nuclear-news

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

President Trump Wants to Cut the Pentagon Budget in Half. How?

According to USAspending.gov and Defense News, the largest defense contractors in 2023 included:

BAE Systems – $13.6 billion

Lockheed Martin Corp. – $60.8 billion

RTX (Raytheon) – $40.7 billion

Northrop Grumman Corp. – $35.0 billion

Boeing Company – $30.8 billion

General Dynamics Corp. – $30.4 billion

L3Harris Technologies – $13.9 billion

Dennis Kucinich and  Elizabeth Kucinich, Feb 18, 2025, https://denniskucinich.substack.com/p/president-trump-wants-to-cut-the

The President advances a three-pronged strategy for national security: 1. Negotiate a peace deal for Ukraine. 2. Negotiate nuclear arms drawdown with China and Russia. 3. Cut military spending by 50%

It is Presidents’ Day, and President Donald Trump has made a bold statement regarding military spending—one that no other president in modern history has made. He claims he could cut the Pentagon budget by about 50%.

President Trump has suggested a major cut in defense spending, proposing that the United States, Russia, and China each reduce their military budgets by 50%. He has also expressed a desire to begin denuclearization and arms control discussions with both Russia and China to accomplish this objective.

Military contractors poured $4,440,605 into Kamala Harris’s campaign—more than double what they contributed to Donald Trump. Yet, even with the support of establishment figures like Dick Cheney, their favored candidate fell short. The defeat of the military contractor’s candidate may have consequences for the industry.

Now, with President Trump in office and a bold initiative to cut Pentagon spending by 50%, the defense industry faces a challenge unlike any before.

The financial markets are already responding: Major U.S. defense firms are experiencing notable stock declines, while European defense companies surge in anticipation of increased regional military spending. Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, and Northrop Grumman have all seen stocks fall, while companies such as Rheinmetall, BAE Systems, and Saab are benefiting from investors expecting a shift in global defense priorities.

As President Trump pursues negotiations to bring peace to Ukraine, European governments appear to be moving in the opposite direction, increasing military budgets and deepening their involvement in the conflict. European defense firms are thriving as they anticipate further arms sales to governments committed to escalating military engagement rather than seeking diplomatic solutions.

This contrast underscores the significance of Trump’s initiative—challenging the entrenched military-industrial complex, wherever it is located, and seeking to end perpetual warfare.

The era of unchecked military expansion may be coming to an end, and for the first time in decades, the ability of the defense industry to influence U.S. military policy is being curtailed.
Will it happen? We don’t know, but President Trump’s bold proposal to cut Pentagon spending reflects his signature negotiation style—starting with an aggressive position to shift the conversation and force a change in conditions, in this case – – scrutiny of military waste.xpansion may be coming to an end, and for the first in decades, the ability of the defense industry to influence U.S. military policy is being curtailed.

Rather than a rigid policy demand, Trump’s talk of a 50% cut in military spending challenges the entrenched interests of the military-industrial complex, putting pressure on defense contractors to reduce costs, compelling Congress to justify every dollar spent.

Peace, diplomacy and international agreements between military superpowers are now squarely on the priority policy table for the first time in decades and are being understood as pragmatic. Such strategic diplomacy can open the door for arms reduction talks with other global superpowers.

By challenging the status quo, Trump is causing security and economic prosperity to be merged. Trump is causing a rethink of national priorities, that America’s strength is built on both security and economic prosperity, and that unlimited military spending threatens both.

It is a longstanding Congressional practice of bloating the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) with unnecessary programs and hyperinflated spending. In all other authorization packages, things must be reduced and streamlined.

In the “defense” bill, they are always padded out and multiple zeros added to appropriations requests by habit. Very few lawmakers have the courage to vote against a “defense” bill despite knowing its excesses, and media will spin on the attack if they do.

Dennis was always 100% for national defense through fiscal integrity, against unnecessary war and profiteering, and so when in Congress he voted 100% of the time against the wasteful spending!

Throughout our careers, we have championed the principle of “Strength Through Peace.” This philosophy is rooted in the belief that true national security is not achieved through ever-expanding military budgets, but through diplomacy, cooperation, and a commitment to resolving conflicts without war.

We have carried this message forward, advocating that real strength is found in preventing war, not waging it. For decades, we have worked to place peace at the center of national policy—not as an idealistic dream, but as the most pragmatic and sustainable path forward.

It is a new day when a President questions military waste and opens the door for de-escalation of global conflict. However, notwithstanding the President’s ambition for sharp reductions in military spending, the current budget is a golden trough for contractors. Let’s take a look.

Breaking Down the Pentagon’s Nearly $1 Trillion Budget

The Pentagon’s budget is a massive and complex expenditure. Here’s a rough estimate of where the money goes:

  • 25% goes toward soldiers’ pay and benefits.
  • 25% is allocated for base operations, including training.
  • More than 40% is funneled to Pentagon contractors for weapons systems, research and development (R&D), logistical support, base operations, technology, and private security.
  • Additional funds go toward military construction and nuclear weapons programs.

Top Defense Contractors & Their 2023 Revenue

According to USAspending.gov and Defense News, the largest defense contractors in 2023 included:

  • Lockheed Martin Corp. – $60.8 billion
  • RTX (Raytheon) – $40.7 billion
  • Northrop Grumman Corp. – $35.0 billion
  • Boeing Company – $30.8 billion
  • General Dynamics Corp. – $30.4 billion
  • L3Harris Technologies – $13.9 billion
  • BAE Systems – $13.6 billion

These companies receive billions annually in government contracts, making them deeply invested in maintaining high levels of military spending.


Military Contractors’ Political Contributions (2023-2024)

According to OpenSecrets, the top defense contractors contributed significantly to political campaigns in the current election cycle:

L3Harris Technologies – $2,475,712 total ($1,126,096 to Democrats, $1,331,975 to Republicans)

Lockheed Martin – $4,470,698 total ($2,393,034 to Democrats, $2,021,283 to Republicans)

Northrop Grumman – $3,354,889 total ($1,903,884 to Democrats, $1,385,924 to Republicans)

RTX Corp (Raytheon) – $2,805,535 total ($1,472,920 to Democrats, $1,258,511 to Republicans)

General Atomics – $2,507,912 total ($595,947 to Democrats, $1,660,970 to Republicans)

In the presidential race, defense contractors have donated:

  • Kamala Harris – $4,440,605
  • Donald Trump – $1,787,259

In total, the defense sector has contributed over $41.4 million in the 2023-2024 election cycle. For every $1 contributed to political campaigns, these companies receive $10,000 in government contracts—a return on investment most businesses could only dream of.

Trump’s Negotiation Strategy: What Is He Really Aiming For?

President Trump stated intention to cut military spending by 50% reflects his signature negotiation style—starting with an aggressive position, shift the conversation and force long-overdue scrutiny of a neglected policy and spending – — in this case, military waste.

Defense contractors will be under pressure to reduce costs. Congress will be forced to ever more careful review of defense appropriations. Just the mere mention of a shift in spending by the President galvanizes budget hawks to search for waste, fraud and abuse in Pentagon contracting,

Is War a Racket?

As Marine Corps General Smedley Butler once famously said, “War is a racket.” If so, how do we end that racket? Here are six possible reforms:

  1. Ban political contributions from federal contractors – No company receiving taxpayer-funded contracts should be allowed to donate to political campaigns.
  2. Prohibit companies that overcharge the government from receiving contracts – Firms with histories of price gouging should be disqualified from future defense spending.
  3. Restrict Pentagon officials from working for defense contractors – A five-year cooling-off period should be implemented for former officials joining military contractors.
  4. Ban members of Congress from lobbying for defense contractors – Prevent lawmakers from cashing in by lobbying for the companies they previously regulated.
  5. Establish public financing for all federal campaigns – This would reduce corporate influence in government decisions.
  6. Pass a Constitutional Amendment to repeal Citizens United and Buckley v. Valeo – Overturning these Supreme Court decisions would reduce corporate and special interest control over elections.

Trump’s Approach: A New Era?

Despite his rhetoric, President Trump is not calling for the disestablishment of America’s defense. Instead, he proposes a new strategy: engaging China and Russia in parallel arms reductions while scaling back America’s nuclear arsenal. This approach could set the stage for fresh arms reduction treaties and a shift away from perpetual military expansion.

For the first time, there is a sitting president who is starting to walk this path. If he follows through, this could mark the most significant shift in American military policy in decades.

If the ultimate goal is to restore peace and fiscal responsibility in America, then the President challenging the military-industrial complex may be the most important fight of all and is deserving of our support.

