nuclear-news

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

Why are US, Russia and China racing to put nuclear reactors on the moon?

The risk is bigger if a running reactor falls back onto Earth, analysts say.

Who is responsible if something goes wrong?

Lunar reactors could revolutionise moon exploration, providing energy for bases and mining, but risks of contamination remain.

By Mariem Bah, 31 Oct 26, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/10/31/why-are-us-russia-and-china-racing-to-put-nuclear-reactors-on-the-moon

The United States, Russia and China are racing to build nuclear reactors on the moon, as scientists warn about the possible risk of a radioactive mishap.

In January, NASA, the US space agency, announced plans to develop a nuclear reactor on the moon by the end of 2030. Russia, working with China, aims to do the same by 2036 as they strive to advance space exploration.

The reactors will be needed to power mining of frozen water trapped deep in the moon’s craters, which scientists believe could supply drinking water, air, and rocket fuel for future bases. The reactors would also provide power for lunar bases.

Here is what we know.

Which countries want to put nuclear reactors on the moon?

The US said NASA’s Lunar Reactor 1 would produce 20 kilowatts of electricity, creating enough power to run on its own for five years without maintenance.

NASA’s reactor is designed to be compact, weighing under 6,000kg (13,200 lbs) and will fit inside a rocket compartment measuring 3.7 metres (12 feet) long by 5.5 metres (18 ft) wide.

Russia is also building a nuclear reactor, which is expected to produce 10 kilowatts. The reactor, called Selena, will be able to run for a decade without maintenance. It will be ready to power a Chinese-led moon base by about 2036.

The Selena reactor is expected to be even lighter than NASA’s, weighing about 1,100 to 1,300kg (2,400 to 2,800 lbs) for an easier and softer landing on the lunar surface.

This would not be the first time nuclear reactors have been placed in outer space.

The Soviet Union launched more than 30 nuclear fission reactors into Earth’s orbit between the late 1960s and the 1980s to power spy satellites during the Cold War.

The small, 1,000kg (2,200 lbs) reactors powered radar-tracking spy satellites using heat from splitting uranium atoms into 3 to 5 kilowatts of electricity. They are no longer operational, and no other country has sent nuclear reactors into space.

The US has spent $20bn on advanced space nuclear programmes over the past 70 years, but has never successfully launched a nuclear reactor into space since an experiment in 1965.

That experiment was carried out to see if nuclear energy could power a satellite. It worked at first but accidentally shut down after just 43 days because a non-nuclear electrical part of the satellite broke down. It is still floating up in space today.

Previous attempts by the US to develop nuclear projects have stalled due to shifting budget priorities.

How do you put nuclear reactors on the moon?

First, scientists will have to build a reactor on Earth, which will then be transported to the moon using a robotic spacecraft that fires rocket engines for a slow and gentle touchdown.

Both the US and Russia say they would keep their reactors switched off until they reach the moon, to keep radioactive risk at a minimum until the last step.

Once set up on the moon, the reactors would be designed to run without maintenance for years, supplying power to bases engaged in mining on the lunar surface.

Why does the moon need a nuclear reactor?

The US, China and Russia want to build bases near the moon’s south pole, close to the known sources of water ice. The ice sits in the permanently shadowed craters, where sunlight has not reached for millions of years.

As well as powering the moon bases, the reactors would also supply enough power for mining. So far, the US, Russia and China want to mine for frozen water which, once released, could be used to support life on the moon at bases where people could live and conduct research.

Tech billionaire Elon Musk has also said he wants to extract minerals such as aluminium, titanium, and silicon, required for manufacturing satellites.

Solar power for such endeavours would be limited as the sun shines on any one spot on the moon only half the time, so solar panels would go dark for about two weeks every month.

Simon Middleburgh, director of Bangor University’s Nuclear Futures Institute (NFI), told Al Jazeera that solar power is too limited to provide the steady flow of energy a moon base would need, while batteries and diesel are too costly, because everything has to be launched from Earth.

Nuclear energy is the “obvious choice”, Middleburgh said, adding that it must be used “responsibly”.

It is likely that three or four reactors working together would be required to provide sufficient energy for mining lunar ice as well as supporting a moon base, he added.

Why the rush?It comes down to geopolitics.

In a December 2025 executive order, US President Donald Trump ordered NASA to build a lunar reactor ready to launch by 2030. Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin have revealed similar plans.

In August this year, Sean Duffy, the US transportation secretary, said the US is in a “race to the moon, in a race with China”.

Middleburgh said the 2030 deadline is likely for building the reactor itself, but the harder part will be landing on the moon and safely setting up the system.

“The biggest challenge isn’t really the nuclear technology at all; it is the regulation for launch, the availability of a launch platform itself, and the landing and setting up the system on the lunar surface ready for it to be operated sustainably and safely,” he said.

The race to the moon also comes amid growing military competition beyond Earth. In September, the US announced it had deployed weapons into orbit, which officials said would be used to defend US forces.

While the US did not provide details about these “weapons”, experts say they are likely to be space-based communications jammers, rather than kinetic ones that launch strikes.

The announcement raised concerns about the concept of “space weapons” or the use of space for military purposes, including the potential targeting of satellites that provide GPS, communications and intelligence.

What could go wrong?

Middleburgh told Al Jazeera that an accident during the launch of the reactors would be less frightening than it sounds because uranium alone, before it is used in a reactor, is not very radioactive. However, that changes once the reactor is switched on.

The risk is bigger if a running reactor falls back onto Earth, analysts say.

In 1978, a Soviet satellite carrying a reactor, Kosmos 954, scattered radioactive material across nearly 124,300 square km (48,000sq miles) of northern Canada.

The accident forced an expensive military cleanup of the highly radioactive fragments and microscopic particles.

On the moon, Middleburgh says, any contaminated area would be “extremely localised” if there were to be a similar accident.

Who has sovereignty over the moon?

Legally, no one. The 1967 Outer Space Treaty bans countries from “claiming” the moon or any part of it, though they have ownership of the equipment they send there. The treaty does not ban nuclear power in space.

Antonino Salmeri, director of the Lunar Policy Platform, a nonprofit, told Al Jazeera that a reactor can be lawful if it follows the treaty’s principles, including peaceful use and avoiding harmful contamination.

Norbert Schorghofer, a senior scientist at the Planetary Science Institute in Arizona, US, told Al Jazeera all signatories “have the right to mine the lunar surface as long as it is for peaceful purposes”.

Whichever country’s reactor gets to the “best” water ice first could claim a “safety zone”, which would not be a land claim but could operate like one. Salmeri said declaring one creates no territorial rights, but a reactor shuts others out anyway, because nobody wants to enter a radioactive area.

A Lunar Policy Platform report released last month points to another problem: Who is responsible if something goes wrong? The report says existing liability rules have not been designed to regulate the use of long-term hazardous equipment on another celestial body.

November 5, 2026 Posted by | China, Russia, space travel, USA | Leave a comment

AI data centres could undermine UK’s emissions goals

Ofgem, the energy market regulator, says data centre developers are seeking connections totalling 72 gigawatts. The peak electricity demand across the whole country last year was 45 gigawatts.

Hayley Mortimer and Adrian Goldberg, BBC, 2 Nov 260

The UK government’s ambition of achieving net zero carbon emissions by 2050 could be undermined by its new deal on AI data centres, according to BBC research.

During Wednesday’s Budget speech, Chancellor John Healey said data centres would be allowed to build onsite power generation while they wait for a grid connection.

BBC File on 4 Investigates has discovered that four planned “hyperscale” data centres – including three in the south of England – are already considering using gas-fired power to meet their electricity needs, creating more CO2 than the cities of Manchester, Liverpool and Southampton combined.

Labour MP Toby Perkins, who chairs the Environmental Audit Select Committee, said a substantial increase in the use of natural gas “can’t be the future”.

“Government absolutely shouldn’t be in the business of just saying anyone who wants to bring it here, can do whatever you like to power it, because that is not acceptable,” he said.

The government said data centres were “essential to Britain’s economy” and that its new Data Centre Covenant set clear expectations for developers to pay a fair share of the costs they impose on the energy system and deliver benefits for local communities.

Data centres are warehouses full of powerful computer servers used to run a vast range of digital services, including streaming, banking and public services and have been part of the British landscape for more than two decades.

But a new generation of data centres due to come on stream in the next few years will operate on a much larger scale to cope with the growing computing demand needed for increasingly sophisticated artificial intelligence technology.

They will consume considerably more energy than their predecessors at a time when the National Grid is already struggling to meet demand.

Ofgem, the energy market regulator, says data centre developers are seeking connections totalling 72 gigawatts. The peak electricity demand across the whole country last year was 45 gigawatts.

Such is the demand for access to the already under-strain national electricity grid, some data centre developers have been told they could be waiting up to 10 years for the system to be upgraded to provide them with a connection.

Nathan MacWhinnie, head of market intelligence and oversight at Ofgem, said: “In a lot of places, the grid is at capacity. I think sometimes it’s easy to forget the scale of the demand of these connections. These projects are sometimes the size of cities.”

In last week’s Budget, the chancellor announced a British Data Centre Covenant, requiring operators to invest in local communities, create jobs and protect water supplies in return for priority grid connections.

But he also said that where grid connections were unavailable, developers would be permitted to generate their own power on-site………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cqvgrvx6ekl2o

November 5, 2026 Posted by | climate change, technology, UK | Leave a comment

Submission to AUKUS Public Inquiry -Australia should quit alliance with the UK and US – Dr Gideon Maxwell Polya.

No.258

“……………………My submission is in 3 parts and summarizes several detailed articles that set out why
Australia should quit alliance with the UK and US.

(A). As a UK lackey, US lackey or major climate criminal country Australia has
violated all circa 80 Indo-Pacific countries.

In 2021 Australia formed the anti-China AUKUS (Australia, UK and US) Alliance and
thence the Quad (Australia, India, US and Japan) Alliance to contain a supposedly
aggressive China. In reality as a nuclear terrorist, climate criminal, serial invader
and subversive entity Australia has violated all Indo-Pacific countries (see Gideon
Polya, “AUKUS & Quad In Context: Australia Violates All Indo-Pacific countries”,
Countercurrents, 9 December 2021: https://countercurrents.org/2021/12/aukus-qu
ad-in-context-australia-violates-all-indo-pacific-countries/ and for an exhaustively
referenced version see Gideon Polya, “Australia violates all Indo-Pacific countries”,
Stop state terrorism, 9 December 2021: https://sites.google.com/site/stopstateterr
orism/2021-12-09-australia-violates-all-indo-pacific-countries ).

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

………………………………………As a UK and thence US lackey, Australia in the last 80 years (i.e. WW2 onwards)
has had armed forces in many countries of the Indo-Pacific region, and has joined
the US in massive invasions and occupations. Australia has participated in all
post-1950 US Asian Wars (atrocities in which 40 million Asians have died from
violence and war-imposed deprivation). Anti-Arab anti-Semitic Australia has been
an enthusiastic participant in the US War on Terror (over 30 million Muslims have
died from violence and imposed deprivation in 20 countries invaded by the US
Alliance since the US Government-exploited 9/11 atrocity that killed 3,000 people).
The joint US-Australian telecommunications spying base at Pine Gap in Central
Australia targets war criminal US drone strikes on 7 Muslim countries.

As US lackeys Australians have been involved with the US in covert subversion of
many Indo-Pacific countries, and were successful in achieving regime change in 8
instances, namely Laos (1960), Indonesia (1965), Cambodia (1970), Chile (1973),
Australia (1975), Fiji (1987), Fiji (2000), and Australia (2010) (the latter 3 also
involving Apartheid Israel). Australia is second only to the US as a fervent
supporter of nuclear terrorist, genocidally racist, grossly human rights-abusing and
globally subversive Apartheid Israel, and hence of the utterly vile and intolerable
crime of Apartheid…………………………………………………………………………………………………

(B). Why Australia should quit military links with serial war criminal, genocidally
racist and egregiously mendacious America.

For a detailed and exhaustively referenced analysis see Gideon Polya, “Why
Australia Should Quit Military Links With Serial War Criminal America”,
Countercurrents, 28 January 2023: https://countercurrents.org/2023/01/why-austr
alia-should-quit-military-links-with-serial-war-criminal-america/ . Summarized
below are cogent arguments why Australia should quit its AUKUS alliance with
nuclear terrorist, genocidally racist and serial war criminal America and the UK.

(1). War typically violates International law, and is the penultimate in repugnant
racism, with genocide being the ultimate in racism…………………………………………..

(2). The US is a horrendous serial invader of other countries. Apart from inevitable
border spats, most countries in the world have not invaded other countries…………………………………………………

(3). War criminal active and passive mass murder by nuclear terrorist America and
the US Alliance. Iraq and Afghanistan were not the only countries murderously
violated by the US in the 21st century. It was estimated in 2015 that 32 million
Muslims had died from violence (5 million) and imposed deprivation (27 million) in
20 countries invaded by the US Alliance after the US Government-exploited 9/11
atrocity that killed 3,000 people, mostly innocent Americans…………………………………………………

(4) American lying ………………………… As cogently analysed by
Professors Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky in “Manufacturing Consent”,
mendacious US Mainstream media serve the interests of the US Establishment and
US governments.

(5). America violates, subverts, dirties and acutely threatens Australia.
(i). Australia was involved in all post-1950 US Asian wars.
(ii). AUKUS and Australian violation of all Indo-Pacific countries.
(iii). Australian involvement in 8 US-effected coups.
(iv). US lackey Australia’s deadly covert operations in neighbouring Indonesia.
(v). The US Murdoch media empire dominates Australia.
(vi). America spies on, subverts, deceives and betrays Australia.
(vii). UK- , US-, and Zionist-backed coups and other subversive interventions in
Australia.
(viii). Craven submission to American militarism makes Australia complicit in
nuclear terrorism and makes Australia a prime nuclear target.
(ix). Zionist subversion of IHRA member Australia is a product of blind Australian
fealty to Zionist-subverted America and soils Australia.

(x). Locked-in support for US militarism and militarist fiscal perversion inescapably
contributes to 100,000 preventable Australian deaths annually.

(xi). Australia is complicit in horrendous UK and US war crimes, notably in Iraq and
Afghanistan.
(xii). Blind support for the US has created a contemptible, reality-ignoring,
“look-the-other-way” Australian national culture.
(xiii). US lies and terror hysteria impacting Australian civil liberties.
(xiv). Genocidal US, US Alliance and Australia need de-Nazification.
(C). The AUKUS Alliance betrays, robs, soils, threatens and kills Australians.

………………………………… (i). AUKUS betrays Australians. The AUKUS deal supposedly protects Australian
sovereignty but the opposite is true. The nuclear submarines (if delivered) would
become Australia-crewed adjuncts to the naval strategy of a serial war-making US.
The deal locks an impotent Australia into US war-making strategy against our
biggest trading partner, China. Conversely, military strategy expert Albert Palazzo
(“The Big Fix”) argues that middle-power Australia should revert from a US-led
“strategic offensive” position to an efficient, effective and Australia-first “strategic
defensive” position. Our AUKUS partner, Zionist-perverted America, gets Australia
to hugely subsidize US war industry, makes Australia a prime nuclear target, and
substitutes hugely expensive, submarine hunting , White Elephant “sitting ducks”
for an intelligent, multi-faceted and high technology defence system.

(ii). AUKUS robs Australians. The Australia Institute estimates that the cost could
be $500 billion for a few second-hand, US-controlled, US-assisting, single-purpose
submarines that may already be detectable and vulnerable to the latest
AI-assisted anti-submarine technology. The US war industry gets A$500 billion and
in return Australia becomes a prime nuclear target, and gets locked into an absurd
“strategic offensive” position for the benefit of the US instead of an expert-advised
“strategic defensive” position for the defence of Australia.

(iii). AUKUS soils Australia. Racism is vile because to whom we are born and by
whom we are raised is out of our control. War is the penultimate in racism and
genocide the ultimate. The UK has invaded 193 countries or nearly every country.
Only 3 countries have not had a US military presence. Before WW2 the British
committed genocide on all inhabited continents whereas the US (African slavery
and Pacific islands aside) largely confined itself to the American Indian genocide
and domination of Latin America. After WW2 the UK replaced colonialism with
deadly neo-colonialism but also participated in the (deaths from violence and
deprivation in brackets) Palestinian (3 million), Korean (5 million), Iraqi (5 million), Libyan (0.2 million) and Afghan (7 million) Genocides. The US invaded a swathe of
countries around the world after WW2…………………………………………………………………….

(iv). AUKUS threatens Australians. The Australia-US joint spying base at Pine Gap,
Central Australia, plays a key role US nuclear terrorism and in targeting US and
Israeli bombing. Australia is constructing a huge base for nuclear-armed US
submarines in Western Australia, is expanding the Tindal air base in the Northern
Territory to host potentially nuclear-armed B-52 bombers, and hosts a
3,000-personnel US Marine base near Darwin. AUKUS makes Australia a prime
nuclear target – in any escalating nuclear war key bases in Australia and Australian
cities would be bombed before bombing any US cities………………………………………………….

(v). AUKUS will kill Australians. AUKUS will remove $500 billion from Australia’s
capacity to keep Australians alive and healthy via its prosperous economy-based
world-leading universal health care system, the National Disability Insurance
Scheme (NDIS), the education system, and preventive medicine…………………………………………………………. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1s1_Y3ywvk8ywqTLFvhOt3RfBFZfYH25g/view


November 5, 2026 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, politics | Leave a comment

600 MW floating nuclear power barge targets US in world-first offshore advanced SMR bid

Rather than building a conventional inland plant from scratch, Saltfoss will divide production between two allied industrial hubs.

ByAman Tripathi, Interesting EngineeringNov 04, 2026

A Danish nuclear developer wants to bring floating atomic power to American shores. Saltfoss has sent a letter of intent to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The firm wants to start early regulatory talks for its offshore power barge and seaMSR-100 reactor.

If approved, the project will mark the world’s first licensed maritime advanced small modular reactor (SMR). The timing is interesting. In March 2026, the NRC introduced 10 CFR Part 53. This modern regulatory rulebook has been designed specifically for advanced reactors. Saltfoss aims to become the first developer to secure a license under this new framework.

Instead of building a conventional plant inland from the ground up, Saltfoss plans to split production between two allied industrial hubs.

Samsung Heavy Industries will build the standardized steel barges in South Korea, using the country’s high-volume shipbuilding yards. Once the hulls are complete, teams in the United States will handle reactor assembly, fuel loading, and final integration.

“As part of its US expansion, Saltfoss will significantly increase its activities in the United States, including reactor assembly, fuel loading and final power plant integration at US facilities,” said the company in a press release.

International regulatory alignment

The company is also coordinating reviews across the Pacific. Saltfoss is working with South Korea’s Nuclear Safety and Security Commission under the nation’s SMR Special Act. South Korea is expected to host some of the earliest commercial deployments.

Meanwhile, maritime safety evaluations are already under way. The American Bureau of Shipping is qualifying the barge design through its formal new technology review………………………..

Each standardized seaMSR-100 unit yields 100 megawatts of electricity (MWe). Multiple modules can sit aboard a single barge to deliver up to 600 MWe of constant electricity and high-temperature industrial heat. This capacity can power remote coastal industries, municipal grids, or power-hungry hyperscale data centers………………………………………

Saltfoss finalized its conceptual design in 2025 alongside the Idaho National Laboratory and Danish researchers. The company plans to submit its formal Regulatory Engagement Plan to Washington in early 2027. https://interestingengineering.com/energy/600-mw-floating-nuclear-power-barge

November 5, 2026 Posted by | Small Modular Nuclear Reactors | Leave a comment

Aukus is ‘worst, riskiest and most costly’ Australian defence decision ever, public inquiry into submarine deal says

Report led by Peter Garrett and former defence chief Adm Chris Barrie says agreement should be suspended and calls for royal commission


Tom McIlroy, 4 November 26, https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2026/nov/04/aukus-worst-australian-defence-decision-ever-public-inquiry

A public inquiry into the $368bn Aukus nuclear submarine agreement has called the plan “the worst, riskiest and most costly defence decision ever made by an Australian government”, urging its immediate termination.

Former Labor MP and Midnight Oil frontman Peter Garrett, alongside former chief of defence Adm Chris Barrie, led the inquiry dominated by critics of the deal with the UK and US, recommending the suspension of plans for new bases and for a royal commission to be held into the agreement signed by the former Morrison government.

Its report, titled Surrendering Australia: the Aukus Deception, says Australia risks being dragged into military conflict with China because of the presence of powerful nuclear submarines. Aukus badly undermines Australia’s sovereignty and undercuts longstanding commitments to nuclear non-proliferation, it says.

The inquiry report, released on Wednesday, was downloaded nearly 15,000 times within an hour of being published online.

The report calls for a rework of the second pillar of the agreement, which covers technology and defence capability sharing, and for a fundamental recalibration of Australia’s relationship with Beijing.

After hearings around the country and more than 1,000 public submissions, the inquiry highlighted a lack of scrutiny and oversight over the five years since Aukus was announced and called for the auditor general and federal parliament to launch independent reviews.

“Since coming to power, Labor has failed to conduct a thorough review of this most significant of defence agreements,” Garrett told the National Press Club in Canberra.

“Conceived in secret, Aukus has spurned established defence and parliamentary oversight practices.”

He said the Stirling defence precinct in Perth risked becoming a “de facto US base” hosting as many as 2,000 serving American personnel, and that nearby communities including Rockingham and Fremantle would become targets for attack.

“The Aukus submarine plan is not tenable,” Barrie, who served as chief of defence between 1998 and 2002, said.

“It’s time for our government to take the lead on this matter. Scrap the Aukus submarine plan now, and rebuild national security decision-making processes.”

Labor agreed to support the deal for Australia to acquire nuclear submarines, which was negotiated under Morrison, then US president Joe Biden and UK prime minister Boris Johnson. As part of the agreement, Australia is funding upgrades to the US defence industrial base and is due to start receiving secondhand Virginia class nuclear submarines around 2032.

But delays and cost blowouts for production of submarines for the US navy have led to scepticism that Australia will receive the in-service boats.

The UK parliament held a year-long review and, after an inquiry by the Pentagon in 2025, Donald Trump agreed to support Aukus.

But former prime ministers Paul Keating and Malcolm Turnbull, former foreign affairs ministers Gareth Evans and Bob Carr, environmental and security campaigners, and some within Labor believe Aukus is not in Australia’s national interest.

Frustrated by the lack of scrutiny – in part due to bipartisan support for Aukus in federal parliament – unions, not-for-profits and former officeholders launched their own inquiry backed by public donations totalling $220,000.

Labor argues Aukus was considered as part of the government’s defence strategic review.

Government ministers have dismissed the public inquiry as a stitch-up by critics of the agreement. A spokesperson for the defence minister, Richard Marles, said on Wednesday that Aukus is a core pillar of the Albanese government’s national security policy.

“As the national defence strategy 2026 re-confirms, we confront the most challenging strategic circumstances since the second world war, and we do so at a time where Australia’s economic connection with the world has never been greater,” they said.

“We need to support the development of an ADF with a much greater capacity to project so we can defend Australia and contribute to regional security and stability.”

Garrett warned any certainty the US president would eventually agree to send submarines to Australia could not be guaranteed.

“There are no refunds, no enforceable obligations on partner countries, and no recourse if things go wrong,” he said.

The inquiry estimates an additional $180bn will be needed to deal with nuclear waste generated by Aukus, based on evidence to the inquiry. No official cost estimates for waste have been published.

Australia has not identified a permanent storage site for the waste, including the high-level radioactive waste from the reactor core and spent fuel, which will remain toxic for thousands of years.

The government’s preferred measure of the total cost of the deal is 0.15% of GDP over its lifetime.

The first Virginia-class nuclear sub from the US is due to arrive in Australia in 2032, with another arriving every four years, before the Australian-built model is ready for operations. The bespoke SSN Aukus model is due to come online in 2042.

Campaign group Labor Against War welcomed the report.

“With rising cost of living and unemployment, spiralling inflation and interest rates, it is beyond comprehension why the Australian government is throwing billions into the war chests of the US military at a time when the Australian people are crying out for solutions at home,” the group’s patron and a former senator, Doug Cameron, said.

November 4, 2026 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, weapons and war | 1 Comment

US/UK collaborate for nuclear “race to the bottom”?

[Photo credit: Holtec International’s SMR LLC Pioneer SMR-300, US Department Of Energy]

accelerated export of novel and still questionable nuclear technologies to the UK as well as the precedent to export to other countries……………………….. marketing tactic unreasonably subordinates and deprioritizes safety critical review times just to facilitate the accelerated US export of novel reactor designs to Great Britain and the precedent for elsewhere.

the technological guinea pig for cutting corners

October 29, 2026, https://beyondnuclear.org/us-uk-in-harmony-for-nuclear-race-to-the-bottom/

Holtec SMR LLC’s  Pioneer reactor chosen to pilot US and UK collaboration to fast track export regulation of novel reactor licensing

In a partnership between the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)  and the UK Office of Nuclear Regulation (ONR), the UK Environment Agency and Natural Resources Wales are collaborating on aligning commercial reactor regulations to fast-track the export(opens in new tab) of several American developers’ of “First Of A Kind” (FOAK) small modular nuclear reactors for licensing and construction in Great Britain. The present American SMR leaders are Holtec International, TerraPower and X-Energy. The partnership was constructed as part of the 2025 “UK-U.S. Atlantic Partnership for Advanced Nuclear Energy(opens in new tab).”

Reuters reports that “UK authorities have identified Holtec’s two-unit SMR-300 project at Palisades, Michigan, as the input reference design for the company’s Generic ​Design Assessment (GDA) – a regulatory review of a nuclear reactor design’s safety, security and environmental acceptability, independent of a specific site.”

Beyond Nuclear’s overall concern focuses on the primary goal and intent initiated by the Trump Administration’s White House Executive Orders to arbitrarily truncate the nuclear regulatory staff’s review time on the projected time and cost to speed up new reactor design approvals for domestic development and foreign export. The plan cuts safety-related technical review times from three and four years to two years. This now translates into the US accelerated export of novel and still questionable nuclear technologies to the UK as well as the precedent to export to other countries.

It is of concern that under a promotionally guise of “avoiding duplication of work” that disregards particularly stubborn technical and still open safety-related issues. That marketing tactic unreasonably subordinates and deprioritizes safety critical review times just to facilitate the accelerated US export of novel reactor designs to Great Britain and the precedent for elsewhere.

The US and UK regulators are risking a lot on their joint pilot project by fast-tracking Holtec International’s SMR-300. Holtec’s SMR venture is explicitly a FOAK reactor. This is Holtec International’s first effort at designing, licensing, building and operating a light water with the associated risks. Holtec International, as any FOAK venture, will be the corporate and industrial guinea pig for the proposed “unleashing” of this SMR technology.

As the technological guinea pig for cutting corners to accelerate export licensing, FOAK reactors are already notorious and unpredictable for uncontrolled cost  compared to subsequent builds or “Next Of A Kind” (NOAK). In a fiercely competitive domestic and international market, the developer is responsible for adequately funding and overseeing its quality control and quality assurance of the initial tooling, engineering, and workforce training.  FOAK nuclear ventures in general face strong financial headwinds as is already in evidence(opens in new tab) with Holtec International’s abrupt cancellation of its $900 million initial public offering (IPO) on the NASDAQ market just three days ahead of scheduled launch on Wall Street.

The push for Holtec International to be the US – UK joint pilot project choice raises particularly challenging and significant concerns for the introduction of what’s euphemistically identified as “dual track complexity.”

Holtec International’s latest wholly owned subsidiary SMR LLC which is the parent company’s firewall to the Palisades Energy Center in Covert, Michigan. The Center initially includes the two Pioneer SMR reactors (SMR-300) which are projected to be sited and operated adjacent to Holtec International’s other subsidiary, Holtec Palisades’ acquisition of the 50-year-old operationally aged and deteriorated Palisades pressurized water reactor. Holtec Palisades is now not only operationally aged and deteriorated but the reactor’s safety-related systems, structures and components have also been neglected by lack of maintenance, repair and replacement since Entergy’s intention to permanently close and decommission the plant. Initially, the previous owner/operator, Entergy Nuclear, neglected the single unit’s operational safety and operability mandate by systematically cancelling maintenance, repairs and replacements of safety-related systems, structures and components in lieu of the plant’s announced closure and decommissioning on December 6, 2016. As a result of the encroaching permanent shutdown, corrosion was allowed to set in by abandoning the unit to a prolonged period of wet storage. Entergy essentially neglected Palisades’ safety-related systems, structures and components as radioactive junk until was “permanently” shutdown on May 20, 2022.

When Holtec International’s subsidiary, Holtec Decommissioning International, took over possession under the suspiciously false pretense of decommissioning, it was then Holtec Decommissioning International that further delayed draining and chemically treating the wet systems. The delay further rendered damage consequences when Holtec International reverse course with creation of its subsidiary Holtec Palisades and switch to the restart the reactor and followed by an extreme license renewal plan projecting reactor operations out to March 24, 2051. Whether or not Holtec intended to actually dismantle, decontaminate and decommission the nuclear power station, they neglected to properly implement the reactor’s safety-related layup primarily for the critical reactor pressure boundary system’s steam generators until May 2024—roughly two years after the initial “permanent” shutdown for decommissioning as certified to the NRC by Entergy, Holtec Palisades (owner) and Holtec Decommissioning International (operator).

According to NRC inspections in late 2024, accelerated stress corrosion cracking (SCC) reveal the exacerbated delay caused extensive, unexpected corrosion on the outside diameter of the steam generator tubes. Regulators found indicators of stress corrosion cracking in 1,163 tubes across both steam generators, vastly exceeding previous operational history.

In Beyond Nuclear’s view, this all adds up to an extremely risky and irresponsible venture.

November 4, 2026 Posted by | safety, UK, USA | Leave a comment

Walt Zlotow – US, European leaders push war, economic ruin; constituents seek peace, prosperity


Walt Zlotow West Suburban Peace Coalition


Walt Zlotow West Suburban Peace Coalition Glen Ellyn IL, 30 Oct 26

The people of the US and Western Europe are mystified by their war crazed leaders.

In the US, President Trump promised peace and prosperity in term two. Instead, he embarked on criminal war on Iran murdering thousands, making life difficult if not unaffordable for all but the wealthy at home. Forty days of relentless bombing ended in failure that severely damaged all US Gulf State bases while choking off a fifth of the world’s oil supply and other valuable resources. Everything in the US and the entire world has become less affordable with no end in sight.

Trump’s boast about restarting the slaughter after the midterms next week has no chance of succeeding….and he knows it. With two more years of failed war to endure, the worst is likely yet to come for the American people utterly against the madness Trump unleashed upon them as well as the innocent Iran nation.

In Europe it’s the same story, just a different senseless war. Back in 2022, European leaders hopped aboard President Biden’s deranged quest to weaken, destroy the Russian regime by sending forth its Ukraine proxy to join NATO to allow NATO nukes on Russia’s border. Europe joined the US in training the Ukraine military to polish off the Russian leaning Ukraine Donbas separatists on Russia’s border as well. Both were existential threats to Russian security Russia had been warning the US and NATO about for years to no avail.

European leaders believed Biden’s boasts that US and NATO weaponry and economic sanctions, but not one drop of Western blood would collapse the Russian regime. They even ditched cheap Russian oil for high priced US liquified natural gas (LNG). Nearly five years on their Russian regime change plan is an utter failure as Ukraine nears collapse while their economies nosedive from skyrocketing energy costs as loss of Russian oil is exacerbated by loss of Middle East oil from Trump’s lost Iran war.

Both US and European leaders remain oblivious their constituents are fed up with senseless war degrading their living standard. Trump appears deranged when he says ‘”I can end the Iran war anytime I choose to.” If he meant that he’d end it today by returning to the Memorandum of Understanding he signed on June 17 which would have ended the war on Iran’s sensible terms to reopen the Middle East oil spigot. Now he faces likely loss of Congress and effective end to his presidency November 3.

Same goes for the leaders of the big 3 in Europe, the UK, France and Germany. While their economies decline, their leaders Burnham, Macron and Merz remain locked in senseless, delusional Russophobia that brooks no realistic diplomacy with Russia to end the Ukraine war on Russia’s sensible terms: No return of Donbas to Kyiv bent on destroying Russian culture there. No NATO for Ukraine. Neutrality between East and West for Ukraine going forward.

They know they are all running out of weapons and money to flush down the rathole of Ukraine’s lost cause. But they’ve spent years warning ‘The Russians Are Coming, The Russians Are Coming.’ They cannot bring themselves to accept the reality of the economic and political self destruction their Russophobia has brought on.

In an odd difference between the US and Europe, Trump may be swept from power from the left which will likely renew weapons and other aid to prolong Ukraine’s suffering. Democrats preposterously charge if Trump seeks a diplomatic end to the war he must be a Russian agent so we Democrats will restore war funding to Ukraine. European leaders face removal from the right who promise to divert Ukraine war spending to neglected domestic needs.

The Iran and Ukraine wars reveal how leaders can embark on senseless war without regard to the wishes and needs of their constituents. Once begun, it shows how difficult, likely impossible it is to admit their catastrophic mistakes and do what is right for their people, their political future; indeed, for humanity.

November 4, 2026 Posted by | EUROPE, politics international | Leave a comment

AI-powered malware ‘highly likely’ to be used to hack UK infrastructure by 2028

National Cyber Security Centre expects attacks on critical facilities such as power stations, airports and hospitals

Dan Milmo, 3 Nov 26,
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/nov/03/ai-powered-malware-artificial-intelligence-hacking-critical-uk-infrastructure

AI-powered malicious software is “highly likely” to be used in hacking attacks against the UK’s power stations, airports and hospitals by 2028, according to the state cybersecurity body.

The National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) said AI will probably enable a ransomware attack against critical national infrastructure [CNI] between now and 2028. The UK’s definition of CNI covers a range of facilities and services across sectors including energy, transport, defence, food, health and finance.

The warning from the NCSC, part of the GCHQ spy agency, was published in the organisation’s annual review, which also warned that Russia and China will start using AI “routinely” in cyber-attacks.

“It is … highly likely that between now and 2028, AI-powered malware will have been used in a ransomware attack on UK CNI,” said NCSC.

Ransomware has become a cornerstone of the criminal hacker’s repertoire and is a signature ploy of gangs that typically operate out of former Soviet Union states.

After gaining access to a victim’s IT systems, the attackers then encrypt files with bespoke malicious software – or malware – and then demand a payment in cryptocurrency to unlock the crippled systems and return any stolen data. UK ransomware victims include Royal Mail, outsourcing firm Capita and various public bodies, including councils.

AI is set to enhance the ransomware threat by helping attackers with tasks such as scouting targets, locating weaknesses in IT networks and writing malicious code, said the NCSC.

Last month, the government urged Britons to stock up to nine litres of bottled water and three days’ worth of food in order to ensure that households can survive a weather, cyber or other serious emergency. Wes Streeting, the defence secretary, said as the Be Ready campaign was launched that Britain needed to prepare for the threat of “state-sponsored terrorism” by Russia or other hostile powers targeting everyday infrastructure.

NCSC’s chief executive, Richard Horne, will warn the public in a speech accompanying the review on Tuesday that AI is going to unleash a wave of cyber-attacks imminently.

“In the coming months, we face a real prospect of an unprecedented rise in the number of cyber incidents,” he will say.

Horne will attribute the threat to the technology’s ability to uncover weaknesses in IT systems that have been “tolerated for far too long”.

An example of AI’s capacity to root out previously undetected vulnerabilities came last month, when the technology helped discover a critical weakness in PHP, a computer language used by almost 70% of the world’s websites.

Alan Woodward, a professor of cybersecurity at Surrey University, said NCSC’s warning underlined the need for nation states and companies to access cutting-edge AI technology.

“AI can help people find these flaws and patch them, but if we don’t get the access the bad guys will beat them to it,” he said. So far, leading AI companies like OpenAI and Anthropic have given some companies advanced access to their most powerful models in order to help them identify serious IT glitches.

Horne will also say in his speech that communications networks used by the British military are subjected to daily attacks that are “persistent” and “sustained”.

Horne will say Russia was one of the perpetrators, but the attacks have deliberately not crossed the line into warfare, with Moscow carrying out “notable campaigns” that “intentionally fall below the threshold of armed conflict as they escalate their attempts at hybrid warfare”.

Horne will add that recent cyber-attacks on supermarket fridges in Europe, which have seen fridge temperatures raised by hackers to more than 50C, are a warning to companies and organisations to invest strongly in cyber resilience.

“For decades we have collectively got away with tech on the cheap,” he will say.

November 4, 2026 Posted by | technology | Leave a comment

When Stealth Meets the Bomb: Inside the US-Israel Nuclear Strike Scenario on Iran’s Deep Bunkers [i]

Conventional physics has its limits. As Iran buries its nuclear program deeper, the US and Israel face a terrifying calculus: the tactical nuclear threshold

Black Mountain Analysis, Mike Mihajlovic, 4 Nov 26,

“The ultimate defense is not stopping the bomb. It is ensuring the strategic cost of dropping it remains forever prohibitive.”

To understand the most dangerous military contingency in the Middle East today, you don’t need to look at the surface. You need to look deep underground.

For two decades, Iran has engaged in a literal race to the center of the earth. Facilities like Fordow, built deep inside a mountain near Qom, and the subterranean levels of Natanz sit beneath hundreds of feet of solid rock and reinforced concrete. They are designed to survive the apocalypse.

For years, the US military’s answer to this was conventional: the 30,000-pound GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP). But the physics of conventional explosives impose strict limits. Even the MOP cannot guarantee the destruction of Iran’s deepest centrifuge halls, as seen in the previous US attacks.

It was previously addressed in the following article:

Israel vs Iran: GBU-57A/B MOP Bunker Buster or Bunker Busted [i]

Mike Mihajlovic, 22 June 2025

This brings military planners to a dark, heavily classified crossroads: Tactical Nuclear Weapons.

Today, we are diving deep into a highly sensitive, hypothetical scenario. What happens if the US and Israel decide to use low-yield, earth-penetrating nuclear weapons to crack Iran’s underground fortresses? How does Iran detect the stealth bombers coming for them? What role do Russian and Chinese satellites play in tipping off Tehran? And how does Iran retaliate when the ultimate taboo is broken?

Key Takeaways

  • The Physics Problem: Conventional bunker busters have a hard limit. The US B61-12 tactical nuke is the only (theoretically) guaranteed way to collapse the deepest Iranian facilities.
  • The Stealth Myth: B-2s and F-35s are (as per the overwhelming marketing mechanism ever present in Western media) “invisible” (to some degree) to fire-control radars, but not to early-warning networks. Iran’s VHF and Over-The-Horizon radars can see them coming.
  • The Geopolitical Shadow: Iran doesn’t fight alone. Russian and Chinese satellite networks provide strategic warning, ensuring the US and Israel cannot achieve total surprise.
  • The Retaliation: If the nuclear threshold is crossed, Iran’s response will not be symmetrical. It will be a massive, multi-front regional war.

Part I: The Offensive Arsenal – The US and Israeli Playbook

A strike of this magnitude wouldn’t be a simple bombing run. It would be a highly orchestrated, multi-domain operation requiring the total suppression of enemy air defenses (SEAD) and precision stealth penetration.

The US: The B-2 Spirit and the B61-12

The primary US instrument for this mission is the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber (and soon, the B-21 Raider). The B-2’s Very Low Observable characteristics allow it to slip through heavily contested airspace by minimizing its radar cross-section.

But the bomber is only half the equation. The weapon is the B61-12.

This is not the city-destroying strategic megaton bomb of the Cold War. The B61-12 is a tactical, earth-penetrating gravity bomb with a “dial-a-yield” feature, ranging from a mere 0.3 to 50 kilotons. It features a guided tail kit, allowing it to be dropped from 30,000 feet—keeping the B-2 safely out of range of most Iranian surface-to-air missiles.

Upon impact, the weapon’s casing penetrates the soil and rock before detonating. The goal is to couple the nuclear energy directly into the surrounding rock, creating a massive subterranean cavity and a seismic shockwave that collapses tunnel networks without necessarily creating a massive, wide-area radioactive fallout cloud on the surface. The Pentagon calls this “escalation control.”

His (or her) highness: the B61-12 Earth-Penetrating Weapon

To understand how the B61-12 destroys deeply buried targets, one must look past the imagery of surface-level mushroom clouds. The B61-12 is, to some degree, an Earth-Penetrating Weapon (EPW). Its design philosophy is not to maximize atmospheric blast, but to maximize energy coupling into the Earth.

By burying the detonation, the weapon transforms the surrounding geology into a highly efficient transmission medium for destructive energy. Here is the step-by-step technical breakdown of the physical mechanisms by which the B61-12 neutralizes subterranean infrastructure……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

The Myth of the “Clean” Tactical Nuke

To fully understand this scenario, we must examine the physical and political reality of using a tactical nuclear weapon. The Pentagon loves the term “tactical” because it implies proportionality and control. But in reality, a “small” nuke is still a nuke.

The Fallout Reality
While an earth-penetrating detonation minimizes the surface blast, it inevitably vaporizes tons of rock and soil, mixing it with highly radioactive fission products. This material is thrown back into the air as highly lethal, localized fallout. Depending on wind patterns, this radioactive cloud could drift over neighboring countries, causing a humanitarian and environmental disaster that makes the “surgical” nature of the strike a complete myth.

November 4, 2026 Posted by | Iran, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Submission to AUKUS Public Inquiry – AUKUS a poorly-conceived, massively-costly and hugely-risky agreement – DR Eric van Buerden.

No. 257

AUKUS is a poorly-conceived, massively-costly and hugely-risky agreement that
should be cancelled forthwith before it creates even more problems than it already
has. Here are just a few of my major concerns, as a scientist with fifty years of
experience using evidence-based methodologies and an extensive record of
publication in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

First, lengthy delays in the delivery and even start time of AUKUS, have already
been mooted, as dictated by the more-highly-prioritised needs of both the US and
UK provider defence systems. With no set budget or timeline or even guarantee of
delivery, the whole agreement is a travesty of Government’s responsibility to the
Australian tax payer.

By inextricably linking us to the US aggressive stance towards China, AUKUS
jeopardises Australia’s security both economically and militarily. It virtually
ensures we would be a target in the event of any military actions between those
two super powers in the same way that US bases in Arabian states are now being
targeted by Iran.

The chance of nuclear accidents in port or Australian waters will be greatly
increased if we have nuclear submarines being house, serviced and possibly
attacked there. Even storing spent rods is a huge risk that has hardly been
discussed let alone planned in a cautious and respectful way.

The environmental and social implications of an accident are enormous and should
have be deeply considered before even entering such a contract. The impact on
First Nations peoples should also have been discussed in consultation with them as
part of our nation even considering such an agreement.

There has been virtually no transparency or public consultation in the decision
making process for AUKUS which in many ways is the most significant in our
history as a nation. Parliamentary oversight regarding the main AUKUS decisions
should have been totally transparent and multi-partisan.

Even currently-known technological advancements in the field of marine warfare
will very likely make the acquisition of outdated submarines a total waste of
resources. We should be investing in much more cost-effective shore-based
defensive capital such as a shield of air and marine drones, not one or two
out-dated long-range submarines that will have little chance of defending ourmany distantly-spaced coastal cities.

Furthermore, AUKUS has huge implications for regional peace and security,
including Australia’s relations with China, ASEAN, and the Pacific Islands nations,
including commitments under the Treaty of Rarotonga. These should not be
jeopardised by rashly-considered and poorly defined agreements like AUKUS.

On the basis of these main objections, there is in my mind no way that AUKUS
should be continued. I believe it was initiated simply as a political point-scoring
and knee jerk reaction. It carries much greater risks than can possibly be justified
by the touted benefits it would bestow in the extremely unlikely event that it were
ever come to fruition in any truly-functional form.

November 4, 2026 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, politics international | Leave a comment

Britain faces ‘substantial’ threat of recession if AI boom falters

Spending on the technology is propping up growth, economists warn

Soaring investment in data
centres and other AI infrastructure has propped up growth since the start
of last year, Oxford Economics said. Without it, growth would be tepid at
best. The warning comes after a heavy tech stock sell-off in recent weeks
driven by concerns that AI spending will not deliver the level of returns
hoped for. October marked the worst month for the tech-heavy Nasdaq index
on Wall Street in more than a year and a half.

Telegraph 3rd Nov 2026,
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/11/03/britain-faces-threat-of-recession-if-ai-boom-falters/

November 4, 2026 Posted by | business and costs, UK | Leave a comment

Third impending Trump, Netanyahu attack on Iran may bring worst defeat yet to world’s two worst war criminals

1 November 2026AIMN Editorial, By Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition Glen Ellyn IL https://theaimn.net/third-impending-trump-netanyahu-attack-on-iran-may-bring-worst-defeat-yet-to-worlds-two-worst-war-criminals/

All signs point to a third try by US President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu to destroy the Iranian regime shortly after the November 3 US midterms, if not before.

US War Secretary Pete Hegseth recently met in Israel with Netanyahu almost certainly to discuss upcoming attack plans.

In a rare meeting, Brad Cooper, head of US Central Command, visited the White House on Thursday to brief President Trump on military options for attacking Iran. Joining Cooper were Hegseth and Dan Caine, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. All three are virulent war hawks likely encouraging Trump who’s long boasted about destroying the Iranian civilization along with their Islamic leadership.

Senator Chris Murphy, after being briefed on the US plan to launch Iran war 3.0 made this astounding statement never before uttered by a US congressperson:

“I’ll just say this, their plan is insane, It will lead to devastating escalation and the likely destruction of our commitment to the rule of law.”

Forget ‘destruction to the rule of law’ for the US and Israel. Both destroyed that decades ago attacking countries, changing out regimes like changing underwear, interfering in elections, and worst of all, cooperating on genocide destroying life for 2,2000,000 Palestinians in Gaza.

But it will surely bring ‘devastating escalation’ to US, Israeli efforts to continue ruling the world. Iran has had over four months to prepare for the near certainty of round three of the criminal US Israeli tag team to oust the only country standing between them and absolute rule in the Middle East and beyond. Iran will likely polish off what remains of US Gulf State bases, destroy most if not all of remaining Gulf State oil infrastructure and reap devastating damage to the now vulnerable Israeli nation. If that occurs, we cannot rule out Israel, even the US resorting to nuclear weapons to avoid catastrophic defeat.

What is truly remarkable is only one of 535 congresspersons even has their hair on fire over what Trump and Netanyahu may ignite within the next few days.

November 4, 2026 Posted by | Israel, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

There’s no national security without international security

in our current predicament, let’s give some thought to strengthening the world’s international institutions

for example, abolishing the Security Council veto

November 2, 2026, by Lawrence Wittner, https://peaceandhealthblog.com/2026/11/02/theres-no-national-security-without-international-security/

For millennia, the world’s people have been kidding themselves about national security.

Worried about the survival of their nation in a world of self-interested, sometimes aggressive nations, people have armed and prepared themselves for war.  Only military strength, they have assumed, would fend off or defeat a military attack on their nation.

And a case can be made for this assumption, for not all nations―and not all people―are willing to deal peacefully or justly with their neighbors.

Even so, over the course of human history, this reliance upon national military might to defend national security has produced disaster after disaster.  Although almost every country has armed itself for national defense, even those with immense military might have ended up fighting recurring wars to defend what they regard as their national security.  Just look at the history of the “great powers” of recent centuries―the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France, Germany, and Japan―and consider how frequently they have waged war, sometimes emerging as the victors and other times as the vanquished.

Furthermore, preparing for and fighting wars, even victorious wars, have come at an immense human cost.  Estimates for the death toll in the almost constant flow of wars over the span of human history range as high as 1 billion people.  And to this we should add the vast numbers of people crippled, blinded, traumatized, and left homeless.  Russia’s current military invasion of Ukraine, aside from slaughtering large numbers of Ukrainians, has already led to the deaths or injuries of 1,581,840 Russian soldiers.

Nuclear war, of course, promises to increase war’s human toll very substantially, with the living, as is sometimes said, envying the dead.

Nevertheless, the nations of the world continue, relentlessly, to arm and prepare themselves for war.  Global military expenditures rose by nearly three percent in 2025, the eleventh consecutive year of growth, reaching $2.9 trillion.  America’s Donald Trump, a fervent supporter of U.S. military power, has proposed a 42 percent increase in the forthcoming U.S. military budget to $1.5 trillion―about 63 percent of federal discretionary spending.

Of course, far-sighted individuals have criticized militarism and war, as well as suggested better ways for nations to relate to one another.  Thanks particularly to the massive slaughter and destruction wrought by the two World Wars, they called for the development of international institutions that could safeguard national security through the development and enforcement of international law.  This agitation led to the establishment of the League of Nations (and its legal arm, the Permanent Court of International Justice) and, near the end of World War II, to the establishment of the League’s successor, the United Nations (and its legal arm, the International Court of Justice).

These new institutions were met with considerable enthusiasm by a war-weary public, and even by many national officials, who recognized that, if every country continued blindly pursuing what it viewed as its own interests, global conflict and war were inevitable.

But this potential turning point in human history was bedeviled by two major problems. For thousands of years, nations had defended their “interests” (and especially their national security) through military might.  Consequently, many government officials and even many members of the public were not accustomed to thinking and behaving according to what best served the common good.  Furthermore, the great powers were particularly reluctant to surrender the advantages, including empire, that military might traditionally afforded them in world affairs.

As a result, the leaders of the major powers, despite their rhetoric about the equality of nations and collective action to cope with international issues, remained committed to ensuring a privileged status for their own countries.

In the case of the League of Nations, this reluctance to accept limits meant that the great power victors in World War I came away from the peace settlement with new territory, including the spoils of empire (disguised as “mandates), taken from the war’s great power losers.  Moreover, in subsequent years, the Axis nations plunged into war to restore their empires or enhance them, while they and other major powers withdrew from the League when it condemned their belligerent behavior.  The U.S. government never even joined the League.

When it came to the United Nations, the great power victors in World War II established a UN Security Council that provided each of them with a veto over collective action for international security.  Thus, they could (and did) veto such action when they felt it adversely affected them or their friends.  They also pursued what they regarded as their national security by subverting, invading, and even occupying other nations, while occasionally withholding their dues payments to the world organization.

Against this backdrop, it’s easy to conclude that international security has failed the test.

But, given the existence of key international institutions for only a tiny portion of human history, isn’t it premature to abandon efforts to create an effective international security system?  After all, the United Nations is only 81 years old.  By contrast, modern human beings have been around for about 300,000 years.

Also, what is the alternative?  Surely it is endless war, capped off by the use of nuclear weapons to annihilate the human race.

So, in our current predicament, let’s give some thought to strengthening the world’s international institutions.

Numerous nations have called for reforming the United Nations.  Modest measures, such as providing it with adequate funding and enhancing the role of the General Assembly, can be fairly easily implemented.  More significant changes―for example, abolishing the Security Council veto―will take a more substantial effort, including the holding of a UN Charter review conference.  Article 109 of the UN Charter provides the framework for such a conference, and an Article 109 Coalition has recently launched a campaign to prepare for it.

Over thousands of years, war and militarism have failed to safeguard national security.  But international security might finally succeed at the task.

November 4, 2026 Posted by | politics international | Leave a comment

Cryosphere faces permanent damage when world overshoots 1.5C, scientists warn

Earth’s icy regions face such dangerous melting that global heating
should be brought back below 1C after an inevitable period of overshooting
global temperature targets, a UN report has found.

Permanent and widespread
losses of snow and ice expose a “persistent myth” that overshooting the
1.5C target of the Paris climate agreement – to 2C or 3C – could be
manageable or even preferable to urgent cuts to emissions, the report
found.

The planet has heated by 1.3C since pre-industrial times and
failures to curb greenhouse gas emissions and protect nature have led
scientists to conclude that some level of overshoot is inevitable as they
fight to keep end-of-century warming to 1.5C.

But extreme effects on the
cryosphere – Earth’s water in a solid state, including all its ice and
snow – mean temperatures must rise above that threshold for as short a
period as possible, the scientists urged. Added to this, enough
planet-heating carbon should be removed from the atmosphere to bring
long-term warming down much further, ideally below 1C by 2150.

Guardian 2nd Nov 2026

November 4, 2026 Posted by | climate change | Leave a comment

Caitlin Johnstone – The War Propaganda Is Even Dumber This Time — And Other Notes

Drop bombs on buildings full of children and the UK will call you an ally. Express support for activists who try to stop those bombs and the UK will call you a terrorist.

Caitlin Johnstone, Nov 02, 2026, https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/the-war-propaganda-is-even-dumber?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=82124&post_id=223026587&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

As CENTCOM meets with Trump to plan more Iran strikes, the war propaganda is dumber than it has ever been.

Fox News is running stories about an Iranian “plot” to kill US military personnel in the middle east, as though a country planning ways to defend itself from hostile attackers is some sinister new development.

CBC ran a completely evidence-free report alleging that Iran has been paying gunmen to shoot bullets into empty buildings in Toronto, Canada. One of the dumbest things we are asked to believe about Iran is that it keeps taking time away from defending itself against US-Israeli aggressions in order to orchestrate random acts of arson and vandalism in mid-power western states for no discernible benefit to its strategic interests.

Former Israeli military intelligence officer Mordechai Kedar went on Piers Morgan to call Iran an “artificial state”, saying “its fate is to be dismantled, is to be shattered to pieces, as it should have been from the beginning.” Calling one of the world’s oldest civilizations an “artificial state” from inside a country that’s younger than Mick Jagger and has been propped up by nonstop western military aggression throughout 100 percent of its existence is, uh, certainly a choice.

Under Trump, the war propagandists don’t even need to try anymore. He’s just going to inflict all sorts of horrors upon the middle east and Latin America with blunt-force military aggression, and then when he leaves office they’re going to act like he’s carrying all the sins of the US empire with him on his back.

British police arrested 325 people on terrorism charges for protesting in support of the proscribed activist group Palestine Action on Saturday. Sky News reports that 94 percent of all terrorism arrests this year have been made because of support for Palestine Action.

“There were 3,867 arrests for suspected terrorist activity in the year to June, of which 94% were linked to supporting the group,” Sky News reports, adding, “In the previous 12-month period, before the ban came into force, 234 terror arrests were made.”

Drop bombs on buildings full of children and the UK will call you an ally. Express support for activists who try to stop those bombs and the UK will call you a terrorist………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/the-war-propaganda-is-even-dumber?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=82124&post_id=223026587&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

November 4, 2026 Posted by | spinbuster | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries