nuclear-news

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

Let’s give Trump credit where credit is due

18 May 25  https://theaimn.net/president-trump-on-ukraine-in-pursuit-of-peace-or-glory/

Yes, he’s a narcissist, yes he’s racist, misogynist, crooked in business, and with no regard for civil institutions and laws. AND he’s just been sucking up to the nastiest most murderous Arabian Gulf regime, in order to make $billions for American business interests, including, notably his own.

BUT even Trump can do some good things. And in the case of the Ukraine war, this is apparent.

In early 2022, Ukraine’s President Zelensky was on the brink of signing a peace agreement with Russia. There’d be no loss of Ukraine territory, and no Ukraine NATO membership. Key Western leaders opposed this negotiation. On April 9, 2022, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson arrived unannounced in Kiev and told the Ukrainian president that the West was not ready to end the war. Then in April, in Kiev,  U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said the U.S. wants to use the opportunity to permanently weaken Russia militarily and economically. He went on , at a meeting of Western leaders in Germany, to declare a Ukrainian victory over Russia as a strategic goal for Europe and the USA.

Zelensky promptly switched policy, and this turned into his peripatetic jaunts to the USA and Europe, to drum up weaponry for this determination to defeat Russia. In this, he had the mindless, and never flinching, support from Joe Biden, and NATO. All of which was most acceptable to America’s warhawks, and manna from Heaven to Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman, Boeing  and General Dynamics.

The West then launched a propaganda campaign about Ukrainian forces defeating Russian forces. English language media continued to show only the Ukrainian perspective. Media scholars have studies this, but I can be sure just from my own experience of the Australian media.

I’ve noticed not only a constant theme that Ukraine can militarily defeat Russia, but that Ukraine IS winning the war. This has been accompanied by copious emotional stories about the Ukrainian civilian victims of Russia’s war. Terrible atrocities done by the Russians. And some atrocity reports are faked. In reality, atrocities have been committed also by Ukrainians, but these are rarely reported on.

With that unflinching support from the West, Russia’s steady progress in the war has been disregarded and downplayed. Now Russia now has the military upper hand on the battlefield and that seems unlikely to change.

From 2022 until 2025, Biden and NATO would not countenance any serious suggestion of a negotiated end, such was their hatred of Russia. Near the end of his office, President Biden signed off on a huge number of weapons to Ukraine.

Donald Trump promised to end the war. In March this year, he stopped all military aid to Ukraine, including weapons already in transit. He’s against NATO membership for Ukraine – as just “not practical”, and  does not expect that Ukraine will get back all of its land.

Ukraine has  extended martial law until 6 August following Zelensky’s request  This will prevent elections from being held before then, and enable Zelensky to stay in power. However, Zelensky could use fraudulent voter lists as a means of gaining re-election.

Critics , (including myself) have stressed Trump’s aim to make money for American companies out of a peace agreement. Well, so what? American weapons companies have been making $billions out of the war.

The thing is, despite all Trump’s negative aspects, he really does not like war. And with the Trump presidency, there is at last the opportunity to end this pointless slaughter, and avoid a wider war – something that was not possible under a Democrat administration.

As to Trump “not liking war” – that is another story to be explored. He likes to bully people with the threat of war. And that may turn out to be a dangerous way to go.

Zelensky’s plan for peace involves Ukraine getting back all the Russian-occupied land, including Crimea, (formally part of Russia since 2014) , and Ukraine headed to become a NATO member.

Europe, and all Westerners who buy into the Joe Biden view of Ukraine seem now still holding onto the idea of a military victory by Ukraine, over Russia. Zelensky’s unrealistic plan for a ceasefire can be disregarded. At least Trump offers a realistic way towards peace. And for that, he deserves acknowledgment.

May 17, 2025 Posted by | Christina's notes, politics international, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Zelensky now needs to shut up and let his negotiating team get to work

Zelensky has actively sought to prevent any possibility of dialogue with Russia on the ending of the war since the first Istanbul talks collapsed in April 2022.

there will be massive pressure from the enormous pro-war lobby in Ukraine and in the west to call off the talks at the first opportunity.

there will be massive pressure from the enormous pro-war lobby in Ukraine and in the west to call off the talks at the first opportunity.

He won’t, of course, but once Istanbul talks finally start, they will soon develop a logic and momentum of their own

Ian Proud, The Peacemonger, May 16, 2025

As I predicted in my article -(The stakes are high for these important Ukraine-Russia-US talks.) there would be no breakthroughs on day 1 or, perhaps, as it should now be called, day -1. Not surprisingly, Zelensky spent his time in Ankara claiming the Russians didn’t want peace, blaming Putin, searching desperately for a reason to call off talks that hadn’t started, while the Russian delegation waited patiently in Istanbul for a Ukrainian team that didn’t show up. Predictably, western leaders including Keir Starmer, did their part, alleging that Putin wasn’t serious about peace talks, while the Russian delegation was still waiting patiently in Istanbul.

My article points out, correctly, that the biggest achievement is that the talks are even taking place if, in fact, they do start today. Zelensky has actively sought to prevent any possibility of dialogue with Russia on the ending of the war since the first Istanbul talks collapsed in April 2022.

Trump has changed the game by insisting direct negotiations are the only way to bring the bloodshed to an end. Indeed, it seems clear that, in the end, Zelensky was pressed by both Trump and President Erdogan to name his delegation and dispatch them to Istanbul which he finally agreed to do late last night.

Let’s be clear, there will be massive pressure from the enormous pro-war lobby in Ukraine and in the west to call off the talks at the first opportunity. The fact that the US has sent Rubio, Witkoff and Kellogg to Istanbul suggests the Americans aren’t going to let up the pressure on Zelensky to cut a deal, even if that means the beginning of the end of his political career.

Expect maximum Zelensky showboating over the next day or so, and minimal progress at the negotiating table. But once the talks start, they may start to build a logic and momentum of their own, grinding us slowly towards the cessation of gunfire. There will be no Victoria Nuland or Boris Johnson to tell Zelensky not to sign the agreement this time. Even Starmer isn’t stupid enough to undermine a deal that Trump has slogged to line up, at a time when Britain is trying to maximize its transatlantic trade and investment relationship.

Foreign policy, after all, always begins and ends with domestic policy, whatever the true believers tell you.

The biggest achievement of today’s Istanbul talks is that they are even taking place. U.S. engagement will remain vital to getting a peace deal over the line. Russia’s desire for a reset with Washington may keep them on track.

I have a sense of déjà vu as I contemplate these long-overdue peace talks between Ukraine and Russia in Istanbul. In April 2022, Ukraine and Russia were close to agreeing a peace treaty, less than two months after war started. However, this came crashing down amid claims that western governments, in particular the United States and the United Kingdom encouraged Ukraine to keep fighting.

It’s worth recapping very briefly what was close to having been agreed. By far the best summary of negotiations between both sides was produced by the New York Times in June 2024. Those negotiations ran for almost two months. The talks started with Ukrainian officials being spirited over the border into Belarus on February 29, 2022 while the fighting raged around Kyiv, and eventually led to the now famous talks in Istanbul in March and April………………………………. https://thepeacemonger.substack.com/p/zelensky-now-needs-to-shut-up-and?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=3221990&post_id=163688883&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

May 17, 2025 Posted by | politics international, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Status and Trends of the Global Nuclear Industry: A Cruel Reality Check

May 13, 2025, By: Mycle Schneider, https://nationalinterest.org/blog/energy-world/status-and-trends-of-the-global-nuclear-industry-a-cruel-reality-check

Trends in the global nuclear industry indicate a high probability that its ferocious rivals have digested its lunch before it has demonstrated that it can actually keep its promises on the ground. That’s the cruel reality.

The excitement is palpable. Enthusiasm in the nuclear community is overwhelming. Red tape is being cut. The nuclear revival is on its way. The New York Times reported that the Administration “formally specified the steps it will take to revive commercial nuclear power, an industry whose current problems the Administration regards as largely due to overregulation by the Government.” The President ordered the Secretary of Energy “to give high priority to recommending ways to speed the regulatory and licensing process for new plants.”

That was in 1981, and the president was Ronald Reagan. Ever since, at least once every decade, a global nuclear renaissance has been proclaimed by industry representatives and policymakers.

What happened in the real world? For the past eighteen years, the annual World Nuclear Industry Status Report, researched by an international team of interdisciplinary experts from universities and think tanks around the world that I coordinate, attempts just that: a periodical reality check on the status and trends of the industry.

Trends in the Global Nuclear Industry

Most of the industry indicators peaked a long time ago. The largest number of units, 438, operated in 2002. With regards to commercial power, nuclear’s slice of the energy pie reached its zenith in 1996 at 17.5 percent. Startups of new reactors peaked in 1984-1985 at thirty-three per year, with only three closed in each of those years. The most units, 234, were under construction in 1979, and the number of construction starts saw its historic maximum at forty-four in 1976.

In comparison, in 2024, seven new reactors started up in the world, while four were closed. That is a net addition of three units, one-tenth of the level seen in the mid 1980s. The share of nuclear declined to around nine percent, about half of the level that existed three decades ago. As of the beginning of 2025, there were 411 reactors operating, and sixty under construction, of which twenty-nine are in China, but not a single one is on the entire American continent from Alaska to Cape Horn. The only indicator in 2024 that marginally exceeded a previous record set in 2006 is operating nuclear capacity – by four gigawatts (GW) or a one percent increase in eighteen years. Total global nuclear electricity generation also has likely exceeded the previous 2006-peak by two  percent or so, but official numbers are not yet available.

In the United States, over the past forty years  since Reagan’s nuclear revival efforts, Westinghouse started construction on just four AP1000 reactors, all in 2013 – two in South Carolina and two in Georgia. The builder claimed that “by using modular construction methods, Westinghouse and its project partners will be able to build the AP1000 in 36 months.” Four years later, after an investment of nearly $10 billion and nine rate increases for local electricity customers, Westinghouse went bankrupt and abandoned the construction at the V.C. Summer site in South Carolina.

The economic disaster had a serious legal aftermath, and four former utility and industry executives were sentenced to prison or home detention. The last one was Jeffrey Alan Benjamin, former senior vice president for new plants and major projects at the Westinghouse Electric Company who “directly supervised all new nuclear projects worldwide during the V.C. Summer project” and who, in November 2024, was sentenced to federal prison for causing the builder-utility SCANA “to keep false records in connection with the failed V.C. Summer nuclear construction project.”

Historically, on a global average, one in nine reactors listed as under construction at some point in time have been given up at various stages of advancement.

In the United States, the other two AP1000s at the Vogtle site in Georgia made it to the grid after, respectively, ten  and eleven  years of construction at an all-in cost of around $35 billion. Georgia Public Services Commission staff calculated that “the cost increases and schedule delays have completely eliminated any benefit [of Vogtle-3 and -4] on a life-cycle cost basis.”

In 2025, ninety-three percent of the capacity added to the U.S. grid is expected to come from solar (fifty-two percent), wind (twelve percent), and battery storage (twenty-nine percent). For 2025, the U.S. Energy Information Administration predicts a twenty-six-percent growth of solar capacity to exceed 150 GW in total. Texas alone is on track to host, by the end of the year, forty GW of solar, over forty GW of wind, and twenty GW of grid-connected battery storage.

Over the past two decades, 2005-2024, we have seen 104 reactor startups and 101 closures in the world. However, fifty-one of the new grid connections were in China, where no closures have occurred. In other words, the world outside China saw only fifty-three startups but 101 closures, a significant net decline of forty-eight units.

Changes in Nuclear Power

Were there any fundamental changes towards the end of the twenty-year period? Yes, Russia became the dominant international vendor. Over the past five years, 2020–2024, forty construction starts took place, of which twenty-six were in China, one was in Pakistan (by Chinese companies) and the remaining thirteen were implemented by Russian companies in Egypt, India, Türkiye, and at home. Basically, recent nuclear construction efforts can be summed up by saying China builds at home and Russia abroad.

Even China’s nuclear expansion is dwarfed by its renewables buildout. Three new reactors totaling 3.5 GW were connected to the Chinese grid in 2024 – just 0.8 percent of total capacity additions – while 357 GW of solar (278 GW) and wind (seventy-nine GW) capacity – together eighty-three percent of the total – was added at the same time, according to National Energy Administration data. Even if nuclear plants in China generate on average seven times more power per GW than solar and close to four times more than wind, solar and wind each generated two times more electricity than nuclear in 2024. Consequently, the share of nuclear power in the national electricity mix shrunk slightly to around 4.5 percent.

There are countless announcements of nuclear projects around the world, policy decisions, budget allocations, and design developments – especially on SMRs, which seem to be more appropriately called small miraculous reactors – but in the end, the question is what happens on the ground. For the time being, nuclear power remains irrelevant in the world market for electricity generating machines. And potential builders, other than the Chinese and Russians, have yet to prove that they are able to design, build, and commission within tight time-frames and budget constraints. Competitors on the renewable and storage side are accelerating implementation now. The probability is high that these ferocious rivals have digested nuclear’s lunch before the atomic industry has demonstrated that it can actually keep its promises on the ground. That’s the cruel reality.

Mycle Schneider is an international energy and nuclear policy analyst based in Paris, France. He is the initiator, editor, and publisher of the annual World Nuclear Industry Status Report and has worked on these issues for over four decades.

May 17, 2025 Posted by | spinbuster, technology | Leave a comment

Safety failures reported at Hinkley Point C days before environmental trial begins

 PBC Today 14th May 2025,
https://www.pbctoday.co.uk/news/health-safety-news/safety-failures-hinkley-point-crane/151164/

An improvement notice has been served to the Nuclear New Build Generation Company (NNB GenCo) regarding the safety of a damaged tower crane at Hinkley Point C

The enforcement was issued by the Office for Nuclear Regulation after a crane was found to have evidence of cracking in one of the mast sections, and a pin connecting two mast sections was found to have failed.

The issues were discovered by an operator during pre-use checks on site in February. They were subsequently reported to HSE under Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations (RIDDOR).

A failure by NBB to plan, manage and monitor

NNB GenCo are the site licensee and principal contractor for the Hinkley Point C project, and as such is responsible for the faults. The enforcement determines a failure by NNB to plan, manage, and monitor the construction phase as well as health and safety requirements in relation to the maintenance and condition of the tower cranes.

This violates Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015, Regulation 13 (1).

Due to the early detection of the issue, no major incidents occurred, and no injuries were caused.

“Served to ensure that action is taken”

Principal inspector at the Office for Nuclear Regulation John McKenniff said: “While the observed damage did not result in any crane failure or collapse, this improvement notice was served to ensure that action is taken to prevent any similar occurrences in the future.

“We will monitor the actions of NNB GenCo and will consider taking further action if additional shortfalls are identified.”

It has been a busy year for HSE so far, having served fines and warnings for Network Rail as well, among various other health and safety concerns.

Hinkley Point domestic environmental information law trial begins today

A case has been opened against NNB GenCo by Fish Legal, due to NNB changing the plans for fish deterrents on site. The plans originally featured an acoustic fish deterrent, but switched to a saltmarsh in the plan.

The plans have since been reverted to an acoustic deterrent due to a new “safe and effective” method of implementation, but the case is still going ahead due to Fish Legal believing that foreign-owned companies who construct and operate a nuclear power plant in the UK must comply with domestic environmental information laws, providing details on environmental plans when asked – something that NNB has failed to do to date when Fish Legal have asked for details.

May 17, 2025 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

Peace For Ukraine – The disastrous derailment of early peace efforts to end the war.

Brave New Europe, Michael von der Schulenburg, Hajo Funke, Harald Kujat, November 10, 2023 

Michael von der Schulenburg is a former UN Assistant Secretary-General, who worked for over 34 years for the United Nations, and shortly for the OSCE, in many countries in war or internal armed conflicts often involving fragile governments and armed non-state actors

Hajo Funke is Professor Emeritus for political sciences of the Otto-Suhr-Institute/ Freie University Berlin

General (ret.) Harald Kujat was the highest ranging German officer of the Bundeswehr and at NATO

The British Prime Minister’s fateful visit to Kiev on 9 April 2022

This is a detailed reconstruction of the Ukrainian-Russian peace negotiations in March 2022 and the associated mediation attempts by the then Israeli Prime Minister, Naftali Bennett, supported by President Erdogan and former German Chancellor Schröder. It was drawn up by retired General H. Kujat and Professor Emeritus H. Funke, two of the initiators of the recently presented peace plan for Ukraine. And it is also in connection with their peace plan that this reconstruction is so extremely important. It reminds us that we cannot afford to delay ceasefire and peace negotiations again. The human and military situation in Ukraine deteriorates dramatically, with the added danger that it could lead to a further escalation of the war. We need a diplomatic solution to this cruel war for Europe and the Ukraine – and we need it now!

From the detailed reconstruction of the March peace efforts 6 conclusions emerge:

1. Just one month after the start of the Russian military intervention in Ukraine, Ukrainian and Russian negotiators had come very close to an agreement for a ceasefire and to an outline for a comprehensive peace solution to the conflict.

2) In contrast to today, President Zelensky and his government had made great efforts to negotiate peace with Russia and bring the war to a quick end.

3) Contrary to Western interpretations, Ukraine and Russia agreed at the time that the planned NATO expansion was the reason for the war. They therefore focused their peace negotiations on Ukraine’s neutrality and its renunciation of NATO membership. In return, Ukraine would have retained its territorial integrity except for Crimea.

4) There is little doubt that these peace negotiations failed due to resistance from NATO and in particular from the USA and the UK. The reasons is that such a peace agreement would have been tantamount to a defeat for NATO, an end to NATO’s eastward expansion and thus an end to the dream of a unipolar world dominated by the USA.

5. The failure of the peace negotiations in March 2022 led to dangerous intensification of the war that has cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of people, especially young people, deeply traumatized a young generation and inflicted the most severe mental and physical wounds on them. Ukraine has been exposed to enormous destruction, internal displacements, and mass impoverishment. This si accompanied by a large-scale depopulation of the country. Not only Russia, but also NATO and the West bear a heavy share of the blame for this disaster.

6) Ukraine’s negotiating position today is far worse than it was in March 2022. Ukraine will now lose large parts of its territory.

7. The blocking of the peace negotiations at that time has harmed everyone: Russia and Europe – but above all the people of Ukraine, who are paying with their blood the price for the ambitions of the major powers and will probably get nothing in return.

Michael von der Schulenburg

HOW THE CHANCE WAS LOST FOR A PEACE SETTLEMENT OF THE UKRAINE WAR

AND THE WEST WANTED TO CONTINUE THE WAR INSTEAD

A detailed reconstruction of events in March 2022

Hajo Funke and Harald Kujat, Berlin, October 2023

In March 2022, direct peace negotiations between Ukrainian and Russian delegations and mediation efforts by the then Israeli Prime Minster, Naftali Bennet created a genuine chance for ending the war peacefully only four to five weeks after Russia had invaded Ukraine. However, instead of ending the war through negotiations as Ukrainian President Zelensky and his government appeared to have wanted, he ultimately bowed to pressures from some Western powers to abandon a negotiated solution. Western powers wanted this war to continue in the hope to break Russia. Ukraine’s decision to abandon negotiations may been taken before the discovery of a massacre of civilians in the town of Bucha near Kiev.

In the following is an attempt of a step-by-step reconstruction of the events that led to the peace negotiations in March and their collapse in early April 2022.

IN EARLY MARCH 2022, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER NAFTALI BENNETT UNDERTOOK MEDIATION EFFORTS …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

APPARENT INITIAL SUPPORT OF MEDIATION EFFORTS BY WESTERN POLITICIANS.

Proof of initial Western politicians’ support for the negotiations emerges from the sequence of telephone calls and meetings during the period from early March to at least mid-March. On March 4, Scholz and Putin spoke on the phone; on March 5, Bennett met Putin in Moscow; on March 6, Bennett and Scholz met in Berlin; on March 7, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany discussed the issue in a videoconference; on March 8, Macron and Scholz spoke on the phone; on March 10, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Kuleba and Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov met in Ankara; on March 12, Scholz and Zelensky and Scholz and Macron spoke on the phone; and on March 14, Scholz and Erdogan met in Ankara. (Cf. Petra Erler: Re: Review March 2022: Who did not want a quick end to the war in Ukraine, in: “News of a Lighthouse Keeper,” Sept. 1, 2023)

NATO SPECIAL SUMMIT OF MARCH 24, 2022 IN BRUSSELS OPPOSES ALL NEGOCIATIONS

But this initial support quickly turned sour, with NATO opposing any such negotiations before Russia doesn’t withdraws all its troops from Ukrainian territories. This, in fact, killed all negotiations. Michael von der Schulenburg, former UN Assistant Secretary-General (ASG) in UN peace missions, writes that “NATO had already decided at a special summit on March 24, 2022, not to support these peace negotiations (between Ukraine and Russia).” (Cf. Michael von der Schulenburg: UN Charter: Negotiations! In: Emma, March 6, 2023). The US president had flown in especially for this special summit to Brussels. Obviously, peace as negotiated by the Russian and Ukrainian negotiating delegations was not in the interest of some NATO countries.

AT FIRST ZELENSKY STICKS TO THE OUTCOME OF THE PEACE NEGOTIATIONS

“As late as March 27, 2022, Zelensky had shown the courage to defend the results of the Ukrainian-Russian peace negotiations in public before Russian journalists – and this despite the fact that NATO had already decided at a special summit on March 24, 2022, not to support these peace negotiations.” (Ibid)

According to von der Schulenburg, the Russian-Ukrainian peace negotiations had been a historically unique feature, made possible only because Russians and Ukrainians knew each other well and “spoke the same language and probably even knew each other personally.” We know of no other war or armed conflict in which the conflict parties agreed on specific peace terms so quickly.

On March 28, Putin, as a sign of goodwill and in support of the peace negotiations, declared readiness to withdraw troops from the Kharkov area and the Kiev area; this apparently occurred even before his public announcement.

THE PEACE NEGOTIATIONS UNRAVEL

On March 29, 2022, the day of the Istanbul meeting, Scholz, Biden, Draghi, Macron, and Johnson again spoke on the phone about the situation in Ukraine. By this time, the stance of key Western allies had apparently hardened. They formulated preconditions for negotiations that were in blatant contrast to Bennett’s and Erdogan’s peace efforts: “The leaders agreed to continue to provide strong support to Ukraine. They again urged Russian President Putin to agree to a ceasefire, to cease all hostilities, to withdraw Russian soldiers from Ukraine and to allow for a diplomatic solution (…)” (Petra Erler: Re: Review March 2022: Who Didn’t Want a Quick End to the War in Ukraine (in “News of a Lighthouse Keeper” September 1, 2023).

The Washington Post reported April 5 that in NATO, continuing the war is preferred to a cease-fire and negotiated settlement: “For some in NATO, it’s better for Ukrainians to keep fighting and dying than to achieve a peace that comes too soon or at too high a price for Kiev and the rest of Europe.” Zelensky, he said, should “keep fighting until Russia is completely defeated.”

BORIS JOHNSON’S MESSAGE TO UKRAINIANS ON APRIL 9, 2022: WE MUST CONTINUE THE WAR

On April 9, 2022, Boris Johnson arrived unannounced in Kiev and told the Ukrainian president that the West was not ready to end the war. According to Britain’s Guardian on April 28, PM Johnson had “instructed” Ukrainian President Zelensky “not to make any concessions to Putin”:

“Ukrainska Pravda” reported on this in detail in two articles on May 5, 2022:

“No sooner had the Ukrainian negotiators and Abramovich/Medinsky agreed in broad terms on the structure of a possible future agreement after the Istanbul results than British Prime Minister Boris Johnson appeared in Kiev almost without warning.

Johnson brought two simple messages with him to Kiev. The first is that Putin is a war criminal; he should be pressured, not negotiated with. The second is that even if Ukraine is willing to sign some agreements with Putin on guarantees, but that the collective West is not. 

The Neue Züricher Zeitung (NZZ) reported on April 12 that the British government under Johnson is counting on a Ukrainian military victory. Conservative Member of the House of Commons Alicia Kearns said, “We’d rather arm the Ukrainians to the teeth than give Putin a success.” British Foreign Secretary (and later Prime Minister) Liz Truss professed in a keynote speech that “victory for Ukraine (…) is a strategic imperative for us all and therefore military support must be massively expanded”. Guardian columnist Simon Jenkins warned: “Liz Truss risks inflaming the war in Ukraine for her own ambitions.” This, he said, was probably the first Tory election campaign “to be fought on Russia’s borders.” Johnson and Truss wanted Zelensky “to keep fighting until Russia is completely defeated. They need a triumph in their proxy war. In the meantime, anyone who disagrees with them can be dismissed as a weakling, a coward, or a Putin supporter. That this conflict is being exploited by Britain for a sleazy upcoming leadership contest is sickening.”

Following his second visit to Kiev on April 25, 2022, U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said the U.S. wants to use the opportunity to permanently weaken Russia militarily and economically in the wake of the Ukraine war. According to the New York Times, the U.S. government is no longer concerned with a fight over control of Ukraine, but with a fight against Moscow in the wake of a new Cold War.

At the April 26, 2022, meeting of defense ministers from NATO members and other countries convened by Austin in Ramstein, Rhineland-Palatinate/ Germany, the Pentagon chief declared the military victory of Ukraine as a strategic goal.

CONCLUSION: MISSED OPPORTUNITY

Based on the publicly available reports and documents, it is not only plain that there was a serious willingness to negotiate on the part of both Ukraine and Russia in March 2022. Apparently, the negotiating parties even agreed on a draft treaty ad referendum. Zelensky and Putin were ready for a bilateral meeting to finalize the outcome of the negotiations. Fact is that the main results of the negotiations were based on a proposal by Ukraine, and Zelenskyy courageously supported them in an interview with Russian journalists on March 27, 2022, even after NATO decided against these peace negotiations. Zelensky had already expressed similar support beforehand in a sign that proves that the intended outcome of the Istanbul negotiations certainly corresponded to Ukrainian interests. 

. This makes the Western intervention, which prevented an early end to the war, even more disastrous for Ukraine. Russia’s responsibility for the attack, which was contrary to international law, is not relativized by the fact that responsibility for the grave consequences that Ukraine’s Western supporters that ensued must also be attributed to the states that demanded the continuation of the war. The war has now reached a stage where further dangerous escalation and an expansion of hostilities can only be prevented by a cease-fire. It may now be the last time that a peaceful resolution through negotiations could be achieved……………….. https://braveneweurope.com/michael-von-der-schulenburg-hajo-funke-harald-kujat-peace-for-ukraine

May 17, 2025 Posted by | politics international, Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Never, Ever Let Anyone Forget What They Did To Gaza

Caitlin Johnstone, 16 May 25, https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/never-ever-let-anyone-forget-what?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=82124&post_id=163621431&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

I will never forget the Gaza holocaust. I will never let anyone else forget about the Gaza holocaust.

No matter what happens or how this thing turns out, I will never let anyone my voice touches forget that our rulers did the most evil things imaginable right in front of us and lied to us about it the entire time.

I will never stop doing everything I can with my own small platform to help ensure that the perpetrators of this mass atrocity are brought to justice.

I will never stop doing everything I can to help bring down the western empire and to help free Palestine from the Zionist entity.

I will never forget those shaking children. Those tiny shredded bodies. Those starved, skeletal forms. The explosions followed by screams. The atrocities followed by western media silence.

I will never forget, and I will never forgive. I will never forgive our leaders. I will never forgive the western press. I will never forgive Israel. I will never forgive the mainstream US political parties. I will always want for them exactly what they wanted for the Palestinians.

No matter what happens or what they do in the future, they will always be the people who did this to Gaza. They will always be the people who inflicted this nightmare upon our species. That will always be the most significant thing about them. It will always be the single most defining characteristic about who they are as human beings.

And the same is true of all the ordinary members of the public who continued to stand with Israel long after evidence of its criminality became undeniable. They are genocide supporters, first and foremost.

If you stood on the side of Israel during the Gaza holocaust, then that is the most important thing about you, and it always will be. It doesn’t matter if you go to church on Sunday. It doesn’t matter if you are nice to your children and your pets. It doesn’t matter if you give money to charity, support local farmers, or drive an electric vehicle. The thing that matters most about you as a person is that you supported history’s first live-streamed genocide, and it always will be the thing that matters most about you.

I will keep bringing this up. Year after year. Decade after decade. I will keep rubbing everyone’s face in it. I will never tire of doing so. I will always do my part to remind the world who these people are, and what they did to Gaza.

May 17, 2025 Posted by | Gaza, Religion and ethics | Leave a comment

Beyond Iran: a new nuclear doctrine for the Persian Gulf

By Seyed Hossein Mousavian | May 13, 2025, https://thebulletin.org/2025/05/beyond-iran-a-new-nuclear-doctrine-for-the-persian-gulf/?utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Former%20NIH%20director%20on%20DOGE%20cuts&utm_campaign=20250515%20Thursday%20Newsletter

Ambassador (Ret.) Seyed Hossein Mousavian is a Middle East security and nuclear policy specialist at Princeton University and a former spokesman for Iran’s nuclear negotiators. He is the author of many books including: The Iranian Nuclear Crisis: A Memoir, Iran and the United States: An Insider’s view on the Failed Past and the Road to Peace; A Middle East Free of Weapons of Mass Destruction and A New Structure for Security, Peace, and Cooperation in the Persian Gulf.

After a letter was exchanged between US President Donald Trump and Iranian Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and since the first talks of April 12, four rounds of indirect and direct bilateral negotiations about Iran’s nuclear program have made progress. Iran Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and President Trump’s chief negotiator Steve Witkoff are leading the talks.

At this stage of the talks, both sides should have reached a mutual understanding on verification and transparency measures. Iran’s full cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) through implementation of the Additional Protocol, the most crucial inspection and verification mechanism, would resolve existing technical ambiguities over the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program.

In 2018, President Trump pulled out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, also known as the Iran nuclear deal, after calling it the “worst deal ever.” On Tuesday, during his first trip in the Middle East of his second presidency, Trump said he wants to make a deal with Iran again. President Trump cherishes big, out-of-the-box deals. As he tours the region, Trump should think beyond Iran’s nuclear issue and work to achieve the denuclearization of the entire Middle East.

Iran’s uranium enrichment dilemma. From 2003 to 2013, nuclear negotiations between the world powers and Iran failed because the United States denied Iran’s right to peaceful uranium enrichment activities. However, according to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), all member countries have the right to peaceful enrichment. Japan, Germany, Brazil, and Argentina have been allowed to develop enrichment programs—and so should Iran be.

The nuclear negotiations from 2013 to 2015 led to the Iran nuclear deal because, then, the United States did not oppose the principle of Iran enriching uranium for peaceful purposes. With the implementation of the JCPOA, Iran cooperated with the IAEA, and by December 2015, all of the agency’s technical ambiguities were resolved. After the first Trump administration withdrew from the JCPOA and imposed maximum pressure sanctions on Iran, Tehran responded by reducing its commitments under the deal, expanding its enrichment program and ultimately becoming a nuclear-threshold state.

Now, the second Trump administration is once again questioning Iran’s legal and legitimate right to enrichment of uranium for civilian purposes. In the last few days, Witkoff said that Iran should abandon enrichment, and Araghchi responded that this is Iran’s red line.

From several decades of experience with and knowledge about Iran’s nuclear program, it is clear to me that President Trump might only be capable of reaching a nuclear agreement with Iran if his red line were limited to Iran never acquiring a nuclear bomb, rather than denying Iran’s legitimate and legal rights to develop peaceful nuclear technology, including enrichment. Under no circumstances will Iran accept discrimination, humiliation, and deprivation of its international rights.

Regional proliferation risk. Reaching a nuclear agreement between the United States and Iran is certainly an urgent and vital necessity to eliminate one of the nuclear proliferation risks in the Middle East. However, the issue of non-proliferation in the region goes far beyond Iran’s uranium enrichment.

Even in an unlikely scenario of an agreement between Iran and the United States, in which  Iran would give up enrichment, the problem would persist for several reasons:

Acceptance of enrichment by Saudi Arabia would open the gate for more regional powers in the Middle East to pursue enrichment.

Iran’s enrichment capability and know-how are immutable. Even a military attack would not eliminate them.

According to NPT’s Article 10, all members have the right to withdraw from the treaty. This alternative will remain available to Iran, especially as US-Iran hostilities cannot be resolved through a single-issue nuclear agreement.

Israel is the only country in the Middle East that possesses dozens of nuclear weapons. For decades, this reality has blocked UN initiatives and resolutions aimed at establishing a Middle East free of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. Yet, Israel continues to receive the strongest US and Western support. However, the status of Israel as the “nuclear gendarme” of the Middle East will not endure.

Saudi Arabia and the United States are negotiating a nuclear deal under which the United States would accept Saudi enrichment.

A deal that focuses solely on Iran’s nuclear program would fail to address the broader—and equally pressing—issues of nuclear proliferation in the region. Therefore, a new regional nuclear doctrine is inevitable.

A two-step roadmap could lead to the historic and monumental achievement of denuclearizing the Middle East.

Establishment of a Persian Gulf nuclear consortium. As a first  step, the Trump administration should work with regional stakeholders to define a new nuclear doctrine for Persian Gulf through establishment of a Persian Gulf Consortium. Such a doctrine should consist of a concerted effort to create a comprehensive and inclusive nuclear nonproliferation framework—a major stepping-stone toward greater regional cooperation, security, and stability in the Persian Gulf. A new doctrine could be articulated around four core principles.

A regional enrichment consortium. A consortium for enrichment, like Europe’s enrichment company Eurenco, could be established to mitigate proliferation risk in the Persian Gulf. This consortium would allow countries in the Persian Gulf and the wider Middle East to participate in uranium enrichment under strict, multilateral oversight, ensuring that all enrichment activities are for peaceful purposes only. The regional enrichment consortium would ensure that the process of enrichment is conducted peacefully, transparently, and under the supervision of both regional stakeholders and the IAEA. This model could help alleviate regional and international concerns about the potential for nuclear weapons development while enabling states to pursue the peaceful use of nuclear energy.

May 17, 2025 Posted by | MIDDLE EAST, politics international | Leave a comment

Can the UK’s 24GW of new nuclear by 2050 target be met? Revisiting the Nuclear Roadmap

29 Apr 2025, Stephen Thomas, University of Greenwich,
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5194931

Abstract

The UK government faces the prospect of having to make major public spending cuts in it June 2025 Public Spending Review, a review covering public expenditure over the following five years. Its plans for expanding nuclear power would require investments of public money in tens of billions of pounds in that period and these must therefore come under scrutiny.

The key decisions are whether to make a Final Investment Decision on the Sizewell C nuclear power plant, which would be majority owned by the government and whether to continue with Small Modular Reactor competition that would see orders placed for four reactors fully funded by government.

I argue that these projects represent poor value for money and will do little to help UK achieve its legally binding target of net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

May 17, 2025 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

What does the Cour des Comptes Report mean for Hinkley Point C and Sizewell C?

29 Apr 2025, Stephen Thomas, University of Greenwich, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5195981

Abstract

The January 2024 report by France’s Cour des Comptes on the future of the European Pressurised Reactor sheds light on the prospects for the UK’s Hinkley Point C and Sizewell C projects. It shows that the main contractor and a key financier, the state-owned Electricité de France does not have the human and financial resources to complete these projects without compromising its ability to fulfil its primary obligations in France.

I argue that the Hinkley Point C project, under construction since 2016, should be scaled back to no more than one rather than two reactors. The Sizewell C project, yet to reach a final investment decision despite the expenditure of at least £3.7bn of UK taxpayer money, should be abandoned. 

May 17, 2025 Posted by | business and costs, safety | Leave a comment

NUCLEAR HOTSEAT podcast – Nuclear Radiation Cancer Zone: Piketon Ohio’s Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant

Podcast at https://www.nuclearhotseat.com/podcast/piketon-nuclear-radiation-cancer/

: Dangers Grow in Nuclear Radiation Cancer Zone: Piketon Ohio’s Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant – Journalist Jason Salley

The Nuclear Hotseat Hot Story with Linda Pentz. Gunter

Reopen Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant? Ukraine should do renewables instead.

This Week’s Featured Interview:

  • Jason Salley is an investigative journalist known for his hard-hitting reporting on environmental contamination and government oversight. With a focus on uncovering the hidden truths of Appalachia, his work has exposed decades of radioactive pollution and corporate negligence at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant in Pike County, Ohio. Salley’s fearless storytelling and relentless pursuit of the facts have made him a powerful voice for the communities impacted by America’s nuclear legacy………………

Libbe HaLevy produces and hosts Nuclear Hotseat, the weekly international news magazine on all things anti-nuclear. She has been a TEDx speaker, an Amazon #1 Bestselling Author, hosted rallies, and led media workshops at anti-nuclear conferences around the country.

May 17, 2025 Posted by | Resources -audiovicual | Leave a comment