The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

MR. MUDD: Good evening. I'm Roger Mudd in New York.

MR. LEHRER: And I'm Jim Lehrer in Washington. After our summary of the news this Wednesday, Senators Wofford and Nickles debate the Clinton national service plan, Elizabeth Brackett updates the flood situation in Kansas City, then come reports on the fighting along the Israel-Lebanon border, on the problems between the two new nations of Russia and Ukraine, and on a Green Beret's return to Cambodia. NEWS SUMMARY

MR. LEHRER: President Clinton said today he was prepared to protect United Nations troops in Bosnia with U.S. air power. French peacekeepers were fired on by Serb gunners in Sarajevo twice over the past three days. The French government demanded the U.N. immediately implement a plan for western planes to provide air cover for their troops. President Clinton explained the U.S. position on such a mission at a Washington news conference this afternoon.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: We're prepared to fulfill our commitments, yes, and the procedure is as follows: The United Nations forces in Bosnia must ask the secretary general of the United Nations for assistance. He will then relay that request to NATO, and we would act through NATO, and the answer to your question is, we are prepared to move if we are asked to provide that assistance by the secretary general. Will it be enough to deter aggression, to stop the shelling in Sarajevo, to, to bring the parties to the peace table? I don't know. But we're prepared to do our part.

MR. LEHRER: The U.S. has already moved about two dozen ground attack aircraft in bases in Italy. Four possible air strikes in Bosnia. U.N. Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali said today the operation could begin as soon as Monday once rules of engagement were worked out. He also said he was waiting for a green light from the commander of U.N. forces in the former Yugoslavia. Meanwhile, the Bosnian peace talks continued in Geneva. U.N. officials said negotiations were progressing steadily but gave no details. Bosnian Muslim officials complained they were being railroaded into a summit. The talks are on a Serb-Croat plan to divide Bosnia into three ethnic states. Roger.

MR. MUDD: President Clinton said today both Israel and the Hezbollah guerrillas could stop their fighting in south Lebanon and that Syria should encourage him to stop. Earlier, the State Department accused Israel of targeting civilians in Lebanon. The Department said Sec. of State Christopher had telephoned his concerns to Israel Prime Minister Rabin. This was the fourth straight day of cross border fighting in the region. More than 14 people were reported killed, bringing the four-day toll to at least 82. thousands more people fled the region to escape the attacks. U.N. and Lebanese officials estimated that more than 200,000 people out of a population 800,000 have left the area. The Israeli government also drew a sharp rebuke today for its assault from U.N. Sec. General Boutros-Ghali. In a statement issued in New York, the secretary general said that given the history of the Mideast conflict "It is deplorable that any government would consciously adopt policies that would lead to the creation of new flows of refugees and displaced persons. We'll have more on that story later in the program. CIA Director James Woolsey today said that North Korea had tested a new missile that could carry nuclear, chemical, or biological payloads. He said the missile with a range of 600 miles is a significant threat to security in the region. Woolsey also voiced concern about use of the missile by other countries. He spoke at a House Foreign Affairs Committee Hearing.

JAMES WOOLSEY, CIA Director: The greatest concern is North Korea's continued efforts to sell the missile abroad, particularly the dangerous and potentially hostile countries such as Iran. Deployment of this missile will provide an important increase in the capabilities of various countries to attack their neighbors. With this missile, North Korea could reach virtually all of Japan, Iran could reach Israel, and Libya could reach U.S. bases and allied capitals in the Mediterranean region.

MR. MUDD: Woolsey said North Korea is believed to have enough nuclear material to make at least one bomb, and he welcomed its decision not to withdraw from the nuclear nonproliferation treaty. Woolsey also confirmed reports that Libya was constructing a second chemical weapons plant. He says Libya continues to evade international attempts to stop its production of chemical weapons.

MR. LEHRER: President Clinton put more pressure on Congress today to pass his budget plan. He assembled a group of more than sixty corporate executives at a White House news conference to endorse the plan. They echoed the President's call of recent days to end the gridlock and get on with it. They called the President's goal of $500 billion deficit reduction essential to restoring economic growth. On Capitol Hill, Democratic negotiators continued to work to meet a Thursday deadline set by the leadership. Some conservative Democrats led by Sen. David Boren of Oklahoma had threatened to vote against the budget if the conferees do not eliminate the proposed gas tax and make more spending cuts. Mr. Clinton was asked about the threatened revolt at his news conference.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Let me say this. The atmosphere in discussions here is not as bad as, if anything, it's a little better than it was before the initial votes were taken in the Senate and the House. We'll just have to see. I mean, I think in the end, whatever the situation is, they're going to have to make up their minds whether the consequences of voting no for the country are graver than the consequences of voting yes. If that's the question, they'll all vote yes.

MR. LEHRER: Republicans made it clear they would be offering little, if any support, for whatever plan the conferees produce. Sen. Phil Gramm of Texas spoke at aCapitol Hill news conference today.

SEN. PHIL GRAMM, [R] Texas: As people who save and invest and create jobs look at this plan, they see a massive tax increase that will raise taxes over $250 billion whether the House version or the Senate version prevails in conference. And you can't get more savings by taxing savers. You can't get more investment by taxing investors. You can't get more job creation by taxing the people who create jobs.

MR. LEHRER: In economic news today, the Commerce Department reported factory orders for durable goods rose 3.8 percent in June. Most of the increase came from higher airplane sales. Ford Motor Company and Chrysler both reported sharply higher profits today. Ford said its 2nd quarter earnings doubled to $775 million. Chrysler's profits were 685 million, nearly four times what it made in the same period a year ago.

MR. MUDD: Flood-soaked Midwesterners may be, may be in for some drier weather over the next few days. The National Weather Service today reported signs of a break in the system that's been causing continual rain in the region the past six weeks. Meanwhile, levees in the Kansas City area continued to hold under mounting pressure from the Kansas and Missouri Rivers. Both rivers crested yesterday at record levels. About 8,000 people in Kansas City, Kansas, have been evacuated. The Army Corps of Engineers said the Missouri River could start dropping a foot today if the area is spared any more rain. Levees along the Mississippi River were also holding today, but a new crest was expected to test them again soon. Officials said the crest should hit St. Louis and towns south of it by early next week.

MR. LEHRER: The head of Italy's Civilian Intelligence Service resigned today following three bomb attacks last night. We have a report from Tim Yuert of Independent Television News.

TIM YUERT: It was the latest in a series of terrorist attacks which began two months ago, the explosion serving to further undermine Italy's already discredited political establishment. Historic buildings were damaged. There were human casualties too. In Milan, three firemen, a policeman, and a man sleeping on a bench were killed. Dozens were wounded. Said one, "The explosion was like an earthquake." In Rome, one blast shook the basilica used by the Pope in his role as bishop of Rome. Another destroyed part of a 7th century church nearby. Italy's cultural heritage was once again a terrorist target. It's not clear who was responsible for the attacks. Some blame the Mafia, others extremists who want to further destabilize the government. Labor groups organized demonstrations this morning, and union leaders demanded a two hour general strike to protest what they called an assault on democracy.

MR. LEHRER: And that's it for the News Summary tonight. Now it's on to the national service debate, a Midwest flood update, the Lebanon-Israel border fighting, problems between Russia and Ukraine, and a return to Cambodia. FOCUS - HELPING HAND

MR. MUDD: We lead tonight with a discussion on the President's National Service Bill. Today the House of Representatives considered the legislation that would allow $389 million next year to a federal program giving about 25,000 students $5,000 a year to pay for college. In return, the students would take public service jobs for up to two years. They would work before, during, or after college for minimum wages, $4.25 an hour, to be funded partly by state and local governments. This afternoon, the House cut the $5,000 allowance by about 10 percent. At the same time, the Senateis still caught up in a Republican filibuster over the bill. We'll sample the debate in the Senate after this backgrounder from Correspondent Kwame Holman.

MR. HOLMAN: On Monday, nearly a thousand young people jammed the committee room in the Dirksen Senate Office Building to voice their support for the National Service Bill and to urge members of Congress to pass it quickly.

NICOLE THOMAS, Washington, D.C.: Congress, don't delay any longer. Pass National Service now and give more of us a chance to make a difference. Give us a chance to become productive and contributing citizens of the world. [applause]

MR. HOLMAN: Meanwhile, in Chicago, President Clinton was delivering the same message, but aiming it directly at Senate Republicans.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: They just want to delay it. Why? Why shouldn't we send a signal to America's young people that we want you to work in your community to make it a better place?

MR. HOLMAN: The National Service Bill has at least the 51 votes needed to pass in the Senate but hasn't had the 60 votes needed to end debate on the measure. Yet, Republican Arlen Specter, a co- sponsor of the bill, yesterday denied Republican opposition amounted to a filibuster.

SEN. ARLEN SPECTER, [R] Pennsylvania: Now there are a few of us on this side of the aisle, myself included, who find ourselves characteristically in the position of being, of being swing votes. And after I took a look at the cost involved in this bill last week and discussed it with members of the other side of the aisle and the administration, it seemed to me that it was too expensive.

MR. HOLMAN: Senate Republicans led by Nancy Kassebaum of Kansas say their concern is that for a new program the National Service Bill is too big and too costly.

SEN. NANCY KASSEBAUM, [R] Kansas: I'm convinced, Madame President, that if this program is going to succeed, it really should start smaller, rather than larger, and grow as the participation and the community needs to fill the program out so that it can be a disciplined, reasonable approach to what I think we could all wish to see achieved.

MR. HOLMAN: Sen. Edward Kennedy reportedly is ready to offer a scaled down version of the President's bill, but yesterday showed frustration with Senate Republicans.

SEN. EDWARD KENNEDY, [D] Massachusetts: Until now, debate on National Service has been open and constructive. Last week, we discussed the important issues looking for opportunities to find common ground and strengthen an improved bill. We have accepted or agreed to accept 14 amendments already, almost all of them offered by Republicans. All of these changes have improved the bill. They've made the bill stronger and more bipartisan, and there is no justification for a filibuster.

MR. MUDD: The Senate is scheduled to vote on ending the filibuster tomorrow. The outcome is very much in doubt. We hear from two Senators now on different sides of the debate. Sen. Harris Wofford is a Democrat from Pennsylvania, and Sen. Don Nickles, a Republican from Oklahoma. Good evening, Senators. Sen. Nickles, what is your main objection to the National Service Bill?

SEN. NICKLES: Well, probably, Roger, the main objection is the cost of this program. It's a brand new program. It's going to be enormously expensive, and I think if our primary purpose is to help people educationally, its, its cost way out of line compared to other programs we have for education, the cost is enormous, and the President's budget, the first year is going to cost about $16,000 per person or per participant. By 1997, it's goingto be $22,600 per person, this under the President's budget, and they're entitled to two years. So that's over $45,000 per participant. I think that's outlandish when you compare it to Pell Grants, when you compare it to student loans. It's much more economical, and we help millions of people there. Even under the President's proposal, if we spend $3.4 billion a year, which he requested for '97 and '98, that would only help 150,000 people at a cost, again, of like $45,000 per beneficiary. I don't think that's money well spent.

MR. MUDD: Well, where, where does the $45,000 figure come from, Senator?

SEN. NICKLES: Roger, if you take the President's budget, he requested $3.4 billion in 1997, in 1998 and additional $3.4 billion. He calls for 150,000 beneficiaries each of those years or participants. You just divide 150,000 into $3.4 billion. That's where you get the $22,600 per year. So it's an enormously expensive program, because not only do they get the $5,000 educational benefit, but they also have the job, and so they're going to be paid minimum wage. Minimum wage will be increased. In addition to that, they're going to get health care benefits. In addition to that, they're going to get day care. Plus, there's going to be enormous administrative costs. So you add all that together, under the President's own budget figures, the cost is $22,600 per participant per year by the year 1997.

MR. MUDD: Sen. Wofford, do you acknowledge the accuracy of your seat mate's figures?

SEN. WOFFORD: No, and he knows that nowhere in this bill, nowhere do those figures appear. The proposal that was before us was for $394 million to enable 25,000 young people at $5,000 a year education voucher, as you accurately said, at minimum wage, and a very modest health care plan, $15,000 per person to engage in hard service to their communities, plus two and a half times that to send a Peace Corps volunteer abroad. I'm glad Don wasn't around when we were starting the Peace Corps. I can see him. There were a lot of Republicans that tried that. They said, let's start this as a tiny pilot project. Sgt. Shriver and John Kennedy said, we want to start it with impact that can help define America and the world. It's the best investment we've made in overseas aid, but this is a small investment compared to what we've put in a Peace Corps volunteer. It's time to bring that Peace Corps idea home in practical ways. This is a sound beginning of a program.

MR. MUDD: Sen. Wofford, you've likened it now to the Peace Corps and others have likened it to the GI Bill, but the Democrats have now scaled it back from what started at 7 billion to 2 1/2 billion. And now you're down to just a billion and a half. How could a program that small have any impact at all?

SEN. WOFFORD: Well, it's either too small or too big, I gather tonight. I think it's just about right. We're -- we have, indeed, gone the extra mile to help break this filibuster, this gridlock. There are lots of Republicans that want to vote for this that aren't being permitted by the gridlock that lock on filibusters in this side of the House. There are a score of Republican sponsors in the House that say this is basically a Republican idea in all of its aspects. The program as scaled down, as trimmed that we're supporting before the Senate tomorrow on a vote, would enable over three years a hundred thousand young people to participate in this program. It'll be a billion and a half, fifteen thousand dollars total cost per person. About 100,000 young people engaged in this can find themselves and help change America. It took the Peace Corps 26 years to build to a total of 100,000 volunteers who've served abroad. So it's a good beginning. It's a small beginning, and the Republicans now, actually the only difference between the proposals that Republicans have made is that they say instead of a three year authorization it should be a two year authorization, which is another way of undermining the bill. You can't start the new program in two years and spend your second year defending the program to be reauthorized. We're down to a narrow, petty difference, and this filibuster is being used to keep dozens of Republicans from voting for this bill who want to vote for this bill.

MR. MUDD: Sen. Nickles, go ahead. Tell me about the --

SEN. NICKLES: Well, let me add --

MR. MUDD: -- two year proposal. Wouldn't that really gut the bill?

SEN. NICKLES: I will say that some of our colleagues on the Republican side are interested in a compromise and they proposed a two year program instead of a three year program, and they proposed the definitive amounts for the first and the second year. The bill that's now pending before the Senate has $394 million the first year, and then it has such sums in the future. Well, the President proposed 394, but then the next year he said 1.2 billion. Now, just a minute. In the President's budget 1.2 billion the second year, 2.4 billion the third year, 3.4 billion the fourth and the fifth years. Also, I might mention, Roger, the President a week ago said that this program is going to benefit millions of Americans. Those are his words. Now the President's promoting this program. He says it's going to benefit millions of Americans. If it benefits 2 million Americans, the cost is $45 billion per year.

MR. MUDD: Was that a campaign --

SEN. NICKLES: No. Stop kidding.

SEN. WOFFORD: It's the direct student lending that's going to immediately --

SEN. NICKLES: Just a minute.

SEN. WOFFORD: -- benefit millions of Americans --

MR. MUDD: So Sen. Nickles, was his, was his, was that rhetoric, or was that a presidential promise that it would help millions?

SEN. NICKLES: Roger, the President made a statement on Larry King last week, and I feel over, because the proposal before the Senate is 25,000 first year, but he said on Larry King last week that it's going to benefit millions of people. If so, it's going to cost at least 45 billion dollars a year.

MR. MUDD: Go ahead, Sen. Wofford.

SEN. WOFFORD: Roger, every, every Peace Corps volunteer affects hundreds of people. Every participant, every one of the hundred thousand here is going to help and affect thousands of people. The direct student lending, which is a different program but tied to this, is going to enable college loans tied to your income to be available to millions of college students. The bill before us is very modest. It's fine to talk about proposals in the campaign or elsewhere. This bill before us is for 25,000 young people. We were proposing that it would only increase in future years to the extent that it proved itself, that it was cost effective, that communities said this is really worth it, and young people like the ones you saw on the show said they want it. Now the Republicans wanted specific numbers, so we've given them some modest numbers.

MR. MUDD: Sen. Nickles, let me ask you, let me go back to the two year question I asked. It has been suggested that one of the reasons the Republicans want it for two years is that the debate to reauthorize the bill would then come in 1995 rather than in 1996, which is a presidential campaign. Is that accurate?

SEN. NICKLES: I really think the reason why Republicans and other people are saying, well, it's a brand new program, before we get this thing into multi-year authorizations, before we allow this thing to ramp up and cost billions upon billions of dollars, we ought to look at it. We ought to find out whether or not it has some successes. And frankly, the costs are so enormous compared to student loans. Give you an example. A student loan, including default and interest, is a little over $400 per student. This program could cost $22,000 per year per student or $45,000 per participant. It is not a good cost/benefit ratio if you're trying to help young people go to school.

SEN. WOFFORD: Well, I hope Don will help us to complete the Pell Grants and student loan funding, which we had before the Congress in the growth and jobs bill and the Republicans vetoed and filibustered that. So join us for that. I'm for that, but this is an entirely different service program that young people are, are getting $5,000 to help them go to college after a year of hard service. It'll be the best investment we've made, as the GI Bill was after --

MR. MUDD: Sen. Nickles, you're aware of the editorial criticism and the criticism from Democrats that all you and some Republicans are trying to do is deny President Clinton something that's very dear to his heart. You're not arguing on the merits. You're just trying to block the initiative.

SEN. NICKLES: I disagree. They should listen to our debates. I've made several speeches on the floor, and I'm saying, wait a minute, let's not start a brand new, expensive program that frankly the same time that the Democrats are trying to raise everybody's taxes in America, they're also trying to come up with a brand new spending program. Now I understand my friend's excitement, because Democrats are excited to spend somebody else's money. This is a big, new spending program. My friend says they're going to have a hard year to work. They have to work 1700 hours a year to qualify for this program. That's about thirty some hours a week. That's not hard work. And some of us seem to think that really you can teach people better how to work in the private sector than you can by having a bunch of federal bureaucrats dictated one-third by Washington, one-third by the states, and one-third by different organizations teaching people how to work. We think the private sector, volunteers, and volunteers who even aren't paid can do a much better job serving the community than a whole army of federal bureaucrats who are going to be paying $22,000 a year, $16,000 a year the first year.

MR. MUDD: Sen. Wofford.

SEN. WOFFORD: My friend who let us go from one, less than a trillion to four trillion dollars in debt in this country, I can't quite understand these credentials that talked about belt tightening.

SEN. NICKLES: I'll be happy to compare my credentials to yours.

SEN. WOFFORD: I'd be willing to compare my $65 billion digital spending cuts.

MR. MUDD: Sen. Wofford, Sen. Nickles says that such a program as this will undermine the American tradition of altruism and unpaid volunteerism. What's your response to that?

SEN. WOFFORD: Well, Elizabeth Dole, president of the American Red Cross, has sent a strong letter supporting this bill, saying exactly the opposite, that full-time volunteers can help multiply the number of part-time volunteers, can help spread the volunteering ethic in this country, and the American Red Cross is ready to help implement this act with the use of full-time volunteers along with their part-time volunteers. Ex-Peace Corps volunteers, by now 140,000, are proving that a year, two years of intense service leads them to a life long practice and ethic of volunteer service. This will multiply that.

MR. MUDD: Tomorrow you have a cloture vote scheduled. You have 56 Democrats. Apparently, you have two Republicans, Duremberger and Jeffords, who will join you. That makes 58. You need 60. Where are the two Republicans going to come from? Do you have any names for me?

SEN. WOFFORD: I have some names in my heart. We'll see tomorrow, but there are far more Republicans than just those two that want to vote for this bill. The issue is: Will the Republican lock on the filibuster let the Republicans who are co-sponsors and who support this bill vote for it?

MR. MUDD: You mean like Sen. Mack of Florida?

SEN. WOFFORD: I mean, I mean, a number --

MR. MUDD: You mean Specter?

SEN. WOFFORD: -- of co-sponsors. Yes, indeed.

MR. MUDD: How about you, Sen. Nickles, do you have a prediction for tomorrow?

SEN. NICKLES: Well, I'm hopeful that cloture will not prevail, and this will be a real victory for taxpayers. Frankly, if they get cloture and they're able to steam roll this bill through the Senate, through the Congress, I will just tell you right now, Roger, we're going to look back four and five years from now. You're going to see a program that is exploding in cost. And people sometimes wonder, why does the deficit go up? Well, it's because Congress passes authorization legislation, has enormous potential, enormous appeal, and frankly, it's going to cost taxpayers billions and billions of dollars.

MR. MUDD: Well --

SEN. WOFFORD: Sixty corporate leaders say this will be the way to --

MR. MUDD: Thank you both very much, Sen. Wofford and Sen. Nickles. Jim.

MR. LEHRER: Still to come on the NewsHour tonight, a flood update, the Middle East fighting, Russia versus Ukraine, and a Green Beret's return. FOCUS - CREST FALLEN

MR. LEHRER: Next, Elizabeth Brackett reports from Kansas City on the flood that came but not as terribly as feared.

MS. BRACKETT: Finally, some good news from the flood-ravaged Midwest. Despite a record level crest on the Missouri River and a near record crest on the Kansas River, the levees protecting Kansas City, Missouri, and Kansas City, Kansas, held. Mayor Emmanuel Cleaver said both cities could breathe a big sigh of relief.

MAYOR EMMANUEL CLEAVER, Kansas City, Missouri: We think that we may have dodged the bullet. We think that we may have been able to get beyond what could have been a very difficult time for Kansas Citians. Our levees so far are holding. We did not have any water come over the levees, so the question now is whether the levees are going to hold, and that's a question that we still have not answered, because we've never had this kind of impact on the levees. But right now we feel somewhat comfortable in the fact that things are, are probably going to return to normal very shortly.

MS. BRACKETT: The two cities were prepared for the worst. On the Kansas side of the river, several low lying business districts were evacuated when the two rivers began rapidly rising on Monday. As the rivers were racing towards their crests, water began seeping through the concrete flood wall that protects the cities. The assistant chief of engineering for the Army Corps, Michael Bart, says the 62 miles of Army Corps flood walls and levees have never been under such pressure.

MICHAEL BART, Army Corps of Engineers: It's probably got its biggest test within the last couple of days here. It's still being tested, but it's functioning, and we're pleased with the performance.

MS. BRACKETT: What are the fears now?

MICHAEL BART: Additional rainfall, more water coming down the river, adding to the already peaks that have occurred, levees that are getting saturated, but right now we have no specific concerns.

MS. BRACKETT: Officials here say that it is not just that the cities got lucky. An extensive flood control plan has been in effect here since the 1930s. The first flood wall and levees were built in the early '40s. Following a major flood in 1951, the wall and the levees were raised and reinforced. Today the roughly 100 million dollars spent to protect the cities seemed like a good investment.

MAYOR CLEAVER: We have had flooding. I want to make sure that I get out the message that we have had serious flooding. We've suffered losses in the millions. We think that it could have been worse. We were fortunate in that many people in the community had some foresight, and we probably have been able to come out of this a little better than most of the cities upstream in particular.

MS. BRACKETT: But they are still keeping a very close eye on the rivers here. Michael Bart says the Army Corps has been analyzing the data from this gage station sitting in the now raging Missouri four times a day.

MICHAEL BART: The gage readings in there give us an indication of how high, how much free board we have remaining on the levee system. It also gives the U.S. Geologic Survey and the National Weather Service valuable data in order for them to make crest predictions as well as discharge and velocity measurements, all the type of technical data that is needed for analysis of the flood.

MS. BRACKETT: Did you ever think you'd see the river at this height?

MICHAEL BART: Yeah, basically. There's a lot of folks who worked the 1951 flood who are retired or, or now deceased that you, you read in books and read stories about it and said, it would have been interesting to see what it did there, and here we are again. In fact, I think it's a correct statement that every high water mark in basically northern Missouri all the way to St. Louis has been broken or will break.

MS. BRACKETT: But 10 minutes up river from Kansas City on the Missouri River, the small, historic town of Parkville has not escaped the floodwaters. Unprotected by any levee, the water began rising here three weeks ago. Now, 40 percent of the town's business district is underwater. The strange sight brought young and old to the water's edge. On the street there was talk of little else but what had happened to their town. Rev. James Hart told his concerns to a doctor who had volunteered to help.

REV. JAMES HART, Parkville, Missouri: Well, I think cleaning it up is going to be depressing. I think it's going to be more depressing. People wait, but when you have to go clean it up and see what's left.

DR. PAT LEARY, Parkville, Missouri: Well, I figure people don't need to be concerned about their health care when they're worried about their, their whole places being destroyed.

MS. BRACKETT: Former Parkville alderman and business owner Bob Dixon is worried about the town's economic future, but he, like many here, is not pushing for levee protection.

BOB DIXON, Parkville, Missouri: I don't think that per se spending millions and millions of dollars for a levee would be particularly beneficial, at least for Parkville, considering that overall the smaller percentage geographically of the town is affected, but certainly a large percentage of the businesses are hurt. But I think that if you ask most business people which would they rather have, a scenic view of the river or this, I think most of them would perhaps opt to we'll take our chances again.

MS. BRACKETT: But right now, the view of the river in Parkville is anything but scenic. Instead, the view is of one more town that has learned this summer it is nature, not man, in charge. UPDATE - UNDER ATTACK

MR. LEHRER: Now a report from Israel on the reaction to the Israeli attacks on Muslim and Palestinian guerrillas in South Lebanon. Today President Clinton urged restraint on the Israelis and the State Department and other countries have issued stronger criticism of the shelling of south Lebanese villages. There is also controversy within Israel. Liz Donnelly of Independent Television News narrates this report.

LIZ DONNELLY, ITN: The roads north to Beirut are jammed as tens of thousands of civilians, men, women, and children, left their homes in southern Lebanon, desperate to escape Israel's bombardment. Families climbed into anything which would take them. Many had packed hurriedly, grabbing a few precious possessions to leave homes destroyed by the bombing. After three long days, the bombardment was eased slightly this afternoon. Israel said this was to allow civilians to leave the area. The Israelis said they wanted to force at least 150,000 people north. They appear to have more than succeeded. Some estimates now put the figure at a quarter of a million. Israel's calculating that this exodus will exert such pressure on the authorities in Beirut and through them on Syria, which effectively controls Lebanon, that the Syrians will take action to subdue Hezbollah, which has increased its attacks on Israeli soldiers operating in occupied southern Lebanon. After a specially called cabinet meeting this morning which heard reports of great satisfaction from the Army at the way the operation was going, the government said its strategy remained unchanged.

AMNON RUBINSTEIN, Israeli Education Minister: The policy of this government and the aim of this operation is to put an end to the attacks of Hezbollah against the citizens and the residents of Israel in the north. And it's up to them, or up to the Lebanese authorities, as well as the Syrian patrons to put an end to this, and then there's no further claim.

URI DROMI, Government Spokesman: I think that they receive the first results of our activity in the last three days. Many villagers listened to our warnings and they left the villages, and now whoever is left is obviously a member of the Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations who used to operate there.

MS. DONNELLY: But in the wider political arena, Israel is far from united. After criticism in some of this morning's newspapers, the prime minister, Yitzhak Rabin, faced heckling from his left wing in the country's parliament, the Knesset. Israel's aim has been to suppress Hezbollah which despite the punitive tax is defiant, and as its leading cleric, Sheik Fadrallah, buried more of their dead today, Hezbollah was determined its message would not go unheard. It vowed to continue its struggle against Israel, whatever the cost, and said that Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin would pay dearly for his illusions. Syria says Israel's attack could threaten the whole Middle East peace process. But unofficially, observers believe Syria's calculating the bombardment will backfire on Israel in the months to come.

HUSSEIN AGHA, Middle East Political Analyst: In the process of having those pictures being seen around the world perhaps the Syrian point of view would be heard more attentively than has been the case up to now.

MS. DONNELLY: So Syria really hopes to benefit in the longer term in the peace process?

HUSSEIN AGHA: Absolutely. I don't think what is happening from the Syrian point of view is a hindrance to peace. It is seen I guess in terms of a lubricant to peace or something that will introduce new blood to peace and make it more forthcoming than has been the case up till now.

MS. DONNELLY: And as Israel has learned, it certainly hasn't been prepared to force Hezbollah into submission yet. Late this afternoon, in another gesture of defiance, more Katusha rockets landed in Northern Israel and were immediately followed by further reprisals, the 11th hour raid today in what Mr. Rabin is calling Operation Accountability. FOCUS - DIVIDING THE SPOILS

MR. MUDD: Next, a report from Ukraine, the former Soviet republic that inherited an enormous stockpile of military hardware when the old superpower collapsed. This week, the Ukrainian government officially agreed to dismantle a few of the several thousand nuclear missiles which are aimed at the United States. But Ukraine still has many other nuclear warheads and also has claims on part of the Soviet navy. All this adds up to tense relations between Ukrainians and their former comrades in Moscow. Special Correspondent Simon Marks reports from Kiev.

SIMON MARKS: Dawn in the Crimea, and a tradition as old as the Black Sea Fleet, itself, but the flags it's raised on Patrol Boat No. 112 is a Ukrainian flag hoisted by soldiers who challenge the Commonwealth of Independent States for the right to own their vessel. These men were among the first sailors to pledge allegiance to an independent Ukraine. Their ship is the first in the Ukrainian Navy.

CAPT. SERGEI NASTENKO, Ship's Commander: [speaking through interpreter] I think it's right. It's necessary, and it's essential. Every civilized state has the right to have a fleet. Ukraine already has its own fleet, and we'll have an even newer and stronger fleet in time.

MR. MARKS: Officially, the Black Sea Fleet is now being evenly divided between Russia and Ukraine. The two countries have spent two years arguing over the spoils of the Soviet Navy. Their decision to split the fleet came after officers on more than half its 380 ships raised the St. Andrews flag of Russia in place of a commonwealth banner to illustrate their loyalty to Moscow. But many officers want the whole fleet to come under Russian jurisdiction. They say they'll refuse to obey orders to carry out the proposed split. Capt. Alexander Yeliseev has served on the Black Sea for 17 years.

CAPT. ALEXANDER YELISEEV, Russian Officer: [speaking through interpreter] Personally, I'm against it. The relations between all the officers on board ship are good. We live together. We work together. But now we're going to have to split up. You can divide up ships, but how can you divide up people?

MR. MARKS: With question marks hanging over its future, morale and discipline have evaporated from the Black Sea fleet. Sailors uncertain whom they serve, some bathe in the shadows of guns that were once ready to fight the Soviet Union's enemies. Nearly all the ships in the fleet are grounded. A fuel shortage means some haven't left port for a year and a half. Defense analysts say a force designed to take on the U.S. Navy in any Mediterranean conflict is now more politically significant than strategic.

SERGEI ROGOV, USA/Canada Institute: It's a large piece of military junk for which Russia and Ukraine are now competing, and there is very little strategic reasons for Russia to have it and no strategic reason for Ukraine to have it.

MR. MARKS: The same cannot be said about these, some of the hundred and seventy-six intercontinental ballistic missiles that Ukraine also claims as part of its legacy from the Soviet Union. Under the Start I Treaty, they should be scrapped, but Ukraine hasn't yet ratified the arms accord. The missile's 2000 nuclear warheads remain targeted on cities across the United States. Ukraine only has the power to block an order issued from Moscow to launch the missiles from their underground silos, but officials in Washington and Moscow say Ukrainian scientists are trying to break the missiles' launch codes to give Kiev full control over them. That claim is rejected by Col. Vladimir Tirtichny, second in command over Ukraine's strategic nuclear forces.

COL. VLADIMIR TIRTICHNY, Nuclear Forces Deputy Commander: [speaking through interpreter] Ukraine's president, Leonid Kravchuk, declared to the whole world that Ukraine in the future will be a non-nuclear power. And if Ukraine is to be a non-nuclear power, why do we need to be cracking the codes?

MR. MARKS: Two years after Ukraine first promised to ratify Start I, the control room from which any nuclear war would be prosecuted is still fully staffed. The United States has offered $175 million to help cover the costs of dismantling the missiles. But the Ukrainians say that isn't enough and that it's in the interests of the West to find some more money.

ANTON BUTEIKO, Ukrainian Presidential Adviser: We don't want to burden on other nations in this respect, but one should take into account that many of those nuclear warheads are directed at the territory of some western countries which were considered by the former Soviet Union as their potential enemy, and, therefore, by removing those warheads by dismantling and destroying, the security of United States would be strengthened.

MR. MARKS: The government says the Ukrainian parliament needs more time to consider ratification of the START agreement, but some voices inside it aren't interested in eliminating Ukraine's nuclear weapons at all. When Ukraine declared independence, most parliament members were keen to disarm. But in the past two years, many have been persuaded by the arguments of opposition leaders like Vyacheslaw Chernovil.

VYACHESLAW CHERNOVIL, Ukrainian Opposition Leader: [speaking through interpreter] If we give up our nuclear weapons tomorrow, the world will forget about us straight away and hand us over to be ripped apart by our neighbors. The presence of nuclear weapons in Ukraine, regardless of whether we have full control, has a deterrent effect.

MR. MARKS: The argument that the West is ignoring Ukraine is heard time and again in the capital, Kiev. Many citizens in a country the size of France say the West incorrectly treats Russia as the single inheritor of the Soviet Union's problems and its resources. The government here says Ukraine is a neutral state, and yet, even if it does scrap the nuclear weapons based on its soil, it will remain a military power to reckon with. It now boasts the largest conventional armed forces in Europe, and many Ukrainian politicians say it already has a clear potential enemy. That enemy is its old Soviet brother, Russia. An imposing monument marking the 300th anniversary of the agreement that brought the two countries together is now out of tune with many of the sentiments expressed. Some Russian political leaders have openly called for swathes of Ukrainian territory to be returned to Moscow's control. Ukrainian Presidential Adviser Anton Buteiko says his country's nuclear policy reflects threats to Ukraine's independence.

ANTON BUTEIKO: Certain countries, certain neighbors, including the big one, are having the territory cleansed, and we proclaimed a nuclear free state of Ukraine at a time when no one expressed any particular claims toward Ukraine. And now the situation is changing, therefore, we have to act accordingly.

MR. MARKS: One way Ukraine is acting is to form its own army and national guard. At a base just outside Kiev, recruits are trained with live ammunition. Ukraine's armed forces are now 1/2 million strong. Loyal only to Kiev, they say they're ready to tackle any future threat.

LT. COL. ANATOLY MALAKHOV, Ukrainian Army: [speaking through interpreter] It's not a question of who we're fighting against but rather whom we're defending. I serve in Ukraine, so if the occasion arises, I'll be ready to defend my country.

MR. MARKS: But like many officers, Lt. Col. Anatoly Malakhov finds a war with Russia difficult to envisage.

LT. COL. ANATOLY MALAKHOV: [speaking through interpreter] I don't think that a war or any sort of armed conflict between Russia and Ukraine will happen. It cannot happen, because fathers do not fight their sons. And many of our officers have Russian relatives. How can you fight your own family?

MR. MARKS: These Ukrainian army recruits are being taught a new history about their Russian relatives. They're told that the Black Sea Fleet historically belonged to Ukraine and was seized by the Bolsheviks in 1919. Ukraine's claim to it today, like its claim to nuclear weapons, is based on rights of inheritance.

ANTON BUTEIKO: Ukraine is peace loving nation, and we want to be in peace with all nations, but we want also to have security. And, therefore, as a nation, the first nation which inherited and which has the right to possess the nuclear weapons, because we inherited it from the 13 successors, we are equal successors as other republics of the former Soviet Union, therefore, we have the right of that.

MR. MARKS: But others argue that the West shouldn't let Ukraine shift the argument towards ownership of its nuclear facilities. At that point, they say the superpower arms agreements signed so far will be lost.

SERGEI ROGOV, USA/Canada Institute: I don't think that you can buy any changes with Ukraine to solve this problem, because when you say negotiating with Ukraine, you recognize that she's a nuclear country, that she possesses nuclear weapons. Now there are five official nuclear countries, and none of them would give up nuclear weapons. So if you recognize Ukraine as an official nuclear power, forget about demilitarization of Ukraine.

MR. MARKS: The impact of the Soviet Union's break-up for the balance of power is only now being fully realized. Ukraine and Russia are still arguing over their military inheritance, while the rest of the world waits to see whether they'll honor their international commitments. PROFILE

MR. LEHRER: Finally tonight, the story of a Vietnam veteran working to heal the wounds of war in Cambodia. When the Vietnam War spilled into neighboring Cambodia in the late 1960s, special forces Sgt. Ron Podlaski took his unit over the border. Now, 25 years later, he's back in Cambodia but in a very different role. Correspondent Elizabeth Farnsworth reports from the capital city, Phnom Penh.

MS. FARNSWORTH: The 16,000 UN peacekeepers sent to Cambodia in November, 1991, are beginning to pull out. They leave behind a newly elected government under the leadership of Prince Norodom Sianhouk. But Cambodia is still precariously balanced between 20 years of war and a fragile peace. And the wounds of war are proving slow to heal, especially the injuries caused by ubiquitous land mines. All the factions here used land mines, and now Cambodia has the highest percentage of physically disabled inhabitants of any country in the world.

RON PODLASKI: We're going to put hands on this guy.

MS. FARNSWORTH: Vietnam veteran Ron Podlaski came here to do something about that.

RON PODLASKI: This war was fought with land mines, the sentinels that never sleep. They never go away. They'll always be here. We'll be here a long, long time.

MS. FARNSWORTH: Two years ago, the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation sent Podlaski to Kyen Plang, a government rehabilitation center across the river from Phnom Penh. He came here to set up a prosthetics workshop and clinic, but first he had to solve more basic problems.

RON PODLASKI: This is their kitchen. This is what they've got, and this is how they cook. There was nothing being done to help these people. I was absolutely outraged. All the children had worms. All the women had anemia. They were breastfeeding children. The children were sick. All these men had infected stumps. We had to deal with tuberculosis, syphilis, everything. This man was wounded. He lost one eye, and when they operated on him, they took out his good eye. This is the other side of the wall. You got to Washington, D.C., and the wall has one side, one side only, 57,000 plus American soldiers that lost their lives in Indochina. This is the other side of the wall 20 something years later, and it's still going on.

MS. FARNSWORTH: For Podlaski, the war began in 1968 when he joined the army as an alternative to reform school. He was wounded twice in Southeast Asia serving in one of the elite units of the Green Berets.

RON PODLASKI: It was a very small unit that ran operations in Laos, Cambodia, and North Vietnam. Our primary objective was to monitor troop movement on the Ho Chi Minh trail, and when a pilot was lost or shot down, we could locate 'em through radio signals. They would send one of our teams in to try to get 'em out. So we ran quite a few missions inside Cambodia.

MS. FARNSWORTH: And these were all secret?

RON PODLASKI: All top secret. We were never in Cambodia, Elizabeth. We never bombed Laos.

MS. FARNSWORTH: After returning home from Asia in 1969, Podlaski worked with troubled children in Vermont and supported the anti- war movement.

RON PODLASKI: I think that the bombing of Cambodia, the secret bombing of Cambodia by Richard Nixon and his administration, Henry Kissinger, was one of the single most effective ways to empower the Khmers Rouge. They were recruiting people left and right after we started bombing cities so far away from the Vietnamese border. The fact is that when 1975, when the Khmer Rouge "liberated Cambodia," they emptied the city of Phnom Penh of 2 million people in three days time because they said the Americans are coming to bomb.

MS. FARNSWORTH: Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge tried to radically restructure Cambodian society and were responsible for more than one million deaths. Podlaski saw the results of Khmer Rouge rule when he returned to Cambodia in 1986, after a trip to Vietnam with other veterans.

RON PODLASKI: And I thought I had seen it all, that there was nothing you could show me in this world that I didn't know. Well, I went into Cambodia and for the first time witnessed the after effects of genocide, going out to Tul Sling, which was the torture center in Phnom Penh where the Khmer Rouge interrogated, tortured, and eventually killed their prisoners, and it stuck in my mind. I just -- we've got to do something to help these people.

MS. FARNSWORTH: So in 1991, Podlaski moved to Cambodia to help amputees at Kyen Plang. With the assistance of other Vietnam vets, he hired a doctor, hauled in clean water, and began to set up the prosthetics clinic. Now in 1993, the Kyen Plang workshop is producing more than 90 limbs a month using a special technology developed in Jaipor, India.

RON PODLASKI: We have contractors putting in cement floors. We have all kinds of activities going on, and while it's all going on, we've got nine men building wheelchairs, we've got men and women building Jaipor feet and Jaipor limbs, so that's the beauty of the Jaipor technology is that you can operate in the middle of the forest and build Jaipor limbs if you have the materials to work with.

MS. FARNSWORTH: A land mine took this man's leg in 1990. He's one of 1,000 amputees who have been fitted with a limb here in the last year. The Jaipor limb is cheap and durable and is designed for people who go barefoot. Podlaski is also contesting the prevailing Cambodian view that because of their karma amputees somehow deserve their fate and that no useful role in society remains for them.

RON PODLASKI: The word "abilities" just kept sticking in my mind, and that's what we focus on, what their ability was, not their disability. Our road was in dire straits of repair. These men and women had to maneuver wheelchairs through the mud, and we repaired that road and repaired it with 100 percent disabled people.

MS. FARNSWORTH: On this project, the blind walk for those who can't, and the men in wheelchairs see for those with no eyes. These people have also build their own homes. Some have learned to read and write for the first time, and some have become full-time technicians making limbs and wheelchairs.

RON PODLASKI: Without the disabled participating in rebuilding Cambodia, Cambodia will not be rebuilt. That's how many people in Cambodia are disabled.

SPOKESMAN: [presenting award to Podlaski] Ron, I'm happy to present to you this token and check -- I'll put the check down. [applause]

MS. FARNSWORTH: In June, the Boston based Petra Foundation, which annually recognizes people working behind the scenes for human rights, presented Podlaski with an award for his Cambodia work. Podlaski used the opportunity to call for a ban on the use and production of land mines.

RON PODLASKI: And Cambodia will be de-mined, but it'll be de- mined one leg, one arm, and one life at a time, when they step on them doing their farming chores, and they're going to step on them until we collectively in the world can address our governments to help pass legislations to stop making these weapons. [applause]

MS. FARNSWORTH: The United States has already agreed to a one year moratorium on the sale of land mines, but in Cambodia, millions of mines, perhaps as many as 8 million, must still be removed. United Nations troops have begun the process by training local people in mine removal, but only a few thousand mines have been taken out so far. Hundreds of Cambodians are still being maimed each month. Meanwhile, Ron Podlaski continues to expand his work at Kyen Plang. In Cambodia, the demand for artificial limbs shows no signs of letting up. RECAP

MR. LEHRER: Again, the major stories of this Wednesday, President Clinton said he would seriously consider U.S. air strikes to protect U.N. forces in Bosnia. Israel and Muslim guerrillas exchanged fire for the fourth straight day, and CIA Director James Woolsey said North Korea tested a missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. Good night, Roger.

MR. MUDD: Good night, Jim. We'll see you tomorrow night. I'm Roger Mudd in New York. Thank you, and good night.