It’s not okay for grown adults to say the Ukraine invasion was “unprovoked”
The US Army-commissioned paper details how the empire can use proxy warfare, economic warfare and other cold war tactics to push its longtime geopolitical foe to the brink without costing American lives or sparking a nuclear conflict. It mentions Ukraine hundreds of times, and it explicitly discusses the same economic warfare tactics we’re seeing today
Caitlin Johnstone, TheAltWorld, Wed, 07 Sep 2022
On a recent interview with the Useful Idiots podcast, Noam Chomsky repeated his argument that the only reason we hear the word “unprovoked” every time anyone mentions Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in the mainstream news media is because it absolutely was provoked, and they know it. Chomsky said:
“Right now if you’re a respectable writer and you want to write in the main journals, you talk about the Russian invasion of Ukraine, you have to call it ‘the unprovoked Russian invasion of Ukraine”. It’s a very interesting phrase; it was never used before. You look back, you look at Iraq, which was totally unprovoked, nobody ever called it ‘the unprovoked invasion of Iraq.’ In fact I don’t know if the term was ever used — if it was it was very marginal. Now you look it up on Google, and hundreds of thousands of hits. Every article that comes out has to talk about the unprovoked invasion of Ukraine.
“Why? Because they know perfectly well it was provoked. That doesn’t justify it, but it was massively provoked. Top US diplomats have been talking about this for 30 years, even the head of the CIA.”
Chomsky is of course correct here. The imperial media and their brainwashed automatons have spent half a year mindlessly bleating the word “unprovoked” in relation to this war, but one question none of them ever have a straight answer for is this: if the invasion of Ukraine was unprovoked, how come so many western experts spent years warning that the actions of western governments would provoke an invasion of Ukraine?
Because, as Chomsky notes, that is indeed the case. A few days after the invasion began this past February a guy named Arnaud Bertrand put together an extremely viral Twitter thread that just goes on and on and on about the various diplomats, analysts and academics in the west who have over the years been warning that a dangerous confrontation with Russia was coming because of NATO advancements toward its borders, interventionism in Ukraine, and various other aggressions. It contains examples like John Mearsheimer explicitly warning in 2015 that “the west is leading Ukraine down the primrose path, and the end result is that Ukraine is going to get wrecked,” and Pat Buchanan warning all the way back in 1999 that “By moving NATO onto Russia’s front porch, we have scheduled a twenty-first-century confrontation.”
Empire apologists love claiming that the invasion of Ukraine had nothing to do with NATO expansionism (their claims generally based on brazen misrepresentations of what Vladimir Putin has said about Russia’s reasons for the war), but that’s silly. The US war machine was continuing to taunt the possibility of NATO membership for Ukraine right up until the invasion, a threat it refused to take off the table since placing it there in 2008 despite knowing full well that this threat was an incendiary provocation to Moscow.
This is to say nothing of the US empire actively fomenting a violent uprising in 2014 which ousted Kyiv’s sitting government and fractured the nation between its more Moscow-loyal populations to the east and the more US/EU-friendly parts of the country. This led to the annexation of Crimea (overwhelmingly supported by the people who live there) and eight years of brutal warfare against Russia-backed separatists in the Donbas. Ukrainian attacks on those separatists are known to have increased exponentially in the days leading up to the invasion, and it has been argued that this is what provoked Putin’s final decision to commit to invading (which was a last-minute decision according to US intelligence).
The US power alliance could very easily have prevented this war with a few low-cost concessions like enshrining Ukrainian neutrality, rolling back its war machinery from Russia’s borders and sincerely pursuing detente with Moscow instead of shredding treaties and ramping up cold war escalations. Hell, it could likely have prevented this war just by protecting President Zelensky from the anti-Moscow far right nationalists who were openly threatening to lynch him if he began honoring the Minsk agreements and pursuing peace with Russia, as he was originally elected to do.
Instead it knowingly chose the opposite course: continuing to float the possibility of formal NATO membership for Ukraine while pouring weapons into the nation and making it more and more of a de facto NATO memberwith closer and closer intimacy with the US war machine, and then either ordering, encouraging or tolerating Ukraine’s aggressive assault on Donbas separatists.
Why did the empire opt for provocation over peace? Congressman Adam Schiff gave a pretty good answer to that question in January of 2020 as the road to war was being paved: “so that we can fight Russia over there, and we don’t have to fight Russia here.” If you relinquish the infantile idea that the US empire is helping its good friend Ukraine because it loves the Ukrainian people and wants them to have freedom and democracy, it’s not hard to see that the US sparked a convenient proxy war because it was in its geostrategic interests to do so, and because it wouldn’t be their lives and property getting laid to waste.
Brian Berletic put out a good video a few days ago about a Pentagon-funded 2019 Rand Corporation paper titled “Extending Russia – Competing from Advantageous Ground,” which is exactly what it sounds like. The US Army-commissioned paper details how the empire can use proxy warfare, economic warfare and other cold war tactics to push its longtime geopolitical foe to the brink without costing American lives or sparking a nuclear conflict. It mentions Ukraine hundreds of times, and it explicitly discusses the same economic warfare tactics we’re seeing today like sanctions and attacking Russia’s energy interests in Europe (the latter of which Berletic points out is also being used to bolster US dominance over its vassals in the EU).
Continue readingSwitzerland plans controversial nuclear waste dump all too close to German border
A plan for a nuclear waste storage facility in Switzerland is raising
safety concerns among Germans close to the border. The project, which is
backed by power plant operators, requires approval by the Swiss government.
Switzerland has announced plans to build a nuclear waste storage facility
on the border with Germany, leaving communities concerned about the issues
of safety and clean drinking water supply. The National Cooperative for the
Disposal of Radioactive Waste (Nagra) is behind the proposal. It suggested
the region of Nördlich Lägern, north of Zurich and close to the border
with Germany, the Swiss Federal Office of Energy said.
Deutsche Welle 10th Sept 2022
France, Germany and UK lose faith in negotiations with Iran, to restore the nuclear agreement.
We the governments of France, Germany and the United Kingdom have
negotiated with Iran, in good faith, since April 2021 to restore and fully
implement the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPoA), along with other
participants to the deal and the United States.
In early August, after a
year and a half of negotiations, the JCPoA Coordinator submitted a final
set of texts which would allow for an Iranian return to compliance with its
JCPoA commitments and a US return to the deal. In this final package, the
Coordinator made additional changes that took us to the limit of our
flexibility.
Unfortunately, Iran has chosen not to seize this critical
diplomatic opportunity. Instead, Iran continues to escalate its nuclear
program way beyond any plausible civilian justification. While we were
edging closer to an agreement, Iran reopened separate issues that relate to
its legally binding international obligations under the Non Proliferation
Treaty (NPT) and its NPT safeguards agreement concluded with the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
This latest demand raises
serious doubts as to Iran’s intentions and commitment to a successful
outcome on the JCPoA. Iran’s position contradicts its legally binding
obligations and jeopardizes prospects of restoring the JCPoA.
French Ministry of Foreign Affairs 10th Sept 2022
Lawmakers demand reparations for New Mexicans imperiled by nuclear bomb testing
Adrian Hedden, Carlsbad Current-Argus, 10 Sept 22,
When the U.S.’ first nuclear bomb was detonated in south-central New Mexico, it was believed to set off a chain of cancers and health problems suffered by the surrounding communities for generations.
People who grew up near the Trinity Test Site, near the remote communities of Carrizozo or Tularosa, were denied federal relief dollars afforded to other “downwinders” impacted by nuclear testing around the country.
Both towns were within 50 miles of the blast site, and advocates say they were exposed to radiation from the bomb testing.
They advocated for years that New Mexico’s downwinders be included in cash payments made to those affected by nuclear activities under the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA).
Members of the Tularosa Basin Downwinders Consortium advocated for such support from state lawmakers during a Tuesday meeting of the interim Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Committee.
“It’s very emotional to reflect on all we’ve lost as a result of being exposed to radiation,” said consortium founder Tina Cordova, herself a survivor of thyroid cancer who said members of her family also suffered from myriad forms of the disease.’
The committee, made up of state senators and representatives voted to send a letter to Congress, calling on the federal leaders to expand reparations to include New Mexicans…………………………..
Cordova pointed to high infant mortality rates and diseases among the people living near the site, which she said were the result of testing at the site.
She also pointed to economic depression in the rural community as its residents struggled for years with high medical bills Cordova attributed to the testing.
“We don’t have a chance in New Mexico to develop generational wealth,” Cordova said. “This has contributed greatly to the poverty we see here.”
Congress voted earlier this year to extend the RECA by two more years, via legislation introduced by U.S. Sen. Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM) and supported by the state’s entire congressional delegation and via a letter sent by the Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Committee.
But that legislation did not expand the compensation to include New Mexican downwinders, although it does give funds to some uranium miners mostly in the northern part of the state.
So far, downwinders were only federally recognized in parts of Arizona, Utah and Nevada attributed to activities at another nuclear test site in Nevada. ………………………. https://www.currentargus.com/story/news/2022/09/09/reparations-demanded-for-new-mexicans-imperiled-by-nuclear-bomb-testing/66874718007/
—
Jung Jae Kwon: Questioning the nuclear umbrella
Dissatisfied with security guarantees from the US, America’s junior allies want greater control over their own defenses.
MIT News, Leda Zimmerman | Department of Political Science, September 9, 2022,
Many of America’s allies have little faith that huddling under America’s nuclear umbrella will keep them safe. “The conventional wisdom has been that the threat of nuclear retaliation by the U.S. is enough to defend our junior non-nuclear allies,” says Jung Jae Kwon, a political science doctoral student at MIT. “But this threat is not as credible as is often believed, and the allies do not simply want to depend on it for their security.”
Kwon has been researching defense strategies of American client states, gathering data to analyze the security policy and military postures of frontline states that came to rely on U.S. nuclear protection during and after the Cold War………………………………………………………
“When conflicts arise, these allies don’t want to give up territory or lose anything,” says Kwon. “They ask for plans where they have a viable option for victory.”
One example Kwon cites is South Korea, where the U.S. stationed tactical nuclear weapons. “But the U.S. didn’t give South Korea any control over the deterrent, no mechanisms for coordination when it came to nuclear planning,” he says. As a result, South Korea tries to maintain superiority in conventional power against North Korea. “It’s their fate; they don’t just want to rely on the U.S. for security,” he says………………….
And West Germany, America’s most important ally in Western Europe during the Cold War, “wanted assurance from the U.S. that nuclear weapons would be used first,” says Kwon. “They were overwhelmed by conventional Soviet military power, and wanted to assert more control over the U.S. nuclear threat.”
With the end of the Cold War and dissolution of the Soviet Union, European allies grew less concerned about attacks from their neighbors, and more content to rely on the U.S. nuclear deterrent. But recently, the war in Ukraine has shifted defense postures, says Kwon, prompting allies’ calls for greater conventional military presence along Europe’s eastern border. ………………………
“My biggest takeaway is that allies won’t be assured simply by gestures of solidarity, formal alliance treaties, or even the huge nuclear arsenal the U.S. possesses,” he says. https://news.mit.edu/2022/questioning-nuclear-umbrella-jung-jae-kwon-0909
Mishandling of Classified Nuclear Documents Is Bad. Mishandling of the Sole Authority to Use Nuclear Weapons Would Be Much Worse.
Union of Concerned Scientists, Eryn MacDonald, 9 Sept 22, Headlines about the discovery of nuclear weapons-related materials in the trove of highly classified documents that former President Trump stashed at his private residence in Mar-a-Lago are not exactly confidence inspiring. The fact that a former president simply walked off with information at the highest levels of classification leaving it unguarded for more than a year should raise alarms for anyone who is concerned about national security.
But if you think it’s unbelievable that it was so easy to sidestep the safeguards and procedures in place to ensure that some of the most secret information known to our government was not packed up and stuck in a basement, I’ve got even worse news for you. Because the process to order the launch of US nuclear weapons has fewer safeguards and would require no sidestepping, leaving it even more vulnerable to the whims of an unstable leader. That decision is put in the hands of a single individual—the president—while the rest of us all just have to cross our fingers and hope that they take this responsibility more seriously than the former president took his responsibility to safeguard those classified documents.
The process that the United States has now for making decisions about the use of nuclear weapons is called “sole authority.” It is an outdated artifact of an earlier time that now carries more risks than benefits. ……………
sole authority intentionally includes no checks and balances. No requirement to consult with advisers or Congress. There is also no one with the legal authority to countermand the order if the president does decide to launch…….. And once missiles are launched, there is no going back—they cannot be called back or ordered to self-destruct.
The good news: we can fix it
Times have changed since the decision was made to give the president sole authority over the decision to launch a nuclear attack. Communications systems have improved immensely. And despite the deterioration of US-Russian relations, a surprise Russian nuclear attack on the US homeland is still not a realistic concern these days. And, the US now has a fleet of nuclear ballistic missile submarines that are essentially invulnerable when they are hidden on patrol in the ocean, rendering the need for split-second nuclear launch decisions obsolete.
Unfortunately, the nuclear launch decision-making system has not kept pace with the times. The good news, however, is that it would be an easy fix, that we could implement very quickly. There have been many suggestions of how this could be done, including a proposal by some of my colleagues at UCS.
The UCS proposal would require that the president obtain the consent of two other high-level officials in the presidential line of succession—for example, the vice president and the speaker of the House—to carry out any order to launch a nuclear attack. …………….
The time to change the system is now..…………………………….
We do not have the luxury of waiting for “lessons learned.” We must take the only opportunity we have to change this outdated, undemocratic, and dangerous system—now. Making this change permanent would require action from Congress, but that is no reason to delay the immediate steps that we can take. UCS and many others, including members of Congress, have already asked President Biden to change the decision-making procedures for using nuclear weapons.
You can join us in asking him to take his opportunity to do so, before it is too late.
https://allthingsnuclear.org/emacdonald/mishandling-of-classified-nuclear-documents/
Public opinion in UK – overwhelming support for solar and wind energy
The UK’s general public is overwhelmingly supportive in building new
wind and solar farms in order to tackle the ongoing cost of energy crisis,
according to Survation. Identified within polling released by Survation and
commissioned by RenewableUK, the data showcased that almost every
constituency in the UK is in favour of developing renewable generation
sites in a bid to reduce the cost of energy.
In fact, 77% of people in the
UK believe the government should use new wind and solar farms to reduce
electricity bills, with 76% of people also in support of building renewable
energy projects in their local area, according to Survation’s data.
This contradicts the new prime Minister, Liz Truss’ previous statement about
solar farms being “paraphernalia”, as in fact the majority of the
general public thoroughly support the development of these farms to tackle
the energy crisis. Causing a further headache for Truss is the fact that
84% of those who backed the Tories at the last election now urge the
government to use new wind and solar farms to cut electricity bills. 81% of
2019 Tory voters also support a renewable energy project being developed in
their local area.
Current 8th Sept 2022
Some UK government ministers are mentioning the radical idea of ENERGY CONSERVATION!
Ministers are drawing up plans for a public information campaign to
encourage people to reduce energy use this winter amid fears that a price
freeze will deter them from doing so.
There is concern within government
that an intervention by Liz Truss to tackle the sharp rise in energy costs
could increase the risk of blackouts if it means that households and
businesses do not reduce consumption.
The Times has been told that
ministers want to work with energy companies on a public information
campaign over the winter to encourage people to turn down their thermostats
and turn off electrical appliances instead of leaving them on standby.
Times 8th Sept 2022
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ministers-will-implore-public-to-cut-use-of-power-wpb38bhtk
France’s problems with nuclear power now causing electricity shortage in Britain, too
More than half of France’s 56 nuclear reactors are offline due to issues
around corrosion. That has left their owner, EDF, struggling to generate
enough electricity to meet the nation’s needs.
Last week it warned it
would take a €29 billion hit as production from nuclear power dipped to a
30-year low. EDF has indicated it wants to get its reactors back online by
the winter, but the problems have raised fears not just for France’s
energy supply, but the UK, which typically imports a chunk of its energy
via undersea cables called interconnectors.
Times 18th Sept 2022
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/hunt-for-cash-fund-britain-new-nuclear-age-sizewell-edf-hq9fg3zt3
Turkey, Russia reach deal resolving nuclear plant dispute, media report
ISTANBUL, Sept 17 (Reuters) – President Tayyip Erdogan said Turkey and Russia had reached a deal resolving a dispute over a nuclear power plant being built at Akkuyu in southern Turkey, reinstating a Turkish contractor, broadcaster NTV and other media said on Saturday……………
more https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/turkey-russia-reach-deal-resolving-nuclear-plant-dispute-erdoganmedia-2022-09-17/
Permit problems for Sizewell C nuclear project? Cooling system could kill millions of fish.
Permit problems for Sizewell C predicted after report confirms cooling
mechanisms can kill millions of fish. The Sizewell C nuclear reactor may
face obstacles in receiving an environmental permit after a report revealed
that the cooling mechanism at a similar development could kill millions of
fish.
ENDS 12th Sept 2022
New forum on nuclear waste policy in UK
A founding document was signed in Edinburgh by the Nuclear Decommissioning
Authority’s Head of Stakeholder Engagement and the Secretary of the Nuclear
Free Local Authorities to launch a new NGO Forum. The informal signing
ceremony by Paul Vallance for the NDA and Richard Outram on behalf of the
NGO community took place at the NDA Stakeholder Summit held in the Scottish
capital on 7-8 September.
Work on establishing a forum had started under
Richard’s predecessor, Sean Morris. Good progress was made before
everything halted with the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic. Contact between
the parties was renewed in February 2022 after the NDA had completed its
restructuring into four ‘pillars’ – Sellafield, Magnox/Dounreay, Nuclear
Transport Services and Nuclear Waste Services. An NGO forum to cover waste
issues is already well established and ‘lively’ as meetings represent an
opportunity for representatives from NGOs, generally campaign groups
opposed to local civil nuclear power projects, to question and challenge
senior nuclear industry figures.
NFLA 12th Sept 2022
Navy Seeks Solution for Decommissioned Nuclear Carrier USS Enterprise
SEP 9, 2022 BY THE MARITIME EXECUTIVE
The U.S Navy is grappling with a huge dilemma on what to do with the decommissioned USS Enterprise, the world’s first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier and the pride of the Navy for 50 years from her commissioning in 1961 to her deactivation in 2012. Officially decommissioned in 2017, she sits in Virginia costing millions of dollars annually in maintenance costs but could require more than a billion dollars and up to 15 years to safely dismantle.
Having been the embodiment of the U.S military might not only because of its sheer size, which earned her the nickname “Big E” she became the centerpiece of the modern Navy. ………………………………………… more https://maritime-executive.com/article/navy-seeks-solution-for-decommissioned-nuclear-carrier-uss-enterprise
NUCLEAR is the worst possible way to back up wind power
Letter to Scottish Herald Pete Roche: NUCLEAR is the worst possible way to
back up wind power. Full Stop. Baseload – which Iain Macwhirter in his
Herald on Sunday article “Nuclear is the worst possible option … except
for the others” (September 4) suggests is needed when the wind doesn’t
blow – is an outdated concept. Renewables should not be described as
intermittent – they are variable, which means their output can be
forecast with good accuracy. Nuclear plants are on 24/7, so can’t balance
the output from variable renewables, and would get in the way of their
expansion, because they are inflexible. There are plenty of better ways of
balancing the grid. We need a more flexible system with smart grids,
time-of-use tariffs, batteries and storage including heat storage and
hydrogen, made using surplus renewables power. A rapidly growing number of
studies show that 100% renewable energy systems are not only feasible but
also cost effective. And we are not just talking about wind. Solar would
also be a central pillar, but other sources will include geothermal, tidal
and wave power, all backed up with an ambitious energy efficiency
programme. Nuclear power is too expensive. Building nuclear stations will
put energy bills up. Electricity from offshore wind is currently about £37
per megawatt hour. If the UK Government goes ahead with Sizewell, in about
15 years its electricity would cost around £120 per megawatt hour. An
added problem is that new nuclear stations take too long to build. The
United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says
that we have less than 10 years in which to make massive and unprecedented
changes to global energy infrastructure to limit global warming to moderate
levels. The UK Government first started consulting on building new nuclear
power stations in May 2007, but Hinkley Point C is not expected to start
generating electricity until around 2027.
Herald 9th Sept 2022
1 This Month.
5 January -Webinar-What is Trump’s Golden Dome?
REGISTER AT Massachusetts Peace Action Education
New book – https://www.amazon.com/dp/1923372157?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Now until to February 10, 2026 Radioactive waste storage in France: the debate is finally open! How to participate?
-
Archives
- December 2025 (249)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
- January 2025 (250)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 