February 19, 2025 Posted by | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Nuclear expert issues Chernobyl update after it emerges fires are still burning.

Luke Alsford and Gergana Krasteva, Metro UK, February 16, 2025 

Flames are still raging inside the Chernobyl nuclear station after multiple fires yesterday.

Three smoldering fires were detected earlier this morning, forcing teams to jump into action to prevent a disaster at the power plant.

Ukraine’s state agency on exclusion zone management confirmed that no release of radioactive material has been reported yet.

The plant was hit on Friday by a drone carrying a high-explosive warhead, according to Ukraine, 38 years after the nuclear explosion at the site…..

Firefighters continue to battle the blaze round the clock in challenging weather conditions, admitted the International Atomic Energy Agency.

The plant’s fourth reactor now has a 314 square foot gash after the drone strike.

Although no rise in radiation has been reported yet, an expert issued a frightening warning about how Russia’s attack will soon affect nearby radioactivity

Dr Olga Kosharna, founder of the Anti-Crisis Expert Nuclear Centre of Ukraine, said: ‘The hermetic seal has been broken.

‘It is clear that the ventilation systems will [work] differently and the radiation level will increase.

‘But I think that it will not go beyond the industrial site and the exclusion zone.

Chernobyl’s reactors are covered by an outer dome to prevent radioactive leakage after the 1986 disaster – the world’s worst civilian nuclear accident – which sent pollution spewing across Europe.

Video footage shows how the explosion blew a hole in the dome at 1.50am on Friday, before a fire then broke out.

An open fire on the roof structure – officially called the New Safe Confinement (NSC) – was swiftly put out by first responders.

However smouldering fires remain inside the 20ft diameter hole.

The International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA] said: ‘The ongoing efforts to put out and prevent the spread of any remaining fires – apparently fuelled by inflammable material in the roof cladding – have delayed work to start repairing the damage.’

The organisation’s director Rafael Mariano Grossi added: ‘This was clearly a very serious incident, with a drone hitting and damaging a large protective structure at a major nuclear site.

‘As I have stated repeatedly during this devastating war, attacking a nuclear facility is an absolute no-go, it should never happen.’

Grossi also warned of an ‘increase in military activity in the area around the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant.

‘The IAEA remains committed to doing everything we can to help prevent a nuclear accident. Judging by recent events, nuclear safety remains very much under threat.’…………………………….

Zelensky spoke at the Munich Security Conference yesterday, accusing Russia of flaming the conflict with the alleged drone attack……………………………… https://metro.co.uk/2025/02/16/nuclear-expert-issues-chernobyl-update-emerges-fires-still-burning-22567966/

February 19, 2025 Posted by | incidents, Ukraine | Leave a comment

French State Spars With EDF Over Multibillion-Euro Reactor Plan


French government officials took issue with Electricite de France SA’s plan to build six nuclear plants, saying cost estimates are too broad and reactor designs not firmed up, according to people with knowledge of recent talks.

Bloomberg News, Francois de Beaupuy, Feb 14, 2025 – https://financialpost.com/pmn/business-pmn/french-state-spars-with-edf-over-multibillion-euro-reactor-plan

EDF’s board met with state representatives last week amid growing concern that the company and its suppliers are far from ready to launch a project deemed key to France’s long-term energy security. The world’s biggest nuclear-plant operator needs to prove it has a credible plan after long delays and cost overruns at other reactor developments caused debts to balloon.

Officials at the Feb. 5 meeting characterized state-owned EDF’s presentation as unconvincing on both budget and reactor design, the people said, asking not to be identified discussing private talks.

A French state auditor said last month that a final investment decision on the six reactors should be made only once their design is well advanced and funding finalized. It said the estimated bill for construction, excluding financing costs, had swelled to almost €80 billion ($84 billion) when accounting for inflation.

The criticism at last week’s presentation went both ways. EDF Chief Executive Officer Luc Remont railed against the government for enacting a finance bill that doesn’t specify tax rates on future windfall revenues, the people said. Several board members also expressed concerns about the uncertainty surrounding the level of state aid for reactor projects, the people said.

Spokespeople for EDF and the government’s shareholding agency declined to comment.

Slow progress is not only fueling tensions between EDF and the government. It also threatens to undermine preparations along the supply chain for reactor construction. In the past two years, EDF has seen US and Korean competitors make inroads in European markets as its own proposals were overlooked.

Nuclear Revival

The difficulties faced by a nuclear behemoth such as EDF may also raise questions over the speed and breadth of an atomic-power renaissance across Europe, with many countries planning new reactors to cut emissions from power generation and bolster energy security.

Back in July, EDF’s Remont expressed hope that a state support package for the six new reactors would be agreed upon by the end of 2024, paving the way for a final investment decision by the end of 2025 or early next year. 

Already on the back foot, EDF must now move quickly to pin down costs and designs so that the government can work out the necessary support and seek approval from European competition authorities, the people said. The state aid needs to be fine-tuned to limit any remedies requested by Brussels, they said.

February 19, 2025 Posted by | business and costs, France, politics | Leave a comment

Film Review- Special Operation: The Invasion of Chornobyl

Sebastian Zaval,  February 17, 2025,
https://loudandclearreviews.com/special-operation-film-review/

Oleksiy Radynski’s Special Operation (Spetsialna Operatsiia) is a chilling experiment in documentary narrative that tries to speak for itself.

Based on 1000 hours of real-life CCTV footage, Oleksiy Radynski’s Special Operation (Spetsialna Operatsiia) manages to show us things “as they were” when Russian troops occupied Ukraine’s Chornobyl Nuclear Power Plant on February 24, 2022.

Just like most documentaries,  Special Operation includes a narrative and a point of view, but Radynski’s movie also does make a point of trying to remain as neutral as possible, allowing the viewer to be a spectator of all the things these soldiers and their superiors did during their five weeks stuck at the plant. The result is a fascinating experiment in documentary narrative that’s hard to watch at moments.

Now, the movie tries to be a sort of summary of all that happened when the Russian troops occupied the place, showing the viewer pretty much everything they did. We see as they arrive with tanks and weapons, trying to look as intimidating as possible. But most fascinatingly, we see them as people, not as particularly tough-looking goons. One of the aims of Special Operation is to show the viewer that these Russian invaders weren’t as efficient or intelligent as they were supposed to be, and looked rather lost most of the time.

It’s an interesting prospect, then, having the opportunity to watch the humanisation of an invading force. It’s not the sort of humanisation that turns these soldiers into three-dimensional figures with which one can empathise, but rather the kind that turns them into bumbling, clueless criminals. Special Operation shows the people who were supposed to be smart and powerful as vulnerable; as a force that arrived in a place without knowing what to do or how to do it. The fact that Radynski managed to get 1000 hours of footage of everything they did should tell us all about their efficiency; apparently, they weren’t even able to turn off or destroy most of the CCTV cameras at the plant.

Now, the fact that Special Operation is told exclusively through CCTV footage is quite fascinating. The viewer gets a birds-eye view of everything: the entrance to the plant, the exteriors, even the hallways and rooms. We see the Russian soldiers from afar, but at times, also closely, which means we see their faces and for a bit, even their bodies. Watching Special Operation almost feels like an out-of-body experience, as if we were passively watching something prohibited and dark, without being able to do anything about it.

Additionally, since CCTV cameras usually don’t record sound, Radynski collaborated with top Lithuanian-based sound artist Vladimir Golovnitski, who designed the film’s soundscape. This results in a completely plausible experience, in which the viewer never really notices the sound design – which is, of course, the whole point of Golovnitski’s work. There are footsteps and unintelligible conversations and even explosions in the background, outside the frame. Thus, the movie manages to create quite an oppressive atmosphere without ever feeling manipulative, complementing the realistic visual style and editing with an equally realistic soundscape.

Barely an hour long, Special Operation is short enough to not  end up testing the viewer’s patience, but long enough to feel like a precise and largely neutral account of what happened in Chornobyl in 2022. It obviously has an anti-Russian invasion point of view, but it doesn’t try to convey it in an obvious or artless way, instead letting the real-life footage speak for itself as the viewer sees everything the invaders did for five weeks. Special Operation is not a movie for everyone, and it does demand quite a bit of patience and critical analysis from the viewer, but those who give it a chance will find themselves glued to the screen, considering the actions of these war criminals at the site of the worst nuclear disaster in history.

February 19, 2025 Posted by | media | Leave a comment

X-Energy threatens to pull out of building nuclear plants in Britain

Developer backed by Amazon demands clarity on financial and regulatory
support before building advanced modular reactor in Hartlepool.

X-Energy, based in Maryland in the United States, is in discussions with EDF, the
French state-backed energy group, over a project to build one or more units
on the site of the Hartlepool nuclear power plant in Co Durham, a
large-scale reactor that is due to be decommissioned in 2027.

The company, which is also backed by Dow, the American industrial group, is developing
its first advanced modular reactor at one of Dow’s manufacturing sites on
the Texas Gulf Coast, with support from the US government. Another project
for Amazon is also planned in Washington state.

While its preference was to
build its first European Xe-100 reactors in Britain, Clay Sell,
X-Energy’s chief executive, said that without greater clarity from the
government on financial and regulatory support mechanisms it would look to
other markets. “We would like to go big in Europe from a base in the UK
but we don’t have to do a base in the UK. We’ve got to get real and
we’ve got to get going, otherwise we’re going to go someplace else,”
Sell said.

A clear framework included sites being made available for
advanced modular reactors, some government support for early development
work for the first plant alongside private capital, and funding for
construction through the so-called regulated asset base model, which is
levied on electricity bills. Unlike the existing designs operating in the
UK, X-Energy’s technology uses helium as a coolant rather than water to
divert heat away from the core. It has also developed its own fuel, which
it claims can withstand four times the temperature of typical nuclear fuel.

 Times 17th Feb 2025, https://www.thetimes.com/business-money/companies/article/x-energy-threatens-to-pull-out-of-building-nuclear-plants-in-britain-hk99djbps

February 19, 2025 Posted by | business and costs | Leave a comment

Netanyahu’s Quest to Attack Iran’s nuclear facilities with the ‘Mother of all Bombs’


“Mother of all Bombs” into nuclear facilities?
Until recently, Israel lacked “bunker buster” bombs and the capacity to mount
a sustained air attack that would destroy Iran’s entire nuclear program. But
perhaps not anymore.

In January, US military intelligence already assessed that, absent an
agreement, Israel would probably strike Iran’s nuclear facilities, most likely the
Fordow enrichment plant, an Iranian underground uranium enrichment facility
20 miles (32 km) from the city of Qom, in the first half of 2025.

By Dan Steinbock,  https://www.juancole.com/2025/02/netanyahus-attack-mother.html
The emboldened Netanyahu cabinet is in a war path, again. It is mobilizing to attack Iran and lobbying President Trump into a plan that presumably would use the ‘Mother of All Bombs.

In a press conference with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed to “finish the job” against Iran with the
support of President Trump.

Ever since his rise to power in the late 1990s, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu has worked toward a war with Iran, presumably to demolish
Tehran’s nuclear facilities but also to ensure its power projection in the region.

Now the emboldened Netanyahu wants to finish the job, decimate Iran’s
nascent nuclear capabilities, undermine Tehran’s future and overthrow its
rulers. After the misguided wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Washington’s
neoconservative empire-builders are also back, pushing still another forever
war for a “paradigm shift in the Middle East.”

The Israel-Iran scenarios
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has discussed with Trump several
possible levels of American backing. According to Israeli observers, there are
now four viable scenarios for an Israeli attack against Iran’s nuclear facilities,
as seen in the light of US-Israeli relations. Let’s name them.


In the cooperative scenario, the US and Israel cooperate in an attack against
Iran’s nuclear sites, which will be followed by Trump’s ultimatum that Iran must
entirely dismantle its military nuclear program.

In the clash scenario, the Trump administration would build on diplomacy to
seal a nuclear deal. Yet, Israel would attack on its own and thereby undermine
Trump’s efforts causing a bilateral drift between the two countries.

In the investment scenario, Saudi Arabia would offer the US hundreds of
billions of dollars in investment, to avoid a destabilization in the region that
could undermine Riyadh’s 2030 modernization program.

In the solo scenario, Israel attacks Israel’s nuclear facilities without direct US
cooperation, but with the tacit consent of the White House. This would happen
after the Trump administration’s threats and coercive diplomacy against Iran.

Ultimately, US priorities will matter the most. But these can be elusive and
contradictory. Some in the Congress have called for more US military action,
including direct attacks against Iran. Others have echoed the Biden
Administration’s calls for restraint and de-escalation.

Here’s the problem: any escalation with Iran, whether by the US, Israel or
both would likely regionalize the Gaza devastation, which is mis-aligned with
Trumps’ economic and geopolitical goals in the Middle East.

Targeting Iran
Ever since the Islamic Revolution in 1979, when President Carter froze
billions of dollars in Iranian assets, Washington has sought to restore the
status quo ante of the Shah that had made Iran safe to American capitalism.
In the 1980s, US intelligence and logistics played a vital role in arming
Baghdad in the Iran-Iraq War, perhaps the most lethal conventional war
between developing countries yet, with total casualty estimates up to 1 to 2
million. In 1988, the US launched an attack against Iran, presumably in
retaliation for Iran’s laying mines in areas in the Gulf. In the mid-90s, the
Clinton administration declared a total embargo on dealings with Iran.

In 2002, President Bush included Iran in his “Axis of evil” speech.
Subsequently, US and Israel cooperated in training secessionist forces in
Iran’s Kurdistan province. In 2007, US reportedly vetoed an Israeli plan to
bomb Iranian nuclear facilities. Instead, during the next three years, the US
and Israel deployed the Stuxnet virus, the world’s first offensive cyber
weapon, to destroy almost a fifth of Iran’s nuclear centrifuges.

In 2015, years of challenging talks resulted in a nuclear deal (Joint
Comprehensive Plan of Action, JCPOA) between Iran, the US and a set of
world powers. Despite Iran’s adherence to it, the Trump administration pulled
the US out of the deal in 2018. As tensions escalated, the Trump
administration assassinated Iran’s most important general, Qasem Soleimani,
in a deadly drone strike in January 2020.

The longstanding quest for Iran War
While the covert war in the shadows has prevailed since the Islamic
Revolution, US regime change efforts moved to a new stage during the Bush
administration. Since 2003, US Army has conducted an analysis called
TIRANNT (Theater Iran Near-Term) for a full-scale war with Iran. Reportedly,
this plan (CONPLAN 8022) would be activated in the eventuality of a Second
9/11, on the presumption that Iran would be behind such a pivotal operation.

That may be one reason why Israeli UN ambassador Gilad Erdan and PM
Netanyahu explicitly compared Hamas’s October 7 offensive to the 9/11 terror
attacks, which sparked the US. global war on terror. Concurrently, many in
Washington sought a pretext for a link with Iran, to legitimize a major regional
conflict. In contrast, the U.S. Directorate of National Intelligence assessed that
Iran had no foreknowledge of or involvement in the October 7 attacks.

For its part, Netanyahu’s government calculated that an Iran conflict could
divert mounting negative public attention from atrocities in Gaza and the West
Bank.

There were precedents. In 2011 Netanyahu had ordered the Mossad and IDF
to prepare for an attack on Iran within 15 days. Yet, Mossad’s chief Tamir
Pardo and chief of staff Benny Gantz, the opposition’s key member in
Netanyahu’s war cabinet, questioned the PM’s legal authority to give such an
order without the cabinet’s approval. Netanyahu had backed off.

A month after the Hamas offensive, Netanyahu’s Mossad chief David Barnea
stated Iran had stepped up terror worldwide.” If Israelis or Jews are harmed,
he added, Israel’s response would go to Tehran’s “highest echelon.”

Using October 7 against Iran
In April 2024, Israel bombed Iranian embassy in Damascus in which 16
people were killed, including the targets, half a dozen high-level officers of the
Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

The IRGC launched a broad retaliatory attack against Israel and the Israeli-
occupied Golan Heights with successive waves of drones, cruise missiles,
and ballistic missiles. Giving full public notice that its response was on the
way, Tehran designed it carefully as a show of force that would not trigger a
wave of escalation. It caused minimal damage in Israel. However, as Israel
would later acknowledge, despite containment efforts by the US, the UK,
France and Jordan, some of Iran’s ballistic missiles penetrated Israel’s
defenses, hitting the Nevatim Airbase in southern Israel.

Iran’s attack targeted Israeli territory as a warning shot. It demonstrated
Tehran’s ability to counteract Israel’s huge air superiority, though lacking a
modern air force of its own. It also highlighted Israel’s dependency on major
Western powers to protect itself and the inadequacy of that protection.

So, how would Israel respond to a conventional “existential crisis” with Iran?
In late 2023, the hypothesis was tested in a high-level US war game.
Intriguingly, initially the US participants presumed that self-restraint would
prevail in this high-level war game. Yet, the simulation’s cold logic compelled
them into a sequence of steps that quickly went nuclear.

“Mother of all Bombs” into nuclear facilities?
Until recently, Israel lacked “bunker buster” bombs and the capacity to mount
a sustained air attack that would destroy Iran’s entire nuclear program. But
perhaps not anymore.

Recently, German newspaper “Bild” revealed that the US envoy to the Middle
East, Steve Witkoff, announced Washington’s intention to deliver one of the
most powerful non-nuclear weapons systems to Israel, known as the “Mother
of All Bombs.” Reportedly, Pentagon denies the story.

Weighing almost 10,000 kg, the GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast
(MOAB) bomb can destroy deep underground bunkers. The explosive yield is
comparable to that of small tactical nuclear weapons.

In January, US military intelligence already assessed that, absent an
agreement, Israel would probably strike Iran’s nuclear facilities, most likely the
Fordow enrichment plant, an Iranian underground uranium enrichment facility
20 miles (32 km) from the city of Qom, in the first half of 2025.

First tested in 2003, the “Mother of All Bombs,” a 30,000-pound (14,000-
kilogram) monster was used for the first time in combat in 2017 in Afghanistan
by the Trump administration, despite the dire collateral damage.

Whether such use of the MOAB would spark a regional war or trigger waves
of new terror and insurgencies in the Middle East is a matter of debate. But it
would mean a potentially catastrophic escalation in the region and reshape
geopolitical landscape in the early 21 st century.

The author of The Fall of Israel (2025), Dr Dan Steinbock is the founder of
Difference Group and has served at the India, China and America Institute
(US), Shanghai Institute for International Studies (China) and the EU Center
(Singapore). For more, see https://www.differencegroup.net/

February 19, 2025 Posted by | Iran, Israel, weapons and war | Leave a comment

High-Explosive Drone Pierces Shell Of Chernobyl Nuclear Plant At Very Moment Trump Pushes Ukraine Toward Peace

by Tyler Durden, Saturday, Feb 15, 2025,  https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/high-explosive-drone-pierces-shell-chernobyl-nuclear-plant-very-moment-trump-pushes

On Friday just prior to high-level meetings among Western security officials and Ukrainian leadership commencing in Munich, including US Vice President J.D. Vance and Zelensky, there was a dangerous incident at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in Ukraine’s Kyiv oblast.

Ukraine’s President Zelensky accused Russia of launching a drone equipped with a high-explosive warhead at the historic, defunct power plant, site of the April 1986 nuclear disaster and meltdown. The drone reportedly hit the protective containment shell of the Chernobyl plant.

Zelensky’s office released footage showing an impact to the giant concrete and steel shield protecting the remains of the nuclear reactor. BBC writes that “The shield is designed to prevent further radioactive material leaking out over the next century. It measures 275m (900ft) wide and 108m (354ft) tall and cost $1.6bn (£1.3bn) to construct.”

And WaPo details further of the looming potential dangers:

In 2019, construction was completed on the New Safe Confinement — a $1.7 billion arch-shaped steel structure, which would contain the destroyed reactor. The site still contained some “200 tons of highly radioactive material,” according to the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development, which helped finance the project.

Thus the situation is deeply alarming given the potential for a new radiation leak at the site which could impact the region, or even Europe. An IAEA team on the ground said it heard an explosion at around 01:50 local time coming from the New Safe Confinement (NSC) shelter. Photos showed flames at the top of the huge structure.

The UN agency is on high alert, but issued a statement saying the drone strike did not breach the plant’s inner containment shell. The IAEA also did not attribute blame, not identifying who sent the drone.

The Kremlin strongly rejected that it was behind the incident:

“There is no talk about strikes on nuclear infrastructure, nuclear energy facilities, any such claim isn’t true, our military doesn’t do that,” Peskov told reporters in a call.

Russian state media has meanwhile been warning of efforts by bad actors to sabotage Trump’s peace plan for Ukraine, after he held a 90-minute phone call with President Vladimir Putin this week.

Serious damage to the protective shield remains, which could present an ongoing serious safety issue at the site:

Simon Evans from the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) was head of the Chernobyl Shelter Fund, which oversaw the construction of the protective dome in the 2010s.

He described the apparent strike as “an incredibly reckless attack on a vulnerable nuclear facility”.

The shield “was never built to withstand external drone attack”, he told the BBC.

Given this, why would Russia at this very moment while Trump and Putin are trying to line up peace talks launch a high-explosive drone at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant? 

Cui bono?…

Zelensky has asserted that Putin is not actually ready for or seeking legitimate negotiations, contradicting recent statements coming from the Trump White House.

On Friday, he claimed: “The only country in the world that attacks such sites, occupies nuclear power plants, and wages war without any regard for the consequences is today’s Russia.”

Meanwhile, Ukraine’s State Nuclear Regulatory Inspectorate has in a fresh statement said that while the drone damaged “the external integrity” of the New Safe Confinement “and equipment in the crane maintenance garage” – it remains that there are no observable radiation spikes. “Firefighting efforts and damage assessment are ongoing,” it added.

Was this a desperate CHERNOBYL 2.0 ATTEMPT? Whodunnit? 

Given that Chernobyl is a name that has captured popular imagination for decades since the apocalyptic historic disaster left the vicinity basically a radiation death zone, it could present the perfect false flag opportunity for anyone wishing to prolong and escalate the war.

February 19, 2025 Posted by | incidents, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Starmer’s nuclear reactors won’t be small, cheap or popular

David Elliott and Arthur Stansfield on Labour’s plans for expanding nuclear power plants, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/feb/16/starmers-nuclear-reactors-wont-be-small-cheap-or-popular

Labour’s plan for siting small nuclear reactor plants around the country (Keir Starmer unveils plan for large nuclear expansion across England and Wales, 6 February) feels almost like something Donald Trump would come up with. The reality is that they would not be small – for example, the system being developed by Rolls-Royce is 470 megawatts, larger than most of the old, now closed, magnox reactors that were built in the UK in the 1960s.

And they will not be cheap – even backers, like the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, have admitted that they “could have higher costs per MW compared to gigawatt-scale reactors”. And there would be a range of safety- and security-risk issues with local deployment, adding to the cost – nuclear plants are usually located in remote sites. Will many people want one near them? By comparison, with costs falling, public support for renewables, like solar and offshore wind, has never been higher.
David Elliott
Emeritus professor of technology policy, the Open University

February 19, 2025 Posted by | Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment

UK’s first new nuclear site since the 1970s begins licensing

China Daily By Bloomberg,  February 17, 2025

The UK’s first new location for a commercial nuclear power plant since the 1970s is undergoing licensing from the country’s regulator, at a time when the government is making it easier to approve new projects.  

Last Energy Inc’s microreactors are set to be built at a site of a former coal plant in South Wales. That would mark the first new site for a commercial reactor to begin licensing since 1978, as all projects since then have been built at locations on or next to sites that have had a plant there, the firm said…….

The government is taking steps to make it easier to approve and build nuclear plants, with an overhaul of planning rules giving developers more freedom over where they can build. Last Energy’s site still needs to be approved by the Office for Nuclear Regulation………….. https://www.chinadailyhk.com/hk/article/604745

February 19, 2025 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Ancient historic sites under threat from South Copeland nuke waste dump.

 The Nuclear Free Local Authorities have written to the prisons’ minister
seeking a government guarantee that Haverigg Prison, will remain open, and
local jobs saved, were the nuclear waste dump to be built in South
Copeland.

Nuclear Waste Services have recently identified ‘Areas of
Focus’ in each of the three Search Areas which are being investigated for
their potential to host a Geological Disposal Facility. The GDF shall be
the eventual ‘forever’ repository for Britain’s stockpile of legacy
and future high-level nuclear waste. The facility will require a surface
site which shall receive waste shipments before they are taken beyond
ground and out through tunnels under the seabed.

One of these ‘Areas of Focus’, designated ‘West of Haverigg’, wraps around the prison site.
In his letter to Lord Timpson, the Chair of the NFLAs, Councillor Lawrence
O’Neill, identifies that over 200 staff work at the prison, including
over 100 from the local area, and that many local businesses also supply
goods and services to HMP Haverigg.

 NFLA 18th Feb 2025 https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/news/can-there-be-any-guaranteed-future-for-haverigg-prison/

Can there be any guaranteed future for Haverigg Prison?

February 19, 2025 Posted by | UK, wastes | Leave a comment