nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

US looking at easing restrictions on radiation exposure at the nation’s nuclear power plants

“This will only increase the disease burden at a time when cancer rates are already rising among younger people,”

The proposal would eliminate a standard to keep radiation exposure ‘as low as reasonably achievable’

The Independent, Rachel Dobkin in New YorkThursday 02 July 2026

Federal regulators are looking at easing restrictions on radiation exposure at the nation’s nuclear power plants.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, an independent agency aimed at ensuring the safe use of radioactive materials, proposed Wednesday eliminating a standard to keep radiation exposure “as low as is reasonably achievable,” also called ALARA.

ALARA is based on the linear no-threshold model, which presumes that any dose of radiation carries a proportional risk of harm.

The commission said in a press release that the proposal would introduce changes, including a graded approach to radiation dose management “based on risk and operational circumstances” and expanding options for managing workplace radiation exposure.

The Independent has reached out to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for comment.

The changes could save the nuclear industry about $9.53 million a year, according to documents from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission obtained by The Hill.

Edwin Lyman, a physicist ​and nuclear safety advocate at the ​Union of Concerned Scientists, told Reuters, “In eliminating its use of ​the ALARA principle, the agency’s sweeping new proposed rule would allow nuclear facility workers and ​the general public ⁠to be exposed to higher levels of cancer-causing radiation just to save the nuclear industry money.”

“This will only increase the disease burden at a time when cancer rates are already rising among younger people,” Lyman said.

The number of new cancer cases increased among people under age 50 from 2010 through 2019, according to researchers at the National Institutes of Health.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission noted in documents that the proposal would address part of President Donald Trump’s executive order to reform the agency. https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/nuclear-plants-radiation-exposure-rules-b3007995.html

July 6, 2026 Posted by | radiation, USA | Leave a comment

US nuclear power regulator proposes changing rule protecting people from radiation

in eliminating its use of ​the As Low as Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) principle, the agency’s sweeping new proposed rule would allow nuclear facility workers and ​the general public ⁠to be exposed to higher levels of cancer-causing radiation just to save the nuclear industry money

By Timothy Gardner, July 2, 2026, https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-nuclear-power-regulator-proposes-changing-rule-protecting-people-radiation-2026-07-01/

Summary

  • Proposal would eliminate the ALARA radiation protection standard and set objective dose limits
  • NRC to take public comments on radiation rule for 45 days
  • NRC Chairman Ho Nieh said change could help speed development of new reactors

WASHINGTON, July 1 (Reuters) – The U.S. nuclear ​power regulator on Wednesday proposed changes to a rule protecting people from radiation, the latest proposal pushed ‌by the Trump administration to change or soften rules to speed development and cut costs for new atomic reactors.

President Donald Trump signed executive orders in 2025 seeking to speed up permitting of reactors and to overhaul the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and directing the Energy and Defense departments to work together ​to build nuclear plants on federal lands. Trump wants to quadruple U.S. nuclear power capacity by 2050 to meet ​power demands that are rising due to data centers, electric vehicles and crypto-currencies.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission ⁠proposal eliminates a radiation protection standard called As Low as Reasonably Achievable, or ALARA, with objective dose limits for radiation. “This rulemaking ​is raising the bar on clarity in our regulations,” Ho Nieh, the NRC chairman, told reporters. “It is not lowering the bar ​on our safety standards.”

The industry has long argued that ALARA is tied to a model known as Linear No-Threshold that holds that any dose of radiation, no matter how small, carries cancer risks and that complying with ALARA is costly, time consuming, and full of uncertainties.

The proposed changes include ​adopting a graded approach to radiation dose management based on risk and operational circumstances. It also allows nuclear power plant operators ​greater flexibility to use “modern methods for evaluating radiation doses to workers and the public.”

Nieh said he does not anticipate that current nuclear reactors will ‌make major ⁠changes due to the changed rule if finalized. But he said it could help speed development of new reactors.

“Now they have a very clear picture of what the requirements for radiation protection are going to look like, that will inform how they build and design their reactor, in terms of the shielding and the materials that they’re using,” Nieh told reporters.

Edwin Lyman, a physicist ​and nuclear safety advocate at the ​Union of Concerned Scientists, ⁠said the NRC has correctly reaffirmed the scientific consensus that there is no safe level of radiation exposure and that the cancer risk is proportional to the dose.

“However, in eliminating its use of ​the ALARA principle, the agency’s sweeping new proposed rule would allow nuclear facility workers and ​the general public ⁠to be exposed to higher levels of cancer-causing radiation just to save the nuclear industry money.”Nieh said he does not anticipate that current nuclear reactors will ‌make major ⁠changes due to the changed rule if finalized. But he said it could help speed development of new reactors.

“Now they have a very clear picture of what the requirements for radiation protection are going to look like, that will inform how they build and design their reactor, in terms of the shielding and the materials that they’re using,” Nieh told reporters.

Edwin Lyman, a physicist ​and nuclear safety advocate at the ​Union of Concerned Scientists, ⁠said the NRC has correctly reaffirmed the scientific consensus that there is no safe level of radiation exposure and that the cancer risk is proportional to the dose.

“However, in eliminating its use of ​the ALARA principle, the agency’s sweeping new proposed rule would allow nuclear facility workers and ​the general public ⁠to be exposed to higher levels of cancer-causing radiation just to save the nuclear industry money.”

“This will only increase the disease burden at a time when cancer rates are already rising among younger people,” Lyman said.

Last month, the NRC proposed rule changes including changing a ⁠rule on ​security standards at nuclear power plants that UCS said would “dramatically weaken measures that ​protect their facilities from terrorist attacks.” Another rule proposed on Wednesday would make sweeping changes to reactor licensing including streamlining the construction of new reactors.

The NRC ​will take public comments on the radiation rule for 45 days before the rule is finalized.

July 6, 2026 Posted by | radiation, safety, USA | Leave a comment

New nuclear plants a difficult option for Switzerland

04/07/2026 By Le News 

Switzerland does not need new nuclear power stations to complete the energy transition, according to a report by 19 energy specialists from ETH Zurich and the Paul Scherrer Institute (PSI), the country’s leading nuclear-research centre. They conclude that a system based on hydropower and solar energy, supplemented by wind power and electricity storage, can provide a secure supply without building new reactors.

…………….. For new nuclear plants to become commercially viable, several conditions would need to be met. The technology would require substantial government support, as other low-carbon energy sources already receive. Investors would also need state guarantees to cover the financial risks. Above all, construction costs would have to fall well below those of recently completed projects in France and Finland, both of which suffered major delays and cost overruns.

The report reinforces conclusions reached in two other recent assessments: a review by the Swiss Academies of Sciences published last year and an analysis by the energy company Axpo earlier this year. All three conclude that new nuclear power is technically possible but highly uncertain. The main obstacles are economic rather than technological. Any serious accident abroad, similar to the Fukushima disaster, could also rapidly alter the political climate.

The studies also agree that Switzerland has credible alternatives. Expanding solar generation is generally regarded as quicker, cheaper and politically easier than building new reactors. Continued investment in battery and other storage technologies could increasingly offset the intermittent nature of renewable electricity generation.

The debate is therefore less about whether nuclear power is technically feasible than whether it represents the most practical route to decarbonisation. The Federal Council and a majority in Parliament have recently backed lifting the ban on new nuclear power stations. Because the change would almost certainly face a referendum, the final decision is likely to rest with Swiss voters.

The three reports are also sceptical about the prospects for so-called Generation IV reactors. Advocates argue that these designs will be safer, cheaper and produce less radioactive waste. But for now those claims remain largely theoretical. Axpo, together with most of the scientists involved in the latest studies, concludes that such reactors are unlikely to make a meaningful contribution to Switzerland’s electricity supply before 2050. https://lenews.ch/2026/07/04/new-nuclear-plants-a-difficult-option-for-switzerland/

July 6, 2026 Posted by | politics, Switzerland | Leave a comment

The Gaza Ethnic Cleansing Agenda Continues To Roll Forward

Caitlin Johnstone, Jul 03, 2026, https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/the-gaza-ethnic-cleansing-agenda?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=82124&post_id=204779474&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

As both US and Israeli leaders openly contemplate attacking Iran again, it’s easy for the world to miss the fact that the genocidal alliance has also dramatically reinvigorated its ethnic cleansing agendas in Gaza.

The Adelson-owned pro-Netanyahu outlet Israel Hayom reports that in the coming weeks the so-called “Board of Peace” overseeing life in the Gaza Strip is planning to relocate Palestinians to “humanitarian shelters” that are not under Hamas control.

Israel Hayom reports that an area near the destroyed city of Rafah is the first location where such camps will be set up. This is noteworthy because one year ago defense minister Israel Katz stated that there was a plan to construct a “humanitarian city” on the ruins of Rafah, where “the emigration plan” for the Palestinians would then be implemented, adding that Benjamin Netanyahu was working on finding foreign nations to accept the population of Gaza.

It’s hard to ignore the similarities. Both accounts even state that the plan is to police the displaced Palestinians using an international force. The 2026 Israel Hayom report states that the camps will be overseen by “multinational forces under the Board of Peace’s management”, and Israel Katz stated in 2025 that Israel is seeking international partners to manage the zone.

So to be clear, in July of last year Israeli officials were publicly stating that they were going to build a “humanitarian city” on the ruins of Rafah to house the Palestinians under international supervision while working to relocate them from their homeland to other countries, and in July of this year we learn that we will soon see Palestinians in Gaza relocated to “humanitarian shelters” near Rafah overseen by international forces.

So it sounds like the same plan. If it is, then it’s a plan for ethnic cleansing.

Israel has already expanded its control over Gaza from 53 percent to 70 percent of the Strip, concentrating the survivors of the genocide into a mere 30 percent of the Palestinian territory. And now, according to Israeli Energy Minister Eli Cohen, the plan is to expand control to 100 percent.

Israel National News quotes Cohen as saying during a recent radio interview that “our control of the territory will only continue to expand until we reach 100%,” adding, “two months ago we controlled 53% of the Strip, about a month ago around 60%, and today we’re approaching 70% of the Strip’s area.”

This comes amid other reports we discussed recently which strongly indicate that the Trumpanyahu administration is renewing its push to remove all Palestinians from the Gaza Strip. The other day we learned from the Israeli press that Israel’s national security agencies had been instructed to rebrand the ethnic cleansing plan as a “plan for free movement” in order to mitigate international resistance to the agenda. A few days before that, we learned that Israel’s new national security chief had convened a meeting with officials from the IDF and Shin Bet to discuss the plan to displace the Palestinians of Gaza to other countries.

Again, Israel’s mass atrocities in Gaza have always been about ethnic cleansing from the very beginning. Within days of Israel’s assault on Gaza in October 2023, Israel’s Intelligence Ministry was circulating a plan for the entire population of Gaza to be moved to the Sinai Peninsula in Egypt, and an Israeli think tank had drawn up a strategy for the “relocation and final settlement of the entire Gaza population.”

The goal has always been to remove the Palestinians from Gaza so their territory can be taken from them. This was never anything other than a blatant Israeli land grab. They’ve been framing it as a “war” so that after they seize and colonize Gaza they can say “the Arabs fought a war and lost, they deserved to lose territory” like they always do, but it was never actually a war.

Calling the Gaza genocide a “war” is like seeing a man beating up a toddler and calling it a “fight”. It’s one of the world’s most sophisticated military forces raining explosives on an area packed full of children with the backing of the most powerful empire that has ever existed, opposed only by a few thousand guys running around in sandals with homemade rockets and ancient Kalashnikovs.

That’s not a war. It’s an ethnic cleansing operation. That’s all this has ever been.

July 6, 2026 Posted by | Atrocities, Gaza, Israel | Leave a comment

The emerging AI battlespace: Counter-AI threats to AI-powered satellite remote sensing analysis

Meanwhile, it is crucial to foster a culture of skepticism toward AI. The success of generative AI models such as ChatGPT and DeepSeek has led to the misguided belief that AI understands the world similarly to humans and can make superior and quicker decisions based on logical reasoning. This notion is unfounded:

Bulletin, By Jingjie He | May 13, 2026

mote sensing is a data collection technique that enables the detection and monitoring of physical characteristics of target objects or areas. It is achieved by measuring reflected and emitted radiation from the targets, using optical, radar, light detection and ranging (LiDAR), thermal, multispectral, or hyperspectral sensors deployed on various platforms, including satellites, aircraft, and unmanned aerial vehicles, among others. The acquired data is generally visualized as imagery from an overhead perspective (Campbell, Wynne, and Thomas 2022, 3-23).

Advances in satellite remote sensing and the deployment of satellite constellations have enabled near-persistent Earth observation, which has allowed for significant applications in international security, particularly in arms control and nonproliferation. But challenges remain in processing and analyzing the vast volumes of remote sensing data, primarily due to the reliance on manual analysis by highly trained experts.

Manual analysis faces three key limitations. First, organizations often lack the manpower required to provide comprehensive analytical coverage of remote sensing data. Analyzing satellite imagery requires technical expertise and practical experience, making real-time analysis of large datasets impractical. Second, human analysts may struggle to identify subtle patterns or anomalies, especially in low-resolution images. Even in high-resolution imagery, cognitive biases and target insensitivity may cause analysts to overlook critical information. Third, remote sensing analysis can be serendipitous, with analysts reviewing imagery without a clear sense of what to look for, potentially missing important details.

To address these limitations, researchers have turned to artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning to analyze satellite imagery at scale. These technologies enable finer granularity, greater accuracy, higher efficiency, and better coverage. But the integration of AI and geospatial science also introduces new challenges, as AI systems can be vulnerable to manipulation through counter-AI techniques.

This article identifies emerging counter-AI threats to satellite imagery analysis and proposes a comprehensive defense framework. It also argues that arms control and nonproliferation missions are not solitary pursuits for seekers but rather dynamic hider-seeker games, where AI functions as both a force and threat multiplier. Adversarial AI attacks—leveraging both digital and physical-world tactics—can be strategically employed to achieve counter-AI objectives, undermining the reliability of AI-driven satellite imagery analyses.

To mitigate these risks, a robust defense framework should encompass five core components: stringent access and quality control for data and models, the integration of robustness into AI frameworks, enhancements to system monitoring capabilities, strengthening cross-sectoral knowledge sharing and threat awareness, and incorporating adaptability and resilience into risk management strategies.

The AI-driven satellite remote sensing revolution

Satellite remote sensing is a powerful tool that can identify objects, detect changes (e.g., facility construction or destruction), and track moving objects (e.g., wartime maneuvers and delivery systems) (Patton et al. 2016). The integration of computer vision, which employs AI to acquire, process, and analyze digital visual data, is revolutionizing the way remote sensing data is interpreted and used.

In particular, AI-driven satellite remote sensing is transforming arms control, nonproliferation, and peacekeeping missions. For example, Amnesty International, in collaboration with Element AI and 28,600 volunteers, developed tools to automatically analyze satellite imagery for monitoring conflicts in Darfur (Cornebise et al. 2018). Palantir Technologies has created MetaConstellation, an AI-powered software for satellite imagery analysis, which has enabled the United States and its allies to automate port monitoring and global submarine deployment tracking (Palantir n.d.). In a joint project with the defense intelligence provider Jane’s, Stanford University, and BlackSky, a satellite imagery provider, the space data analysis company Orbital Insight applied machine learning to assist in the identification of a potential centrifuge assembly facility under construction in Iran (Janes 2021). The US Oak Ridge National Laboratory (2023) also employs AI for applications such as image de-hazing, object counting, and facility function classification. With the precipitous growth of geospatial data, the AI-driven revolution in satellite remote sensing is poised for further acceleration.

Typology of counter-AI attacks

The increasing use of AI-powered satellite remote sensing presents significant security risks. Four primary categories of counter-AI attacks to satellite imagery analysis require attention: data poisoning, model evasion, data inference, and model extraction (see Table 1 below on original).

Data poisoning. Data poisoning attacks aim to contaminate AI models during their training phases by modifying training data. Adversarial artifacts are injected into the data used to train machine learning models, leading to the creation of contaminated models that yield false classifications………………………………………………….

Model Evasion. Model evasion threats are designed to confuse or evade well-trained models by inserting adversarial perturbations—that is, small changes that humans may not be able to perceive—in data that is to be evaluated via machine learning……………………………………………………………………………………..


The potential military applications of adversarial camouflages have attracted considerable interest from researchers. However, the security implications of this technology in satellite remote sensing still require thorough investigation. In addition to evading models designed for satellite imagery analysis, adversarial camouflage could theoretically create decoys, resulting in false alarms that may overwhelm remote sensing systems, particularly when tracking moving objects.

Data Inference. Data inference threats involve attempts to unveil and steal the training data used by an ML model, which can lead to leakage of sensitive information and intelligence……………………………………………………………….

Model Extraction. Model extraction attacks aim at duplicating the functionality of a victim model. In this type of attack, a malicious actor seeks to infer the architecture and parameters of the victim model and subsequently trains a surrogate model using a dataset comprised of inputs and outputs obtained from repeated queries to the victim model. Unlike other types of counter-AI attacks, model extraction specifically targets black-box ML models, whose internal workings are not interpretable by humans…………………………………………………………………….

Prospects for a defense framework

The development of effective countermeasures against counter-AI attacks in satellite imagery analysis is of critical importance. A five-dimensional defense framework could effectively manage and mitigate counter-AI threats…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Meanwhile, it is crucial to foster a culture of skepticism toward AI. The success of generative AI models such as ChatGPT and DeepSeek has led to the misguided belief that AI understands the world similarly to humans and can make superior and quicker decisions based on logical reasoning. This notion is unfounded: The apparent reasoning of machines is at this point not genuine or reliable; instead, it is based on probabilistic pattern matching derived from extensive training data (Jiang et al., 2024; Mirzadeh et al., 2024; Shi et al., 2023). Consequently, humanizing AI can be detrimental, as it limits our ability to think critically and challenge the models when human judgment diverges from machine conclusions. It is essential to promote knowledge about machine learning’s limitations and to foster a culture of skepticism towards AI………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. https://thebulletin.org/premium/2026-05/the-emerging-ai-battlespace-counter-ai-threats-to-ai-powered-satellite-remote-sensing-analysis/?utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=email&utm_content=The%20emerging%20AI%20battlespace&utm_campaign=20260702%20Thursday%20Newsletter

July 6, 2026 Posted by | technology | Leave a comment

The Golden Rule and Crew are ready – Summer 2026 voyage


The VFP Golden Rule Committee plans to bring the Golden Rule to 12 ports-of-call this summer. However, weather on the Pacific coast has been wild this season. After arriving in Fort Bragg, we are waiting for a huge, strong storm to let up a bit before proceeding south.

An optimistic schedule is set out below – note that the order of stops and dates for San Diego, Ensenada, and Oceanside all depend on when the storm breaks. And the rest of the schedule may also shift and a stop or two canceled – stay tuned on our website and eNews, which will be posted as soon as we successfully leave Fort Bragg.

Please see vfpgoldenruleproject.org for the latest schedule.

Locate the Golden Rule with our Tracker.

See live videos from the boat on Facebook: GoldenRulePeaceBoat

Follow us on Instagram goldenrulepeaceboat

We look forward to presentations, peace picnics, concerts, film screenings, city council resolutions, press conferences, Peace Flotillas, “open boat” tours, and taking people sailing!

If you live in or near any of these coastal cities, we encourage you to help organize events and publicity. If you will be visiting the California coast this summer, please plan to join us.

July 6, 2026 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, USA | Leave a comment

Australia’s Royal Commission on cohesion hears only half the story

the same evening news that reports rising antisemitism in Australia – correctly, and without my objection – routinely fails to report the parallel rise in anti-Muslim and anti-Palestinian abuse, the vandalised mosques, the women afraid to wear hijab in public, the children told by implication that their faith makes them suspect

By Wayne Hawkins | 2 July 2026, https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/royal-commission-on-cohesion-hears-only-half-the-story,21247

Australia’s Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion risks undermining its own purpose by excluding evidence of Islamophobia and anti-Palestinian racism, writes Wayne Hawkins.

AUSTRALIA’S Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion is now in its third Sydney hearing block, running until 10 July.

It was established in January, in the aftermath of the Bondi Beach attack that killed 15 people on a night meant for celebration. Nobody disputes that the Commission has real work to do. The rise in antisemitic incidents recorded since October 2023 is documented, severe and deserving of the most rigorous scrutiny our institutions can offer.

But an inquiry into hatred reveals something about itself in who it decides not to hear from. And on that count, this Commission has already answered the question.

In May, the Loud Jewish Collective applied for leave to appear before the first hearing block, wanting to give evidence about their own members’ experiences of antisemitism. They were refused — the Commissioner was, in the words used to reject them, “not satisfied” that they had a direct and substantial interest in the matter.

The Australian Palestine Advocacy Network met the same fate. Two organisations, both with members who have lived antisemitism or anti-Palestinian racism directly, both judged to be outside the scope of an inquiry into hatred and social cohesion in Australia.

I find it hard to read that as anything other than a decision about which Australians get to define what cohesion means.

I wrote a parliamentary submission earlier this year arguing that Islamophobia is racism — not by analogy, not as a lesser cousin of antisemitism, but structurally, mechanistically, the same thing happening to a different group. Collective blame. The demand that an entire community continuously prove its loyalty to the actions of people who share only its faith. The recasting of legitimate  political grievance – in this case, mass civilian death in Gaza – as evidence of an inherent, civilisational danger.

These are not two separate phenomena needing two separate inquiries that never speak to each other. They are the same mechanism, pointed in two directions at once, often by the same actors in the same news cycle.

The Commission’s own proceedings have illustrated the problem it was never asked to examine. Commissioner Virginia Bell described the 7 October attack, in passing, as a “Hamas invasion”, a characterisation that quietly recasts a population under decades of occupation as the invading force on their own land.

Witnesses in an SBS News report on the second hearing block have testified to being “tired” of seeing Palestinian flags at cultural events, of overhearing artists call for a free Palestine, of having to scroll past footage of starvation in Gaza on their phones.

These are real discomforts and I don’t dismiss them. But an Inquiry that treats a 45-second elevator ride past distressing news as a harm worth recording, while refusing entry to the people living the underlying catastrophe, has told us where its sympathies sit before a single recommendation is written. 

This is not a call to relitigate the Commission’s right to exist, or to diminish what Jewish Australians have endured since the Bondi attack and well before it. It is a call to notice the asymmetry, because the asymmetry is the story.

No one has asked Christian Australians to account for Christian nationalist violence as the price of being heard on social cohesion. No one demands that Buddhist or Hindu Australians distance themselves from documented nationalist violence against Muslim minorities in Myanmar and India before their testimony is taken seriously. Only one direction of scrutiny in this country currently requires an entire community to prove, in advance and as a condition of entry, that it is not secretly the threat.

I don’t say this to score a point against the Commission. I say it because the same evening news that reports rising antisemitism in Australia – correctly, and without my objection – routinely fails to report the parallel rise in anti-Muslim and anti-Palestinian abuse, the vandalised mosques, the women afraid to wear hijab in public, the children told by implication that their faith makes them suspect.

A Royal Commission with “social cohesion” in its title, that structurally cannot hear from the second-largest group experiencing religious and racial hostility in this country, is not examining social cohesion. It is examining one half of a single problem and calling the result whole.

The fix here isn’t complicated and it doesn’t require abandoning the Commission’s core purpose. It requires the Commissioner to recognise that anti-Palestinian racism and Islamophobia sit inside the same terms of reference as antisemitism, not outside them — because they are produced by the same mechanism of collective blame, and because a finding on “social cohesion” that only canvasses the cohesion of part of the country isn’t a finding at all.

Bell still has time, before her final report in December, to widen the door rather than defend its current width.

Naming a mechanism early is not alarmism — it’s the only thing that has ever interrupted one before it finishes running its course. Every Australian who has had a synagogue vandalised, a mosque firebombed, or a hijab grabbed in the street deserves the same seriousness from the institutions meant to protect them.

An Inquiry that only extends that seriousness in one direction isn’t building cohesion. It’s choosing sides while insisting it isn’t.

Wayne Hawkins is an independent commentator based in Tasmania and an independent candidate for the federal seat of Clark.

July 6, 2026 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, secrets,lies and civil liberties | Leave a comment

The state of nuclear power in 2026

On life support, barely comatose

Jun 30, 2026, https://johnquigginblog.substack.com/p/the-state-of-nuclear-power-in-2026?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=806934&post_id=204222669&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

There was a renewed burst of enthusiasm for nuclear power a few years ago. In Australia it was confined to the political right and didn’t last long, but elsewhere support was broader. Most notable was the 2023 commitment by more than 20 countries, led by the US, UK and France, to triple global nuclear capacity by 2050. In the three countries mentioned, that would imply building 330 GW of new capacity as well as replacing retiring capacity

So far, this commitment has produced only one final investment decision, for two reactors at Sizewell C in the UK. Construction is expected to start in 2027, with commercial operation in the late 2030s at best. After that, there are no large plants even on the drawing boards in the UK. A few sites have been identified, and there’s a proposal for some half-size reactors (called SMRs but not actually modular or very small) to be built by Rolls-Royce. These don’t even have a prototype yet.

France is a few steps behind. Three sites have been identified, each with two reactors, but none has reached final investment decision yet. The most likely to happen is at Penly, but even that is doubtful. And once Macron’s term finishes in 2027, the political push is likely to dissipate.

Nothing at all is happening with large-scale new nuclear in the US. Proposals to complete the half-finished VC Summer plant in South Carolina have gone nowhere, and even the planned restart of the Palisades plant has missed multiple deadlines. The Trump Administration recently announced an $18.7 billion loan program with the aim of building ten AP1000 reactors, but this is just theatre. There are a few pilot small reactors with construction underway, but all such efforts have failed until now.

Looking at the world as a whole, the first half of 2026 has seen

* two (2) new reactors connected to the grid, both in China

* three (3) construction projects reaching first nuclear concrete, all in China

* zero (0) new final investment decisions outside China

* one (1) new/revised export contract, probably just symbolic, between Rosatom and Uzbekistan

Generously assuming a 4:1 capacity ratio, the two new reactors would be equivalent to around 8 GW of firmed solar. That’s what China installs every week or so, and the world as a whole every four or five days.

In summary, nuclear power isn’t a vital source of energy, obstructed by politics. Outside China, it’s a zombie, animated by political imperatives. In China, it’s an afterthought, running far behind solar and wind, as well as (regrettably) new coal and gas, and about level with new hydro.

July 6, 2026 Posted by | politics international | Leave a comment

University of Manchester and United Kingdom National Nuclear Laboratory (UKNNL) sign landmark nuclear partnership agreement

Manchester University 3 Jul 2026

The University of Manchester and United Kingdom National Nuclear Laboratory (UKNNL) have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) formalising a wide-ranging partnership to advance nuclear science, grow the UK’s nuclear workforce, and strengthen the country’s position as a global leader in nuclear technology.

The agreement was signed at The University of Manchester by UKNNL Chief Executive Officer Julianne Antrobus and Professor Sarah Sharples, Vice President and Dean of the Faculty of Science and Engineering.

The MoU sets out a shared commitment to collaboration across decommissioning research, materials science, nuclear fuels and energy systems, waste management, and innovation — building on a relationship stretching back many years.

Julianne Antrobus, CEO, United Kingdom National Nuclear Laboratory UKNNL, said: “I am looking forward to our collaboration with the University of Manchester moving from strength to strength as we work together to develop the next generation of nuclear talent and technology.

“The 2024 Strategic Review gave us a clear direction: become the partnerships-led national laboratory that government and the sector needs. One of the most important things we can do in pursuit of that is to work strategically with the academic institutions that can genuinely help us deliver our mission.

 The University of Manchester is one of those vitally important institutions. This MoU formalises a relationship that is already delivering world-leading science and growing the next generation of nuclear talent — and it signals our intent to do much more together. Our partnership with Manchester, alongside our recent agreements with CEA, Bangor University, Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA) and Rolls-Royce, positions UKNNL at the centre of a network of world-class partners, so that we can deliver on our purpose: nuclear science to benefit society.”

Professor Zara Hodgson, Director of the Dalton Nuclear Institute, said: “I am delighted to see this MoU between UKNNL and The University of Manchester signed today. It provides us with a firm platform for a renewed and strengthened collaborative approach to serve the sector. Enabling our teams to work together more closely is a foundational step towards progress in vital research and innovation for a transforming sector and to  achieve an accelerated pathway to nuclear expertise that the sector needs now, and in the future……………………….

The agreement also establishes arrangements for sharing facilities and expertise, including access to UKNNL’s Preston and Central Laboratory facilities for Manchester PhD students and researchers, and reciprocal access to University facilities for UKNNL staff……………………………………………………………………………………………

A track record of collaboration

The two organisations have an established history of joint working that is already delivering results for the UK nuclear sector, including published research in leading journals on nuclear fuels and materials, support for PhD researchers in next-generation nuclear technologies, shared personnel arrangements including visiting and honorary academic appointments, and the establishment of centres of excellence such as the Effluents Centre of Excellence and the PHLAME (Photonics and Laser Analysis of Materials and Environments) collaborative research group. https://www.manchester.ac.uk/about/news/university-of-manchester-and-uknnl-sign-landmark-nuclear-partnership-agreement/

July 6, 2026 Posted by | Education, UK | Leave a comment

SGE unveils plans for 4.2GW UK Small Modular Reactor fleet

News provided by SGE 01 Jul, 2026, https://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-releases/sge-unveils-plans-for-4-2gw-uk-small-modular-reactor-fleet-302816135.html

Programme of 14 Small Modular Nuclear Reactors could accelerate UK new nuclear and power almost eight million UK homes

LONDON, July 2, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — SGE, a European Small Modular Reactor (SMR) development and investment platform, yesterday announced its plans to build fourteen GE Vernova Hitachi BWRX-300 Small Modular Reactors on three sites in the UK. The deployment team includes SGE, GE Vernova Hitachi Nuclear Energy, Samsung C&T, Laing O’Rourke, Aecon Group Inc., Google Cloud, Fermi Development, Etara and an experienced nuclear operator.

The company has submitted an application under the UK’s Advanced Nuclear Framework (ANF) to develop a combined 4.2GW fleet which could deliver enough clean power for 11% of UK power demand or equivalent to an estimated almost eight million homes for at least sixty years. To support this ambition, SGE has established SGE SMR UK Limited as its dedicated UK-based project vehicle.

SGE’s proposal reflects a fleet-based development model, centred on repeatable deployment at scale. The project is targeting three multi-unit sites, the first to host six BWRX-300 units, with two further sites to follow in quick succession. In total, the programme represents a significant addition to the UK’s future nuclear capacity and supports the country’s long-term energy security, clean power and industrial growth ambitions.

The UK project builds on significant regulatory groundwork already in place for the BWRX-300, a tenth generation, proven technology that draws on the experience of 67 successful reactor deployments. The technology is under licensed construction in Canada and is on schedule to be the first SMR to operate in the OECD. In December 2025, the BWRX-300 successfully completed Step 2 of the UK’s Generic Design Assessment.

The partnership brings together proven reactor technology, significant project development experience, industrial capability and supply chain expertise and financing structure experience to support the deployment of the BWRX-300 in the UK. SGE is presenting a privately financed, commercially-led investment, supported by strong delivery partners. SGE plans to deploy under a Contract for Difference framework with National Wealth Fund engagement, meaning there will be no charges to consumers prior to operations.

Michał Sołowow, Founder of SGE, said: “We are focused on delivering efficient, safe, affordable, and clean nuclear energy power at fleet scale. The UK is home to one of the world’s most experienced nuclear workforce and the British Government has provided a clear path to market with the Advanced Nuclear Framework. Because of this, I am confident we will set a new standard for nuclear development by combining our disruptive business model with the BWRX-300’s tenth generation proven technology. We will rely strongly on the UK supply chain; it is a critical element for our project. Our project will create a distinct competitive advantage for UK economy.”

Rafał Kasprów, CEO of SGE, said: “The submission of our application under the Advanced Nuclear Framework marks a major milestone in our ambition to develop a fleet of BWRX-300 small modular reactors across the UK and the European Union. The United Kingdom is one of Europe’s most important and capable nuclear markets, with a highly skilled workforce, a strong industrial base, and a strategic need to lead the next generation of nuclear deployment. With a clear requirement for substantial new nuclear capacity over the coming decades, we believe our approach can make a meaningful contribution at scale. Standardisation, repetition, modularisation, and a fleet deployment strategy are the most effective ways to deliver new nuclear projects successfully, reducing costs, construction risk, and delivery times. We are committed to working with UK partners to provide secure, affordable, and clean electricity to millions of British households for generations to come.” 

Jason Cooper, CEO of GE Vernova Hitachi Nuclear Energy, said: “SGE’s vision reflects the growing momentum behind new nuclear across Europe and the critical role SMRs can play in strengthening energy security while delivering reliable, lower-carbon electricity. With construction already underway at the Darlington New Nuclear Project in Ontario, Canada, the first commercial-scale SMR under construction in the Western world, the BWRX-300 offers the confidence that comes from real project execution. We are proud to support SGE as they pursue this important opportunity in the UK.”

John O’Connor, Group Commercial Director of Laing O’Rourke, said: “Laing O’Rourke brings the power of its nuclear experience and pioneering industrialised construction methods to the development of Small Modular Reactors, like this programme, of which we are pleased to play a part. We are applying lessons learned from the use of advanced manufacturing in the construction of large-scale and other complex infrastructure to boost safety and certainty for our partners and clients.” 

Aaron Johnson, Senior Vice President, Nuclear, Aecon Group Inc., said: “Aecon is proud to serve as a leading partner on Ontario Power Generation’s Darlington New Nuclear Project, supporting the first-of-a-kind BWRX-300 deployment in Canada. Drawing on deep expertise in construction management, advanced automation, fabrication, and modularization, Aecon is helping to drive meaningful improvements in safety, quality, schedule certainty, and cost efficiency. Early involvement in this landmark project positions Aecon to leverage first-of-a-kind experience and tailor proven approaches for SGE in the UK and in other international markets. We are building capabilities and insights that will enable us to support efficient and scalable deployment across North America and in global markets, including the UK.”

SGE anticipates this project will enter the Advanced Nuclear Pipeline in November 2026, with site selection and government support scheme negotiations completed in the first half of 2027; after which major investment, site preparation and licensing work would begin within approximately a year, with first commercial operation of the first unit targeted for 2034.

Media contact

Paulina Chorazewska 
SGE 
Communications Director 
+48 539 992 967 
paulina.chorazewska@sge.eu  

July 6, 2026 Posted by | business and costs, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment

U.S.-Israel Military Merger Delayed: Here’s Why and How You Can Stop It

A procedural vote bought Congress—and the American people—one more chance to defend American sovereignty. Welcome to civics class, Washington, D.C. style.

The Kucinich Report, Dennis Kucinich and Elizabeth Kucinich, Jul 03, 2026

The U.S.-Israel military merger has not become law – yet.

Not because Congress rejected it, but because the House unexpectedly voted down the procedural rule governing debate on the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

That vote delayed consideration of the bill, but it did not remove the military merger from it. When the House returns, Congress will almost certainly have another opportunity to consider the legislation.

The American people now have another opportunity to stop it.

What Happened?

The Massie-Khanna Amendment, which would have removed the military merger from the bill, was not made in order by the House Rules Committee, which serves as the traffic cop on legislation, deciding which bills and which amendments move forward.

In this case, the Rules Committee played dirty cop and the fix was in to make sure the House would not be able to vote on the military merger because the amendment was simply not placed in the rule. In fact, the amendment was not taken up by the committee and did not even receive a vote.

It was ignored.

Welcome to civics class, Washington, D.C. style, on how a bill isn’t made

How Congress Was Prevented from Voting

Every piece of legislation has its own specific rule, which determines, among other matters, how much time will be permitted for debate, what amendments are made in order, whether legislation can be further amended from the House floor, and whether a point of order can be raised to challenge the bill.

The Rules Committee makes up the rules for each bill as it goes along.

And it does.

Since Republicans control the House, they determine the committee’s membership. The Rules Committee consists of nine Republicans and four Democrats.

This particular rule governed consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027, legislation that would increase annual Pentagon spending by an astonishing 67 percent to $1.5 trillion. The rule, approved by the committee on a partisan vote at the request of the President, also combined the NDAA with the so-called SAVE Act, restricting voter registration.

Before Members can vote on the underlying legislation, they must first vote separately on the rule. The rule establishes the terms of debate and determines which amendments may be considered.

If the rule goes down, the bill goes down with it.

Why Was the NDAA Vote Delayed?

Here is what happened.

Because of a dispute over the SAVE Act, the House voted down the rule. The NDAA never came before the House for debate or final passage. A disappointed Speaker adjourned the House until July 13.

As a consequence, the NDAA has not passed and the U.S.-Israel military merger it authorizes has not become law.

Yet.

The Fight Continues………………………………………………..https://kucinichreport.substack.com/p/us-israel-military-merger-delayed?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1441588&post_id=204708708&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=c9zhh&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

July 6, 2026 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

As UK’s Prime Minister fades away, will his beloved Small Nuclear Reactor dream fade too?

5 July 2026, https://theaimn.net/as-uks-prime-minister-fades-away-will-his-beloved-small-nuclear-reactor-dream-fade-too/

As soon as mid-July, Sir Keir Starmer is expected to finally quit his job as British Prime Minister. He’s not very popular, either within his own party, or with the general public. Labour’s previous popular leader, Jeremy Corbyn, opposed nuclear power. Soon after coming to power, Starmer called for tech companies to work alongside the government’s Great British Energy – Nuclear, to build SMRs to power energy-intensive AI data centres across Britain. Starmer might be hoping to be, later on, renowned for his legacy in revolutionising British energy systems, and producing a glorious renaissance for the global nuclear industry.

But possibly not.

“I say: build, baby, build,” – Starmer’s theme on Small Nuclear Reactors looks now, on the face of it, to be a resounding winner for Britain on the global nuclear scene. Why? Because… haven’t you heard? It is all over the British press that the UK is to get a fleet of SMRs with a multi-billion dollar “privately financed” scheme (helped just a bit by the government), to start generating in 2034.

SGE is a European Small Modular Reactor (SMR) development and investment platform. Founded by Polish billionaire Michał Sołowow, SGE has plans for SMR developments across Europe. On July 1st SGE announced in glowing terms, its UK plans for “delivering efficient, safe, affordable, and clean nuclear energy power at fleet scale.” It has established a consortium, SGE SMR UK Limited, as its dedicated UK-based project vehicle.

SGE hopes to use the GE Vernova Hitachi BWRX-300 design, to build under the government’s advanced nuclear framework (which was initiated by Starmer in February after the government promised to rip up “archaic rules” and slash regulations to “get Britain building”). SGE boasts that this SMR design is a “proven technology,” but it’s really a smaller, and as yet untested, version of the large boiling water nuclear reactor.

Where’s the money coming from?

The plan is to put in £35bn of private capital to build 14 small modular nuclear reactors on three sites across the UK. The consortium SGE SMR UK consists of SGE (formerly Synthos Green Energy), GE Vernova, Hitachi Nuclear, Samsung C&T, Laing O’Rourke, Aecon Group, Google Cloud, Fermi Development, and Etara. The biggest investor presumably is the Polish company.

Under the National Wealth Fund, Great British Energy – Nuclear (GBE-N) set up its Small Modular Reactor (SMR) Technical Partner contract (TP Contract) as a way for the government to help fund SMR development. It initially forecast that it may need £20bn to cover the cost of the (TP) Contract. “GBE-N has ultimately decided to award only one TP Contract and the contract award notice value reflects this.”

SGE plans to deploy under a Contract for Difference framework with National Wealth Fund engagement. I know that the contract for difference scheme means a fixed price for electricity bills once the project begins generating electricity. If the market price is below the fixed price, the government tops up the payment to the company. I don’t know what the National Wealth Fund engagement means, and I suspect that I’m not the only one puzzled about this.

In May 2026 Great British Energy – Nuclear (GBE-N) announced that Rolls-Royce SMR has been awarded Stage 1 of its Small Modular Reactor (SMR) Technical Partner contract (TP Contract). Stage 1 has a “forecast” price of £359M. A furtherr £8.17bn is estimated for the second delivery phase. Rolls Royce expects the SMRs to start operating in the mid 2030s.

So how much of the tax-payers’ £20bn is Rolls Royce going to get? And is SGE SMR UK going to get some too, and if so, how much? Or is the Polish entrepreneur’s SGE SMR UK truly really going to go it alone – with private financing?

Mysterious unanswered questions

Through the Freedom of Information Act, The New Civil Engineer requested some detail on the breakdown of the TP Contract award ‘s available £20bn. Great British Energy – Nuclear ‘s reply was – “GBE-N does not hold the information you have requested.”

Given the nuclear industry’s notorious history of delays and cost overruns, it’s pretty important to know how much each of these competing SMR projects is likely to cost, how long each would really take to come into operation, and how much the tax-payer will have to cough up.

What a complicated mess!

In 2023 the UK joined enthusiastically with world leaders in The Declaration to Triple Nuclear Energy by 2050. The Starmer Labour government took this up with zeal, and the message has been reinforced by academia and the media. Several UK universities have jumped on the nuclear bandwagon. Just this week, the Manchester University announced:

The University of Manchester and United Kingdom National Nuclear Laboratory (UKNNL) have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) formalising a wide-ranging partnership to advance nuclear science, grow the UK’s nuclear workforce, and strengthen the country’s position as a global leader in nuclear technology.

The UK media, except for The Guardian and New Civil Engineer, is ecstatically regurgitating nuclear lobby handouts. On July 2nd we have excited and positive articles on the SGE SMR UK project – from The Times, Telegraph, PR Newswire, Energy Live, Business Green, as well as from leading international news media. This privately-funded SMR project is a global first.

The New Civil Engineer is peskily pursuing its search for information on the UK government’s planned funding of small nuclear reactors, while the rest of them continue applauding this small nuclear fantasy.

I’m not here to push the points that SMRs are not cheap, not proven, not safe, not clean, not environmentally beneficial, not free of toxic wastes, and not actually in existence. Plenty of economists and scientists have made those assessments. Is the SGE UK thing going to really happen? Or is the Rolls Royce SMR thing going to beat it? When and where are these reactors going to operate? I’m just wondering about – for how long the UK pro SMR charade is going to play. Now that the leading actor Keir Starmer is about to bow out, will the whole performance have a very short season indeed?

July 5, 2026 Posted by | Christina's notes, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment

Another week in the non-corporate nuclear news

Website of the week – NUCLEAR WASTE WATCH

Theme of the week –  British Prime Minister to bow out just as his pet policy  -small nuclear reactors – is reaching crisis point – look out for the onslaught of panicky pro nuclear propaganda.
Some bits of good news – Heatwaves made the case for more urban green.     China restores over 10m hectares of desertified land in 14th Five Year Plan. Ghana launches mass campaign against neglected tropical diseases.

TOP STORIES.

 Empire Managers Invent Fake Threats So We Won’t Fight The Real Monsters. 
Record heatwave cripples Europe’s energy supply as nuclear reactors are taken offline.
When the right denies the true danger of heatwaves, ask yourself this: whose children’s lives is it willing to risk. 
Four US presidents steered European NATO into decline in furtherance of US proxy war against Russia.
American Sovereignty: The USA + Israel = The Department of Forever War.
We’re up against forces that have all the money in theworld’: Erin Brockovich on her battle against AI datacentres.
Israel Is An Apartheid State – And Its Weird Marriage Laws Show Us How.
US moves to eliminate longtime radiation safety principle for nuclear power.

Climate. World Bank drops climate financing targets following pressure from US. Will the heatwave spark action, or further inflame the culture wars?

 If you aren’t terrified by this heatwave, you should be.

AUSTRALIA. Pacific nuclear survivors urge Australia to sign and ratify UN treaty banning nuclear weapons ahead of key conference.

Friends of the Earth Adelaide has made a submission to the AUKUS Public Inquiry. 

Royal Commission on cohesion hears only half the story. 

More Australian news at https://antinuclear.net/2026/06/24/this-week-in-australian-news/

NUCLEAR-RELATED ITEMS

ATROCITIES. Obliterating Gaza’s Children: The Damning UN Report. The Gaza Ethnic Cleansing Agenda Continues To Roll Forward. They’re Still Pushing The Ethnic Cleansing Of Gaza. Netanyahu’s War on Humanity: Ethnically Cleansing the Palestinian West Bank. 
CLIMATE. Swiss nuclear power station shut down as river warms. 
ECONOMICS. Billionaire to invest £35bn in small modular nuclear reactors rollout across UK. EDF agrees to sell US, Canada unit to to private equity firm KKR – must raise cash to maintain its 57 aging reactors and finance the construction of six new units. 
EDUCATION. University of Manchester and United Kingdom National Nuclear Laboratory (UKNNL) sign landmark nuclear partnership agreement. 
ENERGY. The World Is Racing to Develop New Nuclear Fuels. 
EVENTS. 30 July – WEBINAR (Free) – Is Nuclear Power the Solution to Climate Change? 
INDIGENOUS ISSUES.Anishinabek Nation stands united in unequivocal opposition to the transportation of nuclear waste through the entire Anishinabek Nation territory. 
LEGAL White Flag Judgments: Palestine Action, Protest and the UK Courts 
MEDIA . CNBC Helps SpaceX Pull Off Trillion-Dollar Pump-and-Dump.  New York Times Reported Iran Deal From Pro-Israel, Pro-War Perspective. 
OPPOSITION to NUCLEAR . The Golden Rule and Crew are ready – Summer 2026 voyage. 

POLITICS.

POLITICS INTERNATIONAL and DIPLOMACY.

PUBLIC OPINION. Poll shows many Danes worried about planned nuclear reactors at Barsebäck, near Copenhagen. 
RADIATION. RADIATION TRAINWRECK -NRC deregulating radiation standards? US looking at easing restrictions on radiation exposure at the nation’s nuclear power plants. 
SAFETY. More issues reported during manufacture of Sizewell C’s reactor vessels than Hinkley Point C’s. Regulator says additional scrutiny was not required over Hinkley Point C bullying concerns. 
SECRETS and LIES. We’re Expected To Remember October 7 But Never Ask Questions About It. 
SPINBUSTER. Israel rebrands scheme to ethnically cleanse Gaza of Palestinians as ‘Freedom of Movement Plan’: Report. The new nuclear madness is climate criminality. 
TECHNOLOGY. AI is changing biological and nuclear risks; governance must change accordingly. Gaza: How We’re Learning to see the AI-Driven Genocide. The emerging AI battlespace: Counter-AI threats to AI-powered satellite remote sensing analysis. Polish tycoon backs Britain’s £35bn mini nuclear reactors plan. – ALSO AT https://nuclear-news.net/2026/07/04/6-b1-polish-tycoon-backs-britains-35bn-mini-nuclear-reactors-plan/ 

WASTES
. National interest in nuclear site gets mixed reaction. Nuclear Waste Transportation and Burial Plan Could be “Pre-Approved.

WAR and CONFLICT. Europe and Russia Edge Toward Direct War as Nuclear Fears Grow. Russia hearing the European clamour for war, announces it is ready. 
WEAPONS and WEAPONS SALES. The Pentagon’s Budget Redirected Would Exceed Our Wildest Dreams. Starmer Lied: Britain Is Cutting £11 Billion from Frontline Defence What’s in Keir Starmer’s defence investment plan? Key points – ALSO AT https://nuclear-news.net/2026/07/04/3-b1-whats-in-keir-starmers-defence-investment-plan-key-points/ All of our submarines are missing. 

July 5, 2026 Posted by | Weekly Newsletter | Leave a comment

Starmer Lied: Britain Is Cutting £11 Billion from Frontline Defence

The new Defence Investment Plan delivers almost nothing for our armed forces in the near term

Ian Proud, The Peacemonger, Jul 02, 2026

The United Kingdom is in effect going to spend up to £11 billion less per year on the day-to-day running of its armed forces under Keir Starmer’s Defence Investment Plan — and that’s before we even take inflation into account.

Despite the apparent uplift in spending toward 2.7% of GDP by 2029, the UK will get no meaningful increase in front-line conventional capability or personnel.

Our armed forces are at their smallest size in two hundred years, and that situation is not going to change under this plan.

Spending on long-term nuclear capabilities — programmes that will not deliver anything usable until the 2030s and 2040s — is absorbing the great majority of the headline increase.

This comes at a time when the government claims Russia could be ready to use military force against NATO by the end of this decade.

At the heart of the problem is a foreign policy that wants to confront multiple adversaries while maintaining armed forces that simply do not have the mass or readiness to do so credibly.

Important to point out that I am the son of a former British soldier and I am incredibly proud of the armed forces and anyone who serves this country. I also served alongside the British Army in Helmand province in 2010 and worked with some truly remarkable people. I am not criticising the men and women who put on the uniform. I am criticising how badly led we are as a country.

Keir Starmer announced the UK’s long-awaited Defence Investment Plan yesterday, 30 June. To describe it as a damp squib would be generous. It is a document that confirms the continued stagnation of the UK armed forces and the deep sclerosis at the heart of defence procurement.

Do not believe the headlines and the spin.

This plan will not transform our hollowed-out forces.

The British Army is already at its smallest size since 1823. That will not change.

There are no new soldiers being recruited in any significant numbers. Money available for the day-to-day operation of the armed forces is not going up — in real terms it is under severe pressure.

Having crunched the numbers, it’s clear to me that yearly spending on the actual running of the armed forces has effectively declined by up to £11 billion per year under this plan, set against the government’s claim of a £15 billion per year increase by 2027…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

The outgoing UK Prime Minister has declared a big increase in defence spending, yet we are getting no new troops and very little new conventional capability in the near term.

Why?

Because the great majority of the additional money is being directed into nuclear programmes and a procurement system that has repeatedly failed to deliver on time or on budget.

………………………………………………….. As I write, I understand that all of the Astute-class submarines are operationally unavailable.

……………………the largest cost increases and overruns have been in the nuclear and naval programmes.

………….As the National Audit Office reported in 2023, the combined costs of nuclear and naval programmes rose by £54.6 billion between 2022 and 2023, with the nuclear element increasing by £38.2 billion.

The three biggest programmes are the SSN-AUKUS attack submarines, the Dreadnought ballistic missile submarines, and the new Astraea nuclear warhead.

The first UK-built AUKUS submarines are not expected until the late 2030s.

We already have ballistic missile submarines maintaining Continuous At-Sea Deterrence.

We already have attack submarines, even if they cost too much, took too long to build, and don’t work.

We already have nuclear warheads. Do we really need a slightly flashier design folks? Serious question.

The plan is being presented as a response to current and near-term threats, while a war continues in Ukraine and with political leaders abandoning diplomacy.

……………………I have a clear alternative. We should cancel or significantly scale back the highest-risk and longest-lead nuclear programmes — particularly the new Astraea warhead and major elements of the SSN-AUKUS programme.

The savings should be redirected into fixing and sustaining the equipment we already possess, improving the availability of existing platforms, and beginning the serious work of rebuilding conventional force numbers and readiness for the core task of defending the United Kingdom and its immediate interests………………………….. https://thepeacemonger.substack.com/p/starmer-lied-britain-is-cutting-11?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=3221990&post_id=204491995&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

July 5, 2026 Posted by | politics, UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Poland revokes the Order of the White Eagle it had awarded to Volodymyr Zelensky

Voltaire Network | 26 June 2026

Polish President Karol Nawrocki, former president of the Institute of National Remembrance, revoked the Order of the White Eagle — Poland’s highest honor — awarded to Ukraine’s expired president Volodymyr Zelensky, on June 19, 2026.

This decision follows the designation of a Ukrainian military unit as “Heroes of the UPA”, in reference to the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), the military wing of the “Banderists” or “integral nationalists” of World War II. Any reference to the UPA conjures painful memories in Poland as its supporters murdered about 100,000 Poles in a campaign of ethnic cleansing in Volhynia in 1943-1945.

A majority of Poles (51%) reacted negatively to President Zelensky’s announcement………………………… https://www.voltairenet.org/article224771.html

July 5, 2026 Posted by | EUROPE, politics international | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries