't as clear as one would wish here. The one rule that is clear is that an Embassy or the Vatican calls it a Nunciator, the Embassy is sacred ground or I shouldn't use the word sacred with the vatican, inviolable ground.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: That would be any embassy?

MR. CARTER: With any embassy whether it is the Soviet Embassy in Washington D.C. or the U.S. Embassy in Iran. Why we are so upset about the situation in Iran in 1979 was they invaded our embassy. So an embassy is inviolable ground, and you are not supposed to go on to that ground with out the permission of the Ambassador. But having said that, then where it gets difficult is who should be granted political asylum and the term is generally used for people who fear some type of political or religious persecution but there is all sorts of cases. The U.S. has to be a little cautious here because we have in our embassy in Bejeing, China a Fang Via Zee an astrophysist who is a Chinese dissident that we've been holding there since June. We don't want the Chinese going into our Embassy. We had Cardinal Minezetti in our Embassy in Hungary for 15 years. Others have been in various embassies. So the term covers a lot of things.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: But both the Panamanian government through Mr. Endara who is the new head of the Government and United States have argued against political asylum on the grounds that Noriega is a criminal.

MR. CARTER: Even though this is the Christmas season, Noriega is thug, a murder, and a drug dealer it appears but he also essentially is a former head of state. He effectively was the head of State of Panama and so there are some political implications that one can't deny. The term is vague and that's the problem. The Vatican's choice here though do you just turn over to the United States. The Vatican wanting they could keep him there and make him go to mass every day. That would be a real punishment but they could also have him go to Panama or to Cuba or to other countries. The U.S. might be the last country that would get him. I think if anything probably Panama is where the Vatican will send him.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: But what if he goes to Panama. Well first of all the Vatican has said that the chances of them turning him over to the U.S. are very dim because no extradition treaty exists between and the Vatican. Now is that the case?

MR. CARTER: There is no treaty between the Vatican and the U.S. They could just shove him out the door.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: All right. If they shoved him out the door into Panama, what is the situation legally there. I mean can he be extradited from Panama?

MR. CARTER: In Panama, if they shove him out the door and if a Panama police officer was first to get him. Panamanian law according the new leader there Endara says that you can not extradict according to its constitution. I actually looked it up today and there is an extradition Treaty from 1905 which is still good with Panama but it does not include extraditing the nationals of that country. So we cannot extradite Noriega from Panama.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: But we also have, as Jim reported earlier, a ring of troops surrounding the Vatican embassy. Now if they pushed him out the door the which the chances of that don't seem very likely at the moment but if they did, would there be a, would you anticipate a fighting match between the Panamanians and the U.S. and can the U.S. just grab him and take him out of there.

MR. CARTER: This is a tough question. I think that everyone is in a tough position here. The Vatican probably doesn't want him, they don't know what to do with him. The 82nd Airborne surrounds the embassy as you say. So even if they give it to the Panamanians or if they try to drive him to the airport to taker him to Cuba. You know you have to leave the Embassy to say take him the airport.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Because Cuba has said they will take him if he asks to come.

MR. CARTER: Right. Spain has said no. But if the Vatican in some way wants to let him out of the embassy there they've got to go through the U.S. Army corridor there and what is George Bush going to allow to happen. Maybe a deal will be cut in advance but otherwise it can be a nasty little match.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: What do you think, Amb. Moss, just on that particular question, if he came out? What options does the United States have at that point?

AMB. MOSS: Well, the United States recently exercised just that options in the City of Davida they captured and brought to the United States Lt. Col. Louis Del Seat one of the principle right arms of general Noriega, Commanders of the Chudcia Province. I suppose the only legal basis was capture in a military action because he certainly wasn't extradited and he wasn't handed over by Panamanian Authorities under indictment. He was simply captured and brought to Miami today.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: You were going say.

MR. CARTER: I was going to say that the U.S. law today is that if you grab some one in a foreign country whether the foreign country wants it or not. You know we snatch him from the Panamanian Police Officer and we just bring him back trial. Unless we really rough him up, if we just bring him back the U.S. courts will hear the case. We did that recently with an Arab terrorist Eunis.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Amb. Moss, you heard Mr. Carter say a few moments ago that the Vatican really didn't want General Noriega. How likely it is that you think a deal was struck between Noriega and the Vatican before he took refuge there?

AMB. MOSS: I think it has a certain plausibility because in fact the Church preformed an immense service by taking Noriega in and therefore effectively cutting short what could have been a long resistance to the U.S. invasion.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Do you think that was the deal?

AMB. MOSS: I think its plausible because it is what happened.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: In other words, they said we will take you in if you will pacify the fighting?

AMB. MOSS: I don't think Noriega even had to say that because the mere fact that he came in seeking asylum meant basically the fighting was over on his part and it was a strong inducement to his followers to turn in their arms and give up which they began immediately doing.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Why do you think the Vatican would have intervened in a case like this with a figure like Noriega and the with the factors in contention as they are between the U. S.?

AMB. MOSS: Well, there's a long record over the last couple of years actually of the Vatican being helpful in brokering a deal in bringing parties to negotiation and being an end to the conflict in Panama. And the Papal Nuncio there has been extremely effective and instrumental in trying to work out creative solutions to the end of the problems in Panama. So I think all parties there have been looking to the Vatican as a possible source of intermediation in a problem like this and in fact it ended up preforming this very valuable service.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Well, you heard Sec. Cheney say that this is now in the hands of the lawyers and the diplomats at least for the moment. Now what do you suppose is going on right now and what options do you really think the Vatican really has. As you heard Mr. Carter say Spain has refused to take Noriega in. I believe Mexico as well. Cuba has said yes but then he has to get out of there. What do you think is going on right now?

AMB. MOSS: Well, I think right now, the Vatican is trying to broker a deal where if he does leave he will go to a third country. The Vatican has given refugee but not technically asylum. Some other country has got to give him asylum such as Cuba or some other place. There are probably frankly from the stand point of U.S. interest much better places for Washington then he could besides Cuba. He could still be a source of problems and conspiracy if he were in Cuba. It would be much better to see him end up in some other country if that is going to be the out come of all of this.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Do you think the U.S. is -- Marlin Fitzwater, the White House spokesman, said earlier today that there were some options open other than trying to seize him there. I mean where do you think the U.S. would go for at this point.

AMB. MOSS: Well, personally I have a feeling that although the U.S. is making a good showing of saying that he should be brought back to the United States for trial. It is certainly is questionable whether that's really in the U.S. national interest. A public spectacle of a trial of man who after all was an asset of the CIA. who collaborated with Oliver North in raising money for the Contras and with this long history of actually being in the service of the United States could end up proving to be embarrassing. There may in fact be many skeletons in the closet which in our national interest to avoid.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Mr. Carter what chances do you think there are of him being turned over to the Panamanian Government?

MR. CARTER: From the Vatican standpoint that might be the best arrangement. It is not clear who wants him at this point as you pointed out except may be Cuba. The Panamanians would be happy to try him. They would not extradict him as we discussed. So that would be one of the obvious solutions. I agree with Ambassador Moss that the United States might be willing to accept that or some other solution where Noriega is somewhat immobilized. Sending him to Cuba is a problem. He would then be able to operate fromthere.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: What options does the Vatican have if they can't find any country to take him?

MR. CARTER: Then their only choice really is Panama or the United States.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Can he stay in Nuncinata?

MR. CARTER: He could stay there for quite a while and that would be may be the worst punishment of all living by the rules of the Papal Nuncio there of probably frequent mass, no liquor, no women.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: But is that a feasible solution?

MR. CARTER: I don't mean to be light about it. That is feasible. Cardinal Minzetti was in the U.S. Embassy in Hungary for 15 years. Penacostals, fundamentalist protestants where in the U.S. Embassy in Moscow for I believe 5 years. So you can keep some one there for a long time. In theory you could even take him back to Vatican City. It is not a big piece of turf. It is about a mile square but they could take him back to Vatican City where he could be. I don't think he would like that particularly nor do I think the Vatican would.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Amb. Moss what do you think is going to happen now, I mean, how is this stalemate going to be broken and do you expect it to go in indefinitely?

AMB. MOSS: As Prof. Carter said, it can go on indefinitely with him simply being in refuge in the Papal Nuncio's residence or I think more likely however some kind of a deal can be struck with some acceptable third country. Acceptable meaning to Washington and providing the condition where they're simply willing to let him be driven to the airport and go to that country.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: What country would that be?

AMB. MOSS: My first thought would be Spain, but of course Spain has said no. If he were in Spain as opposed to Cuba or some other place for instance better tabs can be kept on what he is doing and he is far away from Panama. So I suspect that countries like that if not Spain itself are being looked at right now.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: But you said earlier that it's your view that the chances of him ever going on trial in the United States are very slim?

AMB. MOSS: I think the chances are slim and despite the protestations to the contrary I am not sure how much the Executive Branch of our Government really is in favor of that because it could pose certain problems. Certainly the main thing as Secretary Chenny said is that the great advantage of Noriega being where he is that the fighting has stopped almost altogether. The side which supported Noriega is heavily induced to turn in their arms and also start working with Endara's new government. All those good things are happening, and I think that it may be of really secondary interest what happens to Noriega provided of course he is not left in a position to cause any further trouble.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: All right. Well, Amb. Moss, well, we'll just have to wait and see what happens. And Mr. Carter thank you both for being with us.

MR. LEHRER: Still to come on the Newshour tonight a youthful view of the 1980s and our Tuesday night essay. SERIES - EVALUATING THE 80's

MR. LEHRER: Now we continue our series of conversations about the 1980s. Tonight we get the perspective of five college students on what this last decade has wrought. Darren Swain is a sophomore at Bowie State University in Bowie, Maryland. He is a business major and president of the Good Brothers, a campus service organization. Jennie Koch is a senior at the United States Military Academy at West Point. She is studying international relations and was recently awarded a Road Scholarship to study at Oxford University in England next fall. Laurie Broquet is a sophomore business major at Oakland Community College in Oakland, Michigan. Pete Baumgartner is a senior at the University of Colorado in Boulder. He is a political science and journalism major and sports editor of the school paper. Juan Astorga is a sophomore at the University of California at San Diego where he is studying mechanical engineering and psychology. He's president of the Hispanic Student Organization on campus. Both he and Pete Baumgartner are in our studios in Denver. Jennie Koch, what do you think was the most important thing to remember about the 1980s?

JENNIE KOCH, U.S. Military Academy: Sir, the most important thing that I look at as a future leader, and that's what West Point is training leaders, is all the incredible changes that have gone on. I mean, only really in the past five years since I think the advent of Mr. Gorbachev have they really accelerated at such a great pace, but everything that we're seeing going on now in Eastern Europe and especially what we're seeing the complete decline of Communism, really the fact that economics are going to be the driving force now, the decrease in ideology and the increased need to work together and the interdependence and as a leader the need to work our problems out together and for peaceful solutions the advantages we can take charge of in a peaceful world.

MR. LEHRER: A peaceful, safer world, Darren Swain, has that emerged in the 1980s?

DARREN SWAIN, Bowie [Md] State University: Yes. I would have to say that a peaceful and safer world has emerged in the 1980s. Also I have to add that during the course of the 1980s our view from the world's perspective looking in has somewhat changed. Our role in the world itself during the course of the 1980s has changed just as Jennie has stated earlier. We have to re-examine our role as a power, as a super power in the coming decade.

MR. LEHRER: Do you think we're not as powerful? Are the powers different, we have to use it differently?

MR. SWAIN: I wouldn't say that we're not as powerful. I would have to say that our role as a super power is changing, whereas, that we're not going to be on the same accord as we were at first in that we will have to go out and re-establish our relationships with different companies. Just as Jennie said earlier, I look at the situation in Eastern Europe where there is, the Communism situation over there is just falling apart. We're going to have to go an re-examine our role that we played before when it was ruled by the Communists. Now there's going to be a free democracy somewhat, we're going to have to see what role we can play and help them develop their status.

MR. LEHRER: Pete Baumgartner, in Colorado, how does it look to you? What is different about the country that you live in and the world that you live in today than was when it started 10 years ago, when this decade started 10 years?

PETE BAUMGARTNER, University of Colorado: Well, I think the world is a lot safer and particularly America. I think America had the biggest, had a great role in that, in making the world safer. I would say overall the dissolution of Communism is the greatest change easily in the world that we've seen particularly now in the last, since China in the summer up through the last few days in Romania. That's easily the biggest change. And I think that's going to change the way both super powers' militaries are going to have to, actually their use, probably their reduction all over the world.

MR. LEHRER: Laurie Broquet what about on a more personal level, is our country, has our country become a more or less ethical country? What about our morality? What about the kinds of standards that have been, that you have learned as a young person these last 10 years. Tell me about that.

LAURIE BROQUET, Oakland [Mich.] Community College: I think the standards are diminishing. I think your home life, since the divorce rate is so high, the home life isn't as strong as it used to be. I think that our home life needs to be re-established with programs such as Darren's, getting children more educated, but that really needs to start at home along with the educational system.

MR. LEHRER: Do you feel that you as one person have a responsibility to do something about that? I don't mean to go out and have a nice home, you know what I mean. But do you feel that you are responsible for the future of this country?

MS. BROQUET: Every single person in the world is responsible for the betterment of the world, not just one person. It takes everybody working together, not one person. One person can make a difference, but if everybody's willing to make a difference and do their own individual part, they can make a difference together.

MR. LEHRER: Now where did you learn that? Did you learn that at home? Did you learn that in school? Did you learn in church, in the neighborhood? Why do you feel that way?

MS. BROQUET: My family. My family is a strong influence on me. They always establish the goals of togetherness and freedom and hope, and that I think has helped me see the world as an importance in freedom and hope.

MR. LEHRER: Juan Astorga, do you feel that, did you enter the 1990s with great hope?

JUAN ASTORGA, University of California, San Diego: I enter it with great hope. I know that the future holds endless amounts of opportunities for all of us. We see the Eastern countries how democracy is making its way. I only wish Tiananmen Square hadn't turned out the way it did. I hope that Panama will regain its freedom like the rest of us. We in the United States shall help them, try to help them as much as possible, show our support, and never never go down saying that we're against any type of reforms.

MR. LEHRER: Jennie Koch said she felt that she was being trained at West Point to being a leader, that she was there and she was looking forward to, paraphrasing, but reading between the lines, she's looking forward to leading the country or leading some piece of this country. Do you feel that coming in your life as well? Do you feel like leadership is a role for you?

MR. ASTORGA: I'm hoping it will be. I'm hoping that in all of us we will awaken some sort of energy or power that we can step up and be positive role models to not only our own people but to our sons. We are the future and we shall continue to establish it as so.

MR. LEHRER: Who are your role models?

MR. ASTORGA: My role models. A few, Caesar Chavez, Jesse Jackson, Martin Luther King, all role models took a stand and they knew what they wanted for the future. And as of now, we don't see too many out there, but I know that we can be those role models.

MS. KOCH: I would disagree actually. I mean, I think it's great, I agree with your idea of role models, but I think if we look out into the world now, there are just millions of role models. I mean, if you look at the students in Tianamen Square fighting for democracy, fighting against our government, if you look at the people, the people's revolution that have caused all these changes in Eastern Europe, it's really the younger students which are leading the movements. I think those are the people that we are looking to to be like and to be inspired from.

MR. SWAIN: But I would also like to add what Juan said about role models in the community, and what Jennie said also, Jennie is talking about the world view, and I guess what Juan is speaking of is the view from within the country, our country, the United States, itself. Within our country there is a need for role models in the community. Mine and Juan's community there is an extreme need for role models because of the current situation that we have with the drugs and different things that are happening in our community. There is an extreme need for role models, role models that can be seen now. Most of the people in our communities don't get a chance to see what's happening in China, don't get a chance to see what's happening in Eastern Europe. And they see what's happening around them. They see the drugs and the devastation that's happening around them because of drugs. And what Juan is saying is that we need to go out now, we need to go out now and provide role models.

MR. LEHRER: Who's we? You mean the five of you and all the other --

MR. SWAIN: Exactly. The five of us go back into our communities and I say Juan and I particularly, because the Hispanic and African-American communities in particular are being hit hard with this current drug crisis that's happening within the United States, the influx of drugs that have recently come in.

MR. LEHRER: Do you feel limits to your potential? I mean, is there something that is going to keep you from accomplishing what you think you're able to accomplish?

MR. SWAIN: No, I don't feel that there are any limits that are going to keep me from accomplishing the things that I want to accomplish. The only things that I see are barriers being set up to persuade me not to or dissuade me not to. But in those barriers they instill within me a certain confidence in myself that there's a need to go on, that if this barrier's been set up against you not to make it, that there's something great when you do make it, and it feels great when you can go back into your community and help out. Just as Laurie said earlier, when she got values, she got different things from her family, in our communities most times we don't have that family unit. In the African-American community, most times the family unit isn't there. There's the mother leading the family most times, the absence of the man.

MR. LEHRER: But are you willing to assume a community responsibility, I mean, to be a big brother and a father and an uncle to people that you're not related to?

MR. SWAIN: Yes, I do that now. Laurie spoke of our group earlier, the Big Brothers Organization. Our group is a group of African- American young men who have come together at Bowie State University and who have made a pledge to go back into the community and to act as role models for these youth who are coming up today, youth who don't see positive role models, who live in communities that I explained to Laurie and Jennie earlier that are devastated with drugs and different things like that.

MR. LEHRER: Pete Baumgartner, are students at the University of Colorado doing that? Are your friends doing that?

PETE BAUMGARTNER, University of Colorado: I would say they are as much as any other university in the country. I think it's harder when you're in college to find the time to do those things. People do the best they can.

MR. LEHRER: The rap that's been put on your generation, as you know, is that you all don't care about anything other than yourselves, and just don't kill the messenger here, Pete. You can't touch me from Denver, but they can here. What is the reality? And don't put any gloss on it. I mean, what is, are the five of you exceptions? Are all of you just super kids and that you're exceptions and the rest of them are whatever? Give me a report. You're studying journalism. Give me a report, Pete.

MR. BAUMGARTNER: As competitive as society is, I think that puts extra strength on people to be out for themselves more, but I think in reality those people once they establish themselves, become successful, get the job that they want or the position they're looking for, I think they are gregarious to the rest of society. I think community participation is incredibly high now, maybe not as high as it's ever been, but when people need help, George Bush's thousand points of light I think has a lot of value, a lot of meaning, and we need to, although the base exists for that already, we need to expand upon that through volunteer and community service.

MR. LEHRER: You're nodding, Laurie.

LAURIE BROQUET, Oakland [Mich.] Community College: I disagree with part of what he said. He said that college students don't have the time to go back into their communities and help them and help them see college students as role models, along with their parents and other family members or religious leaders. I think college students have a large role and a big responsibility to go back into their communities.

MR. LEHRER: And say what?

MS. BROQUET: Stress the importance of education, the importance of understanding your country, about your history, about the future, about technology, about computers, which is our future, the goals of our country and the world.

MR. LEHRER: Yes.

MR. BAUMGARTNER: That's incredibly idealistic for her to think you have that much time to do that. A lot of us have to work our way through school and to say we have time just to go out and teach people values at the drop of a hat is just incredibly idealistic I think.

MS. BROQUET: I work and go to school also, but I still believe there is time. College students are busy, but I do believe that students should make the time. Everybody's busy, people in the work force are busy, my parents are busy, they work, and I think everybody's busy, but the time, we can't always say, well, there's going to be time down the road, once we graduate, there will be more time. When do we make time, when we get the job that we want? Or do start now in college, or do we start in high school? Where do we begin?

MS. KOCH: I think it may be idealistic, but if we, who are the leaders of the world in the next generation can't be idealistic, I don't know who can be. I mean, we need to take our values and our standards and we need to be idealistic with them and to try and teach others the importance of public service, the importance of getting a good education, of not doing drugs, and also I'm bringing a larger world view to it, but also the importance of democracy and pluralism as we're seeing going on in the rest of the world. I think we need to be idealistic. I think it's important.

MR. LEHRER: Juan, what's your view on that?

MR. ASTORGA: I totally agree on that. Another thing that you were talking about limits. A great big limit that we have in the world is racism. On our own campus at UCSD, we have a program called - -

MR. LEHRER: That's the University of California at San Diego.

MR. ASTORGA: Yes, the University of California, San Diego -- we have a program called Student Affirmative Action. And a lot of people think that it's geared towards students that don't have theability to maintain themselves at the university, but that is a misrepresentation, misinformation, because it is for under represented students of color who have the ability to be students at the university and these subtle racist issues that appear, students in the Imperial Valley, their counselors are telling them, no, don't go to University, you're not going to be able to make it, you're a Chicano.

MR. LEHRER: Who are they saying it to?

MR. ASTORGA: To students, Chicano female students. And these issues are, you know, subtle reasons to --

MR. LEHRER: Do you go back to these same students and say forget it, you can do it?

MR. ASTORGA: I go back and we try. We're going out to the students and telling them, hey, it's out there, you just go out there and grasp it.

MR. LEHRER: Do you really believe it's out there? As you go into -- how old are you? You're what, 19?

MR. ASTORGA: I'm 19.

MR. LEHRER: As you go into 1990, do you believe it's out there for you personally?

MR. ASTORGA: Yes, I do.

MR. LEHRER: What is it? What is it that's out there for you?

MR. ASTORGA: Our future. We hold our own future in our hands. We are the ones that are going to say what we want to do, how we're going to go about doing it, and like they was naming it, idealistic society or whatever it is, but we as role models and future leaders of America have to go and reach out for it for ourselves.

MR. LEHRER: You're going to be the first woman chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff?

MS. KOCH: If I want to be the first woman chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. By that time, I probably won't be the first woman. I think women are getting a lot more access to higher roles in society and in the military itself. I'm not sure if I'm going to be in the military at that point in time.

MR. LEHRER: You haven't decided whether you're going to be career?

MS. KOCH: No, sir, I haven't. But if I want to do that, I believe that I can. I believe I can do anything, any of us can do anything we want to do. That's one thing that I've learned through going to West Point and four years is that you can do anything you want.

MR. LEHRER: Is that a new thing, do you think? Based on, obviously you all know people older than you are, people that say if we'd have done this 10 years ago, we're going at the end of the '70s. Do you feel that there are fewer restrictions on your future, Jennie, as you sit here, than somebody with the exact same credentials, also just been selected as a Road scholar, a woman cadet at West Point, do you think your future's brighter than it would have been 10 years ago?

JENNIE KOCH, U.S. Military Academy: I think as time passes, you know, opportunities open up in so many different worlds, I'd have to say, yeah, the first women cadets just entered West Point in 1976. I'll be the 10th class to graduate. The first women Road Scholars just were in the class of 77. So obviously as time goes on, the opportunities are greater and greater, and I think it's incredibly exciting as we approach the change of the century.

MR. LEHRER: For young black people in this country, Darren, do you believe the opportunities are better going into 1990 than they were in 1980?

DARREN SWAIN, Bowie [Md.] State University: Well, that's somewhat not hard for me to comment on, but I would just like to give this view. The last administration, Ronald Reagan's administration, sent a message to the African-American community, that in some ways he wasn't really concerned about its future, and I say that through his policies on affirmative action and his different appointments to the Supreme Court. Through those appointments, and through those actions with the affirmative action program, he sent a message to our community that we aren't really part of the scheme so to speak to warrant a better America, and in that, I would just like to add --

MR. LEHRER: Did you buy that message?

MR. SWAIN: No, I didn't buy that message.

MR. LEHRER: Who did? Who do you think bought that message?

MR. SWAIN: I think those African-Americans who are already disgusted with what's going on, what's been put towards them throughout the entire length of time that they've been here in America. From the beginning, we were brought over as slaves to do a menial job,and then to be accepted somewhat into the society and then have limitations thrown at you one after the other just sometimes frustrates you. And I think those African-Americans who have bought that idea of not really being a scheme, a part of the scheme, or not really being part of the bigger picture of America are the ones who bought the Reagan administration's view of the African-American. But I would also like to add that as an African- American I see numerous opportunities before me. It's just the fact that once I decide to go after those opportunities, once I decide to be part of the scheme to put or have input into the bigger picture of America, will doors still open for me, will people accept me in and let me truly be a bigger part of the bigger picture? Just as Jennie said, I'm prepared to be a leader in this country. Is this country prepared to let me be a leader? That's the question that we as a country need to ask ourselves.

MR. LEHRER: What do you think the answer is?

MR. SWAIN: I think the answer somewhat is yes, but then as we look at the actions, I say actions speak louder than words. We look at the current setaside laws that were just passed in Virginia, what the Supreme Court just ruled on, which now is taking back a lot of the affirmative action programs and the different setaside programs that were setaside in the 60's and the 70's now are being taken away from us.

MR. BAUMGARTNER: They also elected a black governor in Virginia.

MR. LEHRER: Did you hear what Pete said? They also elected a black governor in Virginia.

MR. SWAIN: I would also like to add, thanks for reminding me of that, Pete, that's a key point, but those are individuals. There are a lot of black or African-Americans that I feel that are qualified to be governors of not only Virginia, qualified to be mayors of not only New York, but other states and other cities who are not given the opportunity to be mayors and governors of those different states.

MS. KOCH: I disagree there. David Dinkins was just elected mayor of New York.

MR. SWAIN: I just mentioned New York.

MS. KOCH: And Colin Powell was just named to joint Chairman.

MR. SWAIN: As I mentioned, those are individuals. Those are three people that you can put on your hands.

MS. KOCH: But isn't that what makes up the country, is everyone, individuals?

MR. SWAIN: That's true. But as we look at it, I would just like to look at Prince George's County.

MR. LEHRER: Let's don't look at Prince George's County, if you don't mind. But, Pete, you wanted to say to something to Darren about this. You think he's wrong. You disagree with him as well in terms of the opportunities.

MR. BAUMGARTNER: I think the opportunity is there. I think it's been proven. Also I think Seattle elected a black mayor, there's one in Cleveland, San Antonio has a minority mayor. I think they're all over.

MR. SWAIN: Pete, I'm not really going against that we don't have black mayors and we don't have black governors --

MR. BAUMGARTNER: I just want to know what the limitations are. What are the limitations? That's just what I want to know.

MR. SWAIN: I didn't say that there were limitations. I said that there are more qualified African-American men or people out there. And I would not like not just to say men, women also, who are qualified for different positions other than those that you have named, and they are good that they're in those positions that you did name.

MR. LEHRER: Laurie, are you getting a good education?

MS. BROQUET: Yes, I am.

MR. LEHRER: How do you measure that? How do you measure the quality of your education?

MS. BROQUET: I believe education is not measured only with grades. Anybody can sit and read a book and regurgitate what they have read through those books and can easily get A's and B's. I think learning from the books and applying that to your everyday situations and your everyday problems is what education is about.

MR. LEHRER: And you feel you're getting a good education.

MS. BROQUET: Yes, I do.

MR. LEHRER: What about you, Juan, are you getting, or do you feel you're being well educated at the University of California at San Diego?

MR. ASTORGA: I'm getting the best education I can accomplish, opening up new roads for myself. I'm seeing a lot more doors opening up for Chicanos and Chicanos in this time.

MR. LEHRER: And the system is working, the education system you feel is working for you?

MR. ASTORGA: Slowly, very slowly. Last year we had a rally at school asking for an ethnic studies and gender department at the university. So far it's really going slow. We want more students and faculty of color. There are some but not enough. We want more.

MR. LEHRER: But have you been in a situation since you were in college where you are confronted with a task or a problem or something where you said to yourself, oh, if I'd only had a better high school education, if I'd only had a better junior high school education, I'd be so much further along, this would be easier or whatever?

MR. ASTORGA: Not yet. I've had the best education I can get and so far I'm getting a good one right now.

MR. LEHRER: Pete, what about you in Colorado?

MR. BAUMGARTNER: I'm completely happy with my education at the University of Colorado. I think education is what you make it out to be and I've made mine to be as good as it could be.

MR. LEHRER: What do you mean make it out to be? Explain what do you mean.

MR. BAUMGARTNER: By taking advantage of opportunities that you have to work in the field you want to work in, grabbing internships, just doing things outside of school that will help you get farther in your career.

MR. LEHRER: And do you agree with Laurie that there's more to it than just what you're learning in the classroom?

MR. BAUMGARTNER: Most definitely. Most definitely.

MR. LEHRER: Do you think you're learning, back to what we were talking about a moment ago, you said that we live in a competitive society and people are working hard to get through school, et cetera, and then once they get through school and get established, they will do more. Are you learning a, do you feel you have a sense of obligation because you are coming from a privileged situation, being a college graduate?

MR. BAUMGARTNER: I have an obligation to do what?

MR. LEHRER: To put something back.

MR. BAUMGARTNER: Yes, I do definitely.

MR. LEHRER: When you do succeed and you become the publisher of the New York Times or whatever it is you're going to do.

MR. BAUMGARTNER: Yes, I definitely think I have an obligation to give back to the community.

MR. LEHRER: Like what, put what back?

MR. BAUMGARTNER: I'd actually like to do it through being a legislator, and by passing legislation and hopefully being a leader politically that can get things done, that can help the largest amount of people. If you do something, community service, that's great, but you can do more through politics, and that's what I'd like to do.

MR. LEHRER: Jennie Koch, there are several proposals before Congress that would require some form, require, voluntary, I realize that's a contradiction, but voluntary public service by young people. One of the proposals is, for instance, is you contribute so much voluntary service and you can get a voucher to go to school, either military or whatever, and every survey that's been done of the young people themselves say forget it. Now why is that, the majority, not all of them, the majority?

MS. KOCH: Well, there's always exceptions to everything that goes on. I go to school with 4,000 other people that have chosen to devote at least five years of their lives and a lot more of that to being leaders to defending their country, serving the national interest. Of course, all the children who are our age, our contemporaries, are not going to have this whole idea of public service, but it's us who have this ideal and who have this desire to serve the country and to serve our community, it's our job to instill this into them, and to teach the next generation, the people who are going to be our age 10 years from now that they have to have that idea in their minds.

MR. LEHRER: Do you think there's less of that kind of commitment now among young people than there once was, or can you put it on a scale?

MS. KOCH: The people that I've been around, no. I think there's a great feeling that they want to put something back into the community. You look at Darren or Juan, they're doing it in very, in a very central or centered way in the community, itself, working in their small organizations for the African Americans and for the Hispanics. I'm trying to do it in a larger view. I'd like to get into some kind of political role or into some military role. I think we're just an example of a small population of people who want to do this, but I think there are tons of people out there.

MR. LEHRER: And we would like to have the five of you stay in touch and we'll have you back in 10 years and see how it all worked out, okay, or maybe before then. But anyhow, thank you very much for being with us tonight. And good luck to all five of you.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Our series of conversations marking the end of the decade continues tomorrow. We will hear from five prominent economists. ESSAY - LITTLE SHOP OF WONDERS

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Next tonight we have our Tuesday essay. Jim Fisher, columnist for the Kansas City Times, has some thoughts about donuts and physics.

MR. FISHER: Morning in St. John, Kansas, population 1500 and dwindling. Inside the donut shop, the place for coffee since the other restaurant here closed, folks are talking crops and weather and a little gossip, breakfast time staples here and in a hundred other prairie towns where this year's wheat crop was awful, farm loans still hang like swords, and local businesses struggle. Nothing new here except Jim Hud, the proprietor, wants some country music up front. Watch. Not every donut shop has a radio operated by a laser beam. Welcome to Hud's Haven where physics and chemistry go right along with the cinnamon rolls and apple fritters. The coffee and donuts are up front, but take a look back here. It's a mad scientist's jumble of oscillators, capacitors, transformers, and more.

MR. HUD: When I was getting ready to retire, I wanted some place to house my equipment. Somebody suggested the idea of running a donut shop and I pursued that and found I could buy these donuts already bakes. The town needed a place where people could meet and socialize and it just seemed to work out that by running a donut shop if I could make enough money to do this, I think there is a wealth of material in old junk appliances that is just being thrown away and wasted, that you can build a whole science program out of.

MR. FISHER: Clearly, Hud isn't quite the rustic he appears. He taught high school science here for 31 years until he retired two years ago. He was the 1969 Kansas teacher of the year and was named to the Kansas Teachers Hall of Fame just this year.

MR. HUD: The main thing I find is that when students can see something happen as well as read it out of the book, you can blend those two things together and you'll make your theory mean something. Of course you have to have the students that really want to learn. Now that helps a lot, but part of this making them want to learn is based on motivating them to where they can see that it's something they can be made to understand. If they can add and subtract, multiple and divide, they can learn physics. [Demonstration]

MR. FISHER: Kids who come in learn that an electrical jolt can make a ring jump to the ceiling after it's been briefly dipped in the liquid nitrogen that Hud salvages from Bull Seaman shipping containers. You can see the working of a one cylinder engine working on fuel made from grain, even the coil explains alternating current and how power can be transported long distances and how a gyroscope works. In a sense, Jim Hud is a throwback, a man who's taken generations of farm and town kids, seen that spark ignite behind their eyes, and found join in teaching them, seen scores of them leave the mud and dust of Central Kansas behind and carve out careers in a whole new world of science and technology. Evenings HUD teaches his brand of chemistry to a group of junior college nursing students right here in the donut shop. Many of these students who are working are single mothers who want more than a lifetime of hash house wages but for whom chemistry until now has been a seemingly insurmountable obstacle.

MR. HUD: I like to tell my students in chemistry that chemistry is a lot like cooking. You can almost teach a course in chemistry with baking soda, table salt, vinegar, lye, ordinary lye, a complete thorough understanding of algebra isn't necessarily needed, if they can understand ratio and proportion, I think you can be made to understand basic chemical principles, and I like to think that that's what we can do here is make it more visible to them, take it one step at a time until they get each idea in mind, where the student can actually get his hands into it and understand it.

MR. FISHER: Hud's message is simple. That before Japan, before all the wailing of how we produce 10 lawyers for every engineer, before we abandon function for form, substance for style, America got where it did by being a nation of tinkerers. People did it first, then figured it out, which is what Jim Hud and his students are still doing in a donut shop. RECAP

MR. LEHRER: Again, the major stories of this Tuesday, a new president and prime minister assumed power in Romania, the bodies of Nicolae Ceausescu, the executed former leader of Romania, and his wife were shown on national television. And this evening Romanian television showed excerpts from Ceausescu's trial. The deposed leader remained defiant to the end. He refused to recognize the court and refused to answer their questions. He said he would only answer to the Romanian people. And in Panama, U.S. troops captured another 400 pro-Noriega soldiers, while Noriega remained at the Vatican embassy in Panama City and negotiations continued over where he goes next. Finally, an update on U.S. casualties in Panama. The official death toll is now 23 American soldiers killed, 330 wounded, 2 missing. Here are the latest names of the servicemen killed in Panama: Private First Class Vance T. Coats, Private First Class Martin D. Denson, First Lt. John Wessel Hunter, Chief Warrant Officer Wilson B. Owens, Chief Warrant Officer Andrew P. Porter, Private James Allen Tabor. Good night, Charlayne.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Good night, Jim. That's our Newshour for tonight. We'll be back tomorrow. I'm Charlayne Hunter-Gault. Good night.