nuclear-news

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

We’ve barely scratched the surface of how energy efficiency can help the energy transition

SWITCHEDON Anne Delaney, SwitchedOn Editor, June 24

Amory Lovins, ‘the Einstein of energy efficiency,’ says energy efficiency is a continuous spectrum that keeps rapidly evolving, and better design is twice as efficient as the gains from just dropping fossil fuels.

Amory Lovins has been writing and talking about energy efficiency for over 50 years but he says the need to use energy more productively and efficiently is now more acute than ever.

At the same time, the scope for saving energy is also bigger than ever.

Lovins’ views have been crucial to our understanding of energy efficiency. He’s advised major firms and numerous governments, authored hundreds of papers and books, and taught at several universities most recently Stanford. Time magazine named him one of the world’s most influential people.

“We’ve barely scratched the surface of how much efficiency is available,” Lovins told the SwitchedOn podcast. “It’s about two to four times what I thought in the 70s, and as we learn more about it, especially what we can do with design, the potential just keeps getting bigger and cheaper.”

Whilst enormous gains have been made in energy efficiency through better operational practices and technical improvements – turning off appliances, insulating, plugging cracks and gaps, etc – Lovins says that energy efficiency is a continuous spectrum that keeps rapidly evolving.

He believes the key to better efficiency now is better design.

“What we haven’t yet really tackled is how to design buildings, factories, processes, equipment, vehicles, as whole systems for multiple benefits. That’s what we call integrative design,” says Lovins. “That is twice as powerful as the factor two or three efficiency gains that we can get just by switching from burning fossil fuels.”

In 1976 Lovins predicted that over the next 50 years, the US could nearly quadruple overall energy efficiency, but by 2010 in a study he called ‘Reinventing Fire,’ he found the savings were twice what he’d previously thought, but at a third of the cost.

“That’s now looking conservative as we learn more about integrative design…. the current evidence shows you could about quintuple end use efficiency by about 2060, or treble it by about 2040.”

A passive solar house in the middle of Colorado

Lovins has been walking the talk on integrative design for decades. In the 1980s he built a passive solar house, and banana farm, from where he spoke to the SwitchedOn podcast.

“It’s 2,200 metres up in the Rocky Mountains near Aspen, Colorado, where temperatures used to dip to minus 44 Celsius … and yet in the middle of the house, we’ve harvested so far 81 passive solar banana crops with no heating system.”

Lovins says it was cheaper to build his passive solar house, even 40 years ago, rather than a standard American home, because they saved on construction costs by not building a heating system.

“We optimised the building as a system, not the insulation as a component.”…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Making energy efficiency great again

Energy efficiency has been regarded as the poor cousin of renewable technology, which is more likely to grab the headlines in stories about the energy transition.

“Energy is invisible and the energy you don’t use is almost unimaginable,” says Lovins. “So even though in the US the energy savings since 1975 add up to 25 times more than the increase in renewable supply, the renewables get practically all the headlines, because you can see them there on the rooftop and the skyline.”

Thinking about energy efficiency is also hampered by a belief that we can’t get more efficient, that “we must already have wrung out all the work from our energy that’s worth doing.”


The growing electrification movement is however enabling many more people to realise the importance of efficiency gains – it’s unlocking people’s understanding that what makes these electrification technologies superior is their greater energy efficiency.

“We see it with electric vehicles that are two to four times more efficient than the internal combustion engine, and the heat pump that is three to four times more efficient,” Daan Walter, Principle of Strategy at RMI (the Rocky Mountain Institute), told the SwitchedOn podcast.

Walter argues that electrification is the gateway into efficiency thinking – by encouraging us to move away from just thinking about the upfront costs of appliances, it provides an opportunity to change the narrative about efficiency……………………………………………………………………………………..

You can hear the full interview with Amory Lovins and Daan Walter on the SwitchedOn podcast here.  https://switchedon.reneweconomy.com.au/content/weve-barely-scratched-the-surface-of-how-energy-efficiency-can-help-the-energy-transition

June 18, 2024 Posted by | ENERGY | Leave a comment

20 June WEBINAR: Nuclear Power and Weapons in a Time of Rising Tensions.

Nuclear Power and Weapons in a Time of Rising Tensions – William D. Hartung, Linda Pentz Gunter and Greg Mello speak out in the VFP No Nukes Webinar, Thursday, June 20, 7 pm Eastern, 5 pm Central, 3 pm Pacific

Three outstanding experts – William D. Hartung, Linda Pentz Gunter and Greg Mello – will share critically important insights at the VFP No Nukes Webinar, this Thursday, June 20, at 7 pm Eastern, 6 pm Central, 5 pm Mountain, 4 pm Pacific. 

It is not too late to Register Here.

WILLIAM D. HARTUNGis a Senior Research Fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.  He focuses on the arms industry and US military budget. He was previously the director of the Arms and Security Program at the Center for International Policy and the co-director of the Center’s Sustainable Defense Task Force. He is the author of Prophets of War: Lockheed Martin and the Making of the Military-Industrial Complex (Nation Books, 2011) and the co-editor, with Miriam Pemberton, of Lessons from Iraq: Avoiding the Next War (Paradigm Press, 2008).  And Weapons for All (HarperCollins, 1995) is a critique of US arms sales policies from the Nixon through Clinton administrations.

Time to Rethink the US Nuclear ArsenalWilliam Hartung’s latest articlewarns about the particularly dangerous risks presented by the US basing of Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs), which he says only serve the interests of those who profit off them.

LINDA PENTZ GUNTERfounded Beyond Nuclear in 2007 and serves as editor/curator of Beyond Nuclear International. Prior to her work in anti-nuclear advocacy, she was a journalist for 20 years in print and broadcast, working for USA Network, Reuters, The Times (UK) and other US and international outlets. Beyond Nuclear works to support grassroots, national and international efforts to phase out nuclear power in favor of safer energy choices with which to address the climate crisis. The organization also draws attention to the perpetual pathway between nuclear power and nuclear weapons and advocates for a global nuclear weapons ban. In creating Beyond Nuclear, Linda’s goal was to reach beyond the immediate circle of committed anti-nuclear activists and engage those environmentalists concerned with the climate crisis and peace and the necessity to move away from fossil and fissile energy use.

Nuclear Power Is Too Risky, Even in Peacetime.Ukraine is the Tip of the Iceberg.Linda Pentz Gunter writes: “Fears about fires at Ukraine’s power plant in war-torn Zaporishzhia underscore the broader dangers of nuclear energy.”

Greg Mello

GREG MELLOis a co-founder of the Los Alamos Study Group and has led its varied activities since 1989, which have included policy research, environmental analysis, congressional education and lobbying, community organizing, litigation, advertising, and the nuts and bolts of running a small nonprofit. From time to time Greg has served as a consulting analyst and writer for other nuclear policy organizations. Greg was originally educated as an engineer (Harvey Mudd College, 1971) and regional planner (Harvard, 1975). Greg led the first environmental enforcement at Los Alamos National Laboratory. He was a hydrogeologist for the New Mexico Environment Department and later a consultant to industry. In 2002 Greg was a Visiting Research Fellow at Princeton’s Program on Science and Global Security. Greg’s research, analysis, and opinions have been published in the New York Times, Washington Post, The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Issues in Science and Technology, in the New Mexico press, and elsewhere.

Neocon Humiliation – or Nuclear Exchange?
The Centrality of War Resistance in Moral Politics

A recently updated blogon the Los Alamos Study Group website warns the Neocon obsession with defeating Russia in Ukraine is recklessly tempting nuclear war.

June 18, 2024 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Global spending on nuclear weapons up 13% in record rise

States are on course to spend $100bn a year, driven by a sharp increase in US defence budgets

Dan Sabbagh Defence and security editor, Mon 17 Jun 2024 [good tables on original]  https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jun/17/global-spending-on-nuclear-weapons-up-13-in-record-rise

Global spending on nuclear weapons is estimated to have increased by 13% to a record $91.4bn during 2023, according to calculations from the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (Ican) pressure group.

The new total, which is up $10.7bn from the previous year, is driven largely by sharply increased defence budgets in the US, at a time of wider geopolitical uncertainty caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the Israel-Hamas war.

All nine of the world’s nuclear armed nations are spending more, Ican added, with China judged to be the second largest spender with a budget of $11.9bn – though Beijing’s total is well below the $51.5bn attributed to the US.

Russia is the third largest spender, at $8.3bn, followed by the UK ($8.1bn) and France ($6.1bn), although estimates for authoritarian states or the three countries with undeclared nuclear programmes (India, Pakistan and Israel) are all complicated by a lack of transparency.

Susy Snyder, one of the author’s of the research, warned that nuclear states are “on course to be spending $100bn a year on nuclear weapons” and argued that the money could be used on environmental and social programmes instead.

“These billions could have been used for combating climate change and saving animals and plants that sustain life on Earth from extinction, not to mention improving health and education services around the world,” Snyder said.

Over the past five years, since Ican began its research, nuclear weapons spending has soared by 34%, or $23.2bn. Spending by the US increased by 45% during that time and by 43% in the UK, and on current trends will surpass $100bn in 2024.

Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, has referred repeatedly to his country’s nuclear arsenal to warn the west of a direct military intervention in Ukraine since launching the full-scale invasion in February 2022. Russia also began a series of exercises simulating the use of tactical nuclear weapons near the Ukrainian border in May.

Other data, complied by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (Sipri), shows that the number of active nuclear warheads is also slightly higher, at 9,585, driven largely by China increasing its arsenal to 500 from 410.

The largest nuclear states remain, as they have done since the 1950s, the US and Russia, who possess about 90% of all warheads. Russia has 4,380 nuclear warheads deployed or in storage, compared with the US on 3,708, the researchers added.

The Sipri researchers said “Russia is estimated to have deployed about 36 more warheads with operational forces than in January 2023,” though they added there was no firm evidence that Moscow had deployed any of its nuclear missiles in Belarus, despite public statements from Putin and Belarus’s president Alexander Lukashenko.

Britain’s nuclear weapon arsenal is estimated to be unchanged at 225 (as is France’s on 290), but three years ago the UK said it would raise a cap on the number of warheads it was willing to stockpile to 260 Trident warheads to counter perceived threats from Russia and China.

Wilfred Wan, the director of Sipri’s weapons of mass destruction programme, said: “We have not seen nuclear weapons playing such a prominent role in international relations since the cold war.”

He contrasted the numbers of warheads deployed with a joint statement signed by the US, UK, France, China and Russia in 2022. Building on earlier statements, the five countries declared that “a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought”.

June 18, 2024 Posted by | business and costs, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Kenya’s first nuclear plant: why plans face fierce opposition in country’s coastal paradise

Unease and anger are rising over proposals to build country’s first facility on Kilifi coast, home to white sand beaches, coral reefs and mangrove swamps

Guardian, By Caroline Kimeu in Kilifi, 17 June 24

Kilifi County’s white sandy beaches have made it one of Kenya’s most popular tourist destinations. Hotels and beach bars line the 165 mile-long (265km) coast; fishers supply the district’s restaurants with fresh seafood; and visitors spend their days boating, snorkelling around coral reefs or bird watching in dense mangrove forests.

Soon, this idyllic coastline will host Kenya’s first nuclear plant, as the country, like its east African neighbour Uganda, pushes forward with atomic energy plans.

The proposals have sparked fierce opposition in Kilifi. In a building by Mida Creek, a swampy bayou known for its birdlife and mangrove forests, more than a dozen conservation and rights groups meet regularly to discuss the proposed plant.

“Kana nuclear!” Phyllis Omido, an award-winning environmentalist who is leading the protests, tells one such meeting. The Swahili slogan means “reject nuclear”, and encompasses the acronym for the Kenya Anti-Nuclear Alliance who say the plant will deepen Kenya’s debt and are calling for broader public awareness of the cost. Construction on the power station is expected to start in 2027, with it due to be operational in 2034.

“It is the worst economic decision we could make for our country,” says Omido, who began her campaign last year.

A lawsuit filed in the environmental court by lawyers Collins Sang and Cecilia Ndeti in July 2023 on behalf of Kilifi residents, seeks to stop the plant, arguing that the process has been “rushed” and was “illegal”, and that public participation meetings were “clandestine”. They argue the Nuclear Power and Energy Agency (Nupea) should not proceed with fixing any site for the plant before laws and adequate safeguards are in place. Nupea said construction would not begin for years, that laws were under discussion and that adequate public participation was being carried out. Hearings are continuing to take place.

In November, people in Kilifi filed a petition with parliament calling for an inquiry. The petition, sponsored by the Centre for Justice Governance and Environmental Action (CJGEA), a non-profit founded by Omido in 2009, also claimed that locals had limited information on the proposed plant and the criteria for selecting preferred sites. It raised concerns over the risks to health, the environment and tourism in the event of a nuclear spill, saying the country was undertaking a “high-risk venture” without proper legal and disaster response measures in place. The petition also flagged concerns over security and the handling of radioactive waste in a nation prone to floods and drought. The senate suspended the inquiry until the lawsuit was heard.

………………..Peter Musila, a marine scientist who monitors the impacts of global heating on coral reefs, fears that a nuclear power station will threaten aquatic life. The coral cover in Watamu marine national reserve, a protected area near Kilifi’s coast, has improved over the last decade and Musila fears progress could be reversed by thermal pollution from the plant, whose cooling system would suck large amounts of water from the ocean and return it a few degrees warmer, potentially killing fish and the micro-organisms such as plankton, which are essential for a thriving aquatic ecosystem

It’s terrifying,” says Musila, who works with the conservation organisation A Rocha Kenya. “It could wreak havoc.”

At Mida, those making a living from the land and sea, including workers in tourism, fishers and several dozen beekeeping groups and butterfly farmers around Arabuko-Sokoke Forest, have concerns about their futures. The forest is a Unesco biosphere reserve.

Justin Kenga, 51, a tour operator from the town of Watamu, who has worked in the industry for decades, says: “In tourism, we depend on the biodiversity around us – our tourists are very conscious about the environment – so anything that can alter or destruct our environment, it will destroy our livelihoods.”…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……..tensions between anti-nuclear activists and the government are growing. The UN special rapporteur on human rights defenders, Mary Lawlor, expressed concern over police violence against people in Uyombo, a potential plant site, during a protest in April. Activists said their peaceful protest was met with excessive violence, beatings, arrests and intimidation……………………………………….  https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/article/2024/jun/17/kenya-plans-first-nuclear-power-plant-kilifi-opposition-activists

June 18, 2024 Posted by | AFRICA, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

Iran’s Nuclear Point Man : We Won’t Bow to Pressure

Friday, 06/14/2024, https://www.iranintl.com/en/202406149313—

Ali Shamkhani, advisor to the Supreme Leader and apparent nuclear negotiator, stated on Friday that Iran “won’t bow to pressure” amidst US warnings regarding its uranium enrichment activities.

“Iran’s nuclear program relies on national will and development strategy,” Shamkhani wrote on X. “The US and some Western countries would dismantle Iran’s nuclear industry if they could.”

The US issued a warning to Iran, stating they will “respond accordingly” if Iran continues to accelerate its nuclear program. This came shortly after the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), highlighted Tehran’s expanding uranium enrichment.

The IAEA’s report revealed Iran’s response to a censure resolution, indicating expanded uranium enrichment at two underground sites. Iran rapidly installed more uranium-enriching centrifuges at its Fordow site and began work on additional ones at its Natanz facility, the report said.

A week ago, The IAEA’s Board passed a resolution urging Iran to cooperate and reverse its decision to bar inspector visits, with the US stressing the need for Iran’s compliance. Britain, France, and Germany tabled the resolution, which the US reportedly opposed but later endorsed. Only Russia and China voted against the measure.

Shamkhani, an old-guard military figure who served as the secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council until last year, had previously warned of a “serious and effective response” if European nations pursued the resolution.

According to an IAEA assessment, Iran is enriching uranium to 60% purity, approaching the 90% threshold typical of weapons-grade material. Additionally, it has accumulated enough material for additional enrichment, potentially resulting in three nuclear warheads.

June 18, 2024 Posted by | Iran, politics international, Uranium | Leave a comment

93 Nations Back ICC as Israel Faces Charges for War Crimes in Gaza

A joint statement calls on “all States to ensure full co-operation with the Court for it to carry out its important mandate of ensuring equal justice for all victims of genocide, war crimes, [and] crimes against humanity.”

Common Dreams, JON QUEALLY, Jun 15, 2024

Ninety-three nations on Friday, all them state parties to the Rome Statute that created the International Criminal Court, reiterated their support for the ICC as it assesses an application for arrest warrants of high level Israeli government officials accused of perpetrating war crimes in Gaza.


The 93 countries—including Canada, Bangladesh, Belgium, Ireland, Afghanistan, Costa Rica, Chile, Germany, France, Mongolia, Mexico, New Zealand, and scores of other—cited separate ICC statements defending its mandate for independence and upheld in their joint statement “that the Court, its officials and staff shall carry out their professional duties as international civil servants without intimidation.”

Though neither nation is named in the joint statement, both the United States and Israel have publicly condemned ICC chief prosecutor Karim Khan for his May 20 arrest warrant applications for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant over alleged “war crimes” and “crimes against humanity” in the Gaza Strip.

Khan also submitted arrest warrants for Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar, Mohammed Diab Ibrahim Al-Masri, and Ismail Haniyeh for their alleged roles in the October 7 attack on southern Israel. Following Khan’s announcement in May, U.S. President Joe Biden said, “Whatever this prosecutor might imply, there is no equivalence—none—between Israel and Hamas. We will always stand with Israel against threats to its security.”

In April it was reported that the U.S. government was working behind the scenes to block the ICC from issuing any arrest warrants targeting Israel officials. Neither Israel nor the U.S. is party to the Rome Statute, though the United Nations has recognized the ICC’s jurisdiction over the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT), where the alleged war crimes by the occupying power, Israel, took place…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

With their show of unified support for the ICC and its mandate, the countries said they aim to “contribute to ending impunity for such crimes and preventing their recurrence while defending the progress we have made together to guarantee lasting respect for international humanitarian law, human rights, the of law and the enforcement of international criminal justice.”  https://www.commondreams.org/news/icc-war-cimes-gaza

June 18, 2024 Posted by | Israel, Legal | Leave a comment

Congress will hold a hearing about the Sentinel missile’s exploding budget, but is it too little, too late?

Bulletin. By Chloe Shrager | June 14, 2024

The Pentagon’s new multibillion-dollar intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) program has come under fire as a continual offender of overspending, but there has been little reaction on the issue from Congress. The most recent cost overrun for the Sentinel ICBM (previously known as the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent or GBSD) put the program’s budget an unprecedented 37 percent higher than previous estimates and extended its operational schedule by at least two years. As a result, the Pentagon is critically reviewing the program to determine if it will continue or be canceled.

Critics have called the land-based missile modernization project “wasteful and dangerous.” But much to the dismay of Sentinel’s many naysayers, the costly program is expected to be recertified.

While experts and activists have long called for a thorough reevaluation of the program, most of Congress has been silent on the issue. It is only last month that the chairs of a congressional working group on nuclear arms called for an oversight hearing on the controversial program. The hearing, set for July 24, seeks to “raise the alarm about our unsustainable, reckless nuclear posture,” working group co-chair Don Beyer, a Democrat of Virginia, said of the current US nuclear policy.

The upcoming hearing will be the first—and maybe only—opportunity for lawmakers to critically reevaluate US spending on modernization of its ICBM force. But it will come after the program is poised to be recertified by the Defense Secretary on July 10. This raises the question of whether Congress truly has any oversight on the US nuclear modernization program, or if the hearing is merely a performance.

Sentinel’s history of budget breaches. The Sentinel program is meant to completely replace the 400 deployed Minuteman III missiles that constitute the land-based leg of the US nuclear triad, producing 400 new ICBMs and refurbishing the 450 launch silos capable of holding them. The program also includes the acquisition of more than 250 additional ICBMs and the modernization of over 600 command and control facilities. Of the 659 total ICBMs that Sentinel will produce, 400 will be actively deployed in silos and 50 will be kept “warm,” leaving 209 extras for testing and other purposes. However, the US Air Force has yet to publicly justify why it needs these 259 warm and extra missiles not included in the current generation of Minuteman III missiles or how they increase national security

The Sentinel was chosen in large part for its supposed cost-effectiveness, but its price has skyrocketed since initial cost analyses: It nearly doubled in size from its original projections of $62.3 billion back in 2015 to over $130 billion today. That total is almost as much as what is planned to be spent on Medicaid health services for low income families over the next 10 years. A new report from government watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense projects the price tag might reach $315 billion by 2075.

The most recent cost overrun happened when the production cost per unit jumped from $118 million to $162 million, a 37-percent increase that set off alarms in the Pentagon…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

The July 24 hearing is a first step in the direction of more public accountability in government spending for nuclear weapons programs. But, unless representatives advocate for a full and candid review of Sentinel, the hearing will merely blow hot air at a decision already made. When announcing the oversight meeting on June 4, Garamendi remembered that “historically, nations have collapsed by overspending on outdated defense strategies, and I fear the United States is repeating these mistakes.” https://thebulletin.org/2024/06/congress-will-hold-a-hearing-about-the-sentinel-missiles-exploding-budget-but-is-it-too-little-too-late/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=ThursdayNewsletter06132024&utm_content=NuclearRisk_SentinelBudget_06142024

June 18, 2024 Posted by | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Guam’s fight for radiation exposure compensation ‘far from over’

RNZ, By Mar-Vic Cagurangan, Pacific Island Times, 17 June 24

Despite nearly two decades of relentless lobbying, Guam’s hopes to finally be included in the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA) crumbled anew when the US House Republican leadership let the program expire without extension or expansion.

While the RECA extension and expansion proposal received bipartisan support in the US Senate, House Speaker Mike Johnson shunned its inclusion in the 2025 National Defense Authorization Act.

Guam Delegate James Moylan said the House Rules Committee ruled his amendment to incorporate the RECA expansion language into the defense spending policy bill “out of order”. As a result, the language didn’t make it to the floor for the House vote.

“The primary reason was that offset costs were not provided, which were estimated at around US$50 billion,” Moylan said in a statement.

“This mirrors the message from House leadership when referencing the RECA measure passed by the Senate, and many in the House, including myself, have been requesting for a vote to take place on the floor.”

RECA, the 1990 legislation that provided financial compensation for atomic test downwinders in three states and pre-1971 uranium miners, expired on June 10.

The expanded version would have added Guam, Colorado, Idaho, Missouri, Montana and New Mexico to the list of areas currently included in RECA, namely Nevada, Arizona and Utah.

“The Republican leadership’s policy is that any new spending measure must have an offset provided, to prevent uncontrolled spending or an unfunded mandate,” Moylan said.

“There are others who believe the measure should be passed regardless, and thus allow the executive branch to identify the funds. We believe a combination of both is needed.”

The Pacific Association of Radiation Survivors led by Robert Celestial has been fighting for Guam’s inclusion in RECA, backed by the National Research Council’s 2005 report declaring the territory’s eligibility for compensation under the program.


“Guam did receive measurable fallout from atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons in the Pacific between 1946 and 1958,” read the council’s report, which recommended that people living on island during that period be compensated under RECA “in a way similar to that of persons considered to be downwinders.”

Despite the latest defeat, Moylan said the advocacy “is far from over” and “building more support along the way”.

He is banking on the Senate to include the language in its version of the NDAA in the coming weeks………………………………………… more https://www.rnz.co.nz/international/pacific-news/519741/guam-s-fight-for-radiation-exposure-compensation-far-from-over

June 18, 2024 Posted by | OCEANIA, radiation | Leave a comment

More nuclear warheads operational, analyst says

By Melissa Erichsen, Dpa,  June 17 2024

 Nuclear weapons states are strengthening their arsenals in the face of numerous conflicts worldwide, according to a leading Swedish think tank on conflict and defence.

A new report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), says the number of operational nuclear warheads is steadily rising.

“While the global total of nuclear warheads continues to fall as cold war-era weapons are gradually dismantled, regrettably we continue to see year-on-year increases in the number of operational nuclear warheads,” said SIPRI director Dan Smith.

“This trend seems likely to continue and probably accelerate in the coming years and is extremely concerning.”

The number of nuclear weapons in development is also on the rise, as states bank on nuclear deterrence, the report said.

Of the estimated total of 12,121 warheads recorded worldwide in January, around 9,585 were part of military stockpiles for potential use.

Around 3,904 of these warheads were mounted on missiles and aircraft – 60 more than in the same month a year earlier. According to the report, the rest were kept in centralised storage facilities.

For decades, the global number of nuclear weapons has been steadily declining. However, the decline is mainly due to the fact that discarded warheads are gradually being dismantled by Russia and the United States following the Cold War.

That means peace researchers look not only at the estimated total stockpiles, but also at the deployable arsenals. According to SIPRI, nine states have nuclear weapons: in addition to Russia and the US, these are China, France and Britain, as well as Pakistan, India, Israel and North Korea.

Combined, Washington and Moscow own some 90 per cent of nuclear warheads worldwide.

Around 2,100 of the operational warheads were kept on ballistic missiles on high alert, mainly by the US and Russia, according to the SIPRI report.

For the first time, however, China is also said to have some warheads on high alert.

Beijing’s nuclear arsenal rose from 410 warheads in January 2023 to 500 in January 2024.

Meanwhile, “China is expanding its nuclear arsenal faster than any other country,” said SIPRI expert Hans Kristensen.

However, Kristensen noted that “in nearly all of the nuclear-armed states there are either plans or a significant push to increase nuclear forces.”

The SIPRI experts said that both the US and Russia have become less transparent regarding their nuclear arsenals following Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, while transparency was also down in other nuclear weapons states.

June 18, 2024 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

UN: Israel killed own citizens on October 7 under ‘Hannibal Directive’


SOTT, Nicola Smith, The Telegraph, Sat, 15 Jun 2024

The Israeli military likely killed more than a dozen of its own citizens during the October 7 attacks, a United Nations investigation has alleged.

Comment: Bearing in mind the UN is extremely conservative (and even biased in favor of Israel-the West) in its verdicts, this is rather damning; and one would expect that further, even more incriminating, revelations of Israel’s role in Oct 7, its incitement of the attack, and stand down order, are still to come.


The report by the UN commission investigating the attack on Israel and the subsequent war in Gaza documented “strong indications” that the “Hannibal Directive” was used in several instances that day, “harming Israelis at the same time as striking Palestinian militants.”

The directive – officially revoked in 2016 – was put in place to prevent the capture of Israeli soldiers by enemy forces who may use them as bargaining chips, allowing troops to open fire even if it caused the death of a comrade.

UN investigators, led by Navi Pillay, a former UN human rights chief, concluded that at least 14 Israeli civilians, including 12-year-old twins and a 68-year-old grandmother, “were likely killed as a result of Israeli security forces fire.”


These specific accusations have not yet been addressed by Israel, but the government angrily rejected the overall report, which accused both Palestinian groups and Israel of committing war crimes. The UN panel also claimed Israel’s conduct of the war included crimes against humanity.

The Israeli government said the report was “reflective of the systematic anti-Israel discrimination of this commission of inquiry“, noting that it had ignored Hamas’s use of civilians as “human shields”.

It has also criticised the commission for “outrageously and repugnantly” drawing a false equivalence between Hamas and the Israeli military in relation to sexual violence.


Comment: Thus far it seems Israel is guilty of using sexual violence as a weapon of war, not Hamas. Moreover, with Israel it’s institutional and systematic: ‘Extermination, torture, starvation, sexual violence’: UN finds Israel guilty of numerous crimes against humanity

The report examines both Hamas’s actions on October 7 and Israel’s military response in Gaza and provides legal analysis that could be used in future criminal proceedings.

The UN commission was denied access to Israel, Gaza and the West Bank and said Israel did not respond to six requests for information. It based its conclusions on remote interviews with survivors and witnesses, satellite imagery, forensic medical records, and open source data.

Buried in the detail are several examples when Israeli civilians may have been intentionally targeted by their own armed forces on the day thousands of armed Hamas terrorists violently attacked the Nova music festival and Kibbutz settlements near the Gaza border.

The investigation’s conclusions on this question, much of which is derived from local media, refer to a video statement by an IDF tank crew which “confirms that at least one individual tank team knowingly applied the ‘Hannibal Directive‘ that day.”

It adds: “In a statement given to an Israeli news channel, a tank driver and commander stated that they targeted two Toyota vehicles with militants and Israelis. This occurred at point 179, close to Kibbutz Nir Oz.”

The commander, who believed his troops could be on the vehicles, was quoted as saying: “I prefer stopping the abduction so they won’t be taken,” although he adds that, to his knowledge, he did not kill any soldiers.

Much of the information at the centre of the “Hannibal Directive” accusation stems from the death of Efrat Katz, 68, some 150m from the Gaza border, and another 13 Israelis who were “likely” killed either by tank shelling or caught in the crossfire after being trapped by terrorists in the house of Pessi Cohen in Kibbutz Be’eri.

In their account of the Be’eri incident, investigators say that about 40 terrorists brought 15 civilians, including twins Liel and Yannai Hetzroni, aged 12, into the house of local resident Pessi Cohen, leading to a standoff with the Yamam police counter-terrorism unit and the IDF.

At 3pm, Hasan Hamduna, the terrorists’ leader, called the Yamam through one of the female hostages, threatening to execute all the abductees unless they were given safe passage to Gaza.

At 4pm, the first large IDF contingency, led by Brig Gen Barak Hiram, arrived at the site.

According to the testimony of a surviving hostage, the Yamam commandos opened fire on the terrorists while seven hostages were in the yard, trapped between them, the report says………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

the Israeli government has discussed far-reaching measures against UN agencies operating in Israel and the Palestinian territories, including the possible expulsion of staff, reported the Financial Times.

Bubbling tensions spiked last week after António Guterres, the UN secretary-general, added Israel’s military to a list of countries and organisations that fail to protect children in conflict – a move the Israeli ambassador to the UN described as “shameful.”  https://www.sott.net/article/492277-UN-Israel-killed-own-citizens-on-October-7-under-Hannibal-Directive

June 18, 2024 Posted by | Atrocities, Israel | Leave a comment

NATO chief says members considering deployment of more nuclear weapons, Kremlin warns it’s an ‘escalation of tension’

Reuters, Mon, 17 Jun 2024

The Kremlin said on Monday a remark by NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg that the military alliance was holding talks on deploying more nuclear weapons was an “escalation of tension”.

Stoltenberg told Britain’s Telegraph newspaper that NATO members were consulting about deploying more nuclear weapons, taking them out of storage and placing them on standby in the face of a growing threat from Russia and China.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Stoltenberg’s comments appeared to contradict a communique issued at a weekend conference in Switzerland that said any threat or use of nuclear weapons in the Ukraine context was inadmissible.

The talks, held at the behest of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, were billed as a “peace summit” although Moscow was not invited.

“This is nothing but another escalation of tension,” Peskov said of the NATO secretary general’s remarks…………………………………………………………  https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/kremlin-says-nato-chiefs-nuclear-weapons-remarks-are-an-escalation-2024-06-17

June 18, 2024 Posted by | EUROPE, weapons and war | Leave a comment

The United Nations Security Council takes up Space Security – it might have been best if it had not

As the international community’s dependence on space-enabled services grows exponentially, the disconnect between space powers on rules for responsible behaviour in outer space can only be a matter of great concern.

Open Canada, BY: PAUL MEYER , Adjunct Professor of International Studies and Fellow in International Security, Simon Fraser University, Senior Advisor, ICT4Peace, Director, Canadian Pugwash Group, Fellow, Outer Space Institute 17 JUNE, 2024

It may come as a surprise that until this April the United Nations (UN) Security Council had never taken up the issue of outer space security despite the Council’s primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. Outer space has become an increasingly important environment for global well-being with a wide array of space-based services underpinning many critical civilian activities from telecommunications to navigation to remote sensing of the Earth. The world is also experiencing an exponential growth in the numbers of satellites in orbit driven primarily by the private sector and the launch by companies such as “Starlink” and “One Web” of “mega-constellations” to ensure global Internet connectivity. Many stakeholders in the use of outer space also recognize that preserving this environment for peaceful purposes, in line with the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, means ensuring that it is kept free of man-made threats. 

Regrettably, just as global society is discovering ever more benefits from outer space activity, leading space powers are characterizing it as a “war-fighting domain” while accusing one another of having been the first to “weaponize” this vital if vulnerable environment. The ethos of cooperation imbued in the Outer Space Treaty with its stress on space activity being “in the interests and for the benefit of all countries”; its insistence on each party paying “due regard” to the rights of others and its prohibition on the stationing of nuclear weapons or other WMD in orbit, is currently under severe strain. Hostile rhetoric, accusations of nefarious intent, development of anti-satellite weapons and other so-called “counter-space capabilities” plus the abuse of consensus-based diplomatic processes have generated an atmosphere that is not conducive for states agreeing on cooperative security measures even when these are urgently needed. 

To the degree that space security has been addressed by the UN in the past it has been a preserve of the General Assembly and the 65-member Conference on Disarmament in Geneva, both of which have had the “Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space” (PAROS) item on their agenda since the early 1980s…………………………………………

Part of the problem has been that since it last negotiated an agreement in 1996 the Conference on Disarmament has been a largely moribund body, unable to agree and implement a basic programme of work let alone negotiate anything. This dysfunctionality is sustained by its consensus-based decision making that essentially gives each of its members a de facto veto over any decision. As security perspectives and threat perceptions differ amongst the member states no common ground has emerged for any new agreement. Specifically, on the PAROS item an East-West divide has existed for decades over how best to proceed. 

In 2008, Russia and China put forward a draft treaty on “The Prevention of Placement of Weapons in Outer Space and the Threat or use of Force against Space Objects” (better known by its acronym PPWT). In the view of its sponsors it is essential that a legally binding agreement is concluded that will ban all weapons in space. The United States (US) and its allies have raised objections to the Sino-Russian treaty ………………………………

This gap in positions could be bridged with a modicum of good will and a willingness to compromise on preferred positions, but neither quality is much in evidence these days. Instead, a decision was made to transfer the unresolved debate over PAROS to the Security Council which had never addressed the issue before……………………………………………….

The US and Japan, along with numerous co-sponsors, introduced this April a draft resolution on Outer Space and WMD with a principal call for all states to adhere to the ban on placing WMD into space. At the April 24 Security Council meeting slated to consider this issue, Russia offered up an amendment to the US/Japan resolution. The amendment stipulated that states “take urgent measures to prevent for all time the placement of weapons in outer space and the threat or use of force in outer space, from space against Earth and from Earth against objects in outer space”; and called for “the early elaboration of appropriate reliably verifiable legally binding multilateral agreements” (i.e. like the PPWT). The amendment failed having received only 7 positive votes whereas 9 are required in the Security Council. 

This set the stage for a vote on the US/Japan resolution which garnered 13 positive votes, one abstention (China) and fatally a veto from Russia. In an effort to turn the tables on the US, Russia introduced a new resolution of its own which incorporated much of the text from the US/Japan resolution, but reinserted the language of its amendment. When this resolution went to a vote at a May 20th Security Council session it failed (like the amendment) to garner sufficient support with a repetition of the earlier split 7-7 vote. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

More promising than the combative machinations in the Security Council has been the creative approach shown in the recent UN Open Ended Working Group (OEWG) on “Reducing Space Threats through norms, rules and principles of responsible behaviours”. This group convened for a few weeks in 2022 and 2023 with a final session in the week of August 28 to September 1. Due to disruptive and frankly spiteful behaviour by the Russian delegation no concluding report could be achieved (the group operating by consensus) and even the usual anodyne procedural report was blocked by the Russian representative who openly delighted in the group’s failure. 

Despite this egregious conduct the OEWG benefited from the active participation of those present and the rich menu of proposals that were presented, any one of which, if adopted, would make a positive contribution to the security situation in outer space…………………………………….

Notable among these proposals were restraint measures on any destructive action against satellites and refraining from “any other non-consensual act that destroys or damages the space objects of other States”; refraining from “any deliberate act that interferes with the normal and safe operation of the space objects under the jurisdiction or control of other States”; refraining from “any acts that would impair the provision of critical space-based services to civilians” and ensuring “that satellites under their jurisdiction and control or operating on their behalf do not rendezvous, physically connect or physically damage with satellites under the jurisdiction and control of another State, or operate in proximity to, without prior consultations and consent”. Agreement on such conflict prevention measures is the type of action which would really benefit the international community.

In lieu of further polemics between Russia, China and the US it would be helpful if concerned middle powers, such as Canada, and non-governmental stakeholders spoke out on the need to take up some of these specific proposals and seek agreement on them. Let’s put aside the tired and sterile debates over the desired scope and status for space arms control and embark on a purposeful effort to develop cooperative security measures for outer space.  The international community deserves no less.   https://opencanada.org/the-united-nations-security-council-takes-up-space-security-it-might-have-been-best-if-it-had-not/—

June 18, 2024 Posted by | space travel | Leave a comment