‘Never forget’: Pacific countries remember nuclear test legacy as weapons ban treaty debated.
Supporters of the UN treaty prohibiting nuclear weapons gathered this month in New York to call for wider ratification
Jon Letman, Guardian, 21 Mar 25
Growing up in the Pacific nation of Kiribati, Oemwa Johnson heard her grandfather’s stories about nuclear explosions he witnessed in the 1950s. The blasts gave off ferocious heat and blinding light. He told her people were not consulted or given protective gear against bombs detonated by the US and UK at Kiritimati Island, now part of Kiribati, decades ago.
People in Kiribati suffered grave health consequences as a result of exposure to radiation from the tests in the late 1950s and early 1960s, a legacy they say continues to this day. Johnson says there’s a lack of accountability and awareness of how nuclear testing by foreign countries has harmed her people and homeland.
“It doesn’t matter if they’re very small island nations, their stories matter,” the 24-year-old says.
Between 1946 and 1996, the US, the UK and France conducted more than 300 underwater and atmospheric nuclear tests in the Pacific region, according to Pace University International Disarmament Institute. Kiribati, French Polynesia, and the Republic of the Marshall Islands were among the most affected.
For decades the countries have called for justice for the ongoing environmental and health impacts of nuclear weapons development. The push intensified this month as supporters of the UN treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons (TPNW) – including many from Pacific nations – met to discuss the treaty and call for wider ratification.
The treaty imposes a ban on developing, testing, stockpiling, using or threatening to use nuclear weapons – or helping other countries in such activities. It entered into force in 2021 and has 98 countries as parties or signatories. In the Pacific region 11 countries have backed the treaty. Treaty supporters want universal global support but many countries – including the US, the UK and France – oppose the treaty.
The nine nuclear armed countries argue that nuclear weapons are critical to their security. Likewise, Nato nations, Japan, South Korea and others are not yet party to the treaty. Australia, where the UK conducted nuclear tests in the 1950s, has not ratified the TPNW despite the prime minister, Anthony Albanese, saying in 2018 that Australia would do so the treaty when his party was in power…………………………..
‘Nuclear risks rising’
Against this backdrop, politicians, activists and other representatives gathered at UN headquarters in New York this month for week-long discussions on how to secure more support for the TPNW.
Hinamoeura Morgant-Cross, a representative of the French Polynesia assembly, was among the parliamentarians. She says her family was significantly affected by French nuclear detonations at Moruroa and Fangataufa atolls between 1966 and 1996. Morgant-Cross told the forum high rates of radiation-induced cancer in her family had motivated her to become an anti-nuclear activist and assembly member.
“It started with my grandma with thyroid cancer,” she said. “Then her first daughter – my auntie – with thyroid cancer. She also got breast cancer. My mom and my sister have thyroid disease. I got chronic leukemia when I was 24 years old. I’m still fighting against this leukemia.”
New Zealand’s UN representative in Geneva, Deborah Geels, stressed the treaty’s “special importance in the Pacific”, warning: “Tensions between nuclear-armed states and nuclear risk are rising, and no region is immune – even the South Pacific.”……………………………….. more https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/mar/21/never-forget-pacific-countries-remember-nuclear-test-legacy-as-weapons-ban-treaty-debated
Whistleblowers at nuclear sites may face bullying and threats, MPs warn
Members of public accounts committee raise concerns about culture and call for greater examination
Anna Isaac, Guardian 20th March 2025 https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/mar/20/whistleblowers-at-nuclear-sites-may-face-bullying-and-threats-mps-warn
Nuclear whistleblowers who try to draw attention to cultural and safety issues face bullying, MPs have warned.
Members of parliament’s public accounts committee have said they are concerned about the way people who raise concerns about culture and safety on nuclear sites are treated.
“There is generally a problem with whistleblowing and a safety culture,” said Rachel Gilmour, a Liberal Democrat MP, when quizzing nuclear bosses on Thursday.
“That relation between bullying and safety within a nuclear context” needs greater examination, Gilmour said, adding that her office was seeking to raise the issue further with regulators.
The Guardian’s Nuclear Leaks investigation has revealed claims of bullying, sexual harassment and drug use at the nuclear waste dump, Sellafield, which could put safety at risk.
Gilmour’s interjection followed a refusal by Euan Hutton, the chief executive of the Sellafield site, to apologise for its treatment of an HR consultant, Alison McDermott, when asked to by Anna Dixon, a Labour MP. Hutton also refused to say whether he considered the cost of the case against McDermott to be a good use of public funds.
Sellafield, in Cumbria, spent about £750,000 in its pursuit of McDermott’s claim that she was wrongfully dismissed after raising concerns of a “toxic culture” at the Sellafield site.
McDermott was found by a judge to have blown the whistle by raising reports of harassment. The judgment was made in 2023, after an appeal over the findings of an employment tribunal.
However, her wrongful dismissal claim was not upheld. Sellafield, along with the oversight body the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), sought to recoup costs of £40,000. A judge reduced these to £5,000. McDermott told the Guardian she intends to appeal against this decision.
Dixon said she was “disappointed” by Hutton’s response. She said it was “critical for a safety culture” that people feel able to speak up.
Hutton acknowledged there had been problems faced by staff but that there had been progress in recent years.
Hutton also acknowledged major cybersecurity failings at the site, which were also first revealed by the Guardian.
He said that “as an organisation we let ourselves down”, by failing to meet standards, but he repeated denials that the world’s largest plutonium store had been subject to “successful” cyber-attacks.
Sellafield was ordered to pay nearly £400,000 after pleading guilty to leaving data that could threaten national security exposed for four security.
With Trump’s ‘Thumbs Up’, Netanyahu restarts Gaza genocide.
Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL, 21 Mar 25
Over 400 killed, 500 injured in massive Israeli bombing of Palestinians sheltering in tents from earlier Israeli bombings.
Trump was notified in advance and gave the typical US green light to proceed. In under 2 months Trump has funneled $12 billion in genocide weapons including many 2,000 lb. bombs to fuel Netanyahu’s latest genocide campaign.
Trump is anxious for all the Palestinians in Gaza to be dead and gone so he can begin his massive real estate development there to create a ‘Greater Israel.’
The massive Israeli bombing comes 2 weeks after Netanyahu blocked all humanitarian aid from reaching Gaza. Whether killing Palestinians slowly with no food, fmedicine or killing them quickly with 2,000 lb. US bombs, Netanyahu and Trump cover the gamut of ghoulish death in Gaza.
Trump’s threats reignite talk of nuclear bombs in Iran
Trump is still met with defiance from the leadership in Tehran as he threatens military strikes against Iran.
Aljazeera, By Maziar Motamedi, 19 Mar 2025
Tehran, Iran – The latest threats of military action against Iran by United States President Donald Trump have prompted more discussions about the possibility of Iran abandoning nuclear non-proliferation.
Senior White House officials have again said Iran must do away with its nuclear programme entirely, leaving all uranium enrichment activity, even at low levels.
Amid intense US air strikes on Yemen, Trump has also said the US will hold Tehran responsible for any attacks by Yemen’s Houthis, dismissing Iran’s insistence that the group operates independently.
This has only led to more calls from within Iran to abandon its officially stated policy that it will never pursue nuclear weapons.
‘Nuclear year’
On Tuesday, Vatan-e Emrooz, a top daily newspaper run by ultraconservatives, marked the upcoming end of the Iranian year on March 20 by saying more countries will ponder nuclear bombs for their security as a result of Trump’s policies.
“Nuclear year”, read its headline, complete with an image of a massive nuclear explosion.
Nournews, an outlet affiliated with Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, said there will be “no guarantees” Iran will not abandon the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) if Trump and his team keep threatening.
Ahmad Naderi, a member of the presiding board of the Iranian parliament, told a public session of the assembly last week that “perhaps it is time for us to rethink our nuclear, military and security doctrine”.
The Tehran lawmaker has also previously backed testing intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads, claiming “there will be no balance in the region” unless Iran possesses a bomb
Such calls have increasingly gained favour among hardline factions in Iran, echoing a sentiment that the establishment is prepared to dash for a bomb if its existence is threatened.
Last week, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, whose religious ruling currently bars Iran from seeking weapons of mass destruction, also commented.
“If we wanted to make nuclear weapons, America could not stop us. If we do not have nuclear weapons and are not pursuing them, it is because we do not want it,” Khamenei said.
According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which carries out inspections of Iranian nuclear sites, Iran has amassed enough fissile material for multiple bombs but has made no effort to build one.
On the same page with China, Russia
In the years since Trump’s 2018 unilateral withdrawal from Iran’s nuclear deal with world powers, Washington’s European allies have become increasingly hawkish on the Iranian nuclear programme.
They have pushed Iran to curb its nuclear advances despite no prospects of lifting sanctions, introduced censure resolutions at the board of the global nuclear watchdog, and demanded more answers over several nuclear-related cases – some dating back two decades.
Years of escalation over Tehran’s cooperation with the IAEA, in addition to European anger over Iran’s closer ties with Moscow in light of the Ukraine war, have prompted Iran to maintain closer coordination with China and Russia.
The three countries have been holding talks in Beijing to present a more unified approach on the Iranian nuclear issue, especially over sanctions.
France, Germany and the United Kingdom, the European powers still party to the Iranian nuclear accord of 2015, continue to threaten to activate its “snapback” mechanism to reinstate all United Nations sanctions against Iran.
China and Russia oppose the move.
The E3 have said they are pursuing the snapback because they are concerned about the use of advanced centrifuges to enrich high-purity uranium, alleged non-compliance with the nuclear accord, and alleged provision of ballistic missiles by Iran to Russia.
Iran has strongly rejected that it delivered missiles to Russia, and has maintained that it only sent some drones to Russia months before the start of the war.
Iranian officials also held talks with IAEA chief Rafael Grossi this week, and the country objected to what it called “an unwarranted interference” in its engagements with the IAEA after the United Nations Security Council held a meeting over its nuclear programme.
The closed-door meeting prompted Iran’s foreign ministry to summon the E3 ambassadors to protest against “misuse” of the UNSC mechanism.
The White House said on Tuesday that Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed during a phone call that “Iran should never be in a position to destroy Israel”
Trump letter, threats
The US president’s threat that “every shot” fired by the Houthis in Yemen will be viewed as an attack from Iran has escalated tensions.
In a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump said Iran provides “so-called intelligence” to the Houthis, which has been viewed in Iranian media and online as a potential military threat against Iran’s Zagros warship, inaugurated in January.
The Iranian army in a statement on Tuesday rejected speculation that had circulated online claiming that the Zagros was hit with any projectiles, and said the warship was safely anchored at Bandar Abbas in Iran’s southern waters…………………..more https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/3/19/trumps-threats-reignite-talk-of-nuclear-bombs-in-iran
Idle Lepreau nuclear plant threatens to post worst operational year in 4 decades
Refurbishing only half the nuclear plant was a mistake, utility president admits
Robert Jones · CBC News : Mar 21, 2025
An end-of-the-fiscal-year breakdown at Point Lepreau is worsening what may turn out to be the poorest operational year on record for the 42-year-old plant.
The nuclear generating station was shutdown on Monday after a malfunctioning cooling fan was deemed to need immediate repair. That fix is expected to take almost until the end of the month
“Work is underway to repair an issue with the cooling fan and motor assembly,” D’Arcy Walsh, an N.B. Power spokesperson, said in an email. “We expect the station to return to service by the end of next week.”
A scheduled maintenance shutdown last spring, followed by the discovery of a major issue last summer in Lepreau’s generator, previously had the plant offline from early last April to mid-December. The latest problem is dragging the year’s low productivity further
Not including the years Lepreau was offline between 2008 and 2013 for a $2.5-billion refurbishment, the plant’s least productive year was in 1995, when it underwent work on sagging pressure tubes in its reactor and operated for just over 100 days.
Downtime at Lepreau is expensive for N.B. Power and has been cited as the primary cause for its current financial problems.
In February, N.B. Power president Lori Clark told MLAs the fortunes of the utility are largely dependent on how well, or poorly, the nuclear plant performs…………………….
Since it returned from refurbishment in late 2012, Lepreau has suffered a number of problems and has been taken offline for maintenance and repairs for more than 1,100 days in total.
More than one third of that downtime has occurred just in the last three years.
It has been estimated by the utility to cost between $1 million and $4 million per day when Lepreau is idle, depending on the time of year and the cost of generating or buying replacement power……………………………https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/idle-lepreau-nuclear-plant-threatening-worst-operational-year-nb-1.7490177
House Of Commons Public Accounts Committee: Decommissioning Sellafield – Seafield is the most dangerous place in the U.K
House Of Commons Public Accounts Committee: Decommissioning Sellafield.
Admissions that Seafield is the most dangerous place in the U.K. and an
accident involving the high activity waste storage tanks would be
catastrophic. Witness(es): Clive Maxwell, Second Permanent Secretary,
Department for Energy Security and Net Zero; Lee McDonough, Director
General, Net Zero, Nuclear and International, Department for Energy
Security and Net Zero; David Peattie, Group Chief Executive Officer,
Nuclear Decommissioning Authority; Kate Bowyer, Chief Financial Officer,
Nuclear Decommissioning Authority; Euan Hutton, Chief Executive, Sellafield
Ltd
Parliament TV 20th March 2025 https://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/7f124fa5-c2e2-4c68-bce8-557763429471
UK will not shy away from nuclear weapons, John Healey tells Russia
Defence secretary warned the weapons could do ‘untold damage’ as construction began on the successor to Trident
Larisa Brown, Defence Editor |Bruno Waterfield, Brussels, Thursday March 20 2025, The Times
Britain has the power to do “untold damage” to adversaries such as Russia with its nuclear deterrent, the defence secretary has warned, as he marked the build of the next generation of nuclear submarines.
John Healey said he took Vladimir Putin’s threats to use his nuclear arsenal seriously and the UK should not “fight shy” of the fact it has such weapons.
On a visit to a submarine yard, he also said that France could follow the UK’s example and commit its nuclear weapons to defend Nato and protect the security of Europe. At the moment, France will only officially use its weapons to protect itself.
In an interview with The Times, he said: “Our nuclear deterrent is there as a deterrent.
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/defence/article/britain-nuclear-power-damage-russia-cd8bv0d
Hinkley Point C nuclear will cost at least £75 billion – highly unlikely that Sizewell C will be any cheaper.
KEEPING REEVES SWEET: AXE SIZEWELL C!
Jonathon Porritt, 19 Mar 25
“…………………………… , Ed Miliband’s still a total sucker for the propaganda of both the fossil fuel industry (with the latest research from Fossil Free Parliament reminding us that DESNZ Ministers notched up an unbelievable 104 ministerial meetings with various fossil fuel companies between July and September last year) as well as the nuclear industry.
I’ll return to Ed’s mystifying obsession with the fossil fuel industry’s mega-scam of Carbon Capture and Storage in my next blog. For now, let’s just stick to his nuclear nonsense.
Knowing that he will have to give something big and bold back to the Treasury if he’s going to be able to protect things that really matter in his overall portfolio, the blindingly obvious thing to give up is Sizewell C. He knows the Treasury already despises the nuclear industry, deep down, after literally decades of its over-claiming and under-performing. So give them some red meat. A lot of red meat.
The UK Government has already spent around £3.7 billion on preparing the groundworks for Sizewell C. I saw the consequences of that for myself when I was in the area a couple of weeks ago, and I was genuinely shocked. The devastation is unbelievable – including more than 21,000 trees cut down. And that’s BEFORE a Final Investment Decision (FID) has actually been secured. Prospective investors (even in the Middle East) seem to be a lot less keen on Sizewell C than Ministers keep telling us.
Worse yet, Labour has promised another £2.7 billion in the next financial year – to go on doing exactly the same, again, before an FID is secured. Axing Sizewell C at this point, however painful that might be politically, would be a huge, short-term win for the Treasury.
In fact, this would be a much, much bigger prize for UK taxpayers in the longer term. Sizewell C has been described by EDF as a “Hinkley Point look-alike, with a lot of lessons learned”. There’s mighty little evidence that the UK nuclear industry has ever learned a single lesson from its unparalleled record of failure, but let’s just live with that for the time being.
The latest estimate for the “overnight cost” of Hinkley Point C in Somerset is £46 billion. Please don’t be fooled by that ever-so-opaque terminology: “overnight” simply means the cost of construction. It’s the figure the industry loves to trot out to the UK’s limitlessly gullible media (including the BBC and The Guardian), without acknowledging that it doesn’t include the cost of the capital EDF has had to raise to build this monstrous white elephant in the first place. EDF has indicated in the past that cost of capital can add as much as 60% to the overnight cost.
Yes, that’s right: Hinkley Point C will cost at least £75 billion.
It’s highly unlikely that Sizewell C, on the Suffolk coast, will be any cheaper – indeed, it’s already clear that the engineering challenge at Sizewell C is much greater than at Hinkley Point C.
And who will pay for Sizewell C? Well, it’s either YOU as a taxpayer (depending on the size of the stake that the UK government will eventually have to take in Sizewell C in order to secure that ever-elusive Final Investment Decision), or YOU as an energy consumer, through the chosen mechanism of a Regulated Asset Base. From the moment construction at Sizewell C starts, consumers’ bills will start rising.
Axing Sizewell C will obviously be a huge hit to the nuclear industry. Which means it’s probably too much to kill off the industry’s accompanying fantasies about Small Modular Reactors at the same time. At the moment, subsidising SMRs is relatively small beer for the taxpayer, and it’s got as much to do with keeping Rolls Royce on board as it has with any serious attempt to crack the huge technological challenges associated with these new reactors.
Once free of Sizewell C, DESNZ could then double down on all those parts of its portfolio which will deliver real economic value before the next election: solar and wind, storage (batteries plus a lot more), reconfigured grids, and low-carbon manufacturing………………………………..
https://jonathonporritt.com/poor-old-ed-miliband/
Sellafield decommissioning to continue for at least a century – robot dogs play a part
Robot dogs could help decommission Sellafield nuclear plant after successful trials.
Operators working from the Westlakes Science Park in Whitehaven, around
eight miles from Sellafield, remotely operated “safely and securely” a
custom Boston Dynamics Spot Quadrupedal Robot ‘dog’ that could carry
out tasks such as remote inspections, data gathering and clean-up work.
Energy generation at the plant stopped in 2003, but the painstaking
decommissioning process typically takes decades and presents radioactive
hazards to workers. Sellafield is unusual in that the decommissioning
challenge also encompasses early nuclear research and nuclear weapons
programmes that took place on the site.
The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) is not expecting full site remediation to be completed until 2125.
Engineering & Technology 20th March 2025
Book- Before Our Very Eyes, Fake Wars and Big Lies: From 9/11 to Donald Trump
Before Our Very Eyes, Fake Wars and Big Lies: From 9/11 to Donald Trump. March 2025
World-famous political analyst and editor Thierry Meyssan draws on his last 10 years in the thick of the action in Syria and Libya, where he served personally as an adviser to those governments. In “Before Our Very Eyes,” he shares the inside story of the 21st century regime change wars.
He lays bare the “Arab Spring,” the “revolutions” against Gaddafi and Assad, and the rapid rise of the jihadist monster ISIS, as masked operations of the US empire, “leading from behind.”
In “Before Our Very Eyes” he chronicles the onslaught against Syria and Libya, from the viewpoints of three camps: the foolish ambitions of the French neocolonialists, the fanaticism of the Muslim Brotherhood, and the lust for world domination of the Anglo-Zionist-American Empire.
We see how the Anglo-American axis (the US, UK, and Israel discreetly behind the scenes) deployed their iron grip on the world’s money and media to propagate a fake scenario of human rights violations. This was the cover story for the real scheme — to utterly disable the Muslim world by bringing it under the sword of fanatics like the Brotherhood, Al-Qaeda and ISIS. Vassal regimes like Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Jordan and the Emirates were assigned to do the heavy lifting.
For public relations purposes, the US pretended to fight half-heartedly against ISIS – which in fact it had intentionally created in Iraq, to divide and conquer the insurgency. The US then covertly ferried the terrorists into Libya and Syria. It continues to prop up ISIS by devious means. Thus the wars on Libya and Syria were based on treachery and fakery from start to finish – but the suffering of millions of innocent victims is all too real. A most murderous masquerade!
After Ukraine, Iran?
nuclear experts who studied the Iranian documents provided by Israel would all assure that it was not Iran that lied, but Israel.
while Iran is no longer complying with its commitment not to enrich uranium above 3.67%, it is still abiding by its JCPOA commitments to IAEA inspectors and fulfilling its obligations under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).
From the State Department, where he is in charge of Venezuela, Elliott Abrams, who brought together Straussians and revisionist Zionists within the Vandenberg Coalition, is advocating for an attack on Iran.
Thierry Meyssan, voltairenet.org, Tue, 18 Mar 2025 , https://www.sott.net/article/498539-After-Ukraine-Iran
For the “revisionist Zionists” (that is, the successors of Ze’ev Jabotinsky and Benzion Netanyahu — not to be confused with Theodor Herzl’s “Zionists”), the time has come, after the victory over Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Assads, to crush Iran.
On the contrary, for Donald Trump, after the pacification of the Ukrainian conflict, the priority should be to pacify the one surrounding Iran.
The press has its eyes fixed on Palestine, but it is around Tehranthat peace in the Middle East is being played out.
In Tehran, Iranians are anxiously wondering whether, once their economy is exhausted and they can no longer defend themselves, the Israelis and the United States will bomb them. Under these circumstances, should they or should they not negotiate with the enigmatic President Donald Trump?
On March 2, 2025, Iran’s Majlis (Parliament) voted no confidence in Economy and Finance Minister Abdolnaser Hemmati over his handling of the Western economic blockade and the resulting economic crisis. On the same day, his friend Mohammad Javad Zarif, former negotiator of the Joint Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (JCPOA) and current Vice President, resigned.
President Donald Trump revealed on March 7 that he had sent a letter to Iran. The international press had reported that it had been delivered the same day by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov to Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. However, Nournews revealed that Russia had refused to act as intermediary. According to Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei, it was ultimately delivered on March 12 by Anwar Gargash, diplomatic adviser to the President of the United Arab Emirates.
In any case, without waiting to hear about it, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, leader of the Revolution, declared:
“What interest do we have in negotiating when we know that he will not respect his commitments? We sat at the same table and negotiated for several years, and once the agreement was completed, finalized and signed, he overturned the table and tore up the agreement.”
The liabilities of the JCPoA agreement
Indeed, in 2013, Iran negotiated a comprehensive agreement with the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany, the 5+1, in Geneva. They resulted in a temporary halt to Iran’s nuclear program and a partial lifting of unilateral Western coercive measures and Security Council economic sanctions. The 5+1 negotiations then broke off, while direct discussions between Iran and the United States continued behind the scenes. They finally resumed in 2015 in Lausanne. The public agreement was signed in Vienna, in much the same terms as the draft that had been drawn up two years earlier. It is known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPoA).
The United States finally recognized the Islamic Republic’s right to develop its civilian nuclear program. In exchange, Iran agreed to allow the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to verify that it was not concurrently developing a military program. To this end, it agreed to possess no more than 5,060 centrifuges, not enrich uranium above 3.67%, and limit its plutonium production.
France and the United Kingdom declared themselves satisfied, while the French negotiator, Sayan Laurent Fabius, acknowledged that, as the talks progressed, he had informed the Israeli Prime Minister, his friend Benjamin Netanyahu, without the knowledge of other diplomats.
Russia and China concluded from these discussions, confirmed by their own observations on the ground, that Iran had closed its military nuclear programme in 1988, in accordance with a fatwa from Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, and had never resumed it [ 1 ].
On April 30, 2018, Benjamin Netanyahu released 100,000 documents stolen by the Mossad from archives in Tehran relating to the AMAD project. He explained that, by resorting to the Muslim principle of taqiya, Iran had lied. Tehran had developed a military nuclear program from 1989 to 2003 under the direction of physicist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh.
A week later, on May 8, 2018, President Donald Trump announced the United States’ withdrawal from the agreement signed by the Obama administration in Vienna. The persisting unilateral coercive Western measures are being maintained and strengthened.
“Since then, Iran has lost $100 billion a year,” according to former President Hassan Rouhani. By this measure, the US withdrawal would have caused $650 billion in losses over the past six and a half years.
Subsequently, nuclear experts who studied the Iranian documents provided by Israel would all assure that it was not Iran that lied, but Israel. The only part of the AMAD project that could be linked to the manufacture of an atomic bomb is a shock wave generator that is used in the manufacture of a detonator for this type of bomb [ 2 ].
Iran, in turn, withdrew from the JCPoA and the secret agreements signed with the United States. Its stockpile of uranium enriched to 60% increased to 182 kg in the last quarter of 2024.
In 2020, Israel assassinated Mohsen Fakhrizadeh in Tehran.
Towards new negotiations
Asked by the Iranian press about possible contacts via Oman, Minister of Foreign Affairs Abbas Araghchi said:
“Yes, this is not a strange method, and it has happened many times throughout history. Therefore, indirect negotiation is feasible… What is important is that the will to negotiate and reach a fair and just agreement arises under conditions of equality between states. The form of the negotiation is irrelevant.”
On March 12, the same day President Trump delivered his letter, France, Greece, Panama, South Korea, the United Kingdom, and the United States convened a closed-door meeting of the Security Council to examine Iran’s continued failure to comply with the IAEA’s requests for information.
The following day, March 13, Mohammad Hassan-Nejad Pirkouhi, director general for International Peace and Security at the Iranian Foreign Ministry, summoned the ambassadors of the United States, France, and the United Kingdom. He criticized them for an “irresponsible and provocative” convening of the Security Council by abusing UN mechanisms. He emphasized that while Iran is no longer complying with its commitment not to enrich uranium above 3.67%, it is still abiding by its JCPOA commitments to IAEA inspectors and fulfilling its obligations under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).
The United Kingdom has indicated that it is prepared to reinstate UN sanctions by October 18 if Iran does not curb its uranium enrichment. These sanctions have, in fact, been suspended, not repealed.
Simultaneously, the United States took unilateral coercive measures against Mohsen Paknejad, Iran’s oil minister.
On March 14, Russian Sergei Ryabkov and Iranian Kazem Gharibabadi were received by their Chinese counterpart, Ma Zhaoxu, in Beijing. The latter stressed that “the parties concerned should commit to addressing the root causes of the current situation and abandoning sanctions, pressure, or threats of force.” At a press conference, Kazem Gharibabadi stated that “all negotiations and discussions will be focused exclusively on the nuclear issue and the lifting of sanctions.” The former JCPoA negotiator, for his part, told the BBC that “the negotiations should not include Iran’s missile program or its regional influence. Adding these topics would complicate the process and make it unmanageable.” Finally, Sergei Lavrov, Russian Foreign Minister, told the press that adding additional conditions to the negotiations would doom them to failure. Finally, Mao Ning, spokesperson for the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, stressed that “in the current situation, we believe that all parties must maintain calm and restraint in order to avoid the escalation of the Iranian nuclear situation or moving towards confrontation and conflict.”
Meanwhile, G7 foreign ministers, meeting in La Malbaie, Canada, discussed arbitrary detentions in Iran and assassination attempts by Iranian intelligence abroad.
On March 15, former President Hassan Rouhani emphasized that the leader, Ali Khamenei, “does not have absolute opposition to negotiations.” He continued:
“Didn’t we negotiate with the United States on Iraq, Afghanistan, and the nuclear deal? Even back then, when I was secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, the leader himself wrote that negotiations must adhere to certain principles.”
However, on the same day, the Pentagon bombed Ansar Allah (called “Houthis” by Atlanticist propaganda) in Yemen, killing nine civilians. On his TruthSocial network, President Donald Trump posted this message:
“To Iran: Support for Houthi terrorists must end IMMEDIATELY. Do NOT threaten the American people, their President, who has been given one of the most important presidential terms in history, or the world’s shipping lanes. If you do it, WITH the Houthis, America will hold you fully responsible and we will not be nice.” [ 3 ]
From the State Department, where he is in charge of Venezuela, Elliott Abrams, who brought together Straussians and revisionist Zionists within the Vandenberg Coalition, is advocating for an attack on Iran.
The stakes of the new negotiations
If new contacts take place (and it is likely that they have already begun), the pacification of US-Iranian relations would once again shake up the broader Middle East.
Currently, Iran has lost in Palestine, Lebanon, and Syria.Tehran maintains its military influence only in Yemen. Economically, the country, subject to unilateral Western coercive measures, is on the brink of famine, like Iraq before the overthrow of Saddam Hussein (2002) and Syria before the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad (2024). It would no longer withstand a ground invasion.
Since nature abhors a vacuum, Israel and Turkey are attempting to divide up the region’s ruins. The internal pacification of the Kurdish question in Turkey delegitimizes the position of Kurdish mercenaries from the pseudo-state formed in Syria (Rojava) and makes them available for a possible ground invasion of Iran on behalf of Israel.
Behind the scenes, the man behind Benjamin Netanyahu, Elliott Abrams [ 4 ], is doing everything he can to turn President Donald Trump against Tehran [ 5 ].
References:………………………..Thierry Meyssan. Political consultant, President-founder of the Réseau Voltaire (Voltaire Network).Latest work in English – Before Our Very Eyes, Fake Wars and Big Lies: From 9/11 to Donald Trump, Progressive Press, 2019.
Hold Southern California Edison (SCE) Accountable: From Wildfires to Nuclear Waste.
Samuel Lawrence Foundation, 20 Mar 25
On March 5, 2025, Los Angeles County filed a lawsuit against Southern California Edison (SCE) over the devastating Eaton Fire, which killed 17 people and destroyed over 9,000 structures. The lawsuit alleges that SCE’s failure to maintain its infrastructure led to the disaster—echoing a long history of negligence by the utility. From wildfires to nuclear waste, Edison has repeatedly put profit over public safety, avoiding accountability for the risks it imposes on millions of Californians. The parallels to nuclear waste stored at San Onofre are striking: just as SCE’s equipment failures have fueled deadly fires, their reckless handling of 3.6 million pounds of nuclear waste at San Onofre poses an existential threat to our coastal communities.
This lawsuit highlights the urgent need to hold SCE accountable—not just for wildfire destruction but for the dangerous waste sitting on our shoreline. Our fight continues to demand oversight, responsibility, transportability, and real solutions for San Onofre’s ticking time bomb before disaster strikes again. We are optimistic that LA County will see justice in this fight against Edison.
‘Vandals in the White House’ no longer reliable allies of Australia, former defence force chief says
Henry Belot and Ben Doherty, Guardian, 21 Mar 25
Chris Barrie says Donald Trump’s second term is ‘irrecoverable’, but stops short of calling for end to Aukus pact.
A former Australian defence force chief has warned “the vandals in the White House” are no longer reliable allies and urged the Australian government to reassess its strategic partnership with the United States.
Retired admiral Chris Barrie spent four decades in the Royal Australian Navy and was made a Commander of the Legion of Merit by the US government in 2002. He is now an honorary professor at the Australian National University.
“What is happening with the vandals in the White House is similar to what happened to Australia in 1942 with the fall of Singapore,” Barrie said. “I don’t consider America to be a reliable ally, as I used to.
“Frankly, I think it is time we reconsidered our priorities and think carefully about our defence needs, now that we are having a more independent posture … Our future is now in a much more precarious state than it was on 19 January.
“Trump 1.0 was bad enough. But Trump 2.0 is irrecoverable.”
Barrie said it was “too soon” to say whether Australia should end its multibillion-dollar Aukus partnership, but raised concerns about a lack of guarantee that nuclear-powered submarines would actually be delivered. He also warned about an apparent lack of a back-up option.
Pillar One of the Aukus deal – which would see the US sell Australia nuclear-powered submarines before the Aukus-class submarines were built in Australia – is coming under increasing industry scrutiny and political criticism, with growing concerns the US will not be able, or will refuse, to sell boats to Australia, and continuing cost and time overruns in the development of the Aukus submarines.
“Let’s define why we really need nuclear submarines in the first instance, given a new independent defence posture for Australia,” Barrie said. “If they still make sense in that context, fine. But they might not. There might be alternatives. There might be alternatives with conventional submarines if we didn’t want to go any further than the Malacca Straits.”
Barrie’s warning comes after former foreign affairs minister Bob Carr said Australia would face a “colossal surrender of sovereignty” if promised US nuclear-powered submarines did not arrive under Australian control.
Carr, the foreign affairs minister between 2012 and 2013, said the Aukus deal highlighted the larger issue of American unreliability in its security alliance with Australia.
“The US is utterly not a reliable ally. No one could see it in those terms,” he said. “[President] Trump is wilful and cavalier and so is his heir-apparent, JD Vance: they are laughing at alliance partners, whom they’ve almost studiously disowned.”………………………. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/mar/21/vandals-in-the-white-house-no-longer-reliable-allies-to-australia-former-defence-force-chief-says-ntwnfb?CMP=share_btn_url
Climate impacts may be starting to spiral, but a sub-1.5C world is ‘still possible’
Climate impacts may be starting to spiral, but a sub-1.5C world is ‘still
possible’. World Meteorological Organisation report shows CO2 in atmosphere
has reached its highest level in 800,000 years, but the world can still
avoid a climate catastrophe. Carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere has
reached its highest level in 800,000 years, with temperature records being
shattered, polar ice melting at unprecedented rates, and ocean
acidification worsening.
Business Green 19th March 2025, https://www.businessgreen.com/news-analysis/4411077/climate-impacts-starting-spiral-sub-5c-world
“We will not back down:” Court tells Greenpeace to pay billion dollar damages bill to oil and gas company
The case has been mired in controversy from the outset with many jurors holding unfavourable views of the protests and it was reported that more than half the jurors selected to hear the case had ties to the fossil fuel industry.
the US decision is a good indicator about what may be in store for Australia.
Royce Kurmelovs, Mar 20, 2025,
https://reneweconomy.com.au/we-will-not-back-down-court-tells-greenpeace-to-pay-billion-dollar-damages-bill-to-oil-and-gas-company/
A jury in the US has hit Greenpeace with $US660 million ($A1.04 billion) in damages for defamation and other claims for the green group’s part in a campaign led by First Nations people against an oil pipeline in 2016 and 2017.
The Standing Rock protests marked a major turning point in the movement against new oil and gas infrastructure, when the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe led a campaign against the construction of the Dakota Access pipeline.
Right wing organisations and groups mobilised in response to the protests that became a flashpoint in the broader fight over climate change, with sweeping anti-protest laws rolled out across the United States.
The case against Greenpeace is the latest reaction to the protest with Dallas-based oil and gas company, Energy Transfer Partners, alleging it lost $70 billion as a result of the campaign. It pursued Greenpeace in the courts alleging defamation and incitement of criminal behaviour against the project.
The lawsuit relied upon a US-specific statute, the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), that was initially written to target the mob, but has since been used to prosecute international football federation FIFA for corrupt conduct and ExxonMobil for its role in attacking the science of climate change.
By seeking hundreds of millions in compensation against an organisation that played a minimal role in the protests, legal experts have described the litigation known as “strategic litigation against public participation”, or a “SLAPP Suit”. These are cases brought by large corporation to shut down public criticism or protest about a company’s activities.
The case has been mired in controversy from the outset with many jurors holding unfavourable views of the protests and it was reported that more than half the jurors selected to hear the case had ties to the fossil fuel industry.
Greenpeace made multiple attempts to move the hearings to another venue over concerns it would not get a fair hearing but were denied.
Following the verdict, Greenpeace International Executive Director Mads Christensen linked the decision to a broader corrosion of the right to protest in the US under the Trump administration.
“We are witnessing a disastrous return to the reckless behaviour that fuelled the climate crisis, deepened environmental racism, and put fossil fuel profits over public health and a liveable planet,” Christensen said.
“The previous Trump administration spent four years dismantling protections for clean air, water, and Indigenous sovereignty, and now along with its allies wants to finish the job by silencing protest.”
“We will not back down. We will not be silenced.”
David Mejia-Canales, a senior human rights lawyer from the Human Rights Law Centre, said the US decision is a good indicator about what may be in store for Australia.
SLAPP suits are not new in Australia, but the US lawfirm representing oil company Santos in the recent Munkara decision that ruled against the Environmental Defenders Office used an approach similar to US-style RICO litigation.
Coalition leader Peter Dutton has already pledged to defund the Environmental Defenders Office after the ruling in Munkara found its lawyers had behaved improperly, but has recently proposed to formally introduce RICO-style laws into Australia if elected.
Mejia-Canales said it was early days on the opposition leader’s proposal that seemed “a bit of a thought bubble” but said that should these laws be introduced, they had “potential to be abused”.
“In a way, the Greenpeace decision in the US is peering a little bit into our own future,” he said. “What we are seeing happening in the US today might be happening here tomorrow.”
“If these RICO type laws get introduced in Australia, they’re not doing it for the greater good or the greater purpose, it’s to stop us critiquing these massive companies whose behaviour leads to a whole lot of criticism and we should be able to do that safely.”
The Human Rights Law Centre is working to draft a bill that would introduce a set of principles for Australian courts to follow when confronted by a SLAPP litigation.
1 This Month
Website of the Week
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
- January 2026 (83)
- December 2025 (358)
- 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)
-
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 