nuclear-news

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

‘Ukraine will not recognize any territory occupied by Russia’: Zelensky


Tyler Durden, Zero Hedge, Wed, 12 Mar 2025,
 https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/moscow-studying-30-day-truce-plan-while-making-steady-battlefield-gains-meantime

 On Wednesday Zelensky shut the door on territorial concessions, awkwardly at a moment Ukraine has just agreed to a US plan for a 30-day ceasefire intended to pave the way for extended peace negotiations. An initial statement from the Kremlin said that Putin likely to eventually agree to truce but with own terms as Moscow “studies” the Trump-sponsored proposal hammered out during the Tuesday Jeddah talks.

Zelensky said in fresh comments:

“We are fighting for our independence. Therefore, we will not recognize any occupied territories as Russia’s. This is a fact. Our people have fought for this, our heroes died. How many injured, how many passed. No one will forget about it… This is the most important red line. We will not let anyone forget about this crime against Ukraine.”

But Russia’s red line in any near-future negotiations will be to demand recognition of the Russian Federations sovereign control over the four easter territories of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhia regions – which President Putin has previously referred to as “our citizens forever.”

As for Zelensky’s new proclamation that he won’t cede territory, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters just after the Ukraine-US talks in Saudi Arabia that discussions with Kiev’s delegations included “territorial concessions” as part of a negotiated settlement. The suggestion from the US side is that Ukraine showed openness and willingness on this question. So either the two allies can’t get on the same page (which is no surprise), or else Zelensky is trying to tank these negotiation efforts before they ever get off the ground, also as the White House has pressed Kiev to hold new presidential elections.

Fresh comments from Zelensky asserting Ukraine will NOT recognize any territory occupied by Russia

Certainly Russia sees no need to rush into negotiations, especially if Zelensky is unwilling to budge on territory in the east, given all the battlefield gains of late. Kursk will also soon return to full Russian control, as Ukrainian forces there are reportedly in disarray, and as Moscow has taken back over a dozen key sites just this week.

The Kremlin says it is “studying” statements issued by the US and Ukrainian delegations following yesterday’s talks in Jeddah, and further describes Russian officials are waiting for a fuller briefing from the US on the proposal. The 30-day ceasefire plan calls for a halt to all the fighting on land, sea and in the air – whichcan be extended by mutual agreement, with a hoped-for path to a permanent truce based on negotiations in the interim.

Zelensky in a Tuesday X post said the ceasefire will apply to missile, drone and bomb attacks “not only in the Black Sea, but also along the entire front line” – though its as yet unclear what mechanism there will be to monitor this.

The joint statement issued from Jeddah said the sides “will communicate to Russia that Russian reciprocity is the key to achieving peace.” Thus nothing will happen unless Moscow agrees.

Washington has agreed to lift the Trump ban on arms and intelligence for Kiev, while at the same time Kiev and Washington agreed on inking a deal on Ukraine’s critical minerals “as soon as possible”.

Russian state media is meanwhile reporting that President Putin is open to holding a telephone conversation with his US counterpart.

On the potential for a new Trump call to discuss progress toward setting up negotiations and a truce, spokesman Dimitry Peskov said Wednesday:

“We also do not rule out that the topic of a call at the highest level may arise. If such a need emerges, it will be organized very quickly. The existing channels of dialogue with the Americans make it possible to do this in a relatively short time.”

If it happens this would mark the second call since Trump’s inauguration, after the prior February 12 call. Theoretically this could lead to an in-person meeting between the two leaders if all goes well.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio is traveling back from the meeting in Saudi Arabia, and gave some remarks to a press conference in Ireland:


  • Deterrence against future attacks on Ukraine will be a crucial element of future negotiations.
  • The US-Ukraine minerals deal benefits both nations and deepens Washington’s interest in Ukraine, but “I would not couch it as a security guarantee”.
  • European sanctions against Russia will be part of the negotiations, making Europe’s involvement in the process essential.
  • Any truce could be effectively monitored, but “one of the things we’ll have to determine is who both sides trust on the ground” to oversee it.

One regional sources says that the Russian advance has been swift especially after one particularly daring operation: “Reports over the weekend claimed that 800 Russian special forces had crawled for 15 kilometers through an unused section of pipelinewhich once carried Russian gas to Europe via Ukraine, in order to carry out a sneak attack on Ukrainian forces in Sudzha,” writes Moscow Times.

These developments mean that Putin is even less likely to agree to any temporary pause in fighting. In January statements he had warned the Kremlin will not sign off on any temporary truces – given Ukraine could just use it to rearm, resupply, and regroup. Moscow has less incentive to sign onto a deal unless territorial concessions are part of it, given that at this rate it can just keep advancing in territory, particularly in the Donbass.

March 16, 2025 Posted by | politics international, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Uranium fever collides with industry’s dark past in Navajo country

Mining.com, Bloomberg News | January 14, 2025

A few miles south of the Grand Canyon, thousands of tons of uranium ore, reddish-gray, blue and radioactive, are piled up high in a clearing in the forest.

They’ve been there for months, stranded by a standoff between the mining company that dug them deep out of the ground, Energy Fuels Inc., and the leader of the Navajo Nation, Buu Nygren.

Back in the summer, Energy Fuels had triggered an uproar when it loaded some of the ore onto a truck, slapped a “radioactive” sign over the taillights and drove it through the heart of Navajo territory.

Radioactive is an alarming word anywhere, but here in Navajo country, surrounded by hundreds of abandoned uranium mines that powered America’s nuclear arms race with the USSR and spewed toxic waste into the land, it causes terror. Those fears have only grown the past couple years as nuclear power came back in vogue and sparked a uranium rush in mining camps all across the Southwest.

So when the news made it to Nygren that morning, he was furious. No one had sought his consent for the shipment. He quickly ordered dozens of police officers to throw on their sirens, fan out and intercept the truck.

The dragnet turned up nothing in the end — the truck snuck through — but the hard-line response delivered a warning, amplified over social media and ratified days later by the governor of Arizona, to the miners: Stay out of Navajo country.

Cut off from the lone processing mill in the US — all the main routes cut through Navajo territory — executives at Energy Fuels stockpiled it by the entrance of the mine. When the heaps of crushed rock grew too sprawling, they pulled the miners out of the tunnels and turned the drilling machines off…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Animosity towards mining companies runs high on Navajo land. It’s visible everywhere. On huge roadside billboards and small office signs, in fading pinks and yellows and jet blacks, too. They read “Radioactive Pollution Kills” and “Haul No” and, along the main entrance to Cameron, a hard-scrabble village on the territory’s western edge, “No Uranium Mining.”

A few miles down the road, big mounds of sand streaked gray and blue rise, one after the other, high above the vast desert landscape. They are the tailings from some of the uranium mines that were abandoned in the territory last century.

To Ray Yellowfeather, a 50-year-old construction worker, the tailings were always the “blue hills,” just one big playground for him and his childhood friends.

“We would climb up the blue hills and slide back down,” Yellowfeather says. “Nobody told us they were dangerous.”

Years later, they would be cordoned off by the Environmental Protection Agency as it began work to clean up the mines. By then, though, the damage was done. Like many around here, Yellowfeather says he’s lost several family members to stomach cancer. The last of them was his mother in 2022.

Yellowfeather admits he doesn’t know exactly what caused their cancer but, he says, “I have to think it has to do with the piles of radioactive waste all around us.” It’s in the construction material in many of the homes and buildings and in the aquifers, too. To this day, drinking water is shipped into some of the hardest-hit areas.

The US government has recognized the harm its nuclear arms projects have done to communities in the Southwest. In 1990, Congress passed a law to compensate victims who contracted cancer and other diseases. It paid out some $2.5 billion over the ensuing three decades. The EPA, meanwhile, has been in charge of the clean-up of the abandoned mines. Two decades after the program began, though, only a small percentage have been worked on at all.

This is giving mining companies an opportunity to curry favor in tribal communities by offering to take over and expedite the clean-up of some mines.

…………………………………………………………………………..the EPA released a detailed study on Pinyon Plain. In it, the agency found that operations at the mine could contaminate the water supply of the Havasupai, a tribe tucked in such a remote corner of the Grand Canyon that it receives mail by mule. The report emboldened Havasupai leaders to step up their opposition to the mine, adding to Chalmers’s growing list of problems.

For the Navajo, the risks that come from the hauling of uranium through its territory are far smaller — so negligible as to be almost non-existent, according to Chalmers. Nygren is unmoved. The Navajo have heard such reassurances many times before, he says, only to pay dearly in the end.

Nygren grew up near a cluster of old mines right along the territory’s Arizona-Utah border, which makes the whole Energy Fuels affair “incredibly personal,” he says. His voice grows louder now and his tone more emphatic, indignant. To him, the Energy Fuels incursion feels no different than all the abuses committed over the course of decades by the US government and the mining companies that supplied it with a steady stream of uranium.

“We played a big role in the national security of the United States and we played a big part in the Cold War, providing energy for nuclear weapons. We’ve done our part. And now it’s time for the US to do its part by cleaning up these mines and respecting our laws.”  https://www.mining.com/web/uranium-fever-collides-with-industrys-dark-past-in-navajo-country/

March 16, 2025 Posted by | environment, indigenous issues, Uranium, USA | Leave a comment

High stakes as Iran nuclear issue reaches crunch moment

Caroline Hawley, BBC diplomatic correspondent,  BBC 14th March 2025

Almost a decade since world powers sealed a historic deal to limit the Iranian nuclear programme, this is a crunch moment for Iran and the international community.

The country is now closer than ever to being able to make a nuclear bomb.

And the agreement – designed to prevent Iran developing a nuclear weapon – expires later this year.

“It’s a real fork in the road moment,” says Dr Sanam Vakil of the London-based think tank Chatham House. “Without meaningful and successful diplomacy we could see Iran weaponise or we could see a military strike against the Islamic Republic.”

The deal, painstakingly negotiated over nearly two years under Barack Obama’s presidency, imposed restrictions on Iran’s nuclear activities in return for relief from sanctions that crippled the country’s economy.

But after Donald Trump pulled out of the agreement in 2018 during his first presidency and reinstated US sanctions, Iran gradually stopped complying with its commitments.

It has accelerated its enrichment of uranium – used to make reactor fuel but also potentially nuclear bombs – to close to weapons-grade.

Experts say it would now take Iran less than a week to enrich enough material to make a single nuclear weapon.

Hence a flurry of urgent diplomatic activity by the US and the five other parties to the deal – the UK, China, France, Germany and Russia.

A closed-door meeting of the UN Security Council discussed Iran’s nuclear programme on Wednesday.

And China is hosting talks with Iran and Russia on Friday in search of a “diplomatic” resolution.

“In the current situation, we believe that all parties should maintain calm and restraint to avoid escalating the Iran nuclear situation, or even walking towards confrontation and conflict,” Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning said this week.

On Wednesday, a letter from President Trump was delivered in Tehran by a senior diplomat from the United Arab Emirates.

The contents have not been made public.

But President Trump, after imposing new sanctions on Iran as part of a “maximum pressure” campaign, last week issued a televised ultimatum to Iran: make a deal or else.

“I’ve written them a letter saying, ‘I hope you’re going to negotiate because if we have to go in militarily, it’s going to be a terrible thing,'” he said.

Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, appeared to reject the idea of talks with a “bullying” US.

So too – publicly – has President Masoud Pezeshkian, who had previously supported a resurrection of the nuclear deal, in return for an end to sanctions.

But the country has been sending out mixed messages.

“There are camps inside the country that favour negotiations,” says Dr Vakil. “And there are camps that see weaponisation as the best opportunity for Iran to manage its security.”

Trust in the Trump administration is in very short supply.

“They have seen his erratic, very bullying approach to [Ukraine’s President Volodymyr] Zelensky. And his outlandish proposals on Gaza and they don’t want to be put in that position,” Dr Vakil adds.

Iran hates the humiliation of having a gun held to its head. But it is currently vulnerable – weakened militarily by Israeli air strikes last year, which are believed to have destroyed most of the air defences protecting its nuclear programme.

Israel has long wanted to take the facilities out.

Iranian authorities continue to insist the country’s nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes.

But concern in the international community is becoming increasingly acute……………………………………………………… https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c86pvyd2qeno

March 16, 2025 Posted by | Iran, politics international | Leave a comment

Poland’s president urges U.S. to move nuclear warheads to Polish territory, FT reports

By Reuters, March 13, 2025, Reporting by Gnaneshwar Rajan in Bengaluru, Pawel Florkiewicz and Alan Charlish in Warsaw; Editing by Christopher Cushing and Gareth Jones, https://www.reuters.com/world/polands-president-urges-us-move-nuclear-warheads-polish-territory-ft-reports-2025-03-13/

WARSAW, March 13 (Reuters) – Poland’s president has called on the U.S. to transfer nuclear weapons to its territory as a deterrent against future Russian aggression, the Financial Times reported on Thursday.

President Andrzej Duda also told the newspaper he had discussed the proposal recently with U.S. President Donald Trump’s special envoy for Ukraine and Russia, Keith Kellogg.

Poland has previously said it would be ready to host U.S. weapons under a nuclear arms sharing programme, and Polish policymakers have also more recently expressed interest in an idea floated by French President Emmanuel Macron that Paris’s nuclear umbrella could be extended to its European allies.

The borders of NATO moved east in 1999, so 26 years later there should also be a shift of the NATO infrastructure east. For me this is obvious,” the FT cited Duda as saying in an interview.

It would be safer if those weapons were already in the country, Duda added.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, a political opponent of Duda, said on Thursday he thought it was better to address such issues discreetly rather than in media interviews, although he added that he believed the president had good intentions.

“We should formulate certain expectations… publicly when we are certain, or have reasons to be convinced, that such appeals or calls will be heard and that the addressee, in this case the American administration, President Trump, is prepared for a positive response,” Tusk told reporters.

Galvanised by Russia’s invasion of neighbouring Ukraine three years ago, Poland now spends a higher proportion of its gross domestic product (GDP) on defence than any other NATO member, including the United States.

Last year Poland’s defence spending reached 4.1% of GDP, according to NATO estimates, and it plans to hit 4.7% this year. Duda has suggested enshrining defence spending of at least 4% of GDP in the Polish constitution.

March 16, 2025 Posted by | EUROPE, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Some Small Nuclear Reactors could bypass environmental review step under Arizona bill

SMRs in rural Arizona would be exempt from review if the units are colocated with certain large industrial loads or built at power plants that previously received environmental certification.

March 14, 2025, By Brian Martucci,  https://www.utilitydive.com/news/arizona-smr-nuclear-environmental-review-bill-aps-srp/742564/

Dive Brief:

  • Arizona utilities would be allowed to bypass a key state environmental review process to deploy small modular nuclear reactors on or near certain power plants and large rural industrial sites, including data centers, under a bill that cleared the state House of Representatives on Feb. 26.
  • In most Arizona counties, the bill would supersede any local zoning restrictions on the construction and operation of colocated SMRs, provided the host facility received all required zoning entitlements, according to a March 7 fact sheet developed by Arizona Senate staff. 
  • Arizona House Majority Leader Michael Carbone, R, introduced the bill on Feb. 10, days after the state’s three largest utilities announced a joint effort to assess “a wide range of possible locations” for the siting and deployment of nuclear reactors.

Dive Insight:

The collaboration among Arizona Public Service, Salt River Project and Tucson Electric Power would consider options for both small modular reactors and “potential large reactor projects,” the utilities said Feb. 5.

The utilities have applied for a grant through the U.S. Department of Energy’s Generation III+ Small Modular Reactor Program, they said. The Gen III+ SMR program will provide up to $800 million to “two first-mover teams of utility, reactor vendor, constructor, and end-users or power off-takers” committed to an initial SMR deployment and developing a multi-reactor order book, according to DOE.

The utilities called the application a first step in a broader effort to “explore the possibility” of adding nuclear capacity in Arizona, possibly at retiring coal-fired power plant sites. The trio could select a preferred nuclear site later this decade “at the earliest, potentially enabling additional nuclear to be in operation in the early 2040s,” they said. 

“We know the development timeline would be long, so it makes sense for our state’s energy providers to begin this preliminary evaluation as soon as possible,” Tucson Electric Power President Susan Gray said in February.

Carbone’s bill allows a utility to construct an SMR in Arizona after providing 30 days’ notice to the Arizona Corporation Commission, the state utility regulator, provided the SMR complies with applicable state, federal and local laws and is colocated with a large industrial user.

The utility would not have to apply to the ACC for a certificate of environmental compatibility, as is typically required for new generation and transmission projects, according to the Arizona Senate fact sheet.

The bill also allows utilities to bypass the certificate of environmental compatibility process to construct a new or replacement SMR if the SMR is located “on or immediately adjacent to” a power plant that previously received a certificate of environmental compatibility or was in operation before Aug. 13, 1971. This allowance covers SMRs built to replace existing thermal generation units.

The bill requires the ACC to define colocation, large industrial user and eligible SMR types and sizes, provided the maximum nameplate capacity is at least 100 MW, according to the fact sheet.

The bill limits preemption of local land use ordinances related to SMR construction to counties with fewer than 500,000 people, according to the fact sheet. That comfortably excludes Arizona’s two largest counties, Maricopa and Pima, which are together home to about 75% of the state’s population. Fast-growing Pinal County crossed the 500,000-person threshold in 2024, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

March 16, 2025 Posted by | environment | Leave a comment

State Police to Hold Major Radiological Incident Exercise with International, Federal, State and Local Partners

March 13, 2025, https://www.michigan.gov/mspnewsroom/news-releases/2025/03/13/state-police-to-hold-major-radiological-incident-exercise#:~:text=The%20Cobalt%20Magnet%202025%20exercise,ensure%20preparedness%20against%20radiological%20threats.

The Michigan State Police, Emergency Management and Homeland Security Division (MSP/EMHSD) is playing a lead role in the planning, hosting and execution of a historic full-scale radiological exercise. More than 70 local, state, provincial and federal agencies from the United States and Canada will participate in this major radiological incident exercise at various locations in Lansing, southeast Michigan, Indiana, Ohio and Ontario from March 14 – 21.

The Cobalt Magnet 2025 exercise is led by the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), in partnership with the MSP/EMHSD. It will bring numerous agencies together to ensure preparedness against radiological threats.

“Michigan is home to two active nuclear power plants, with a third slated to return online within the next year,” said Col. James F. Grady II, director of the Michigan State Police and state director of emergency management and homeland security. “Given our location near Canada and other Great Lakes states, Michigan is uniquely positioned to play a critical role in this vital exercise, where the lessons learned will improve safety and response actions impacting the nation and beyond.”

Cobalt Magnet 2025 represents the culmination of 18 months of planning by local, state, provincial and federal responders. The exercise, with more than 3,000 participants, will simulate a nuclear power plant accident. It will enable response personnel to practice scanning for radiological materials, protecting public health and safety, providing emergency relief to affected populations and restoring essential services.

“During the exercise, members of the public may see field teams in protective clothing using radiological monitoring and detection equipment, low-flying aircraft conducting data-gathering overflights and groups of first responders and others staged at various locations,” explained Capt. Kevin Sweeney, deputy state director of Emergency Management and commander of the MSP/EMHSD. “The MSP/EMHSD will host a large portion of the Cobalt Magnet 25 exercise at the State Emergency Operations Center at MSP Headquarters in Dimondale. Multiple State of Michigan agencies will join the MSP in this full-scale exercise.”

Cobalt Magnet 2025 is part of a regular program of training, exercises and planning that help first responders prepare in case of a public health and safety emergency.

For more information on how to prepare before, during and after an emergency or disaster, visit www.michigan.gov/miready or follow MSP/EMHSD on X at @MichEMHS.

March 16, 2025 Posted by | safety, USA | Leave a comment

Anas Sarwar U-turns on Scottish Labour nuclear weapons policy

SCOTTISH Labour are facing calls to clarify their stance on the UK’s
nuclear weapons after Anas Sarwar appeared to pull a unilateral U-turn at
First Minister’s Questions. Speaking at Holyrood on Thursday, the Labour
group leader called for First Minister John Swinney and the SNP to reverse
their stance on Trident – the UK’s nuclear weapons system which is
housed on the Clyde.

The SNP oppose nuclear weapons and oppose renewing
Trident, want to see the system removed from Scotland, and support an
international treaty banning the bomb.

Previously, Scottish Labour’s
membership passed a motion opposing the renewal of Trident – and in 2021
Sarwar backed it despite Keir Starmer’s support for the policy. Sarwar
has now suggested that he supports the UK’s nuclear weapons being
renewed. Speaking at FMQs, the Scottish Labour leader said: “Global
events are reshaping the world before our eyes. This is a generation
defining moment, and all political parties and both of Scotland’s
governments must adjust to this new reality and rethink previous red
lines.”

 The National 13th March 2025, https://www.thenational.scot/news/25005720.anas-sarwar-seems-u-turn-scottish-labour-nuclear-weapons-policy/

March 16, 2025 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Walt Zlotow – GOP intervention needed to remove disintegrating Trump from office

Walt Zlotow, Glen Ellyn, 14 Mar 25

It took nearly 4 years to Democrats to stage an intervention to remove a mentally disintegrating Joe Biden from office.

We cannot wait that long for GOP to do their version with a disintegrating Donald Trump.

That’s because his disintegration is compounded by a malevolent streak of vindictiveness, revenge, lust for dictatorial power, gleeful dismantling of the American safety net maintaining the commons never before experienced in American history.

Annoy him and he’ll call you Asian if you’re black; Palestinian if you’re a Jew. That is sick.

Trying to salvage Musk’s sinking Tesla brand, he morphed into a sleazy car salesman pitching Tesla cars as his smug governmental wrecking ball looked on.

His obsession with tariffs has spooked Wall Street, every sensible economist, every trading partner and Joe Sixpack watching his retirement drop while his costs of necessities rise. He appears detached from reality of the economic deluge he’s unleashing.

His congressional speech sounded more like an indoor Nuremburg Rally than a prescription for healing America. His idolatrous congressional Republicans roared their approval. Apparently oblivious they’re standing on the deck of the Titanic along with the Democrats, they jeered them for not saluting America’s first autocratic president.

Whether it’s sliming critics, stealing foreign territory, gutting government, snipping the social safety net, provoking self-destructive trade war, Trump’s delusions of grandeur increase daily.

There is historical precedent for Republicans staging an intervention to remove a morally compromised president. In 1974 a GOP intervention led by Sen. Barry Goldwater visited morally compromised President Nixon in the White House and convinced him to resign. Such an intervention by today’s GOP, while virtually inconceivable, is still critically needed to prevent an unprecedented collapse of every vestige of the American promise to its citizenry.

If morally centered Barry Goldwater were in the Senate today, he’d likely step up to lead the Trump intervention. Alas, knowing the makeup of today’s GOP, it might be an intervention of one.

March 16, 2025 Posted by | USA | Leave a comment

Poisoning the well – The toxic legacy of Cold War uranium mining in western New Mexico

Studies have shown that chronic exposure to uranium through drinking water can cause kidney damage and cardiovascular disease. When inhaled, uranium can lead to lung cancer and pulmonary fibrosis, a scarring of the lung tissue. Studies of uranium miners associate cumulative exposure to radon with higher rates of death by lung cancer.

Proving that one’s illness originated as a result of living near a mine or mill, as opposed to actually working in it, is nearly impossible, given that symptoms can take years to manifest — a lack of clear causation that is ultimately advantageous to polluters.

Near the western New Mexico town of Grants, the toxic legacy of Cold War uranium mining and milling has shattered lives, destroyed homes and created a contamination threat to the last clean source of groundwater for an entire region

SEARCHLIGHT NEW MEXICO, by Alicia Inez Guzmán, March 13, 2025 [ excellent pictures and maps]

Driving along a stretch of New Mexico Highway 605, just north of the tiny Village of Milan, it’s easy to imagine that this area has always been no-man’s-land. Little appears in the distance except for a smattering of homes and trees peppered by expanses of bone-dry scrub brush. But a hard second look reveals something else — vestiges of a mass departure. Sidewalks lead to nowhere, a dog house sits in the middle of a field next to a mound of cinder blocks, phone lines crisscross empty stretches of land and deserted propane tanks and mailboxes sit perched in front of nothing. Around the bend on one unpaved side road, a neighborhood watch sign stands sentinel where a neighborhood no longer exists…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

This home site was once part of a cluster of five rural subdivisions interspersed with rich farm and ranchland. The Homestake Mining Company — famously known for gold mining in the Black Hills of South Dakota — took up residence here in 1958, to mill uranium. From that year until 1990, millions of tons of ore were prised from nearby mines and processed at Homestake, where the ore was ground into fine particles and leached with a solution that coaxed out pure uranium oxide, often called “yellowcake.” That uranium was then shipped off to help make America’s Cold War fleet of nuclear weapons or to power nuclear reactors. The leftover slurry was piped into two unlined earthen pits, the largest the size of 50 football fields and filled with over 21 million tons of uranium mill tailings.

Over time, the uranium tailings decayed into radon gas; meanwhile, radioactive contaminants seeped into four of the region’s aquifers. Residents compiled a list of neighbors who died of cancer — they called it the Death Map. In 2014, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) predicted that the probability of developing cancer was notably higher for residents who lived closest to the mill, especially if they drank the water.

In the intervening decades, Homestake attempted to hold its remaining contamination at bay rather than offer a long-term solution. That changed in 2020, when the company declared that a full cleanup of the groundwater was not feasible and instead embarked on a mass buyout and demolition of homes inside the rural subdivisions and beyond, Boomer and Billiman’s included. Homestake’s goal, ultimately, is to hand over 6,100 acres of land — almost twice the size of nearby Milan — to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) as part of a special federal program that takes over shuttered nuclear outfits when industry walks away. The deadline is 2035. And if this site is anything like the majority of the DOE’s other sites, the land will be rendered inaccessible to the public, with the company’s guarantee that toxins will stay inside the massive contamination zone boundary for a thousand years.

“Talk about the myth of containment,” says Christine Lowery, a commissioner in Cibola County. “The myth of reclamation as well,” she adds. For Lowery, a member of the Pueblo of Laguna who lives in Paguate, one of its six villages — itself blighted by the Jackpile-Paguate Uranium Mine, one of the world’s largest open pit uranium mines — the subtext is clear. “What they should be saying is, ‘We’ve contaminated everything we can, and there’s no way we can fix it.’”

In fact, the conditions necessary for contaminants to infiltrate a fifth aquifer in a single generation — not a thousand years — could already be in the making. The aquifer in question is the San Andres-Glorieta, so ancient that its limestone was forged from the same material as seashells before the era of the dinosaurs. It’s also the last clean source of groundwater for Milan, the county seat of Grants, many private well owners and the Pueblo of Laguna, as well as the Pueblo of Acoma, one of the longest continually inhabited communities in the United States.

According to regulators, the San Andres-Glorieta still meets standards for groundwater that is safe to use and drink. According to Homestake’s own reports, however, at least three uranium plumes are converging toward what Ann Maest, an aqueous geochemist with Buka Environmental, a Colorado-based firm, calls “a bull’s-eye of radioactive contamination.” The potential target? A geological formation called a subcrop. Here, approximately 100 feet below the surface of the earth and three miles southwest of the Homestake site, this subcrop directly connects the San Andres-Glorieta with an overlying aquifer long known to transport contamination from two uranium mills including Homestake. In 2022, the company commissioned an independent firm to study the geological feature. But according to a memo sent to state and federal regulators and written by Maest the following year, the findings were “light on interpretation” and evaded answering the most important question of all: Have those contaminants reached the San Andres-Glorieta?………………………

Gauging the extent of groundwater plumes is notoriously difficult. Topography and geology shape how groundwater moves, and sampling can underestimate the full range of a plume, leaving gaps in the data, whether that’s inadvertent or intentional. A 2022 ProPublica investigation found that regulators had been lax in their oversight of the Homestake mill, its toxic footprint and the uranium industry as a whole. Over time, a dizzying array of state and federal agencies have each overseen a different aspect of the site’s reclamation; in the past, those agencies haven’t even agreed on what that reclamation should look like.

Now, as uranium mining undergoes a national revival under initiatives that favor carbon-free nuclear energy, waste from the previous Cold War era of mining and milling endures. Homestake’s remediation — which has gone on for 49 years — exemplifies this legacy. During that time, company reports say, its collection wells have pumped out billions of gallons of contaminated water. Nearly one million pounds of uranium have been removed from the groundwater, too. Bingham says this represents 85 percent of the total uranium that was released into the environment. That’s in addition to the removal of tens of thousands of pounds of selenium and over a million pounds of molybdenum.

The company has attempted to keep pollutants that have seeped into groundwater from migrating farther away from the source. But this so-called hydraulic barrier has only addressed the symptoms of the contamination, not the cause: the tailings piles, which the company declined to relocate into a lined repository nearby. That means that some groundwater contamination continues to spread beyond Homestake’s site. The hydraulic barrier has another drawback — it has used “a massive amount of freshwater from the San Andres-Glorieta aquifer to operate,” says Laura Watchempino, a member of the Multicultural Alliance for a Safe Environment (MASE), a grassroots network of uranium-impacted communities working collectively to address the legacy of mining and milling on the health and environment of future generations. Watchempino is a former lawyer who also worked as a water quality specialist for the Pueblo of Acoma………………………………………………………………………………..

………………………………………………………………….Carver estimates that he is one of around 30 holdouts left in the five subdivisions; four of the families live in his own, Murray Acres. But few others have spent so much time fighting to hold the company accountable. “I’m 85 and it all started when I was 40,” he says.

In 1983, he was one of the plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed against the company, which argued, among other claims, that contamination of the well water had “completely destroyed the market value of the plaintiffs’ properties.” As part of the settlement, the company made small cash payments to residents and hooked them up to the municipal water system, which drew from the last clean source of water in the region, the San Andres-Glorieta. That year, the mill was designated a Superfund site, and in 1987 the company entered into a consent order with the EPA to analyze radon levels in residents’ homes, the product of uranium decaying from the tailings piles.

The mill closed in 1990, less than a decade after the uranium industry went bust. Records from the county assessor’s office show that Homestake quietly began buying a handful of homes in adjacent neighborhoods as early as 1996. (In 2001, Homestake Mining merged with the Canadian juggernaut, Barrick Gold, one of the world’s largest gold mining companies.)

“Every time someone dies or decides to move away, Homestake-Barrick Gold buys the property at a greatly reduced cost, which they can do because their ineffective groundwater remediation has devalued property many of us worked lifetimes to build,” Candace Head-Dylla, a former resident, said in a 2017 letter to the NRC.

In 2020, the company argued that it was no longer technically practical to clean up the groundwater to match its pre-mill days, Bingham wrote. So began the tangled regulatory process of applying for a less-stringent cleanup standard through the NR……………………………………

Searchlight asked the DOE for comment, but the agency declined. According to Samah Shaiq, a former DOE spokesperson, the agency is not yet responsible for the site.

The NRC denied Homestake’s application for the lower standard — the basis of the buyout — but the company remains steadfast in its desire to walk away. As part of those plans, Homestake has already scooped up approximately 455 of the estimated 523 properties that sit inside its proposed boundary, an expanse that’s nearly as large as the most contaminated area of the Rocky Flats Plant, another of the more than 100 sites under the DOE’s perpetual care, where thousands of plutonium bomb cores for the nation’s nuclear arsenal were fabricated between 1952 and 1989. 

Much of Milan, along with huge swaths of land west and north, including some five miles of Highway 605, sit within this massive pie-shaped chunk, a proposed boundary that is based on the company’s groundwater modeling data. Inside are public water and electric lines, groundwater wells, septic systems and other, smaller roads, the fate of which have yet to be determined. Milan Elementary School sits only a mile away from the boundary’s southernmost rim.

When Searchlight asked how fast those plumes are migrating, drawing on a Homestake-produced simulation that’s meant to predict how contaminants move in groundwater aquifers at the site, the EPA declined to comment, because the simulation was still in draft form.

Regulators, meanwhile, are plodding through the process of determining what final act of remediation they should require before allowing Homestake to hand off the site to the DOE. But prospects for that remedy depend on whether and when the company will receive a lower cleanup threshold. If a lower standard is settled on, that remedy, whatever it may be, will fall radically short of truly protecting groundwater, advocates believe. Adding to the uncertainty is a recent announcement that the Trump administration intends to cut personnel at the EPA by up to 65 percent.

The future of the site seems all but predetermined: a wasteland in the truest sense, and a national sacrifice zone. The buyout, a prologue to this future, has fractured residents’ lives in the present. Homestake subjected sellers to nondisclosure agreements — “standard business practice,” in Bingham’s words — but to some in the community, a mechanism for silencing dissent……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

“We’ve been poisoned to the gills”

The Grants Mining District stretches from the Pueblo of Laguna to Gallup, across almost 100 miles of western New Mexico’s red bluffs. Uranium here and throughout the world is ancient even by cosmic standards………………………………………………………

…………………………..in time, more than 150 mines would be developed across this district and the greater San Mateo Creek Basin, and, today, there are a total of 261 former uranium mines statewide, making New Mexico the fourth-largest producer of uranium globally, behind East Germany, the Athabasca Basin and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which supplied much of the uranium for the Manhattan Project. 

But with the uranium boom came a wave of devastation across the greater Southwest, including in Indigenous communities like the Pueblo of Laguna, as well as the Navajo Nation, where there are more than 500 abandoned uranium mines. Workers often lived near mines and mills and would bring yellowcake home on their clothes, exposing their families to harmful radioactive dust; water sources, meanwhile, have shown “elevated levels of radiation,” according to the EPA. 

In the Church Rock Chapter of the Navajo Nation, a tailings dam breached on an early July morning in 1979, sending contaminated water into the Rio Puerco. Today, it constitutes the largest release of nuclear materials in the U.S. worse even than the meltdown at Three Mile Island. 

Church Rock was among the eight mills that processed uranium ore in New Mexico. Others include Homestake and, in its immediate vicinity, Bluewater  and two mills at Ambrosia Lake. Workers flocked here from across the state and nation during the booming 1960s and 1970s, with Homestake alone employing 1,500 people at its peak.

After graduating from high school and intermittently through his college years, Carver worked stints at all four of those mills before opening his own business, Carver Oil. At Homestake, he worked at a site where yellowcake was processed and packaged into barrels to go to Oak Ridge, Tennessee, where it would be enriched for use in nuclear weapons. He also worked in the tailings piles.

Carver now receives benefits for spots on his lungs from the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA), a program he qualified for because of his time working in the mills. Whether his illness was compounded by living near the mill tailings and by breathing excess radon, or by drinking the water — at least until the company connected residents to a clean source — is unknown. Studies have shown that chronic exposure to uranium through drinking water can cause kidney damage and cardiovascular disease. When inhaled, uranium can lead to lung cancer and pulmonary fibrosis, a scarring of the lung tissue. Studies of uranium miners associate cumulative exposure to radon with higher rates of death by lung cancer.

Maggie Billiman, who’s from the Sawmill Chapter of the Navajo Nation, has advocated for RECA to cover people in New Mexico and parts of Arizona who lived downwind of atmospheric nuclear tests or who worked in mines after 1971, the current cutoff date. Last fall, she traveled with other Indigenous activists to Washington, D.C., as part of her efforts to expand RECA after struggling with various undiagnosed illnesses for years; several painful cysts that have yet to be biopsied were recently found on her liver and pancreas. Many doctor visits later, she’s still pursuing a clear diagnosis and treatment plan. 

But whether or how one gets sick can depend on biological sex, age when exposed and the pathway a certain type of radioactive particle takes to enter the body. Proving that one’s illness originated as a result of living near a mine or mill, as opposed to actually working in it, is nearly impossible, given that symptoms can take years to manifest — a lack of clear causation that is ultimately advantageous to polluters.

Groundwater contamination from uranium mining was detected as early as 1961. Even before that, the federal government was aware that New Mexico’s waterways were already showing signs of radioactive contamination from the burgeoning uranium extraction industry. It would take another 15 years for Homestake to begin a convoluted, if limited, remediation effort: A series of collection wells would pull contaminated water out and treat it, then pump that water, along with clean water sourced from the San Andres-Glorieta, back into the subsurface.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. It’s hard to visualize such an underground fortification — on maps, it looks like a cashew-shaped moat that wraps around the west and south sides of the large tailings pile — or the timescale needed for its maintenance. In 1982, Homestake said it would “require operation for a considerable amount of time.” In response, NMED declared that Homestake had to commit to operating the system until it “can be demonstrated that contaminants in the groundwater will not exceed New Mexico Water Quality Control Commission standards off Homestake’s property in the foreseeable future.” 

Advocates believe that means forever. If barrier maintenance is stopped, experts contend that highly contaminated groundwater will migrate southward and downward and eventually make its way to the subcrop, an entry point into the San Andres-Glorieta, municipal supply wells for Milan and Grants and eventually the Río San José. “This signals a bleak future for the stream system and for future generations,” Laura Watchempino warns. 

Bluewater’s plume is coming from the northwest; Homestake’s plumes from the northeast. Models show that all are converging, like a Venn diagram, in a location where groundwater flows toward the subcrop. On one side, the hydraulic barrier is warding off some of that pollution, but when it stops operation completely, those contaminants will very likely infiltrate the San Andres-Glorieta, according to NMED

In the past, it’s been difficult to discern what contaminants belong to what polluter, especially when they mingle, as is the case here. But in 2019, the USGS published the findings of a study that “fingerprinted” such mine and mill contaminants to show their point of origin……………………….

…………………………………….. “We’ve been poisoned to the gills,” says Christine Lowery, the Cibola county commissioner. “The question is: How do we recover and live with contamination?”

Alicia Inez Guzmán

alicia@searchlightnm.org

Raised in the northern New Mexican village of Truchas, Alicia Inez Guzmán has written about histories of place, identity and land use in New Mexico. She brings this knowledge to her current role at Searchlight, where she focuses on nuclear issues and the impacts of the nuclear industry. The former senior editor of New Mexico Magazine, Alicia holds a Ph.D. in Visual and Cultural Studies from the University of Rochester in New York. More by Alicia Inez Guzmán  https://searchlightnm.org/new-mexico-cold-war-uranium-mining-toxic-legacy-threat-homes-underground-aquifers/?utm_source=Searchlight+New+Mexico&utm_campaign=d2d0fd81fc-3%2F13%2F2025+%E2%80%93+Poisoning+the+well&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8e05fb0467-d2d0fd81fc-395610620&mc_cid=d2d0fd81fc&mc_eid=a70296a261

March 15, 2025 Posted by | environment, Uranium, USA | Leave a comment

Could Poland and Germany acquire nuclear bombs?

A proposal to place US atomic weapons in Poland could lead to Poland and Germany having nuclear weapons stationed.

Poland’s outgoing head of state has appealed to President Trump to
station American atomic weapons on Polish territory as a close-range
deterrent against Russia. The rift between the US and Europe has opened up
a broad debate about how to shore up Nato’s nuclear deterrence.

Germany’s probable next chancellor has expressed an interest in sharing
France or Britain’s arsenal. Poland, however, remains one of the most
staunchly Atlanticist members of the alliance and is seeking to use its
good standing with the Trump administration to keep the US on side.

 Times 14th March 2025,
https://www.thetimes.com/world/russia-ukraine-war/article/nuclear-bombs-poland-germany-weapons-3pwvwdwhz

March 15, 2025 Posted by | EUROPE, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Great British Nuclear explains how it will mitigate risks to SMR programme.

13 Mar, 2025 By Tom Pashby

Great British Nuclear (GBN) has explained how it plans to overcome the key risks to the small modular reactor (SMR) programme is it running and that it plans to establish of SMR development companies (DevCos) to take the projects forward.

  The updates were shared in its inaugural 2024 Annual
report and accounts for the 2023/2024 financial year.

It is assumed that GBN will select two vendors to deliver one SMR each, but this was recently
called into question by sources speaking to the Telegraph who said the
chancellor may cut spending at GBN as part of the Spending Review which is
due on 11 June 2025. GBN chief executive officer Gwen Parry-Jones said:
“The UK’s nuclear sector has had some well-documented challenges, ones
that GBN has been set up to navigate.” She did not spell out the
challenges.

“SMRs have not yet been deployed anywhere at scale and their
first-of-a-kind (FOAK) nature presents unique considerations and complex
challenges for us to overcome.” She reassured, however, that she is
“committed to ensure that GBN is an adaptable and resilient organisation
that is flexible and evolves as conditions change, but with our eyes always
firmly fixed on the future to deliver our long-term mission and value for
the UK”.

The report lays out the “principal risks” which GBN believes
the SMR programme faces, along with “key mitigation measures”. The
risks are centred around technology maturity, the ambitious programme
timeline, resourcing, funding and financing, stakeholder alignment,
‘contractual and procurement complexity’, site readiness and cyber
threat.

On technology maturity, it said: “Due to the first of a kind
(FOAK) nature of the technology, providers may not be able to meet
strategic objectives, including timely delivery, value for money and
obtaining regulatory approval. “This may delay approval timelines, affect
project milestones or cause an SMR project to fail.” It says that the SMR
competition that it is running will assess the technologies and mitigate
this risk. However, it also reveals that it will retain the option of, in
addition to the SMR competition winners, selecting a “reserve contractor,
to provide contingency against one provider failing to meet agreed
standards”.

GBN lists four other mitigations, including stating it could
or would provide “predetermined exit points” from projects “should a
project exceed cost estimates or timelines stretch beyond acceptable
parameters”. Regarding risk relating to “funding and financing”, it
says: “GBN’s available funding may be insufficient to resource and
deliver the programme to the planned timetable, e.g. should a change arise
from any change in government policy or in its budgetary priorities.

“A reduction in funding could also be triggered by market conditions or
external events such as an external nuclear event affecting public
sentiment towards nuclear safety.

 New Civil Engineer 13th March 2025, https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/great-british-nuclear-explains-how-it-will-mitigate-risks-to-smr-programme-13-03-2025/

March 15, 2025 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Eight Reasons Why Nuclear Power is Not the Answer for Hawaii

by Sherry Pollack, 14 Mar 25

Nuclear power isn’t “zero emission.” The nuclear industry has conducted a propaganda campaign rife with factually inaccurate information, including that nuclear power is “carbon-free electricity.” However, this could not be further from the truth. To be clear, there is no such thing as a zero- or close-to-zero emission nuclear reactor. Even existing reactors emit due to the continuous mining and refining of uranium needed for the reactor.

Transporting nuclear fuel is a hazard. As an isolated island chain, Hawaii faces unique and significant risks in transporting nuclear fuel over vast ocean distances. Any accidents during transport, be it from bringing fuel here or shipping waste back, could have catastrophic consequences for Hawaii’s pristine marine environment and tourism-dependent economy.

Nuclear waste. The waste generated by nuclear reactors remains radioactive for thousands of years and needs to be kept contained throughout that time. Currently, there are no long-term storage solutions for radioactive waste, and most is stored in temporary, above-ground facilities.

Hawaii’s geological instability, including frequent earthquakes, volcanic activity, and tsunami risks, makes it an unsafe location for storing nuclear waste. There are no viable long-term solutions for safely containing radioactive materials in such a volatile environment.

Accidents. Human error and natural disasters can lead to dangerous and immensely costly accidents. Think Red Hill but multiply that exponentially. Direct costs would include cleanup operations, property damage, and evacuation efforts, as well as significant indirect costs including long-term health consequences, economic disruption due to lost productivity and tourism, and severe psychological impacts on affected populations, often lasting for generations. According to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), the emergency planning zone around a nuclear power plant typically extends to a 10-mile radius for immediate radiation exposure concerns, while a broader “ingestion pathway” zone reaches out to a 50-mile radius where food and water contamination could occur in the event of an incident. This would make safely siting a power plant, particularly on Oahu, impossible.

Impacts on Local Communities and Ecosystems. In addition to the significant risk of cancer associated with fallout from nuclear disasters, studies also show increased risk for those who reside near a nuclear power plant, especially for childhood cancers such as leukemia. Workers in the nuclear industry are also exposed to higher-than-normal levels of radiation, and as a result are at a higher risk of death from cancer.

Nuclear energy is too expensive. To protect the climate, we must reduce the most carbon at the least cost and in the least time. Nuclear power does none of this. A report by the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis found that even small modular reactors (SMRs) are expensive, too slow to build, and too risky to play a significant role in transitioning from fossil fuels in the coming 10-15 years.

Integral Fast Reactors, Pebble Bed Modular Reactors, Thorium Fueled Reactors, Molten Salt Reactors, and Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) are not viable. Nuclear power advocates promote small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) and other “advanced” nuclear technologies as the only real solution for the climate crisis. However, proponents of SMRs and these other so called “new” types of reactors fail to address their unproven nature, unresolved safety risks, and economic inefficiency. Moreover, SMRs cannot be counted on to provide ‘firm’ power as has been touted. Just like today’s nuclear plants, SMRs will be vulnerable to extreme weather events or other disasters that could cause a loss of offsite power and force them to shut down. Additionally, the push for SMRs often serves the private interests of billionaires looking to power AI data centers rather than benefiting the people of Hawaii. Bottom line, SMRs are wishful thinking rooted in misinformation.

Nuclear power is an expensive distraction undermining our ability to achieve our clean energy goals. Investment in nuclear power, including SMRs, will take resources away from carbon-free and lower-cost renewable technologies that are available today and can push the transition from fossil fuels forward significantly in the coming decade. Hawaii is already on the path to achieving 100% renewable energy by 2045. Nuclear power is not renewable, requires costly infrastructure, and pursuing it would divert attention and resources from proven, sustainable solutions like solar, and wind.

Nuclear power has NO place in Hawaii’s clean energy future. Nuclear power is too dirty, too dangerous, and too expensive. It is environmentally harmful and produces waste that will be a burden on future generations. Accordingly, we urge the legislature to commit to uphold Hawaii’s constitution, a sustainable future, prioritize investing our resources in a clean renewable energy future, and honor the voices of its people by opposing the use of nuclear power in Hawaii.

March 15, 2025 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

Alarmed by Trump, South Korea mulls Japan-style nuclear option

Prominent voices seek capacity to reprocess spent nuclear fuel or enrich uranium and be able potentially to make bombs.

ASIA TIMES, by Daniel SneiderMarch 15, 2025

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… The most striking evidence of South Korean alarm over the treatment of allies is the widening discussion of the need to have an independent nuclear arms capability. Conservatives have long advocated that option, but the debate has now moved into progressive circles where prominent voices are calling for South Korea to develop nuclear latency – the capacity to reprocess spent nuclear fuel or enrich uranium to be able to potentially possess fissile material for making bombs.

The Japanese model?

For now, South Korea hopes it can follow the path set by Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba and offer Trump concessions ranging from trade, supply chain investment, and cooperation on shipbuilding to promoting South Korea’s role as an asset in a confrontation against China.

At the moment, South Korea does not have an effective government, pending the imminent decision of the Constitutional Court on the impeachment of South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol. But whatever follows, the South Korean president will have to deal with Trump.

Assemblyman Wi believes the best they can hope for is a smooth and non-confrontational meeting modeled on that of Ishiba, which yielded a joint statement that reaffirmed the US-Japan alliance along the lines of previous statements with the Joe Biden administration.

………………………………………………………………………………….. I think President Trump thinks North Korea is unfinished business left over from the first Trump administration. We have to prepare for the worst.”

Nuclear latency

“The worst” includes the withdrawal of United States Forces Korea (USFK) from South Korea and a withholding of the US nuclear umbrella.

Regardless of how important the U.S.-ROK alliance is now, “there may come a time when it is difficult to rely on the US for our security,” former Minister of Foreign Affairs Yoon Young-kwan wrote in an op-ed published this month. “In preparation for that time, we should strengthen our national defense capabilities, including potential nuclear capabilities, and prepare to handle the deterrence of North Korea with our own strength.”

Progressives are more reticent to endorse nuclear weapons outright, but some have thrown their weight behind nuclear latency – a conscious imitation of the model pursued by Japan to have a full fuel cycle capability. South Korea could, theoretically, reprocess the spent fuel from its power reactors to extract bomb-grade plutonium or, alternatively, have the capacity to enrich uranium, potentially up to bomb-grade levels.

South Korea has long sought to revise the so-called 123 agreement for nuclear cooperation with the United States, which has restricted its ability to have a full fuel cycle. The agreement was only recently reaffirmed, in January at the close of the Biden administration.

In an important column published on March 4 in the progressive newspaper Kyunghyang Shinmun, former Minister of Unification Lee Jong-seok, another close advisor to presidential aspirant Lee Jae-myung, argued that nuclear latency can be achieved within the framework of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and with the consent of the United States.

“China, Russia and North Korea, our neighboring countries, are nuclear weapon states, and Japan has already demonstrated its potential,” Lee wrote. “In this situation, it is rather unnatural that South Korea, a nuclear power, cannot reprocess or enrich uranium due to the restrictions of the Korea-US Nuclear Energy Agreement.”

Others in Seoul advocate defecting from the 123 agreement if the United States reduces USFK forces on the peninsula, says Kim Joon-hyung, a Rebuilding Korea Party lawmaker and former senior diplomat.

Kim is a critic of the U.S. alliance but is personally opposed to nuclear latency. “I don’t agree with nuclear proliferation,” he said. “Even if we have nuclear weapons, I don’t think we have security. Small conflicts may become more common. The Korean Peninsula is too small – high tech conventional weapons are enough. Japan will go nuclear and relations with China and Russia will worsen.”

Others are concerned about the isolation that South Korea could experience if it goes down this road. Cho Hyun, a former senior diplomat and progressive foreign policy advisor, helped negotiate the 123 agreement during the Bill Clinton administration. “The right wing thinks we should have our own nuclear development,” Cho told me in Seoul. “We don’t think it is realistic. Some progressives want to request the US for full fuel cycle like Japan. I am against this.”

As the nuclear latency argument rapidly gains support among progressive circles, revising the 123 agreement may become a bargaining chip for South Korea in negotiations with the Trump administration.

At least some inside the administration, though likely not Trump-appointed officials, have become aware of this, prompting media reports that the U.S. Department of Energy is considering labeling South Korea a “sensitive country,” a designation for countries who might be considering going nuclear.

For South Korea, this may only be the start of many shocks to come.

Daniel C. Sneider is a non-resident distinguished fellow at the Korea Economic Institute of America and a lecturer in East Asian studies at Stanford University.  https://asiatimes.com/2025/03/alarmed-by-trump-south-korea-mulls-japan-style-nuclear-latency/#

March 15, 2025 Posted by | politics, South Korea | Leave a comment

Chinese nuclear weapons, 2025

Bulletin, By Hans M. KristensenMatt KordaEliana JohnsMackenzie Knight | March 12, 2025

The modernization of China’s nuclear arsenal has both accelerated and expanded in recent years. In this issue of the Nuclear Notebook, we estimate that China now possesses approximately 600 nuclear warheads, with more in production to arm future delivery systems. China is believed to have the fastest-growing nuclear arsenal among the nine nuclear-armed states; it is the only Party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons that is significantly increasing its nuclear arsenal. The Nuclear Notebook is researched and written by the staff of the Federation of American Scientists’ Nuclear Information Project: director Hans M. Kristensen, associate director Matt Korda, and senior research associates Eliana Johns and Mackenzie Knight.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… more https://thebulletin.org/premium/2025-03/chinese-nuclear-weapons-2025/

March 15, 2025 Posted by | China, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Iran, Russia, China discuss Tehran’s nuclear programme at Beijing meeting

Meeting between top diplomats from three countries signals Tehran may be ready for renewed negotiations on its nuclear programme.

14 Mar 2025,  https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/3/14/iran-russia-china-discuss-tehrans-nuclear-programme-at-beijing-meeting

Diplomats from Iran, Russia and China are meeting in Beijing for talks on Tehran’s nuclear programme that could lead to negotiations following years of delay.

Beijing said the three countries hope to find a “diplomatic” solution to Iran’s nuclear issue, Chinese state media reported on Friday.

“In the current situation, we believe that all parties should maintain calm and restraint to avoid escalating the Iran nuclear situation, or even walking towards confrontation and conflict,” China’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning told reporters before the meeting.

The meeting was attended by Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov and Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi, who “exchanged views on the Iran nuclear issue and other issues of common concern,” according to Chinese media.

Donald Trump, a year into his first term as United States president in 2018, withdrew from a landmark pact Iran reached in 2015 with the US, Russia, China, Britain, France, Germany and the European Union, in which Tehran agreed to curb its nuclear programme in exchange for the lifting of international sanctions.

Tehran continued to abide by the terms of the deal – which was considered a milestone for the administration of then-US President Barack Obama – but began slowly rolling back its commitments after Trump ended the deal.

The meeting in Beijing between the three diplomats follows a series of overtures from Trump since his return to the White House in January to resume nuclear talks with Tehran.

The US president this week sent a letter to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei calling for new talks but also warning that the US was within its rights to take military action against the country’s nuclear programme.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian responded that he would not negotiate with the US while being “threatened”, and Iran would not bow to US “orders” to talk.

Iran was further enraged after six of the United Nations Security Council’s 15 members – the US, France, Greece, Panama, South Korea and the United Kingdom – held a closed-door meeting this week to discuss its nuclear programme. Tehran said the meeting was a “misuse” of the UN Security Council.

March 15, 2025 Posted by | politics international | Leave a comment