Lehigh University
Lehigh University


Selected Media Coverage: June 28, 2006

12 Chances to Be a Better Parent
07/01/2006 - ADDitude (cir. 200,000)

Barkey: Amnesty Can Sharply Undercut Iraqi Insurgency
06/27/2006 - Council on Foreign Relations (cir. )

Mergers to keep on coming
06/26/2006 - CNNMoney.com (cir. )

Amnesty for insurgents would work
06/23/2006 - Los Angeles Times (cir. 851,832)

Stanford U. to Receive $100-Million; Other Gifts
06/01/2006 - Chronicle of Philanthropy, The (cir. 13,000)

How two veteran researchers got HPS-100W from here to there
05/01/2006 - American Metal Market (cir. )

Do you recall or remember at ail? Two old hands talk steel R&D the way it used to be
05/01/2006 - American Metal Market (cir. )

12 Chances to Be a Better Parent
07/01/2006 - ADDitude (cir. 200,000) ž
Return to Top
George DuPaul is quoted throughout the article about the challenges of raising children who have ADD—and how to “smooth out the rough spots and avoid common mistakes.” Click on the paperclip for a PDF of the full article.

Barkey: Amnesty Can Sharply Undercut Iraqi Insurgency
06/27/2006 - Council on Foreign Relations (cir. ) ž
Return to Top
Interviewee: Henri J. Barkey
Interviewer: Bernard Gwertzman, Consulting Editor

June 26, 2006

Henri Barkey, a Middle East expert and head of the international relations department at Lehigh University, says Iraqi plans for an amnesty can seriously undercut the Iraqi insurgency by creating a rift between homegrown Iraqi insurgents, who are entitled to amnesty, and members of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, who are not.

Even though many Americans oppose an amnesty if given to Iraqis involved in killing American troops, Barkey supports such an offer because "if we want Iraq to succeed, we need to figure out a way for them to have national reconciliation, and we should not stand in the way."

Gwertzman: You had an interesting op-ed in the Los Angeles Times a few days ago in which you advocated that the Iraqis offer an amnesty to the Iraqi insurgents, even if responsible for the death of American soldiers. What got you thinking about amnesties in Iraq?

Barkey: I've been following the Iraq situation for a while, but I've also been following the situation in Turkey, and I've been convinced that in the case of Turkey, the Turks are really an amnesty away from resolving their problems [with their Kurdish minorities]. That said, of course the devil is in the details. It depends on the amnesty, it depends on the terms, and it depends obviously on other circumstances and the kind of deals you make with neighboring states.

Amnesties are important for one reason apart from national reconciliation. One of the things people miss with insurgencies is that behind every insurgent is a family structure, and especially in the Middle East you are talking about extended families. So for every person who is part of the insurgency there is an automatic support group. Even if the families don't like what their son is doing, they will tend to support him. They will tend to provide him safe haven. They will tend to provide food and shelter, and God knows what else. And when you think about the close relations that exist in the Middle East, where your cousin's cousin is seen as part of your family, insurgencies create their own natural support basis within the population.

Gwertzman: And these extended families extend to tribes as well in Iraq, I guess.

Barkey: Right. But the converse also works. When you offer an amnesty, pressure now arises. Many families don't necessarily want to be involved in the insurgency business because there are costs to them. Their house may be raided, their kids may get killed. So the moment you give an incentive of an amnesty, then you're putting pressure on the insurgent to take advantage of it not because he wants or he likes the amnesty but because now his mother, his father, his grandfather, his uncles, his nieces, everybody probably will try to say "Look, this is a good deal here, it's time for you to come home."

Obviously, al-Qaeda-type people and foreigners should not be given that incentive, in part because the family structure that I just discussed doesn't work in that case. Secondly, when you talk about giving an amnesty to insurgents in Iraq, it should even include insurgents who may have killed Americans. In the end, we are going to want to leave Iraq, hopefully the sooner the better. But insurgents who are Iraqi will remain in Iraq. They have no other place to go. And if we want Iraq to succeed, we need to figure out a way for them to have national reconciliation, and we should not stand in the way. It is critical they create the institutions and the basis for a future, peaceful Iraq.

Gwertzman: You saw Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's statement to his parliament yesterday. Did you get any sense of whether this was a solid enough proposal?

Barkey: Again, the details are very important, and he did not provide many details. It's not clear how it's going to be implemented. The important thing is that he now has put it out there, and he has talked about creating certain institutions that will administer this amnesty. And obviously, as time goes by, they will fill the content of the amnesty, and there will be negotiations. Because the Iraqi government itself is divided, it will take time. But it will be difficult, and he has been very upfront about this, to take a step back, especially because the Sunni elements within the government have welcomed the idea very heartily. And so even though there are Shiite elements who are very much opposed to the amnesty, it will be very difficult for the government to retreat from this. When you talk about the most horrific bombings, especially suicide bombers, they were mostly al-Qaeda people who did it and not necessarily Iraqi insurgents, so I think this is a very, very good step.

The other issue about the amnesty and the United States is we have been arguing that this is a sovereign Iraqi government. We have transferred sovereignty to them. Yes, we have lots of American troops on the ground, but the fact of the matter is, if we really mean that this is a sovereign Iraqi government, and it decides to do this because they think this is in [their] best interest, it is not really up to us to criticize them too much. I mean understandably there will be a lot of Americans who will be very upset about this.

Gwertzman: Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, who is the ranking Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, was very critical of any amnesty for those who wern the wake of strong global demand, firms aren't scared to pay up for other companies, as witnessed last week when Anadarko paid a nearly 30 percent premium for Kerr-McGee.

"It's like when you know that big bonus is coming, you start going out car shopping," said Samuel Weaver, a finance professor at Lehigh University.

Several experts mentioned ethanol companies like Verasun (Charts) or Pacific Ethanol (Charts) as possible takeover targets, as buzz continues to swirl around the plant-based fuel.

Weaver also mentioned construction materials as another possible sector for consolidation, noting that most building material firms tend to be "mom-and-pop" operations in what "really is a splintered industry."

Related: Restyled J. Crew set to go public Top of page

Amnesty for insurgents would work
06/23/2006 - Los Angeles Times (cir. 851,832)

Return to Top
Amnesty for insurgents would work It would help stabilize Iraq and hasten an exit for U.S. troops
HENRI J. BARKEY, a former State Department official, is chairman of the Department of International Relations at Lehigh University.

June 23, 2006

THE NEW IRAQI government is considering giving amnesty to some insurgents, including those who committed attacks against the United States, other coalition forces and the Iraqi military. It's understandable that many U.S. soldiers and other Americans would find the idea offensive. Nevertheless, it is critical for the Bush administration to quietly back the proposal behind the scenes.The details of the amnesty haven't been announced, and the details are crucial.

It would be a grave mistake to offer amnesty to the foreign fighters who have poured into Iraq to help with or foment the insurgency. But amnesty for former Baathists and other Sunni rejectionists could help divide them from their Al Qaeda comrades, to the benefit of Iraq and the United States. However distasteful, some sort of amnesty is a prerequisite for Iraqi reconciliation. U.S. troops will leave one day, and the Iraqis will have to find a way to live together. If the United States wants to succeed in Iraq, it must put Iraqi interests first. The killing of the Al Qaeda leader in Iraq, Abu Musab Zarqawi, has created an unprecedented opportunity for the new Iraqi government.

Zarqawi triggered resentment not just because he slaughtered civilians indiscriminately but because he hogged international attention, eclipsing his home-grown jihadist competitors. Moreover, although he controlled only a segment of the Iraqi insurgency, Zarqawi had an aura of invincibility. His death gives the Iraqi government a chance to divide and co-opt the insurgents, exploiting whatever intelligence was gained in the Zarqawi raids and whatever disarray his death has created to score more military gains. The government of Prime Minister Nouri Maliki enjoys more legitimacy than its predecessors, and for the first time, it includes bona fide Sunni representatives.

But it needs to change the pessimistic mood in Iraq while retaining the goodwill of its American backers. As a sovereign government, Iraq has every right to set the terms of the amnesty, but it should proceed with caution.An amnesty aimed only at non-Al Qaeda insurgents would deepen the divide between the foreign and Iraqi fighters. On the other hand, an amnesty for those who perpetrated the hideous and indiscriminate bombings of mosques and marketplaces would both condone terror and validate the insurgents' cause. Anyone involved in recruiting suicide bombers, or planning or helping execute bombing attacks, should not qualify for amnesty. Americans will find it repugnant that those who blew up our soldiers may get off scot-free. But ironically, that outcome is in our best interests.

An Iraqi government that insists, in the face of American objections, on implementing an amnesty would demonstrate to its people, especially the Sunnis, that it is not a stooge of Washington, that it is capable of acting independently of the Bush administration. And the stronger and more independent the Iraqi government, the more likely that U.S. soldiers can come home.Amnesties have succeeded in ending insurgencies in many other countries because they bring the rebels in from the cold and undermine their support structure. Algeria, which experienced some of the most violent civil strife of the modern era, offered repeated amnesties, and today, its nightmare appears to be ending. Turkey, which has refused even to consider a meaningful amnesty for its Kurdish rebels, is engaged in a seemingly unending low-intensity conflict.

Amnesties alone are not a panacea. There will always be die-hards for whom the cause is too sacred or for whom violence is a raison d'etre. Still, every militant has an extended family network. These relatives are unwittingly drafted into the conflict; they are likely to worry about their sons' or brothers' fates, to be extremely antagonistic toward the authority pursuing them and to help fighters evade their pursuers. A meaningful amnesty, accompanied by a counterinsurgency campaign, can turn these relatives into allies. They will, often for their own sakes, put pressure on fighters to take advantage of such an offer.

In Iraq, the jihadists Zarqawi trained will not lay down their arms, but their Iraqi brethren may do so and betray the foreigners to save their own skins. Even a few such victories would give the counterinsurgency momentum and the Maliki government breathing space. A decisive victory against the Iraqi insurgency could take a decade or more. But Washington and Baghdad have demonstrated that they can be allies for the long haul.

Washington can best demonstrate its commitment to the new government by accepting an Iraqi amnesty that allows Maliki to give his foes a reason to lay down their arms.

Stanford U. to Receive $100-Million; Other Gifts
06/01/2006 - Chronicle of Philanthropy, The (cir. 13,000)
Return to Top
The following appeared in The Chronicle of Philanthropy. To read the full listing, please click on the paperclip:

Lehigh U. (Bethlehem, Pa.): Five million from Ernest E. Althouse, a retired vice chairman of the Central Hudson Gas and Electric Corporation, in Poughkeepsie, NY and his wife, Elizabeth, to endow scholarships for undergraduate students attending the P.C. Rossin College of Engineering and Applied Science. Mr. Althouse, a 1926 graduate, died in April, and his wife died in 1995.


How two veteran researchers got HPS-100W from here to there
05/01/2006 - American Metal Market (cir. )
Return to Top
Two Lehigh University researchers believe they have found the key to building better, albeit uglier, bridges.

Through the use of metallurgical and structural engineering technology at Lehigh's Advanced Technology for Large Structural Systems (ATLSS) Research Center, Robert Stout and John Gross have completed one goal and are continuing with their mission to make a superlative copper-nickel blend plate steel.

"It's a dark brown color. It's not the most attractive thing in the world. But when you save thousands of dollars, you can look at it and feel satisfied about it," said Stout, a distinguished research fellow at the Bethlehem, Pa., school.

"I'd say it has a purplish cast," said Gross, also a distinguished research fellow. "But after years of research, I'm biased. I think it's beautiful."

Either way, the two men say the copper-nickel combination they have developed boosts plate steel's yield strength and tensile strength, making it stronger, longer lasting, virtually maintenance free, more weld-
able and less expensive because its inherent strength allows engineers to use less material.

A real-world test of the material came recently with the construction of a bridge over 1-80 near Omaha, Neb., that uses their steel, called HPS-100W. With that complete, the duo's next pursuit is finding a way to make the new steel even more weldable.

Although the idea of a cop per-nickel plate steel combination has been around for decades, it has had disadvantages.

"It is true that somehow during the period from the '50s to the '70s more work was done to develop a copper-nickel combination as a means of getting strength in place of carbon," Stout said. "The carbon ingredient is normally what we think of when deciding how strong some thing is. But carbon doesn't give added strength without heat treatment and quenching. Then ductility and toughness goes down and the welding ability of steel is less. Preheat, and it becomes more expensive to use."

HPS-100W reduces the carbon level to between 0.04 and 0.08 percent from 0.2 percent; and for commercial applications, the steel is 1-percent copper and 0.75-percent nickel.

Stout said the U.S. Navy picked up on the copper-nickel steels and used them to give toughness to double-hulled ships. Military applications use 1.25-percent copper and 3-per cent nickel. "But at the same time they expressed a desire for steel that wasn't quite so expensive," Stout said. "We picked that up subsequent funding by the Federal Highway Administration (FHA) and the Pennsylvania Infrastructure Technology Alliance, in 1991 the two men began analyzing copper-nickel steel's behavior. "We wanted to find out what combination of alloying elements would be the best for commercial use at a reasonable cost," Stout said. "We also dealt with magnesium, chrome, molybdenum and vanadium contributing to the strength of the material."

To optimize the compositions, they used multiple regression very complex computer programs.

When they first had a 165-ton heat of the optimum combination made about eight years ago, they paid 42 cents a pound, Gross said. At that time, he said Tl steel, the traditional plate steel, was 36 cents a pound. "That was not an exorbitant difference considering the excellent properties it offered."

Even with copper and nickel currently at their highest prices ever, the two men said their steel is still the better buy at around 55 cents a pound vs. 42 cents pound for Tl.

"The analysis made of how much gain you have by going up in strength and reducing the section size reduces the quantity of steel you need to do the job," Gross said. "Typically, if you go up 15,000 to 20,000 in yield strength you can gain 20 percent in final onsite costs."

Additionally, the steel is very weldable and doesn't need to be preheated. "That saves a lot of money," Stout said. "Nebraska saved 20 percent by those advantages."

William Wright, FHA team leader of bridge design and construction in the office of infra structure research, said the results were well worth the agency's funding. "Past steels we've used at that strength range have had questionable weldability," he said. "The new generation has much better weldability and mechanical properties."
However, the steel is for use in a niche market, Wright said. "Because it's very high strength, a run-of-the-mill bridge can't utilize that. "Larger bridges with longer spans that's where the payoff is."

A spokeswoman for the American Association of State High way and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), Washington, hadn't heard of Gross and Stout's new metal, but she said the group is always testing and certifying new technologies when they're found to be beneficial.

"Continuous exploration of new materials and approaches to new materials is a line of research we welcome and are engaged in," said Jennifer Gavin, AASHTO's deputy director of communications. "Research is what has made it possible to do more with taxpayers' money and make new construction."


Do you recall or remember at ail? Two old hands talk steel R&D the way it used to be
05/01/2006 - American Metal Market (cir. )
Return to Top
Do you recall or remember at ail? Two old hands talk steel R&D the way it used to be Lehigh University researchers Robert Stout and John Gross have come up with a copper-nickel plate steel that they believe could revolutionize bridgemaking.

"These steels are so tough it is unimagin able," Gross said. "We've never seen any thing (like it) in our life." And he isn't just being dramatic. Gross and Stout are 83 and 91, respectively.

The men have been involved in steelmaking research throughout their careers and said they have no intention of stopping now, particularly with the degree to which research and development has shrunk in the consolidating industry. "We now have skeleton research facility in this country in terms of steel research," Gross said.

The two men, who work at Lehigh's Advanced Technology for Large Structural Systems (ATLSS) Research Center, say the facility's amenities are one of the main rea sons they've been so successful in their work.

Gross had been director of research and technology implementation at U.S. Steel Corp.'s Monroeville, Pa., development facili ty until his retirement 23 years ago. Then he began his career at Lehigh. "U.S. Steel was able to do every bit as much metallurgically," Gross said. "But we didn't have anything resembling the physical, structural test facilities we have here at ATLSS. It just took an awfully long time to get things to the mar ketplace. Here we have the synergy to immediately fabricate large scale prototypes and test them.

Typically, we have been able to go from laboratory composition develop ment to full scale test heats, structural tests of large prototypes in two years, not the usual 10 to 15 years for lab to commercial application."

The facility includes a huge testing area where the men can attach full-size 45-foot long bridge girders to as many as 15 con crete slabs or to large actuators that can supply many tons of force.

Posted on Wednesday, June 28, 2006

share this story: