A resounding win for the world’s nuclear-free clean energy movement

https://theaimn.net/a-resounding-win-for-the-worlds-nuclear-free-clean-energy-movement/ 5 May 25
In early analyses of the historic Labor election victory, commentators have tut-tutted over the Liberal Coalition’s policies that didn’t impress voters – like reduced tax on petrol, like poor housing plans, and certain Trump-like aspects. These were the things, and the “cost-of living” issues that brought down the vote for the Coalition. And a number of interviews with voters did show that these issues were important.
BUT, in the media build-up to the election, those issues were hammered, and it seemed to me, that Peter Dutton’s party was happy with that, and especially, to stay OFF the topic of nuclear power.
But nuclear power was the core policy in the Opposition’s campaign. Its quiet partner policy was the drastic slowing down of solar power, and renewable energy in general. Along with this went a downgrading of climate change – Dutton coming close to climate-change denial – “I’m not a scientist” was his answer to questions about the impacts of global heating. The inevitable delay in nuclear power becoming operational would be a gift for the fossil fuel industries,
And it was a pretty amazing policy- to bring in nuclear power across a very special country! Australia is the only country in the world that is a nation-continent, a great island -continent with one federal government, and one predominant language. There is no doubt that, had the Coalition won this election, it would have been a grand coup for the global nuclear lobby.
The Labor government is also beholden to the nuclear lobby. Anthony Albanese, as Opposition leader in 2021, agreed to the then Liberal government’s AUKUS nuclear submarine deal. In 2024, his Labor government cemented its agreement by signing an updated version of the AUKUS Exchange of Naval Nuclear Propulsion Information Agreement (ENNPIA).
So no wonder that both of Australia’s major parties are playing down the significance of the nuclear issue, now that across the nation, voters have rejected nuclear power. And the obedient mainstream media is playing it down, too.
Australia’s unique advantage is that it is the only nuclear-power -free nation-continent , and is also a world leader in renewable energy.
Even in 2023, 33% of Australian households had rooftop solar panels. generating their own electricity. Australia is a world leader in rooftop solar adoption, with solar panels installed on more homes per capita than any other country. This trend continues to increase, with Australians making huge savings on energy costs.
To be fair to the Albanese Labor government, it has done well on promoting renewable energy. It has not done so well on climate change action – The Australian government is continuing its long-standing support for fossil fuels both at home and abroad.
Despite its two major political parties being wedded to the fossil fuel industries, and both of them sycophantic to American militarism and the nuclear lobby, Australia really does have the opportunity to lead the world in the direction of clean safe nuclear-free energy.
The AUKUS agreement, the nuclear submarine deal , is looking a bit wobbly at this moment -with the Trumpian uncertainty clouding Australia’s relationship with the USA.
All in all, it is a positive outlook for Australia, and its leading role in clean energy. But don’t expect the corporate media, or the timid ABC, to genuinely emphasise the importance of this election victory over the nuclear lobby.
Will the World Speak up Against Israel’s Likely Attack on Humanitarian Activists?
The Conscience was carrying no weapons. It posed no threat. Its only crime was daring to challenge a brutal siege and slaughter that the United Nations itself has condemned as illegal and inhumane.

Medea Benjamin, May 02, 2025, Common Dreams, https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/freedom-flotilla-attack
In the early hours of May 2, the quiet of night was shattered aboard the Conscience, a civilian vessel anchored in international waters, 17 kilometers off the coast of Malta. Aboard were 18 crew members and passengers, jolted from sleep by the sound of two explosions. Flames and smoke filled the air. The ship had just been struck—by what the crew members say were drone attacks.
The very day of the attack, more passengers from 21 countries were waiting in Malta to be ferried out to join the Conscience. Among those slated to join the ship were world-renowned environmentalist Greta Thunberg, retired U.S. Army Colonel Ann Wright, and longtime CODEPINK activist Tighe Barry.
The Conscience is part of the Freedom Flotilla Coalition, a network of international activists that has been challenging Israel’s maritime blockade of Gaza since 2008.
“The U.S. condemns the Houthis for stopping ships carrying weapons to Israel—and bombs Yemen mercilessly for it. But will they condemn Israel for attacking a peaceful ship on a humanitarian mission to Gaza?”
The group alleges that the attack came from Israel—an allegation bolstered by a CNN investigation. According to CNN, flight-tracking data from ADS-B Exchange showed that an Israeli Air Force C-130 Hercules aircraft departed from Israel early Thursday afternoon and flew at low altitude over eastern Malta for an extended period. While the Hercules did not land, its path brought it in proximity to the area where the Conscience was later attacked. The plane returned to Israel approximately seven hours later. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) declined to comment on the flight data.
The ship suffered significant damage, but fortunately, no one was hurt. That was not the case when the Freedom Flotilla was attacked in 2010. This May 2 attack comes just weeks before the 15th anniversary of the infamous raid on the Mavi Marmara, the Turkish ship that led a previous flotilla to Gaza in 2010. On May 31 of that year, Israeli naval commandos stormed the ship in international waters, killing 10 people and injuring dozens. The Mavi Marmara had been carrying over 500 activists and humanitarian supplies. That attack drew condemnation from around the world and calls for an international investigation—calls that Israel dismissed.
One of this year’s flotilla organizers, Ismail Behesti, is the son of a man killed in the 2010 raid. In videos circulating after the recent strike, Behesti is seen walking through the damaged interior of the Conscience, his voice resolute as he condemns what he believes was another Israeli act of aggression against civilians on a humanitarian mission.
“People are asking how Israel can get away with attacking a civilian ship in international waters,” said Tighe Barry, speaking from the port in Malta. “But since October 8, 2024, Israel has shown complete disregard for international law—from bombing civilian neighborhoods to using starvation as a weapon by blocking food from entering Gaza. This is just one more example of its impunity.”
“Where is the outrage?” Barry continued. “The U.S. condemns the Houthis for stopping ships carrying weapons to Israel—and bombs Yemen mercilessly for it. But will they condemn Israel for attacking a peaceful ship on a humanitarian mission to Gaza?”
The Freedom Flotilla Coalition and activist groups such as CODEPINK are calling on governments and international bodies to speak out and take action.
The Conscience was carrying no weapons. It posed no threat. Its only crime was daring to challenge a brutal siege and slaughter that the United Nations itself has condemned as illegal and inhumane. That’s the real threat Israel fears—not the ship itself, but the global solidarity it represents.
So, will the world speak up about Israel’s latest outrage? Or will this, too, be quietly buried beneath the waves?
NATO leaders as delusional as Zelensky on lost Ukraine war

no chance of prevailing.
Yet, Zelensky won’t budge on his goals of reclaiming all captured territory including Crimea, lost 5 years before his presidency. Nor will Zelensky give up his delusional goal of NATO membership.
Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL, 4 May 25
Thruout the 3 year, 3 month Russo Ukraine war, Ukrainian President Zelensky has steadfastly ignored battlefield reality of Ukraine’s destruction and impending defeat.
His delusions started in April, 2022 when he swallowed US and UK demands he walk away from the negotiated peace deal that would have cost Ukraine no new lost territory, albeit no NATO membership for Ukraine and neutrality between East and West.
Since then he’s lost roughly a fifth of his land, a hundred thousand plus casualties, a shattered economy…and no chance of prevailing.
Yet, Zelensky won’t budge on his goals of reclaiming all captured territory including Crimea, lost 5 years before his presidency. Nor will Zelensky give up his delusional goal of NATO membership.
But outside of US realism under Trump, Zelensky is not alone in his war delusions.
Recently, retired Deputy Supreme Allied Commander in Europe Sir Richard Shirreff advised that Europe will build up its troops, ships and planes if America pulls back from European defense against imaginary enemy Russia, “if only Europe has the will.” Shirreff appears clueless that due to European economic decline from supporting a lost war, most Western European people only have the will that it end
Current NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte is even more Zelensky-like. He trumpet’s Russia’s casualties of a thousand troops daily and that “Ukraine is not losing…and we must ensure Russia does not capture even one more square kilometer of Ukraine territory.” Rutte is oblivious that his intransigence to supporting Trump’s peace plan costs Ukraine more square kilometers of land every single day. Rutte is channeling delusional Baghdad Bob talking about “the mother of all victories” during the second Iraq war..
The oddity of all this delusion is that on just about every domestic and foreign policy issue, Trump is the poster president for delusion. On the Ukraine war he’s the only realist in the war room.
US-Ukraine minerals deal ‘hides secret agreements’ – Ukrainian MP
2 May 25 https://www.rt.com/news/616662-ukraine-us-deal-secret-agreements/
Separate provisions outline Kiev’s “indefinite obligations” and bypass parliamentary ratification, Irina Gerashchenko has claimed.
The US-Ukraine minerals agreement announced this week “hides” details of Kiev’s “indefinite obligations” to Washington, a Ukrainian lawmaker has claimed.
In a Facebook post on Friday, Irina Gerashchenko, a member of European Solidarity party said the deal includes two “secret,” supplementary documents that will not be subject to parliamentary ratification.
The minerals deal reportedly grants the US preferential access to Ukrainian mining projects in exchange for assistance with an investment fund to support the country’s reconstruction. Initially portrayed by Washington as repayment forbears of military support – estimated at $350 billion by President Donald Trump – the final text, published on Thursday by the Ukrainian government, states that only future aid will count toward US contributions to the fund.
Gerashchenko claimed however that instead of one agreement, the US and Ukraine signed three.
“The Zelensky government has not provided deputies and society with all the agreements signed in the US, which, as it turned out, are three, not one,” she wrote. “Meanwhile, they want to ratify only one framework document in the Verkhovna Rada. Others are labeled ‘implementation documents,’ despite the fact that it is in these two secret agreements that all the technical details of indefinite Ukrainian obligations are hidden.”
Ukrainian Prime Minister Denis Shmigal “avoided” commenting on the two documents and the lack of security guarantees in the published agreement – reportedly a key point of contention during negotiations – Gerashchenko told the country’s parliament on Friday.
The claim has raised questions among Ukrainian lawmakers and the public on the actual scope of the agreement. MP Yaroslav Zheleznyak claimed on Telegram that, when pressed, Shmigal acknowledged the two additional documents but downplayed them as “technical” and exempt from ratification. The texts “must be signed after the ratification” of the main agreement, Shmigal claimed, noting that lawmakers would see them when the Ukrainian negotiating team returns from the US next week.
Western media reports have also noted the existence of additional documents and claimed that a last-minute dispute arose when Washington demanded Kiev sign all three. Ukrainian officials reportedly argued they could not sign the annexes until the main agreement was ratified in Parliament. Later reports suggested all three documents were ultimately signed.
Further details about the contents of the supplementary documents have not been publicly released, and the Ukrainian government has not issued an official statement addressing their existence or content.
Need to use nuclear weapons has not arisen in Ukraine, says Putin

Russian leader says he hopes nuclear strikes ‘will not be required’ in state TV film about his 25 years in power.
Angelique Chrisafis and agencies, 5 May 25, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/may/04/need-to-use-use-nuclear-weapons-has-not-arisen-in-ukraine-says-putin
The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, said in comments broadcast on Sunday said that the need to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine had not arisen, and that he hoped it would not.
Speaking in a film by Russian state television about his 25 years in power, Putin said that Russia has the strength and the means to bring the conflict in Ukraine to what he called a “logical conclusion”.
Responding to a question from a state television reporter about Ukrainian strikes on Russia, Putin said: “There has been no need to use those [nuclear] weapons … and I hope they will not be required.”
Fear of nuclear escalation has been a factor in US officials’ thinking since Russia invaded Ukraine in early 2022. The former CIA director William Burns has said there was a real risk in late 2022 that Russia could use nuclear weapons against Ukraine.
In autumn 2022, the US was so concerned about the possible use of tactical nuclear weapons by Russia that it warned Putin over the consequences of using such weapons, Burns has said. At the same time, the Chinese leader Xi Jinping also warned Putin not to resort to nuclear weapons.
Putin signed a revamped version of Russia’s nuclear doctrine in November 2024, spelling out the circumstances that allow him to use Moscow’s atomic arsenal, the world’s largest. That version lowered the bar, giving him the option of using nuclear weapons in response to even a conventional attack backed by a nuclear power.
The US president, Donald Trump, has said he wants to end the conflict via diplomatic means, raising the question of whether Putin was willing to negotiate a peace settlement. But the Kremlin has rejected calls by Kyiv and Washington for an unconditional 30-day ceasefire.
Putin, in February 2022, ordered tens of thousands of Russian troops to invade Ukraine. Moscow’s forces now control about 20% of Ukraine, including parts of the south and east.
In the carefully choreographed state television film, Putin was shown in his private Kremlin kitchen offering chocolates and a fermented Russian milk drink to the Kremlin correspondent, Pavel Zarubin.
Putin, a former KGB lieutenant colonel who was handed the presidency on the last day of 1999 by an ailing Boris Yeltsin, is the longest serving Kremlin leader since Joseph Stalin, who ruled for 29 years until his death in 1953.
How bloody conflict 4,000 miles away could spark nuclear Armageddon killing billions
The “Army of the Righteous” terror group has been accused of slaughtering 22 Indian tourists holidaying in the Baisaran valley – which is pushing India and Pakistan to the brink of conflict
12:23, 02 May 2025, Ryan Fahey News Reporter, https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/how-bloody-conflict-4000-miles-35158973
While the West is focused on how close Vladimir Putin is to pushing the red button, the real threat of Armageddon could be brewing in South Asia.
In April, suspected Islamist Pakistani militants shot dead 22 Indian tourists holidaying in the Baisaran valley, which is now pushing India and Pakistan – both nuclear-armed countries – to the brink of a nuclear confrontation. The gunmen are said to have prowled through the group of tourists, picking off any individual unable to recite Islamic verses. It’s being viewed by Indians as the worst massacre since the 2008 Mumbai bombings.
India’s security services are also being blamed for failing to realise the looming threat as the public outcry for retribution continues to grow. Indian national identity and foreign policy expert Dr Manali Kumar said the relations between the two countries are at a critically low point and “just short of war”. However, any overt acts of war would see a swift response from Pakistan, which would likely push the two sides into an escalating conflict that would be impossible to reverse once started.
India has an active army of 1.2million, with an additional 250,000 individuals split between the navy and air force, while Pakistan has less than 700,000 – but experts believe the two sides are far more evenly matched than it would seem.
Defence experts say that Pakistan could still “inflict significant damage and cause massive casualties”, according to the MailOnline.
Where the most concerning comparison comes is when looking at the nuclear arsenals of each country. Both Pakistan and India are understood to have around 170 warheads heads each, according to the Arms Control Association. While India has agreed to a “no first use” nuclear pact”, Pakistan does not adhere to the same moral restriction.
And if the apocalypse did happen in South Asia, 125 million people would be dead in a matter of days, researchers warned back in 2019.
India has accused Pakistani nationals – said to be members of the same “Army of the Righteous” terror group responsible for Mumbai – of carrying out the April 22 killing spree. Pakistan has denied involvement, and has already warned it would respond to any military aggression on the basis of “baseless and concocted allegations”.
The reason India has conflated the Pakistani government with the terror group is that they are said to have links to Pakistan’s Inter-Services-Intelligence (ISI) agency.
In the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists in 2019, researchers said that there would be “tens of millions” of immediate victims if a nuke was launched in South Asia. It would have devastating environmental impacts, causing famines that could affect billions of people across the world.
“The direct effects of this nuclear exchange would be horrible; the authors estimate that 50 to 125 million people would die, depending on whether the weapons used had yields of 15, 50, or 100 kilotons,” the article read.
“The ramifications for Indian and Pakistani society would be major and long-lasting, with many major cities largely destroyed and uninhabitable.
“Smoke and radioactive particles would ‘spread globally within weeks… cooling the global surface, reducing precipitation and threatening mass starvation.”
Israel Bombs Humanitarian Aid Flotilla on Way to Gaza

A similar aid convoy was attacked by Tel Aviv in 2010, killing 10 people and injuring dozens more.
by Will Porter May 2, 2025 , https://news.antiwar.com/2025/05/02/israel-bombs-humanitarian-aid-flotilla-on-way-to-gaza/
A ship carrying supplies bound for the Gaza Strip was attacked by Israeli drones in international waters on Friday, according to the activist group that organized the flotilla. The vessel reportedly took at least one direct hit to its hull and sustained damage from fire, forcing its crew to issue an urgent call for help.
Organizers with the Freedom Flotilla Coalition (FFC) said one of their vessels was attacked by an unidentified drone in the early hours of Friday morning, noting the ship was not far off the coast of Malta when it was hit.
“At 00:23 Maltese time, the Conscience, a Freedom Flotilla Coalition ship, came under direct attack in international waters,” the group said in a press release. “Armed drones attacked the front of an unarmed civilian vessel twice, causing a fire and a substantial breach in the hull. [. . .] The drone strike appears to have deliberately targeted the ship’s generator, leaving the crew without power and placing the vessel at great risk of sinking.”
An FFC spokesperson, Caoimhe Butterly, later told Reuters that the ship was struck en route to Malta, where it was scheduled to pick up other activists, among them climate campaigner Greta Thunberg and retired US Army Colonel Mary Ann Wright. The group said it had arranged the aid shipment “under a media black out to avoid any potential sabotage.”
The FFC also shared footage which allegedly shows the aftermath of the strike, with smoke and flames seen on the ship. At one point in the brief video, an apparent explosion can be heard.
In a second press release, the group later shared a photo of the damage sustained in the strike.
Maltese authorities said they received an SOS call from a vessel in international waters soon after midnight local time, adding that a nearby tugboat assisted the ship, according to Reuters. Officials added that the crew of the Conscience declined to board the tugboat, and also confirmed to CNN that the fire on the ship had been extinguished. No casualties have been reported in the attack.
The FFC press release added that “Israeli ambassadors must be summoned and answer to violations of international law, including the ongoing blockade [on Gaza] and the bombing of our civilian vessel in international waters.”
In a social media post early on Friday, the United Nations special rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territories, Francesca Albanese, said she “received a distressed call from the people of the Freedom Flotilla that is carrying essential food and medicine to the starving Gaza population.”
“I call on concerned state authorities, including maritime authorities, to support the ship and its crew as needed. I trust the competent authorities will also ascertain the facts and intervene appropriately,” she added.
The Israeli military has yet to comment on the incident, but said it was looking into reports about the attack, according to the BBC. Israel’s Foreign Ministry did not immediately respond to a request for comment by Reuters.
The FFC mission aimed to bring supplies to Gaza some two months into a heightened blockade by Tel Aviv, whose forces have leveled much of the territory in air and ground operations in response to Hamas’ October 7, 2023 attack on Israel. On Friday, the International Committee of the Red Cross said aid operations in Gaza were on the verge of “total collapse” thanks to the blockade.
In 2010, a similar humanitarian aid flotilla organized by the Free Gaza Movement and the Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief, a Turkish org, was attacked by Israeli forces in international waters. Nine people were killed in the assault, with another later dying of their injuries, while dozens more were wounded. A UN report later found that all 10 activists had sustained gunshot wounds, and added that “the circumstances of the killing of at least six of the passengers were in a manner consistent with an extra-legal, arbitrary and summary execution.”
Will Porter is assistant news editor and book editor at the Libertarian Institute, and a regular contributor at Antiwar.com. Find more of his work at Consortium News and ZeroHedge.
Senator Strangelove
Like the ghost of Armageddon Future, former Senator Jon Kyl keeps reappearing in nuclear debates, writes William Hartung
A primary responsibility of the government is, of course, to keep us safe. Given that obligation, you might think that the Washington establishment would be hard at work trying to prevent the ultimate catastrophe—a nuclear war. But you would be wrong.
A small, hardworking contingent of elected officials is indeed trying to roll back the nuclear arms race and make it harder for such world-ending weaponry ever to be used again, including stalwarts like Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Rep. John Garamendi (D-Calif.), and other members of the Congressional Nuclear Weapons and Arms Control Working Group. But they face ever stiffer headwinds from a resurgent network of nuclear hawks who want to build more kinds of nuclear weapons and ever more of them. And mind you, that would all be in addition to the Pentagon’s current plans for spending up to $2 trillion over the next three decades to create a whole new generation of nuclear weapons, stoking a dangerous new nuclear arms race.
There are many drivers of this push for a larger, more dangerous arsenal—from the misguided notion that more nuclear weapons will make us safer to an entrenched network of companies, governmental institutions, members of Congress, and policy pundits who will profit (directly or indirectly) from an accelerated nuclear arms race. One indicator of the current state of affairs is the resurgence of former Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl, who spent 18 years in Congress opposing even the most modest efforts to control nuclear weapons before he went on to work as a lobbyist and policy advocate for the nuclear weapons complex.
His continuing prominence in debates over nuclear policy—evidenced most recently by his position as vice chair of a congressionally appointed commission that sought to legitimize an across-the-board nuclear buildup—is a testament to our historical amnesia about the risks posed by nuclear weapons.
Senator Strangelove
Republican Jon Kyl was elected to the Senate from Arizona in 1995 and served in that body until 2013, plus a brief stint in late 2018 to fill out the term of the late Sen. John McCain.
One of Kyl’s signature accomplishments in his early years in office was his role in lobbying fellow Republican senators to vote against ratifying the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), which went down to a 51 to 48 Senate defeat in October 1999. That treaty banned explosive nuclear testing and included monitoring and verification procedures meant to ensure that its members met their obligations. Had it been widely adopted, it might have slowed the spread of nuclear weapons, now possessed by nine countries, and prevented a return to the days when aboveground testing spread cancer-causing radiation to downwind communities.
The defeat of the CTBT marked the beginning of a decades-long process of dismantling the global nuclear arms control system, launched by the December 2001 withdrawal of President George W. Bush’s administration from the Nixon-era Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) treaty. That treaty was designed to prevent a “defense-offense” nuclear arms race in which one side’s pursuit of anti-missile defenses sparks the other side to build more—and ever more capable—nuclear-armed missiles. James Acton of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace called the withdrawal from the ABM Treaty an “epic mistake” that fueled a new nuclear arms race. Kyl argued otherwise, claiming the withdrawal removed “a straitjacket from our national security.”
The end of the ABM treaty created the worst of both worlds—an incentive for adversaries to build up their nuclear arsenals coupled with an abject failure to develop weaponry that could actually defend the United States in the event of a real-world nuclear attack………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
There is another way. Even as Washington, Moscow, and Beijing continue the production of a new generation of nuclear weapons—such weaponry is also possessed by France, India, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, and the United Kingdom—a growing number of nations have gone on record against any further nuclear arms race and in favor of eliminating such weapons altogether. In fact, the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons has now been ratified by 73 countries.
As Beatrice Fihn, former director of the Nobel-prize-winning International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, or ICAN, pointed out in a recent essay in The New York Times, there are numerous examples of how collective action has transformed “seemingly impossible situations.” She cited the impact of the antinuclear movement of the 1980s in reversing a superpower nuclear arms race and setting the stage for sharp reductions in the numbers of such weapons, as well as a successful international effort to bring the nuclear ban treaty into existence. She noted that a crucial first step in bringing the potentially catastrophic nuclear arms race under control would involve changing the way we talk about such weapons, especially debunking the myth that they are somehow “magical tools” that make us all more secure. She also emphasized the importance of driving home that this planet’s growing nuclear arsenals are evidence that all too many of those in power are acquiescing in a reckless strategy “based on threatening to commit global collective suicide.”
The next few years will be crucial in determining whether ever growing numbers of nuclear weapons remain entrenched in this country’s budgets and its global strategy for decades to come or whether common sense can carry the day and spark the reduction and eventual elimination of such instruments of mass devastation. A vigorous public debate on the risks of an accelerated nuclear arms race would be a necessary first step toward pulling the world back from the brink of Armageddon.
William D. Hartung is a Senior Research Fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, and the author most recently of “Pathways to Pentagon Spending Reductions: Removing the Obstacles.” This article first appeared on Tom Dispatch and on Common Dreams, whose content is available through a Creative Commons license. https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2025/05/04/senator-strangelove/
EDF sues Czech competition authority over Dukovany nuclear tender
05/02/2025, https://english.radio.cz/edf-sues-czech-competition-authority-over-dukovany-nuclear-tender-8849981
The French energy company EDF has filed a lawsuit against the Czech Office for the Protection of Competition (ÚOHS) with the Regional Court in Brno. EDF is challenging the authority’s decision to reject its objections to the multi-billion euro tender for new nuclear reactors at Dukovany. The Czech government chose the South Korean firm KHNP over EDF last year and is expected to sign a final agreement with KHNP on May 7. EDF argues the process violated public procurement rules and EU regulations on foreign subsidies. The court may still decide whether the lawsuit will delay the project.
-
Archives
- May 2026 (72)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS