nuclear-news

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

Be wary of Google Search, especially on nuclear matters.

24 Apr 25 https://theaimn.net/be-wary-of-google-search-especially-on-nuclear-matters/

I’ve been meaning for a long time, to write about Google’s very pro-nuclear stance.

Then today, I found something that was both amusing and a wake-up call.

I have, for the past 16 years, run an anti-nuclear website – nuclear-news.net. Today, I typed into Google Search:

“who owns nuclear-news.net?”

And here is Google’s answer:

The online news service at nuclear-news.net, also known as World Nuclear News (WNN), is supported by the World Nuclear Association. WNN is based within the Association’s London Secretariat. The Association is an international industry organization with a global mandate to communicate about nuclear energy. 

Well fancy that! I had no idea that WNN promoted the nuclear-free cause. Well of course, it doesn’t. Interestingly one does not “own” a website name, -one licenses it from a domain names company. Even if you make up the name yourself, as I did. And I still have the license. So – poo to the WNN.

And to Google. What a sad decline in morality! They started out with that noble motto: “Don’t Be Evil”

Back in 2008, if you typed “nuclear news” into Google Search – my website would come up at or very near the top. Google’s system then prioritised its list according to two considerations:

  1. That the website title accurately indicated its content.
  2. The number of viewings the website receives.

That system’s gone long ago, and Google has at least had the grace to abandon its former motto. Its now motto is “Do the right thing”.

Now isn’t that an interesting motto? Sounds similar to “Don’t Be Evil” – and yet, and yet ……. it’s not really the same. You see “the right thing” depends on who decides between right and wrong.

For a start, in today’s zeitgeist – the culture of economic growth – the right thing is what makes the most money. Therefore, Google correctly prioritises the websites that pay Google the most in sponsorship.

But that priority leads on to other considerations. For a company like Google, well, it’s essential to keep the most powerful economic interests onside. So, the weapons companies, Western militarism, the nuclear industry, and the other polluting industries get priority. And the Gazans and other impoverished communities don’t matter much.

Anyway, as I don’t pay Google any sponsorship money, my website comes up at something like page 154 on Google search , when looking for “nuclear news”.

I’m not writing this to get you to go to my website. And quite a healthy number of viewers do go there each day.

The thing is – be aware of Google’s priorities. They are not interested in the facts. We all knows that economic progress is more important than the truth, don’t we?

And at the same time, you might fairly accuse me of hypocrisy. I use Google Search all the time. It is tremendously useful . One just needs to be aware of the sources of information, and of Google keeping its nose clean by not too much offending the powerful and wealthy.

April 24, 2025 Posted by | Christina's notes, media | Leave a comment

As more countries enter space, the boundary between civilian and military enterprise is blurring. Dangerously.

By Zohaib Altaf | April 9, 2025, https://thebulletin.org/2025/04/as-more-countries-enter-space-the-boundary-between-civilian-and-military-enterprise-is-blurring-dangerously/#post-heading

Outer space is no longer just for global superpowers and large multinational corporations. Developing countries, start-ups, universities, and even high schools can now gain access to space. The democratization of space has led to significant technological advancements, economic growth, and international collaboration.

In 2024, a record 2,849 objects were launched into space. The commercial satellite industry saw global revenue rise to $285 billion in 2023, driven largely by the growth of SpaceX’s Starlink constellation. Private space companies such as SpaceX have played crucial roles in making space more accessible globally.

Developing countries have also made strides. Since 2018, nations like Bangladesh, Ghana, Nepal, Rwanda, and Sri Lanka have launched their first satellites. The African space scene has grown, with 43 satellites launched since 2016, totaling 63 in 2025. Ethiopia, despite being one of the world’s poorest countries, has made significant progress in space activities. Similarly, Rwanda, with a substantial portion of its population living in poverty, has embarked on its space journey. These advances show that barriers to space entry are declining.

While the democratization of space is a positive development, it has introduced complex challenges, particularly an ethical quandary that I call the “double dual-use dilemma.” The double dual-use dilemma refers to how private space companies themselves—not just their technologies—can become militarized and integrated into national security while operating commercially

Unlike the traditional military-industrial complex, space companies fluidly shift between civilian and military roles. Their expertise in launch systems, satellites, and surveillance infrastructure allows them to serve both markets, often without clear regulatory oversight. Companies like Walchandnagar Industries in India, SpaceX in the United States, and the private Chinese firms that operate under a national strategy of the Chinese Communist Party called Military-Civil Fusion exemplify this trend, maintaining commercial identities while actively supporting defense programs. This blurring of roles, including the possibility that private space companies may develop their own weapons, raises concerns over unchecked militarization and calls for stronger oversight to preserve space as a neutral domain.

Dual use of space companies. Countries like the United States and China have already shown a willingness to use commercial space entities for military purposes. China encourages private entities to participate in space activities as part of its Military-Civilian Integration Strategy. Similarly, the 2021 United States Space Priorities Framework outlines how new commercial space capabilities and services can be leveraged to meet national security needs. In a 2021 interview, the then-head of the US Space Force discussed the importance of using the space industry for national security.

Researchers and security analysts are increasingly concerned that the dual use of private space companies is not limited to their space technologies, such as the satellites they launch. In some cases, a company may appear to be a civilian space entity while actually maintaining close links with defense sectors.

For instance, take the example of India, which has seen phenomenal growth in its space sector in recent years. The leading companies of the Indian Space Association have worked closely with the Indian Ministry of Defence on various contracts.

Furthermore, the association’s leadership maintains a close connection with the Indian army and defense organizations. For example, the first chairman, Jayant Patil, was also the senior vice president for defense business at Larsen and Toubro, an Indian company involved in the space industry. The company has collaborated with India’s Defence Research and Development Organisation since the mid-1980s.

The usefulness of space companies goes beyond their existing technologies. Military organizations can use expertise gained through civilian cooperation programs to develop other critical technologies. India’s intercontinental ballistic missile program, based on the SLV-3 vehicle, was initially developed under civilian space cooperation with NASA. India’s Agni-V ICBM, which is capable of carrying multiple warheads and has a range exceeding 5,000 kilometers, has also benefited from technological cooperation with NASA.

Indian private space companies such as Walchandnagar Industries are also defense contractors producing aerospace, defense, missile, and nuclear power technologies. These companies collaborate with India’s Defence Ministry and the Defence Research and Development Organisation to produce strategic articles, tactical missiles, and critical platform-based equipment. The expertise gained from private space launches and technological developments can be leveraged to improve missile technology.

There is a serious risk that civilian companies in India and elsewhere, having gained expertise through cooperation with the military, might start developing their own weapons. The table below shows how specific types of space expertise can be used to develop missiles, drones, precision missiles, hypersonic missiles, and other loitering munitions.

Dual use of space technology. India’s rapidly growing space sector and expanding military-commercial partnerships make it a key case study of the double dual-use dilemma. Unlike the United States and China, which have structured policies—the US Space Force and National Space Policy formally integrate private firms into defense, while China’s Military-Civil Fusion strategy mandates commercial space support for China’s army—India’s private space sector is expanding, but its dual-use regulatory framework is still developing. India’s Space Policy 2023, while not explicitly mentioning the military, hints at defense applications by emphasizing space capabilities for “national security.”

This lack of clear regulatory boundaries allows technologies initially developed for civilian use to be repurposed for defense applications, as seen in the case of Synthetic Aperture Radar. Originally acquired through civilian cooperation with NASA, this radar imaging technique is now being adapted for military reconnaissance and targeting. Although not a weapon, the technique’s dual-use nature enables high-resolution surveillance, missile guidance, and intelligence operations.

The commercialization of space by private companies poses significant security challenges. For instance, ostensibly civilian satellites can be repurposed for military uses such as surveillance and espionage. Commercial satellites with high-resolution imaging capabilities, like those from companies such as Planet Labs, can be used for intelligence gathering, providing detailed information on adversaries’ activities and installations. The dual-use dilemma affects governments as well as private companies, but poses greater risks with private entities due to weaker oversight and profit-driven priorities. Governments operate under strict security frameworks and treaties like the Outer Space Treaty, ensuring accountability in the use of dual-use technologies. In contrast, private companies may prioritize commercial interests, potentially selling technologies to less accountable actors, increasing proliferation risks. While satellite launches are regulated, post-launch activities—like selling high-resolution imagery or repurposing technology—are harder to monitor.

Furthermore, companies like the American company Capella Space have developed synthetic aperture radar satellites for civilian purposes such as disaster management and environmental monitoring. However, the high-resolution images provided by these satellites can also be used for military applications, including counterforce strikes and espionage. These satellites can monitor adversaries and plan strategic military operations.

Moreover, American companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin, which focus on developing rockets and spacecraft for civilian space missions, also have the potential to contribute to military logistics and defense operations. For instance, SpaceX’s Starlink constellation, designed for global internet coverage, could be used in military scenarios to support drone operations by enabling real-time communication and coordination, as seen during the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

Repurposing commercial technologies for military use introduces potential risks. Civilian systems could become high-value targets, vulnerable to cyberattacks and physical strikes, potentially disrupting operations and escalating conflicts into  space. The reliance on privately owned infrastructure also poses challenges, as it reduces government oversight and increases the risk of misuse or proliferation. For example, reusable rockets developed for commercial launches could be adapted for missile programs, enabling military advancements to be concealed within civilian initiatives. These dual-use capabilities have the potential to blur the boundaries between civilian and military applications, increasing the risks of conflict escalation and complicating efforts to maintain global stability in a democratized space domain.

Need for robust regulatory framework. The challenges posed by the double dual-use dilemma necessitate robust regulatory frameworks and international cooperation to ensure that the commercialization of space does not compromise global security. For example, commercial satellite launch services could be used to deploy space-based weapons or reconnaissance systems under the guise of civilian activities, making it harder to enforce arms control agreements. Effective space governance must address the potential for commercial space entities to be co-opted for military purposes. One practical step is the establishment of international agreements that mandate transparency in satellite launches and operations.

The Outer Space Treaty, which forms the basis of international space law, should be expanded to include specific provisions for the dual use of space technologies. For example, countries could be required to declare the intended uses of their satellites, with periodic inspections to ensure compliance. International space governance must ensure that expertise gained through civil cooperation does not translate into new weapons programs.

Furthermore, partnerships between governments and private corporations should be regulated to prevent the misuse of commercial space capabilities. The European Union’s Space Surveillance and Tracking network is an example of regional cooperation to monitor space activities and ensure that space assets are used for their declared purposes. This type of cooperation should be extended globally to include major space-faring nations and emerging space players.

In the United States, the Space Force has already begun leveraging commercial space capabilities for national security purposes. For instance, the National Reconnaissance Office has contracted with commercial satellite companies to provide imagery for intelligence purposes. Such partnerships highlight the need for clear guidelines to differentiate civilian and military applications and to ensure that commercial space activities do not escalate geopolitical tensions.

The international community must develop comprehensive strategies to manage the complexities introduced by the double dual-use dilemma. It is no longer a distant challenge—it is actively reshaping the balance of power in space. As private space firms blur the lines between commercial innovation and military assets, the risk of an unregulated arms race beyond Earth’s atmosphere grows.

Without clear governance, space could follow the path of cyberspace—a once-neutral domain now deeply entrenched in geopolitical rivalry. The question is no longer if commercial space activities will fuel strategic competition, but how soon nations will act to prevent the militarization of the final frontier.

April 24, 2025 Posted by | space travel | Leave a comment

Russia’s Rosatom says will proceed with Myanmar nuclear plant despite quake.

Myanmar lies on the boundary between two tectonic plates and is one of the world’s most seismically active countries.

Reuters, By Panu Wongcha-um, April 22, 2025

Summary

Myanmar is one of the world’s most seismically active countries

Myanmar and Russia agreed in early March to build small-scale nuclear facility

Construction timeline and location have not been announced

Thousands were killed in March 28 earthquake

BANGKOK, April 22 (Reuters) – A plan to build a nuclear power plant will continue in Myanmar, a war-torn Southeast Asian country partly devastated by a massive earthquake in March, the Russian state-owned firm leading the project told Reuters.

Myanmar’s junta chief Min Aung Hlaing and Russian President Vladimir Putin last month signed an agreement for a small-scale nuclear facility, three weeks before the 7.7 magnitude quake flattened communities and left more than 3,700 people dead – the country’s deadliest natural disaster in decades.

The agreement involves cooperation to build a Small Modular Reactor (SMR) in Myanmar with an initial 110 MW capacity, consisting of two 55 MW reactors manufactured by Russia’s state nuclear corporation Rosatom.

“The recent earthquake has not affected Rosatom’s plans in Myanmar,” the company’s press office said in an email.

“Rosatom adheres to the highest international safety and reliability standards, including strict seismic resistance requirements.”

The company’s intention to go ahead with the nuclear plan despite the quake, which crippled critical infrastructure, has not been previously reported.

Rosatom declined to provide any construction timeline or details of the location of the proposed nuclear facility that will be powered by RITM-200N reactors, which were made by the company for use initially on icebreaker ships.

A Myanmar junta spokesman did not respond to calls from Reuters seeking comment.

The push for nuclear power in Myanmar comes amid an expanding civil war triggered by a 2021 military coup that removed the elected government of Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi.

Facing a collection of established ethnic armies and new armed groups set up in the wake of the coup, the ruling junta has lost ground across large parts of the country and increasing leaned on its few foreign allies, including Russia.

The conflict, which stretches from the border with China to the coast along the Bay of Bengal, has displaced more than 3.5 million people and left Myanmar’s mainly agrarian economy is tatters.

Myanmar is currently evaluating options for financing the Russia-backed nuclear power project. “This may involve both own and borrowed funds,” Rosatom said. In places such as Bangladesh and Egypt, Russia has funded conventional nuclear power projects through low interest loans.

Authorities in neighbouring Thailand, which is closely monitoring Myanmar’s nuclear developments, assess that a plant could be built in Naypyitaw, a fortified purpose-built capital that was heavily damaged by the earthquake, according to a security source briefed on the matter.

Two other potential sites include a location in the central Bago region and the Dawei special economic zone in southern Myanmar, where the junta and Russia have announced plans to build a port and an oil refinery, according to the Thai assessment.

Myanmar lies on the boundary between two tectonic plates and is one of the world’s most seismically active countries.

MONEY AND MANPOWER

Southeast Asia’s first nuclear facility – the 621 MW Bataan Nuclear Power Plant in the Philippines – was finished in 1984 with a price tag of $2.3 billion but mothballed in the wake of the Chornobyl disaster, opens new tab in the then Soviet Union two years later.

The Philippines and other regional countries have since mounted repeated efforts to explore nuclear energy but made limited progress.

Vietnam is, however, renewing a bet on nuclear power after it suspended its programme in 2016.

Russia and Myanmar have been collaborating in the sector for years, with Burmese students studying nuclear energy and related subjects in Russian universities under government quotas since 2019, according to Rosatom…………………

With the Myanmar junta prioritising exports of natural gas, which could be used to fuel cheaper domestic power generation, to earn foreign exchange, the nuclear plan makes no economic sense for a cash-strapped administration, said Richard Horsey, senior Myanmar adviser at International Crisis Group.

“Nuclear power is very expensive, and Myanmar simply can’t afford it,” he said.

Reporting by Panu Wongcha-um; Editing by Devjyot Ghoshal and Kate Mayberry, https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/russias-rosatom-says-will-proceed-with-myanmar-nuclear-plant-despite-quake-2025-04-22/

April 24, 2025 Posted by | ASIA, safety | Leave a comment

Drawing inspiration from Vaclav Havel..

https://www.artistespourlapaix.org/3-ans-de-souffrances-ukrainiennes/ 
Par Pierre Jasmin, Artiste pour la Paix, 21 février 2025


1 Vaclav Havel and the Art of Compromise
Unfortunately, I never knew Vaclav Havel personally, even though I gave masterclasses (except for one in Piešťany, Slovakia), concertos, and recitals in the Czech Republic for fourteen summers between 1991 and 2005. I therefore had the privilege of experiencing the miracle of the Velvet Revolution in a country as Eastern European as Ukraine. The ruling communist party, allied with the Soviet army that had bloodily halted Dubcek's revolution, sought out a humanist playwright from prison in 1989 and installed him in the presidential seat. The new Havel government accepted the separation of Czecho-Slovakia less than three years later, without a drop of bloodshed.

Five years after the first Minsk Treaty (UN), mistreated by our Minister Baird, an accomplice of the fascist Poroshenko, a similar hope arose in Ukraine with the election of the comedian Zelensky in May 2019. This unprecedented electoral moment unfolded in the first round with the defeat of the comfortable Russian gas option (to prevent the elderly from dying in their poorly insulated homes) represented by the succession of the corrupt President Yanukovych, deposed by the Maidan revolution in 2014, and then, in the second round, of the outgoing head of state, Poroshenko.
 
But unlike Havel, Zelensky, with 73.2% of the vote, surrounded himself with nationalist Bandera supporters who threatened his life to force him to bomb Donbass and join his country to the militaristic NATO, thus provoking the Russian invasion of his country. In a context of devastating war, he avoided running for re-election.

Our government, Radio-Canada, and professors like Dominique Arel, the only ones authorized to speak (Artists for Peace are censored), are imposing the obstinacy of unconditional Canadian support for this Zelensky, corrupted by Biden's weapons and money, against the imposition of a peace desired by the sacrificed young people in the trenches of Donbass, those who survived, and by the improbable Putin-Trump duo. Other arguments can be read in ().

This point 1 was an “opinion” sent to Le Devoir on Wednesday, which did not publish it. On February 20, Arel was among six university colleagues who cowardly avoided contradicting his pro-Zelensky propaganda, except for Frédérik Gagnon of UQAM: see point 7.

Lviv and its troubled history
Putin is blamed for having wanted to invade the whole of Ukraine as early as the end of February 2022 with his advance near Kyiv, which aimed to bomb the arms factories and munitions located in the capital and in Lviv. Why this former capital of Galicia, which also bore the Austrian name of Lwow, the German name of Lemberg, and the Polish name of Lvov? The answer lies in the murky history revealed in two books I read by Philippe Sands, “Return to Lemberg” and “The Line.” With a complacent ambiguity that delighted his far-right readers at Albin Michel, the Franco-British lawyer recounts the romanticized saga of Charlotte, the Nazi wife of Otto von Wächter. A member of the Nazi Party since 1923, the latter became, after the outbreak of the Second World War, governor of Krakow in Poland, then governor of the district of Galicia, two territories that were noted for the mass extermination of Jews whom he saw as allies of the Bolshevik Soviet Union. “Handsome Otto” praised Lemberg, a place far more welcoming to his family than Berlin and Krakow, as it fully shared Nazi ideology. He evaded justice until 1949, notably due to complicity in the Vatican.

Before his two questionable books, Sands had worked on the horrors of the Rwandan genocide, the Bosnian-Serb massacres, Guantanamo, and the invasion of Iraq by Blair and Bush, but not Jean Chrétien, following our mass demonstrations in Montreal motivated by the UN’s refusal to endorse the war, given the conclusions of the Swede Hans Blix exonerating Saddam Hussein of possessing weapons of mass destruction. We should also read Sands’s 2006 book, prophetic of the recent marginalization of the UN by Biden, Trump, Macron, etc., Lawless World, subtitled Torture Made in the USA (Music And Entertainment Books, 2009), in which he denounced the use of music at Abu Ghraib by CIA agents and the American army, sentenced last November to pay millions of dollars to compensate three victims (who were better defended than the thousands of others).

February 21: A Ukrainian historian exposes the “real” Zelensky

Hosted by Clark University (Atlanta), historian Marta Havryshko, a graduate and professor at the University of Lviv (!), received death threats for criticizing the Ukrainian far right, to which she retorted:

“Every day, we lose parts of our territory. Every day, we lose people. Every day, our children suffer from missile and drone attacks. And we don’t know the consequences.”

She commented for Aaron Maté on the destruction of her homeland by a proxy war waged between Russia and the United States, with Zelensky’s complicity:

“Those who want to continue this disaster, this hell,” she said, addressing the foreign warriors and those who criticized her for seeking peace, “ARE THEY READY TO SACRIFICE THEIR LIVES, and those of their brothers, sons, and other beloved family members, FOR THE ABSURD IDEA OF ACHIEVING VICTORY? “Russia is bigger, resourceful, with powerful friends. I cannot conceive that anyone who is not mentally disturbed can truly believe that Ukraine can change the situation on the front and reconquer the lost territories.”

Marta observed family members forced to fight and die in this proxy war. She showed Aaron Maté newsreels showing the army Ukrainian forces hunting and kidnapping men to force them to become conscripts to replace soldiers who are dying (or being sent to hospitals).

“Who will recapture these territories? Several of my friends, several of my relatives, are conscripted now. They suffer from suicidal thoughts, they suffer from despair or intense frustration. No one can replace them because of the problems with forced mobilization, and because we simply lack manpower.“

And she explains that everyone (except the neo-Nazis) blames Zelensky:
“His popularity has plummeted (even though television channels are censored). Ukraine under Zelensky is no longer a democracy.“
American Caitlin Johnstone adds that anyone who doesn’t support a ceasefire is a monster (of ignorance, I might add, to soften her attack).

4 abi Yar
Western censorship of Russian music, even that of a genius like Dmitri Shostakovich, is applied, for example, to the excellent Italian film The Rape. Fortunately, in 2019, the Montreal Symphony Orchestra and Nagano programmed his thirteenth symphony with the choir featuring the composer David Sela. Through a long poem by the Ukrainian Yevtuchenko (whose ex-wife, the poet Bella Achmadulina, I met in Moscow in 1978 and 1987), the Babi Yar symphony, his masterpiece, denounces the worst pogrom of all time, perpetrated by Ukrainian einsatzgruppen: 33,771 Jews murdered on the night of September 29-30, 1941. Why don’t pro-Netanyahu activists say a word about this humanist work? Because NATO supports Israel?

5 – Chrystia Freeland vs. Glenn Michalchuk
We won’t dwell on the nefarious role played since 2015 by the granddaughter of a Ukrainian Nazi, up until the horrific House of Commons ceremony that gave a standing ovation to Zelensky and the old Nazi soldier Hunka, much to the dismay of our dear friend Glenn Michalchuk, National President of the Association of United Ukrainian Canadians and a peace activist in Winnipeg, who spoke with the Artists for Peace on November 24 at the Pan-Canadian Justice and Peace Network Counter-Summit ().

6 – Colleague David Mandel
and Sachs, Guterres, Swanson, Rabkin, Philpot, Saul, Seymour, Maté, Lorincz, Stone, etc.
A full professor of political science at UQAM, David, who is Jewish, had a devastating experience following Ukraine’s breach of the UN treaty signed in Minsk in 2014: he spent his summers with trade unionists in the Ukrainian Donbass who were being bombed by the Azov Battalion; here’s a photo that triggers warnings from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police on my computer every time I share it, even though my intention is not to claim that the Nazification of Ukraine was a major phenomenon in the population.

(on the original of this photo, the man on the left is making a NAZI salute)

But here as elsewhere, for example in Germany on this election day where the AfD is increasing its support through a fierce campaign against immigrants and the illusion that more money for the army will solve the problems, the vociferous extreme right is taking an exaggerated position.

Supported by Professor Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University, also an advisor to Antonio Guterres, David Swanson of World Beyond War writes: “NATO is not what its defenders imagine it to be. NATO is neither legal nor legalistic. It is a violation of the UN Charter for a group of nations to swear to join each other’s wars, and it does not legalize, authorize, legitimize, or sanctify a war.” Amen to the British-American wars in Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan, at the cost of hundreds of thousands of deaths. A warning to journalists who still lie about the obvious.

7 – UQAM and the Raoul Dandurand Chair – Forum on February 20 at 12:30
Seven guests, including six university professors, spoke, repeating media nonsense. Third, then first in line to ask questions, the organizers (who know me) interrupted the presentation four minutes before the scheduled start time of 2:00 p.m. PAIX’s opinion is not welcome among intellectuals, who find it too simplistic…and, above all, anti-government.

The APLP really don’t like dictators Putin and Trump, but if they stop the war, on this point alone, we will congratulate them. The same goes for Elon Musk, if he succeeds in cutting the American military budget in half as he says he intends to do. Are the left-wing ideologues disowning us? We reassure them that as soon as these two objectives are achieved (?), we will collaborate in the fight for equality, fraternity and liberty…

8. Good news in Berlin with the award of a special prize on February 18th to the following film, which we loved for its objectivity on Hamas and the fate of civilians in the Gaza Strip following the Israeli bombings that decimated the family of this great humanist

April 24, 2025 Posted by | politics, Ukraine | Leave a comment

ANNE LINDSEY DENOUNCES MARK CARNEY’S NUCLEAR TEMPTATIONS.

Article published on April 16 in the Winnipeg Free Press. https://www.artistespourlapaix.org/anne-lindsey-denonce-tentations-nucleaires-carney/

IN this “flag-waving” moment, where the U.S. government is threatening our sovereignty  and economic well-being, it now appears the federal election is the Liberals’ to lose. 

Amid the hype and adulation for Liberal Leader Mark Carney, however, the Liberals are  promoting ideas that merit a closer look. Not least their plan to “make Canada the world’s  leading energy superpower” announced in Calgary on April 9. 

On the surface, it looks like the perfect recipe for self-reliance in energy and building a  stronger Canada. It’s an industrial development strategy meant to exploit our natural  mineral resources, build needed infrastructure and create jobs. 

But what kind of energy and infrastructure? The plan includes many welcome and  essential commitments to reducing emissions: investment in zero-emission vehicles,  developing battery and smart grid technologies, reducing methane, and references to our  “clean energy advantage.” 

But there is also this nagging notion of “dominating the market in conventional energy”  and building out pipelines… neither of which square with the looming climate emergency,  regardless of (and exacerbated by) the external pressures from the south. 

The “clean energy advantage” is not well defined. Conventional wisdom suggests it  includes hydropower, renewables like solar, wind, and geothermal energy, along with  energy efficiency. However, although Carney mentioned “more nuclear, both large scale  and small modular” in his Calgary announcement, the word “nuclear” is absent from the  written plan. 

Why? Nuclear is a controversial energy technology, for good reason. It seems inevitable  that nuclear power will play a starring role in Canada’s energy future but not one the  Liberals want to highlight.

  Nuclear’s proponents might be winning the semantic battle branding it as “clean,” despite  its routine operations releasing a cocktail of radioactive substances, its waste products  containing among the most dangerous elements on the planet, and its inextricable link to  the manufacture and proliferation of nuclear weapons. 

Federal Liberals (and for that matter, Conservatives) have always been pro-nuclear, even  though no nuclear plants have been built in Canada for decades. The annual federal  expenditure on Crown corporation Atomic Energy of Canada Limited is more than $1  billion, due in no small part to the massive liabilities of managing nuclear waste. Tax  credits for nuclear companies already abound. 

Just this year, in the month of March alone, the current Liberal government committed  another nearly half a billion dollars to a variety of nuclear projects across the country. The  plan may not talk, but money does. 

Mark Carney himself, a former UN special envoy on climate change and finance, has said  there is “no path to net zero without nuclear.” In 2022, he joined Brookfield Asset  Management, a firm holding both renewable energy and nuclear portfolios that, together  with uranium giant Cameco, purchased bankrupt reactor company Westinghouse, under  his watch. No question that Carney has a strong pro-nuclear bent. 

More nuclear energy is an inappropriate climate action response, for at least two reasons.  First, reactors take decades to be licensed, constructed and connected to the grid. And  that’s a luxury we can’t afford. 

Business as usual while waiting for nuclear power to get online means we surpass the  tipping points of global warming, a scenario we must avoid. 

Second, nuclear is the costliest way to generate electricity. Studies by organizations from  the Ontario Clean Air Alliance to Lazard show that nuclear is not competitive with  renewable alternatives which continue to drop in price. As governments fund nuclear,  there is a massive lost opportunity cost for developing cheaper and readily available  renewable energy. 

Nuclear is too slow and too expensive to address climate change. The IPCC shows nuclear  to be inefficient in reducing emissions. This is not an ideological perspective. It is fact. 

Besides, “new generation” reactors being touted in Canada (such as GE Hitachi’s BWRX300) carry a massive political liability, given current world events: most are American  designs and all require enriched uranium fuel fabricated outside Canada. 

Hardly a prescription for self-sufficiency. It’s a bit mysterious why “nuclear” does not  appear in Liberal election plans while getting so much government (Liberal and  Conservative) attention and money — unless we recognize the essential role of civilian  nuclear infrastructure in maintaining weapons of mass destruction. Canada was instrumental in building the first atomic bombs and remains central to today’s U.S.  defence/weapons supply chains for critical minerals, including uranium. Let’s keep that in  mind as leaders negotiate trade and tariffs. 

Canada should define itself not by becoming an “energy superpower” in the conventional  and nuclear sense, but by disengaging from the defence industrial complex. We should  use our critical minerals, ingenuity and workforce to pursue a decentralized, affordable,  locally based renewable energy infrastructure leaning heavily into building and  transportation efficiencies. We need to work together with Indigenous and remote  communities, fully understand environmental and social impacts of developments and  create smart grid interconnections that allow for maximum flexibility in energy sharing  within Canada. 

Anne Lindsey volunteers with the No Nukes MB campaign of the Manitoba Energy Justice  Coalition and has been monitoring nuclear waste since the 1980s.

April 24, 2025 Posted by | Canada, politics | Leave a comment

Pope Francis’ Obituaries Omit Focus on Palestine

rather than criticizing Francis’ attention to Gaza, the lengthy obituaries in the most prominent US newspapers ignored his advocacy for Palestinian rights entirely.

By relegating Francis’ compassion for Palestine to sidebars, as though it were only of transient interest, US outlets eliminated a central aspect of his papacy from that record.

Fair, Ari Paul, April 23, 2025

The obituaries for Pope Francis in the leading US newspapers ignored the late pontiff’s commitment to the Palestinian people and the acute suffering in Gaza in the last years of his life. Many of them ran separate pieces that highlighted Francis’ concern for Gaza and the response of Palestinians to his death, but they failed to mention these aspects of his papacy in the lengthy obituaries that summed up his life.

……………………………………………..regarding his outspoken concern for Gaza, the Times found room for not a word.

Obituaries at other major US newspapers also failed to include Francis’ Palestine focus.

……………………… Toward the end of Francis’ life, the head of the Catholic Church focused his attention on ongoing genocide in Gaza. “He used to call us at 7 p.m. every night. No matter how busy he was, no matter where he was, he always called,” George Anton, spokesperson for the Church of the Holy Family in Gaza, told NPR (4/22/25). Reuters (4/22/25) ran the headline, “Gaza’s Christians ‘Heartbroken’ for Pope Who Phoned Them Nightly.” AP (4/21/25) called these communications his “frequent evening ritual,” noting that this “small act of compassion made a big impression on Gaza’s tiny Christian community.”

Francis was generally sympathetic to addressing political and human rights for Palestinians, and under his watch the Vatican recognized the state of Palestine (BBC, 5/13/15). He “suggested the global community should study whether Israel’s military campaign in Gaza constitutes a genocide of the Palestinian people” (Reuters, 11/17/24). In his final Easter message, issued the day before his death, he called for a ceasefire in Gaza to end a conflict that “continues to cause death and destruction, and to create a dramatic and deplorable humanitarian situation” (Truthout, 4/21/25).

‘Privileged a politicized version’

Not everyone in the press approved of this act of compassion when recalling his life and church leadership. In an editorial, the New York Post (4/21/25) criticized the “leftist” positions of the “deservedly beloved figure,” complaining that Francis “even went so far as to call for an investigation of Israel over its nonexistent genocide in Gaza.”

When it came to Francis’ support for Middle East peace generally, the Jerusalem Post (4/22/25) said in an editorial, “Time and again, Israel expressed dismay at the Vatican’s tendency to elevate Palestinian narratives while brushing aside Israeli concerns.” It complained that “the Vatican’s posture under Francis consistently privileged a politicized version of the Palestinian story over the complex reality on the ground.”

But rather than criticizing Francis’ attention to Gaza, the lengthy obituaries in the most prominent US newspapers ignored his advocacy for Palestinian rights entirely…………………………………………………………………..

 regarding his outspoken concern for Gaza, the Times found room for not a word.

Obituaries at other major US newspapers also failed to include Francis’ Palestine focus.

………………………………………………The Wall Street Journal’s obituary (4/21/25) didn’t say anything about the topic either, though it said that Francis

made a priority of improving ties with the Islamic world, washing the feet of Muslims on Holy Thursday, visiting nine Muslim-majority countries and insisting that Islam was, like Christianity, a religion of peace.

The same is true with AP‘s obituary (4/21/25), which likewise commented instead that he “charted new relations with the Muslim world by visiting the Arabian Peninsula and Iraq.” USA Today’s obituary (4/21/25) said Francis “sometimes took progressive or controversial stances on pressing issues, such as same-sex couples and climate change,” but it didn’t bring up Gaza.

By contrast, it was not hard to find references to Gaza in Francis’ obituaries in major non-US English-language outlets. The British Guardian (4/21/25) noted, “During his recent period in hospital, he kept up his telephone calls to the Holy Family church in Gaza, a nightly routine since 9 October 2023.” The Toronto-based Globe and Mail (4/21/25) included Palestine in a list of war-ravaged places Francis prayed for, and devoted most of a paragraph to his nightly Gaza calls.  Reuters (4/21/25), headquartered in London and owned by Canada’s Thomson family, noted that Francis’ last Easter Sunday message “reiterated his call for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza—a conflict he had long railed against.”

Though the major US obituaries all ignored Gaza, the same outlets published separate articles on Francis and Gaza. USA Today (4/21/25) ran “Pope Francis Used Final Easter Address to Call for Gaza Ceasefire.” The Wall Street Journal (4/23/25) had “Pope Francis Kept Up Routine of Calling Gaza Until the End.” For the New York Times (4/22/25), it was “Even in Sickness, Pope Francis Reached Out to Gaza’s Christians.” AP (4/21/25) offered “Pope’s Frequent Calls to a Catholic Church Made Him a Revered Figure in War-Battered Gaza,” an article that appeared on the Washington Post‘s website (4/21/25).

These stand-alone pieces are welcome, and spotlight the importance of the Gaza crisis to Francis. But the official obituaries in these major outlets are meant to stand as a permanent record of Francis’ life and career. By relegating Francis’ compassion for Palestine to sidebars, as though it were only of transient interest, US outlets eliminated a central aspect of his papacy from that record.

Reuters not only had a stand-alone story (4/22/25) about Palestinians’ response to Francis’ death, but included his advocacy for Gaza in its main obituary (4/21/25) https://fair.org/home/pope-francis-obits-omit-focus-on-palestine/

April 24, 2025 Posted by | media | Leave a comment

Nuclear Free Local Authorities express support for Democracy Day at USAF Lakenheath

The NFLAs have sent a message of solidarity and support to the organisers
of the Peace Camp at RAF / USAF Lakenheath for Democracy Day being hosted
today. The Lakenheath Alliance for Peace has kept up a 24/7 vigil at the
gates of the airbase since 14th April. LAP consists of 59 organisations,
including the NFLAs, who are opposed to the siting of US nuclear weapons at
the base and campaign in favour of nuclear disarmament. Although notionally
an RAF station, Lakenheath is really the largest US airbase in the UK
hosting the 48th ‘Liberty’ Fighter Wing of around 6,000 personnel and
F-15C/D Eagle, F-15E Strike Eagle, and F-35A Lightning II fighter bomber
aircraft. From 1954 until 2008, the station held nuclear weapons in its
inventory. Now there are plans to reintroduce them.

 NFLA 22nd April 2025, https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/news/nflas-express-support-for-democracy-day-at-usaf-lakenheath/

April 24, 2025 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

‘Spiral of silence’: climate action is very popular, so why don’t people realise it?

Researchers find 89% of people around the world want more to be done, but
mistakenly assume their peers do not.

The Guardian is joining forces with
dozens of newsrooms around the world to launch the 89% project—and
highlight the fact that the vast majority of the world’s population wants
climate action. The illusion that climate action is not popular is global.
So imagine dispelling that myth: such a shift, experts say, could be a
gamechanger, pushing the world over a social tipping point into unstoppable
climate progress. Such a communication campaign, low-cost and scalable,
could be among the most powerful tools available to fight the climate
crisis, they say. Decades of psychological research indicates that
correcting such misunderstandings can change people’s views across a
swathe of issues, from participating in protests to voting for Donald
Trump.

 Guardian 22nd April 2025
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/apr/22/spiral-of-silence-climate-action-very-popular-why-dont-people-realise

April 24, 2025 Posted by | climate change | Leave a comment

Nuclear Free Local Authorities call for more NGO cash and solar panels on Sellafield nuke plant.

Responding to the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority’s consultation on its latest three-year draft Business Plan (2025 – 8), the NFLAs have made modest calls for more cash for nuclear groups engaged in stakeholder consultation and for Sellafield to install solar panels to reduce electricity use.

Reiterating a request made forcefully by the NFLA Secretary to last year’s NDA Stakeholder Summit, we once more requested financial support for non-government organisations engaged in stakeholder dialogue. At present, a wide range of NGOs are represented on two Forums, one generalist, but the other specialising in examining the challenges attendant to the Geological Disposal Facility. Delegates invited to in-person Forum meetings or other events have historically had expenses reimbursed but have never received an honorarium. At the last Stakeholder Summit, NGO participants were refused reimbursement of travel costs and, facing the possibility of being substantially out of pocket, attendance declined. By way of pushback, we stated in our response: ‘If the NDA truly valued stakeholder consultation it would set out in this Business Plan a commitment to provide some financial support to the NGO community.’

The NFLAs have also made an appeal for GDF Community Partnerships to be granted cash and autonomy to commission third-party independent research and advice. At present, Nuclear Waste Services has a tight hold on the purse-strings and any request for information initiated by GDF panel members is vetted by NWS who draw on NDA group resources or go to other approved external sources.

In the second core strand of our response, we returned to a past aspiration – that the NDA generate ‘an increasing proportion of the energy that it consumes in the course of its work from installing renewable energy technologies on its estate’. Sellafield places great demands on the national grid; the business may have made a great play on replacing its carbon-guzzling shunting locomotives with electric ones, yet, on a recent visit, the NFLA Secretary saw that there was currently zero renewable electricity generation on site. There are a huge number of buildings, many of which will not be decommissioned and demolished for decades, so there must be possible to install solar panels on many of them. The NDA also has significant land holdings around Sellafield that could accommodate wind turbines.

April 24, 2025 Posted by | renewable, UK | Leave a comment

Activate climate’s ‘silent majority’ to supercharge action, experts say

Making concerned people aware their views are far from alone could unlock the change so urgently needed.

‘Spiral of silence’: climate action is very popular, so why don’t people realise it? The Guardian is joining forces with dozens of newsrooms around the world to launch the 89% project—and highlight the fact that the vast majority of the world’s population wants climate action. Read more

Making people aware that their pro-climate view is, in
fact, by far the majority could unlock a social tipping point and push
leaders into the climate action so urgently needed, experts say. The data
comes from a global survey that interviewed 130,000 people across 125
countries and found 89% thought their national government “should do more
to fight global warming”. It also asked people if they would
“contribute 1% of their household income every month to fight global
warming” and what proportion of their fellow citizens they thought would
do the same. In almost all countries, people believed only a minority of
their fellow citizens would be willing to contribute. In reality, the
opposite was true: more than 50% of citizens were willing to contribute in
all but a few nations. The global average of those willing to contribute
was 69%. But the percentage that people thought would be willing was 43%.
The gap between perception and reality was as high as 40 percentage points
in some countries, from Greece to Gabon.

Damian Carrington Guardian 22nd April 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/apr/22/activate-climate-silent-majority-support-supercharge-action

April 24, 2025 Posted by | climate change | Leave a comment

DOE Releases More Funding to Reopen Palisades Nuclear Plant

Energy Secretary Chris Wright on April 22 announced the release of a third
loan disbursement to Holtec for the reopening of the Palisades Nuclear
Plant in southwest Michigan. Today’s action releases $46,709,358 of the
up to $1.52-billion loan guarantee to Holtec for the Palisades project.

The 800-MW Palisades plant, located in Covert Township, was closed in 2022.
Holtec bought the power station from Entergy that year, with intent to
decommission the facility, before deciding instead to restart the plant.
Palisades at present would be the first U.S. nuclear power plant to restart
after being closed.

The plant still needs licensing approvals from the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).

Opponents of restarting the nuclear power plant have said they will appeal a recent decision by a three-judge panel of the NRC’s Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, which refused to grant a hearing on the merits for seven safety-related contentions brought by a coalition that includes Beyond Nuclear, a nonprofit group. Beyond Nuclear and other groups have argued the plant should not be restarted.

 Powermag 22nd April 2025,
https://www.powermag.com/doe-releases-more-funding-to-reopen-palisades-nuclear-plant/

April 24, 2025 Posted by | business and costs, USA | Leave a comment

No Joke: US considering nuclear power for Saudi in grand bargain

Surprise — the Trump team’s latest bid for Saudi-Israel normalization goes way too far and appears to be a one-way street.

Ivan Eland, Apr 21, 2025, https://responsiblestatecraft.org/no-joke-us-considering-nuclear-power-for-saudi-in-grand-bargain/

The Trump administration is reportedly pursuing a deal with Saudi Arabia that would be a pathway to developing a commercial nuclear power industry in the desert kingdom and maybe even lead to the enrichment of uranium on Saudi soil.

U.S. pursuit of this deal should be scrapped because the United States would bear all the increased commitments, costs, and risks with very little in return.

In the Abraham Accords of 2020 and early 2021, the first Trump administration brokered bilateral agreements between Israel and the Middle Eastern countries of Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, Morocco, and Sudan to normalize diplomatic relations. The administration also attempted to get Saudi Arabia to recognize Israel as a sovereign state and open similar relations, to no avail.

The Biden administration carried the torch in this regard but it became even more difficult to get Riyadh on board after the 2023 Hamas attacks on Israel and ensuing war in Gaza. The rising civilian death toll and humanitarian crisis led to an elevation of the Palestinian cause and engendered region-wide animosity toward Israel. The Saudis demanded at that point that Israel commit to meaningful steps toward the creation of an independent Palestinian state before any normalization would occur.

That continued into this year as the Saudi government denied President Donald Trump’s assertion that it had dropped its demand for a Palestinian state in order to normalize relations with Israel.

Even though efforts aimed at ending the war in Gaza have been unsuccessful, the second Trump administration is seemingly now reviving its efforts toward brokering an Israel-Saudi rapprochement, albeit beginning with a new U.S.-Saudi agreement first, as hinted by U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright.

The problem is that all the countries would benefit from such a grand bargain except the one brokering it — the United States, which would also absorb all of the costs. Israel and Saudi Arabia would gain the most. The Saudis have desperately wanted a nuclear power deal for some time. Meanwhile, if there is eventual normalization, Israel would neutralize what is now a powerful Arab rival and likely even gain a new ally in its quest to counter Iran (but it had better do it fast as Riyadh and Tehran have been approaching some level of detente for some time now).

Saudi Arabia has also sought formal security guarantees, which were reportedly on the table during the Biden administration. This would supplant the long-standing informal agreement between President Franklin Roosevelt and Saudi King Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud, which provided security for the desert kingdom in exchange for U.S. access to cheap oil supplies.

Yet, with a $37 trillion national debt, why would the United States take on another ward that doesn’t pay its fair share for security (a common Trump gripe about other U.S. allies)? With fracking, the United States is no longer running out of oil, as FDR assumed would be the case, and is again the world’s largest oil producer. A formal defense pact with Saudi Arabia would incur yet more costs, further entrench the U.S. in the region, and put our own troops in harm’s way if Washington is expected to defend and bail out Riyadh in any military dispute with its neighbors.

In addition, what could go wrong if Saudi Arabia was given a nuclear program? Talks on an Israel-Saudi agreement previously faltered when the Saudis opposed restrictions that would have prevented them from using a commercial nuclear program to build nuclear weapons (to counter any Iranian nuclear capability), or to assist other countries in obtaining them.

The truth is, the Saudis have wanted to be able to enrich uranium — perhaps to bomb-grade levels — on their own soil rather than import uranium already enriched only to a level capable of generating commercial energy, for some time.

Some in the United States insist that the Saudis could get nuclear technology from other nations like Russia or China, but if they resist safeguards to prevent them from getting a weapon, then it wouldn’t matter who gave them the technology that would allow them to do it.

Thus, the Trump administration should desist in reaching any such agreement with the Saudis in its (right now) futile quest for Israel-Saudi grand rapprochement. Normalization of relations between the two countries would be a fine aspiration for the region (if it is not merely to isolate and poke Iran), but the United States meeting the Saudis’ exorbitant demands to achieve it would come at too great a cost.

After all, bilateral normalization should be in the interest of both countries, so they should negotiate it on their own without being coddled by the United States.

April 24, 2025 Posted by | politics, Saudi Arabia, UK | Leave a comment

Sam Altman steps down as chair of nuclear power supplier Oklo to avoid conflict of interest.

The modular reactor company he funded and led is in
talks to deliver energy to OpenAI. OpenAI chief executive Sam Altman is
stepping down as chair of Oklo to avoid a conflict of interest ahead of
talks between his company and the nuclear start-up on an energy supply
agreement, as the race to power artificial intelligence intensifies.

Altman, who was an early-stage investor in Oklo, will step down immediately
and be replaced by Jacob DeWitte, the group’s CEO and co-founder. The
move comes as the AI industry strives to procure high-wattage, low-carbon
energy supplies. Although it may be years before tech companies can benefit
from nuclear power, the launch of DeepSeek, the less energy-intensive
Chinese large language model competitor, has underscored the urgency for
western companies such as OpenAI to compete.

Oklo has yet to enter into any firm partnerships or receive approval for any of its designs from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the US.

 FT 22nd April 2025,
https://www.ft.com/content/a511bae0-d19f-4ebd-9520-69d3f89d8556

April 24, 2025 Posted by | business and costs, USA | Leave a comment

Locals call for transparency after nuclear drill

Vikki Irwin, BBC political reporter, Suffolk, Matt Precey, Suffolk,
 BBC 22nd April 2025

People living near a US airbase earmarked to house nuclear weapons say they are being left in the dark about what would happen in the event of a radiation alert.

It comes after a drill simulating an accident involving such material was held, with personnel from RAF Lakenheath in Suffolk taking part.

Nick Timothy, Conservative MP for West Suffolk, said while the US military was “welcome”, there needed to be “transparency as far as possible on issues like this exercise”.

A Ministry of Defence (MoD) spokesman said: “Exercise Diamond Dragon demonstrated our preparedness to respond to any incident, no matter how unlikely”……………………………………….

The Suffolk Resilience Forum, which leads on emergency planning in the county, confirmed the scenario in both instances was a simulated crash in the UK of a US aircraft carrying “defence nuclear materials”.

Lakenheath Parish Council chairman Gerald Kelly said he had been told informally about the latest drill.

He said the area had an emergency plan, but added: “There is nothing in there about this sort of incident.”

The MoD should inform residents “what it wants us to do” if the event of an incident, he said.

Mr Kelly called for a siren system to be installed and for the local community to be involved in any future exercises.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cde2dyk5rjpo

April 24, 2025 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

Iran-US talks wrap up in Rome with agreement to establish framework for potential nuclear deal

19 Apr 25, https://thecradle.co/articles/iran-us-talks-wrap-up-in-rome-with-agreement-to-establish-framework-for-potential-nuclear-deal

Omani officials stated that the indirect talks are ‘gaining momentum’ after Tehran and Washington agreed to establish technical delegations to draft a potential replacement for the Obama-era JCPOA

The second round of indirect talks between Iranian and US officials concluded in the Italian capital, Rome, on 19 April, with both sides agreeing to establish working groups to draft a “general framework” for a potential new nuclear deal.

“In this round of talks, senior Iranian and US negotiators outlined the general framework for the talks and exchanged views on some important issues in the areas of sanctions relief and the nuclear issue. The two sides agreed to continue the next round of indirect talks next Saturday in Muscat,” the Iranian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

Tehran also stated that talks to limit the country’s uranium enrichment program in exchange for sanctions relief “require more detailed discussion and examination at the expert level.” As such, the two sides agreed to send technical delegations to the Omani capital next Wednesday for detailed discussions.

Following Saturday’s talks, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi described the atmosphere as “positive” and said that officials “made clear how many in Iran believe that the [2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action] is no longer good enough for us.”

“For now, optimism may be warranted but only with a great deal of caution,” he told reporters.

The Omani Foreign Ministry said the second round of talks “led to the parties agreeing to move to the next phase of targeted negotiations to achieve a fair, permanent, and binding agreement that ensures Iran is free from nuclear weapons and the full lifting of sanctions while preserving the country’s right to develop nuclear energy for peaceful uses and purposes.”

“Dialogue and clear communication are the only way to achieve a credible and reliable understanding that will benefit all parties in the regional and international context,” Omani officials said.

There was no immediate comment from the US side following the talks.

Nevertheless, soon after Saturday’s talks ended, Israeli TV broadcast a pre-recorded address by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in which he reiterated his commitment to preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.

“I am committed to preventing Iran from attaining nuclear weapons. I won’t give on this, I won’t let up on this, and I won’t withdraw from this — not a millimeter,” Netanyahu said.

Earlier in the day, Reuters reported that Tel Aviv “has not ruled out” launching an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities in the near future without US involvement.

April 24, 2025 Posted by | Iran, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries