The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry

Russia boasts of The Right To Put Nuclear Weapons In Crimea

Russian-BearRussia: We Have The Right To Put Nuclear Weapons In Crimea Business Insider JEREMY BENDER Russia announced on Monday that it believes it has the full right to deploy nuclear weapons in the recently annexed Crimean peninsula.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told the Interfax news agency that since Crimea was now a part of Russia, Moscow had full rights to deploy nuclear weapons into the region.

Lavrov argues that Crimea can be treated just like any other part of Russia and can therefore host nuclear infrastructure. “Now Crimea has become part of a state which possesses such weapons in accordance with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty,” says Lavrov. “In accordance with international law, Russia has every reason to dispose of its nuclear arsenal … to suit its interests and international legal obligations.”………

Technically, neither the US nor Russia can move strategic nuclear forces without verifying the deployment with the other country due to the 2010 New START treaty, which set a timeline for mutual cuts to the countries’ nuclear stockpiles. Any Russian movement of strategic nuclear weapons into Crimea (long-range, high-yield weapons, as opposed to tactical or battlefield nuclear warheads) without prior notification to the US would result in Russia violating the treaty.

December 17, 2014 Posted by | Russia, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Hostilities escalate, but Russia rules out a pre emptive nuclear strike

flag_RussiaRussia Rules Out Pre-emptive Nuclear Attack But Will Strike When Provoked or Under Threat – Report International Business Times, By Erik Pineda | December 13, 2014  As reports came out that Russia under President Vladimir Putin is getting overly aggressive in Europe, per NATO claims, analysts begin to entertain fears of pre-emptive nuclear strike by the Kremlin.

The NATO leadership announced this week that Moscow is engaged in a high-level of military activities in the Baltic region, underscored by the 400 times that alliance jet fighters were scrambled this 2014 in response to incursions made byRussian military planes.

NATO declared that Russia’s recent actions “can be destabilising and potentially dangerous,” according to The Daily Mail.

Now the question begs: Will this bold display of power foreshadow the escalation of hostilities?

No pre-emptive strike

While the tense posturing between Russia and the West – the U.S. and NATO specifically, could potentially graduate into a shooting a war, the Kremlin, as dictated by its recently revised military doctrine, will not fire the first shot, according to a new report

“The renewed draft of the military doctrine would not have a reservation for preventive nuclear strikes on potential enemy,” the news site added, pointing to unnamed insiders from Russia’s Defence Ministry as sources.

It was indicated too in the same report that pre-emptive nuclear attack on specifically identified enemies was deliberated upon by the Russian military and political leaders but the option was not included in the doctrine that was finalised in 2010.

Russia, however, is not discounting the use of nuclear weapons, which they will be willing to rain down on deemed aggressors when provoked. “The Russian Federation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in reply to strikes with nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction on its territory or on the territory of its allies,” the doctrine reportedly states………

Perceived threats

Not surprisingly, Moscow pinpoints Washington and its NATO allies as threats. “Russian foreign policy appears to be based on a combination of fears of popular protest and opposition to U.S. world hegemony,” writes Jonathan Masters, deputy editor for the Council on Foreign Relations.

Putin is apparently convinced that the U.S. and NATO is undermining Russia’s influence in the former Soviet Union republics, according to Masters, likely making the two as prime targets of Russia’s nuclear attack blueprint in the event World War III erupts.

To report problems or to leave feedback about this article,

To contact the editor, e-mail:

December 15, 2014 Posted by | Russia, weapons and war | Leave a comment

USA resists tightening international safety rules on nuclear reactors

safety-symbol-Smflag_RussiaFlag-USARussian Nuclear Safety Proposal Put Focus on U.S. Reactors Bloomberg, By Jonathan Tirone  Dec 10, 2014 Russia scaled back opposition to European proposals to improve the safety of nuclear power, leaving the U.S. as the main dissenter to new rules intended to avoid a repeat of Japan’s 2011 meltdown in Fukushima.

Russia changed its stance at a Dec. 4 meeting of nuclear diplomats, setting out the Moscow government’s view of new rules to limit radioactive contamination in the event of a nuclear accident, according to a copy of the 13-page presentation seen by Bloomberg. The move raised the chances of a deal to strengthen the Convention on Nuclear Safety, according to three Western diplomats present at the meeting, who asked not to be identified because the talks were private.

The European Union is trying to find a path to tighter safety rules for the world’s aging nuclear reactors with its relationship with Russia overshadowed by the conflict in Ukraine. Yet it’s the U.S., the world’s biggest nuclear-power generator, that is proving the biggest obstacle, the diplomats said, as company investments in reactor safety lag those of European peers.

U.S. resistance to the European safety proposals is a “serious concern,” Senators Barbara Boxerand Edward Markey said in a Dec. 1 letter to Nuclear Regulatory Commission chairman Allison Macfarlane. The Democrats urged U.S. diplomats to work with “international partners” to amend safety flaws exposed by the 2011 Fukushima Dai-Ichi meltdowns.

Two Proposals

Russia abandoned its opposition to tightening international rules on reactor safety the day after reports of a nuclear accident in Ukraine. The reported mishap — which ultimately proved to be false — roiled markets and sent Ukrainian bond yields to a record high. The 1986 meltdown of a Soviet-built reactor in Chernobyl, about 80 miles north of the capital Kiev, weighed on Ukraine’s budget for decades and resulted in a 2,600 square kilometer (1,000 square miles) exclusion zone.

The European proposal would compel nuclear operators to both prevent accidents and, should they occur, mitigate the effects of radioactive contamination. Most controversially, the treaty change would also force potentially costly upgrades at existing plants.

More than half of the world’s 438 reactors were built at least 30 years ago and are nearing the age when they’ll need special attention, according to International Atomic Energy Agency statistics………

“People in the U.S. don’t realize that in many ways our nuclear safety standards lag behind those inEurope,” former NRC commissioner Victor Gilinsky said in a written reply to questions. “The German and French containment structures are generally more formidable than ours and those reactors generally have more protection systems.”……

Regulators worldwide have tried to boost safety standards in response to the Fukushima meltdown, which forced 160,000 people to flee radioactive contamination after a tsunami flooded safety back-up systems.

The NRC is still working out the parameters on how it values human lives at risk from a nuclear accident, spokesman Scott Burnell said. The value helps determine how much nuclear-plant operators need to spend on backfitting reactors with new safety gear. The NRC was criticized Dec. 3 by Boxer, chairman of the Senate’s Environment and Public Works committee, for being slow to ensure plant safety improvements.

“Some reactor operators are still not in compliance with the safety requirements that were in place before the Fukushima disaster,” Boxer said. “This is unacceptable.”

To contact the reporter on this story: Jonathan Tirone in Vienna at

December 13, 2014 Posted by | Russia, safety, USA | Leave a comment

Putin determined to market nuclear reactors to India

Russian-BearPutin’s India visit: New nuclear plants high on agenda , Live Mint 9 Dec 14 Vladimir Putin dispels concerns about military cooperation between Russia and Pakistan, says India is a ‘reliable and time-tested partner’ Moscow: Terming the ties with India as a “privileged strategic partnership”, Russian President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday disclosed that construction of new nuclear plants besides military and technical cooperation was high on the agenda during his visit to New Delhi…………
Listing the joint strategic projects, the President said that these included construction of new units for Indian nuclear power plants, promotion of Russian Sukhoi superjet-100 and MS-21 passenger aircraft to Indian market besides manufacturing of helicopters and creating a “smart city” on the basis of Russian technology. Putin said Russia’s resources enable it to build upto 25 energy units in India……………
The policy document “Strategic Vision of the Strengthening Russian-Indian Cooperation in the Field of Peaceful Uses of the Atomic Energy” is also being prepared to be signed. Alongside with the new energy units construction, it provides for the exchange of the results of activities in the field of science, technology and innovation,” he said. Calling nuclear energy cooperation as one of the pillars of strategic partnership between India and Russia, Putin said both the countries had concluded two inter-governmental agreements in this field in 2008 and 2010. “The Road Map for the Serial Construction of the Russian designed NPP in the Republic of India, which was signed in 2010, is currently being implemented. “The work on two energy units of the NPP Kudankulam is proceeding as scheduled.

December 10, 2014 Posted by | marketing, Russia | Leave a comment

Report: Russian Nuclear Industry in Review

Russian-BearPAY MORE WITH NUCLEAR” : REPORT 4 The report, entitled “Russian Nuclear Industry in Review”, is authored by Russian environmental activist and academic Vladimir Slivyak; and provides an insider view into the workings of the Russian nuclear industry. The report is fourth in the series “Pay more with nuclear”, which examines the enormous costs involved in building, operating and decommissioning nuclear power plants.

The Russian deal is being marketed as preferential because it includes Russian government funding, construction assistance and fuel cycle services. But the “Russian Nuclear Industry in Review” report shows fatal flaws with the concept and reveals the shady corners of the Russian nuclear industry.

Key Documents:
  1. Report 1: Nuclear Technology options for South Africa
  2. Report 2: Funding Nuclear Decommissioning – Lessons for South Africa
  3. Report 3: What Does It Take To Finance New Nuclear Power Plants?
  4. Report 4: Russian Nuclear Industry Overview

December 8, 2014 Posted by | politics, Russia, South Africa | Leave a comment

The disastrous problem of Russia’s mounting spent nuclear fuel waste

wastes-1flag_RussiaRUSSIAN NUCLEAR INDUSTRY OVERVIEW, Earth Life Johannesburg Vladimir Slivyak Russian environmental group, Ecodefense
National Research University Higher School of Economics Moscow December 2014
“……..Waste and spent nuclear fuel reprocessing
According to governmental sources, about 500 million tons of radioactive waste is accumulated
at various facilities across Russia. There is no clear plan as to how the waste problem should
be solved. Rosatom has pushed through the Russian Parliament the “Law on the Radioactive
Waste treatment,” a first of its kind in Russian history. The adoption of the law was protested
in a dozen of regions across Russia because it effectively excludes local population from the
decision-making process over establishing new sites to store and dump radioactive wastes.
Judging by the supplementary documents given to the parliamentarians in 2009 along with the
proposed draft of the law, the radioactive waste management plan outlined by Rosatom would
affect no more than 30% of all accumulated wastes until 2030. It is unclear when and how the
majority of the Russian radioactive waste will undergo proper management or treatment. Some
of the storage facilities across Russia are in poor condition and require urgent measures to avoid
radiation leaks.22
Mayak nuclear accidentThe overall amount of spent nuclear fuel accumulated at Russian nuclear sites is estimated
at over 22,000 tons. Fuel from seven commercial reactors (six VVER-440s and the BN-600) is
transported for reprocessing at the Mayak nuclear facility in Chelyabinsk Region – a place of a
devastating nuclear accident of 1957, which caused widespread radioactive contamination and
led to the resettlement of about 20,000 of local residents in the subsequent years.
Mayak disaster
Spent nuclear fuel reprocessing does not help to solve the problem of nuclear waste. Rather, it
makes the problem that much bigger. Between 100 to 200 tons of radioactive waste of various
compositions and activity levels is generated during reprocessing per just 1 ton of spent fuel
reprocessed. As a result of the reprocessing activities at Mayak, large amounts of radioactive
waste have been accumulated and, over the years, partly dumped into the local river, Techa,
causing ever wider radioactive contamination.
In 2005, Mayak’s former director, Vitaly Sadovnikov, was taken to court and charged with illegal dumping of radioactive waste into theTecha. Although he was found guilty by the court, Sadovnikov was immediately released under
an amnesty granted by the Russian government. Nevertheless, the court’s decision concluded
that radioactivity levels in the river water were so high in some parts of the Techa that the water
could well be qualified as liquid radioactive waste.23
Although environmental groups successfully pushed the nuclear industry to resettle Muslyumovo
– the most contaminated village in the region – several thousands of local residents still live in
the radioactively contaminated area on the banks of the Techa. The Russian government and the
nuclear industry refuse to provide resettlement funding for the local residents while many of
them continue to suffer from radiation-caused illnesses, including conditions related to genetic
In 2011, about twenty families of local villagers along with two environmental groups
(Ecodefense, Planet of Hope) filed a class action against the nuclear industry and several
government ministries over the lack of radiation protection in the contaminated area.
Spent fuel from the VVER-1000s and RBMKs is only stored in Russia, as the country does not
possess a facility for reprocessing such fuel. While reprocessing of spent RBMK fuel was never
seriously planned, a plan to build a facility to reprocess spent fuel from the VVER-1000 reactors,
to be sited in Krasnoyarsk, Siberia, has existed since the 1980s. After it was approved by the
Soviet government, the plan was stopped by mass protests around 1990. It is unclear if Rosatom
will ever bring it to implementation.
One of the issues under discussion in the nuclear industry is the future plans for the management
of spent nuclear fuel. Rosatom may either go for reprocessing and extraction of plutonium –
especially if the development program for breeder reactors and the concept of using plutonium
as fuel gets political approval – or for final disposal of spent fuel in a repository in a deep
geological formation near Krasnoyarsk. Presently, the option of long-term storage there is
approved with a new storage site partly completed in that area. It is projected that the storage
site will hold close to 40,000 tons of spent fuel in the future. As of today, spent fuel is mostly
stored at nuclear power plants around the country, and the old storage facilities are overfull or
nearing capacity; Rosatom is planning to move 22,000 tons of this fuel to Krasnoyarsk by 2025.
But any final solution for the highly radioactive spent fuel must include efficient barriers to
prevent the radiation from escaping into the surrounding environment during the next million
years. Such a solution obviously does not exist………..

December 8, 2014 Posted by | Russia, wastes | Leave a comment

Fast breeder nuclear reactors: Russia the only country with one in commercial operation

RUSSIAN NUCLEAR INDUSTRY OVERVIEW, Earth Life Johannesburg Vladimir Slivyak Russian environmental group, Ecodefense National Research University Higher School of Economics Moscow December 2014

“………..Fast breeders

The nuclear industry started to promote the so-called closed nuclear fuel cycle with fast breeder
reactors some 50 years ago. The idea was to develop a technological cycle that would involve
reprocessing spent nuclear fuel, extracting plutonium from it, and then “breeding” this nuclear
material in commercial reactors in order to provide the nuclear power industry with a virtually
inexhaustible source of fuel while also eliminating the problem of managing the highly toxic
nuclear waste. No country in the world, however, has since been able to introduce a closed fuel
cycle successfully. All breeders that were brought online in Western countries that attempted to
close the nuclear cycle stopped their commercial operation long before their designed lifetime
periods expired, for economic, safety, and technical reasons. As of 2014, Russia remains the only
country with a fast breeder reactor in commercial operation, a BN-600 operating at Beloyarsk
Nuclear Power Plant.

Continue reading

December 8, 2014 Posted by | Reference, reprocessing, Russia | Leave a comment

Troubled story of Russia’s new nuclear reactors plan

RUSSIAN NUCLEAR INDUSTRY OVERVIEW, Earth Life Johannesburg Vladimir Slivyak Russian environmental group, Ecodefense
National Research University Higher School of Economics Moscow December 2014
“…….New reactors
In 2008, the Russian government approved the “General Layout Plan for Siting Power Generation
Facilities for the period until 2020.” It included construction of 13.2 GW in new reactor capacities
within the next five years. By March 2010, this goal had been downscaled to just 5.2 GW. After
auditing the Ministry of Energy in March 2010, the Russian Audit Chamber announced it would
not be possible to achieve the target outlined in the plan. As a result, only about 40% of planned
reactors were expected to come online by 2015.11
In July 2012, Russia’s overall nuclear power development target for 2020 – 44 GW – was again
reduced, to 30.5 GW.12 The new target remains a pie-in-the-sky figure because the Russian
industry is unable to produce more than one reactor per year, according to the industry’s top
As of today, Rosenergoatom – Rosatom’s reactor-operating branch – lists ten new reactors as under
construction: eight VVER units, one fast breeder that is approaching the 30-year anniversary of
its construction, and a small floating nuclear plant.13
At least two of the VVER projects on this list have seen no progress since mid-2013 – the two units
of a planned Baltic NPP in Kaliningrad Region. A variety of reasons caused the construction to
freeze indefinitely, including the limited market for the future electricity and harsh criticism
by environmental movements on the project’s safety and financing issues. Rosatom sought
funding for this project in European Union countries, in hopes to involve foreign investors and
energy companies in building the plant and exporting its energy to Europe. These negotiations
took three years and proved unsuccessful. Russia’s neighbor and EU member, Lithuania, also
repeatedly criticized Rosatom over the project’s safety and lack of transparency. Environmental
groups from both Russia and Europe successfully campaigned against this project by pushing
European banks and companies to stay away. In 2013, the German Hypovereinsbank and the
French BNP Paribas announced in written form that they would not join the project. Earlier, the Italian energy giant ENEL had stated that it was doing its assessment and looking into the
possibility of investing in the Kaliningrad project. That led to heavy criticism by Russian and
Italian environmental groups in 2011-2012. The company never announced its decision. The
French bank Société Générale was under heavy pressure from Russian and French campaigners
in 2013 over its possible involvement in the Kaliningrad project. Société Générale’s managers
said in the beginning of 2013 that the bank planned to assess the possibility of joining the project
in Kaliningrad by providing the funds for turbine manufacturing by the French firm Alstom. No
decision was announced before the Russian government put the project on hold in June 2013.
Two more VVER-1200 reactors are currently under construction at the Leningrad nuclear plant;
construction started in 2008 and 2010, respectively. The units were slated for grid connection
by 2013 and 2016. Both projects, however, hit delays with grid connection dates pushed back
to 2016 and 2018, partly on account of a major accident that occurred at the construction site on
July 17, 2011. A 600-800-ton reinforcement cage of the containment building fell on its concrete
frame. The weight of the cage caused the concrete frame to crack and the entire structure had to
be replaced, leading to massive additional costs.14
Another two units on Rosenergoatom’s current construction list are so-called “floating reactors”
(Akademik Lomonosov 1, 2), 32 MW each. Rosatom began this project in 2007 with plans to
complete it by 2010. As of 2014, the completion date had been revised to 2019.15 Among the major
concerns with the project are the high risk of accidents, vulnerability to piracy and terrorism
threats, and the increased risk of proliferation of nuclear materials, if the project is taken to serial
production and floating nuclear power plants are deployed on a wide international scale.16
However, two units each at the Novovoronezh plant, Novovoronezh-2 (VVER-1200, under
construction since 2007, delayed for 2-3 years), and Rostov (VVER-1000, under construction
since 1983) are close to completion. Russian media repeatedly reported on corruption and safety
concerns related to the Novovoronezh-2 construction, but there was no investigation of these
claims by Rosatom.17
Another unit that is nearly completed is the fourth unit at Beloyarsk. This is a fast breeder r of the
BN-800 design; construction started back in 1986. So far, the only commercial breeder reactor
in operation in the world is the highly problematic Beloyarsk-3, of the BN-600 design. It was
passing its 30-years-in-operation mark back in 2013 and got its license extended for another 15

December 8, 2014 Posted by | politics, Reference, Russia | Leave a comment

Nuclear catastrophe could result from isolating Russia from the West

diplomacy-not-bombsFor U.S. and Russia, Isolation Can Lead to Nuclear Catastrophe NYT,  NOVEMBER 15, 2014,  Siegfried S. Hecker is a research professor and senior fellow in the department of management science and engineering at Stanford University. He was director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory from 1986 to 1997, and is completing a book with Russian colleagues on U.S.-Russian nuclear cooperation.

Moscow’s announcement that no new joint Russian – U.S. projects to secure nuclear materials in Russia are “envisioned” in 2015 came as no surprise. Over the past 10 years the Russian government has systematically terminated most cooperative threat reduction projects initiated after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Nuclear cooperation was born of necessity because the political chaos and economic hardship endangered Soviet nuclear assets, those in Russia and other former Soviet states……..

Cooperative threat reduction was highly successful. Nothing really terrible happened in the Russian nuclear complex since the Soviet collapse. Threat reduction was not only cooperative, but it was highly collaborative. Hundreds of Russian and American nuclear weapons scientists and engineers worked hand in hand in each other’s facilities to vastly improve Russian practices and technologies to help them better secure and safeguard their enormous stocks of weapons-grade nuclear materials. They collaborated on how to ensure the safety and security of nuclear weapons in transport, storage and disassembly. They collaborated on how to strengthen nonproliferation and export control regimes and to prevent nuclear terrorism………

Moscow is willing to collaborate in science and nuclear energy technologies, but is terminating bilateral security cooperation. Washington wants to continue the latter, but in response to the Ukraine crisis, is isolating Russia from broader scientific and nuclear energy cooperation. The combined actions will diminish safety and security, as well as threaten nuclear cooperation in other key areas of common interest, such as countering nuclear terrorism and preventing nuclear proliferation.

My Russian colleagues and I believe that in nuclear matters, collaboration is essential, whereas isolation can lead to catastrophes. It is important for both Moscow and Washington to heed this message.

November 17, 2014 Posted by | politics international, Russia | Leave a comment

Russia’s underwater nuclear graveyard- the danger in the Arctic

Sunken Soviet Submarines Threaten Nuclear Catastrophe in Russia’s Arctic, Moscow Times. by Matthew Bodner Nov. 13 2014 While Russia’s nuclear bombers have recently set the West abuzz by probing NATO’s air defenses, a far more certain danger currently lurks beneath the frigid Arctic waters off Russia’s northern coast — a toxic boneyard for Soviet nuclear ships and reactors whose containment systems are gradually wearing out.

Left to decay at the bottom of the ocean, the world is facing a worst case scenario described as “an Arctic underwater Chernobyl, played out in slow motion,” according to Thomas Nilsen, an editor at the Barents Observer newspaper and a member of a Norwegian watchdog group that monitors the situation.


According to a joint Russian-Norwegian report issued in 2012, there are 17,000 containers of nuclear waste, 19 rusting Soviet nuclear ships and 14 nuclear reactors cut out of atomic vessels at the bottom of the Kara Sea.

For extra historical details see: Soviet Nuclear Submarine Wrecks at Bottom of Arctic Ocean (Video) Continue reading

November 15, 2014 Posted by | oceans, Russia, safety, wastes | Leave a comment

Russia’s nuclear czar, Sergei Kirienko plans wind down of nuclear security co-operation

After Two Decades Of Cooperation, Russia May Pull The Plug On Nuclear Security Contracts With The US, Business Insider 15 Nov 14 PIERRE BIENAIMÉ In the years following the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, Russia’s former American rival has spent billions helping Moscow secure a sprawling network of nuclear infrastructure, in the interest of lowering the odds that weaponised uranium might fall in the hands of extremists or rogue states.



Now Russia may be planning to wind down those joint efforts, the New York Times reported. Sergey V. Kirienko, the head of Russia’s state nuclear company, told US Energy Secretary that no new contracts aimed at nuclear security for 2015 were envisioned “under current circumstances” — a concise reference to the ratcheting tensions between Russia and the West since its annexation of Crimea in March………

November 15, 2014 Posted by | politics international, Russia, safety | Leave a comment

Russia announces plans to build new nuclear reactors in Iran

Russian-Bearflag-IranRussia steps up nuclear plans in Iran as talks near deadline By Josh Levs, November 11, 2014 (CNN) — Russia has announced plans to build new nuclear reactors in Iran — a move with international repercussions as a deadline looms.

The country will construct up to eight new reactors for the “peaceful use of atomic energy” in Iran, Russian state news agency Ria-Novosti reported Tuesday.

The announcement came less than two weeks before Iran’s negotiations with Western powers over its nuclear activities are set to expire……..

November 12, 2014 Posted by | Iran, marketing of nuclear, Russia | Leave a comment

Russia will not attend 2016 nuclear security summit

Russia told U.S. it will not attend 2016 nuclear security summit WASHINGTON/MOSCOW Wed Nov 5, 2014  (Reuters) – Russia has told the United States that it will not attend a 2016 nuclear security summit, the State Department said on Wednesday, in the latest sign of frosty ties between Washington and Moscow.

Explaining why it would stay away, Moscow said it doubted the value of the summit, which is to be held in Chicago in 2016, and believed the views of states which disagreed with the event’s organizers would be ignored.

Instead, Russia would focus on a similar conference to be held also in 2016 by the United Nations nuclear body, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the Russian Foreign Ministry said.

The bi-annual summit aims to improve nuclear security around the world and, in the past, has involved more than 50 countries including ChinaFranceGermany and Britain……….

November 6, 2014 Posted by | politics international, Russia | Leave a comment

Long range Russian missile fired from submerged submarine

missile-risingflag_RussiaRussia Test-Fires Intercontinental Missile From Nuclear Submarine IBT, By  @KukilBora on November 05 2014  
Russia successfully test-fired an intercontinental missile from a submerged Northern Fleet nuclear submarine on Wednesday, the country’s defense ministry announced in a statement.

The submerged vessel fired the missile from the Barents Sea to the Kura Range on the Kamchatka Peninsula in the country’s far east. The Sineva, which has a range of about 12,000 kilometers (7,500 miles), was deployed in 2007 as part of the country’s efforts to maintain its nuclear power status,according to Reuters. This is the second such test of a missile by Russia in a week after it had successfully test-fired a new intercontinental ballistic missile on Oct. 29…….

Last week, the Russian navy’s Yuri Dolgoruky nuclear submarine test-fired a Bulava missile from an underwater position in the Barents Sea. The missile successfully reached the selected targets at a testing range in the Kamchatka Peninsula, the Associated Press reported.   According to media reports, the Bulava missiles can hit targets as far as 5,000 miles away and can cause a blast 100 times more powerful than the atomic bombs dropped by the U.S. on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.

November 6, 2014 Posted by | Russia, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Russia fails to show up at nuclear security meeting

Russia boycotts nuclear meeting   By GEORGE JAHN and DEB RIECHMANN 3 Nov 14
VIENNA (AP) — Russia has failed to show up at meeting planning the 2016 Nuclear Security Summit, U.S and European officials said Monday, in a potentially serious blow to efforts by President Barack Obama to cement his legacy as leaving the world safer from nuclear terrorism than when he took office.

The officials said it was not immediately clear whether Russia’s absence meant that Moscow meant to boycott the summit itself or if it was a temporary show of displeasure over Washington’s harsh condemnation of Moscow’s role in Ukraine unrest and its lead in orchestrating Western sanctions and other punitive measures in response.

But even if short-term,, Russia’s no-show is significant. Only three or four planning meetings are scheduled before the spring of 2016, when the summit is tentatively set to open. With Russia a key global player — and one of the world’s five formally recognized nuclear powers — its input is crucial to setting an agenda.

The U.S. president initiated a string of summits in 2010 aimed at preventing terrorists from getting their hands on weapons-grade nuclear material. Since then, the number of countries that have enough material to build a nuclear weapon has fallen from 39 to 25.

November 4, 2014 Posted by | politics international, Russia | Leave a comment


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 899 other followers