nuclear-news

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

Britain’s Storm Shadow tech transfer to Ukraine will lead to more escalation. We need dialogue!

Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, August 25, 2026, https://cnduk.org/britains-storm-shadow-tech-transfer-to-ukraine-will-lead-to-more-escalation-we-need-dialogue/?link_id=1&can_id=0a448bf4278898648e02a8f6dea4650f&source=email-britain-pushes-for-more-escalation-in-ukraine-aukus-webinar-register-for-cnd-agm-policy-conference&email_referrer=email_3374903&email_subject=britain-pushes-for-more-escalation-in-ukraine-aukus-webinar-register-for-cnd-conference

Britain’s decision to join France in transferring classified Storm Shadow blueprints to Ukraine so it can domestically produce the long-range cruise missile will only increase nuclear risks, warns CND.  

Prime Minister Andy Burnham made the announcement about the technology transfer during a visit to Kyiv on Monday.

The Storm Shadow is co-produced with France by the multi-national arms company MBDA and has a range of 155 miles (250km). The air-launched missiles also have bunker-busting warheads and are capable of hitting Russian targets in its territory. In November 2024, the British government, in coordination with the US administration, gave permission for Ukraine to use these weapons to hit targets deep inside Russian territory. This was in spite of Russia’s threat to use its nuclear weapons against such long-range attacks. 

France already agreed to hand over its own blueprints for the SCALP-EG (its French export name) in July, as part of a wider arms deal that included Rafale fighter jets and interceptor missiles.  

On Sunday, Russia’s foreign ministry said it had withdrawn its ambassador to London, Andrei Kelin, accusing Britain of choosing a “path of confrontation.”  This comes after Russia announced that there would be consequences for attacks on civilian infrastrcutrue by British-made long-range drones. Some reports have suggested that this could mean British drone factories could be attacked by “unknown sources.” 

Burnham’s announcement has been interpreted as an attempt by Britain and France to push the US into giving Ukraine its Patriot interceptor technology so it can produce them locally. During July’s NATO summit, Donald Trump told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that the US would give a licence to produce Patriots only to backtrack on the promise weeks later saying it “a hard thing to give away.”

The reversal coincided with an escalation in the US’s illegal war on Iran in July. That conflict, ongoing since February, has led to a shortage in stocks of both Patriot and Tomahawk as the US and its Gulf allies use them to counter Iranian ballistic missiles and drones. It’s estimated that only 1,000 Patriot missiles remain in US stocks and current annual production is currently 600. Plans are already in place to set up new production lines in Germany and Poland to help replenish their stocks given to Ukraine, while Zelensky is also calling for a line to be set up in Ukraine. 

CND General Secretary Sophie Bolt said:
“The British government’s strategy of escalation is very dangerous. We have already seen the nuclear risks from such escalation in 2024 when Russia threatened to use its nuclear weapons against long-range missiles. Burnham needs to end this reckless war-mongering and focus on dialogue and de-escalation.” 

August 29, 2026 Posted by | UK, Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Romania steps up efforts to restart Cernavoda nuclear reactors

By Iulian Ernst in Bucharest August 24, 2026, https://www.intellinews.com/romania-steps-up-efforts-to-restart-cernavoda-nuclear-reactors-462977/

Romanian authorities are changing their approach to restoring water levels at the Cernavoda nuclear power plant, with national waterways management company Apele Romane (Romanian Waters) building a temporary dam on the Danube and state-controlled hydropower group Hidroelectrica releasing additional water from its Olt River reservoirs to support the restart of at least one of the two reactors currently offline, according to G4Media and Radio Romania.

The measures follow several weeks of emergency interventions that included dredging and attempts to sink barges loaded with stone in an effort to raise water levels near the nuclear plant’s intake. Those measures produced insufficient results, leaving Romania dependent on more expensive electricity imports during peak consumption hours.

Under the revised strategy, Apele Romane is constructing a transverse guide dam on the Old Danube arm to redirect water towards the intake channel serving the plant. Emergency dredging is continuing in the Cernavoda area under the coordination of the Lower Danube River Administration and Apele Romane.

Hidroelectrica has meanwhile started releasing additional water from reservoirs on the Olt River. According to Antena 3, the company can release around 50 cubic metres per second for five days, although water reserves in the Olt system have also been reduced following several months of drought.

The Ministry of National Defence has resumed support for the emergency works. Military specialists will carry out topobathymetric and geodetic measurements, while military divers will participate in underwater interventions.

The effectiveness of the measures remains constrained by the exceptionally low flow of the Danube. Water entering Romania’s section of the river is currently around 1,300 cubic metres per second, roughly one-third of the multi-annual average.

According to the forecast for August 22-29, the flow is expected to remain at around this level for the first three days before gradually increasing to approximately 1,550 cubic metres per second. The expected natural increase would therefore provide considerably more water than the temporary releases from the Olt reservoirs.

The engineering works could eventually have a larger effect by improving the flow towards the nuclear plant’s intake, but their impact is unlikely to be sufficient immediately. This leaves the timing of a reactor restart dependent primarily on the availability of adequate cooling water.

Cernavoda’s two reactors, each with an installed capacity of 680 MW, have been taken offline because of insufficient Danube water for cooling. Their prolonged outage has increased Romania’s reliance on electricity imports during a period of high summer consumption. Out of the 7,500 MW consumed by Romania during the peak hours, it imports 1,00-2,500 MW.

August 29, 2026 Posted by | business and costs, climate change, EUROPE | Leave a comment

Trump Sends Nuclear Agreement With Saudi Arabia to Congress

The president still insists that the deal is contingent on the kingdom normalizing relations with Israel

By Michael R. Gordon and Robbie Gramer, 

President Trump has submitted a landmark nuclear
accord with Saudi Arabia to Congress for review, but hasn’t dropped his
last minute condition that the kingdom normalize relations with Israel, an
administration official said.

 Wall St Journal 25th Aug 2026,
https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/trump-sends-nuclear-agreement-with-saudi-arabia-to-congress-7f01af2c

August 29, 2026 Posted by | politics, Saudi Arabia, USA | Leave a comment

New nuclear plan could deliver up to 6 GW of power to data centers by 2040

NANO Nuclear and Tillman are planning up to 6 GW of advanced nuclear power for future data-center campuses.

Interesting Engineering. By Neetika Walter, Aug 24, 2026 

US-based nuclear technology company NANO Nuclear Energy has signed a non-binding commercial framework with Tillman Global Holdings to explore deploying advanced nuclear reactors across large AI data-center developments in the US.

The companies are targeting at least 2 gigawatts of advanced nuclear capacity by the mid-2030s and 6 GW or more by 2040. The plans remain subject to definitive agreements, customer commitments, financing, regulatory approvals and other project requirements.

The framework identifies NANO Nuclear as Tillman’s anticipated preferred nuclear technology provider for its planned AI industrial zones. Tillman is developing a multi-state pipeline of sites designed around the large power requirements of hyperscale and AI customers.

The companies plan to evaluate potential sites, licensing requirements, customer demand, and project financing as individual developments move forward. The broader strategy is to reserve space for nuclear generation alongside other power sources as data-center campuses expand.

Nuclear enters the data-center mix

NANO Nuclear’s KRONOS MMR Energy System is a 15-megawatt high-temperature gas-cooled reactor designed for modular and phased deployment. The companies say that architecture could allow nuclear capacity to be added in stages as electricity demand grows across large data-center campuses.

The arrangement pairs Tillman’s experience in developing and financing large digital and energy infrastructure with NANO Nuclear’s reactor technology and nuclear licensing capabilities. The proposed model could also allow Tillman or its affiliates to own and finance qualifying power projects while NANO Nuclear supplies reactors and fuel and supports development and operations………………….

Gigawatts planned for AI

The proposed deployment pathway would start with 2 GW or more of advanced nuclear capacity by the mid-2030s before expanding to at least 6 GW by 2040. The companies are also evaluating potential projects in selected international markets where Tillman has digital infrastructure interests.

The framework contemplates a milestone-based equity arrangement as well. Tillman could receive warrants to purchase up to $100 million of NANO Nuclear stock, with most of the warrants tied to future reactor purchase commitments and project-development milestones.

It also includes a proposed $5 million initial restricted stock grant to Tillman, with most of that grant subject to additional milestones. The terms remain subject to definitive agreements.

Tillman Co-President Sachit Ahuja said the company is planning for the long-term electricity requirements of its AI campuses…………

The companies now need to move from the commercial framework to site-specific development, licensing and financing agreements before any reactors can be deployed. https://interestingengineering.com/energy/advanced-nuclear-power-ai-data-centers

August 29, 2026 Posted by | Small Modular Nuclear Reactors | Leave a comment

Is Putin about to test ‘Flying Chernobyl’ nuclear-powered missile that can fly for DAYS?

By WILL STEWART and SOPHIA STANFORD, 25 August 2026,
https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-16078037/Putin-test-Flying-Chernobyl.html

Vladimir Putin may be about to test a nuclear-powered cruise missile – dubbed the Flying Chernobyl – that can fly for days, according to analysts.

An influx of aircraft and shipping has converged in the Arctic in a telltale sign that a new experimental firing is expected of a weapon powered by its own atomic reactor, say analysts.

The ‘invincible’ Burevestnik missile – with a nickname inspired by the nuclear catastrophe that could be inflicted, much like the Chernobyl power plant explosion in 1986 – carries a nuclear warhead with an ‘unlimited range’ and is designed to fly for days at a time before striking the West, according to the Russians.

Norwegian defence analyst Thord Are Iversen said the movements followed the pattern seen during previous tests of Putin’s experimental 9M730 Burevestnik cruise missile.

‘It now appears that everything is ready for actual Burevestnik flight testing,’ he told independent Russian outlet The Insider.

In the Arctic, two specialist Il-976 SKIP aircraft used to monitor missile trajectories and collect test data arrived at Rogachyovo airbase on the remote Novaya Zemlya archipelago, reports say.

Satellite imagery also shows an A-50U airborne early-warning aircraft, four An-26 military transports, an An-74 and several helicopters at the base amid a suspected test of Putin’s Flying Chernobyl missile.

Civilian vessels previously involved in missile trials have taken up positions in the Barents and Kara seas around the Pankovo test range.

August 29, 2026 Posted by | Russia, weapons and war | Leave a comment

California´s last working nuclear power plant sits in a landscape that would worry any firefighter when the wind picks up.

Federal wildfire crews are stretched thin. California is stepping in to help

By ASSOCIATED PRESS, 26 August 2026

California´s last working nuclear power plant sits cradled in a landscape that would worry any firefighter when the wind picks up.

The Pacific Ocean and its perpetual fog lick the western edge of the coastal bluffs holding the Diablo Canyon Power Plant. But the Irish Hills rise steeply to its east – their slopes rugged, dark with scrub and oak. Difficult to access, and full of fuel.

“Any fire within the Diablo power plant area could be catastrophic,” said Dave Erickson, a division chief and forester with the Cal Fire San Luis Obispo unit. The property, he said, is in a very high fire severity zone. “So we just take precautions.”

It´s one of the many places where California is now stepping into federal gaps created by Congress´ long-term underinvestment in fuels management on federal lands, the Trump administration´s cuts, and firefighters stretched thin by blazes raging across the West.

A local organization with state funding, the San Luis Obispo County Community Fire Safe Council, started carving a fuel break into the surrounding ridgelines. And Erickson put his crews to work closing the gaps, to create a critical toehold for firefighters to get ahead of flames………………………………….

The stakes are high for California, where wildfires have burned through millions of acres in the last decade – killing more than 220 people, hastening the deaths of tens of thousands more, and racking up tens to hundreds of billions of dollars in damage.

But the costs are high, too. California has spent nearly half a billion dollars in grants for wildfire resilience and forest health projects on federal lands since Gov. Gavin Newsom took office, according to the California Natural Resources Agency…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
https://www.dailymail.com/wires/ap/article-16079773/Federal-wildfire-crews-stretched-California-stepping-help.html

August 29, 2026 Posted by | climate change, USA | Leave a comment

Could nuclear fusion become economically viable?

 Prototype fusion power plants are under construction. And now scientists
have come up with a measure called “economic Q” to assess their
commercial viability. The idea — published last month in the Journal of
Fusion Energy and taking in such factors as construction costs and energy
price — aligns with growing investor confidence.

Privately held fusion
companies raised $4.5bn over the past year alone, according to the Fusion
Industry 2026 report. There are now more than 50 such companies. Last
month, General Fusion, a Canadian outfit backed by Jeff Bezos, became the
first publicly listed fusion company. These signals hint at an important
shift: fusion energy is gradually being perceived less as a scientific
challenge and more as an economic one. External factors — energy shocks,
geopolitical instability, climate change, energy-intensive AI — have also
cast this perpetually fledgling technology in a flattering light.

 FT 25th Aug 2026, https://www.ft.com/content/9a1f39cf-e622-4c68-bb80-0fb93bcec3ec

August 29, 2026 Posted by | business and costs, technology | 1 Comment

The Race to Power AI Is Reviving America’s Nuclear Ambitions

By Haley Zaremba – Aug 25, 2026, https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/The-Race-to-Power-AI-Is-Reviving-Americas-Nuclear-Ambitions.html

  • Surging AI and data-center electricity demand is attracting billions of dollars to advanced nuclear technologies.
  • SMRs could offer a cheaper and more flexible alternative to traditional nuclear plants, but none are commercially operating in the United States yet.
  • Applied Atomics is reviving BWXT’s shelved mPower technology and Virginia test infrastructure in an effort to commercialize modular nuclear power.

The artificial intelligence boom is supercharging the development of next-gen nuclear energy technology. Big Tech and private equity are catalyzing the research and development of cutting-edge approaches to round-the-clock clean energy production as hyperscalers add power-hungry data centers to the grid at a blistering rate.

“A single hyperscale data center can consume as much electricity as 50,000 homes,” writes the MIT Energy Initiative. “U.S. data centers consumed more than 4% of the country’s total electricity in 2023, and by 2030 that fraction could rise to 9%,” MIT goes on to warn. This means that the expansion of data centers to fuel the integration of AI into everything from your email provider to your electric toothbrush is seriously changing the way we consume – and therefore the way we produce – energy in the United States and beyond. Not only do we need to expand energy production capacity at a breakneck pace, but we also need to find a way to do so without throwing climate goals out the window. 

As a result, venture capital funding is going gangbusters for both nuclear fusion and fission startups. According to a recent report from Axios, global investment in both fission and fusion has topped USD $4.5 billion across 81 companies in 2026 so far. At this rate, projections show that 2026 will shatter the previous annual record of $6.2 billion for 93 companies in 2025.

Some of the biggest figures and deepest pockets in Silicon Valley are throwing their weight behind nuclear energy advancement as a silver bullet solution to the energy monster that AI is creating. Major investors include Microsoft’s Bill Gates and OpenAI’s Sam Altman. “There’s no way to get there without a breakthrough,” Altman said at the 2024 World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. “It motivates us to go invest more in fusion.”

In addition to nuclear fusion, there is a lot of buzz around the potential for small modular reactors (SMRs) to transform the aging and ailing nuclear power sector in the United States. These smaller and cheaper reactors hold considerable promise for overcoming some of the hurdles that have been causing nuclear energy to fall out of fashion in the last several decades. 

Traditional nuclear power plants are enormously expensive and time-consuming to develop. The United States’ newest traditional nuclear power plant, Georgia’s Plant Vogtle, finally came online in 2024, years late and billions of dollars over budget. While this has scared a lot of policymakers and investors away from large-scale nuclear power, there is hope that SMRs could allow for a more agile energy future at a time when carbon-free energy sources are sorely needed. 

However, SMRs have been slow to deliver on the considerable hype behind them. While billions of dollars have gone toward developing the technology, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission only approved NuScale’s uprated SMR design last year, there are still zero commercial SMRs operating in the country. Some experts think that the buzz has turned to bust. But others, buoyed by the new wave of investment interest driven by the AI boom, think that the timing is finally right for the SMR revolution. 

For example, a duo of scientists with SpaceX pedigrees is taking advantage of an abandoned SMR test facility in Virginia, with the hopes of being the team to push the SMR revolution over the finish line and into commercial reality. “We’re standing on the shoulders of giants here, right?” Applied Atomics co-founder Ben Kellie recently told the Washington Post. “We’re starting with something that had $400 million in investment put into it, and significant time and effort. That’s a leg up.”

Whether this project is the one that will ultimately serve as a proof-of-concept for SMRs, it will at the very least provide more data in a nascent field where hard numbers are sorely needed. “It is not just about whether the technology is viable,” David Schlissel, a ‘longtime nuclear consultant to consumer and environmental groups,’ told the Washington Post. “It is also whether the cost is viable. … The industry is running around with all this hype trying to sell nuclear broadly. But they still have not fully tested and built any of these new reactors.”

August 28, 2026 Posted by | Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, USA | Leave a comment

Construction costs and financing of new nuclear power plants in Switzerland.

Source :
Neu U (2026) Construction costs and financing of new nuclear power plants in Switzerland. Swiss Academies Reports 21 (6)

This report provides a more detailed analysis of the observed development of construction costs for new nuclear power plants and discusses the potential costs of a new plant in Switzerland, as well as the associated uncertainties. Furthermore, it presents current financing models in Europe and the financial risks for the state and the economy associated with such construction.

In addition, current financing models in Europe and
the financial risks associated with construction for the state and the
economy are presented.

[Paul Dorfman says: The report is significant
because, unlike many other cost studies, it derives the risks from real
construction projects and, for the first time, also takes into account the
immense financing costs during the long construction period of a nuclear
power plant. It therefore estimates the expenditures to be 20 to 30 %
higher than estimates that consider only the pure construction costs.
According to the report, these account for around 70 % of the total costs
over the plant’s service life.

The study authors concludes, without billions in federal guarantees, no private investor would be willing to take on the financial risk.]

 Swiss Academy of Sciences 21st Aug 2026, https://scnat.ch/en/uuid/i/5e8fa25a-bfa9-54ac-b33b-4e5f464f8561-Baukosten_und_Finanzierung_von_neuen_Kernkraftwerken_in_der_Schweiz

August 28, 2026 Posted by | business and costs, Switzerland | Leave a comment

A Nuclear Option Against Iran Would Be a Catastrophe – Not a Solution

Taut Bataut, August 21, 2026, https://journal-neo.su/2026/08/21/a-nuclear-option-against-iran-would-be-a-catastrophe-not-a-solution/

Driven by desperation after failing conventionally in West Asia, the U.S. demonstrates reckless foreign policy by entertaining the use of tactical nuclear weapons to forcibly capture the Strait of Hormuz and preserve petrodollar hegemony.

his reliance on nuclear blackmail reflects a long-standing U.S. pattern of resorting to aggressive, unconventional force whenever its global military dominance is challenged.

A line in the sand that, once crossed, cannot be uncrossed. “They are discussing using nuclear weapons on Iran in strategy meetings. Yes, you read that correctly. It’s real. I’m not speculating; I know. And it’s pure evil.” This is what former US Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene wrote on her X account on 17 August 2026. Although this statement is neither confirmed by the White House nor does it unveil any implicit information, the mere consideration of such an option signals a dangerous psychological shift in U.S. foreign policy. Heading towards any such move against Iran could result in global catastrophe, and the consequences would then be out of control. The real query here is whether the ongoing Middle Eastern volatility is paving the way for a nuclear holocaust or not.

Historical Perspective

To understand the ongoing situation in the Middle East, it is necessary to look into the historical perspective. When the US used nuclear weapons against Japan in World War II, we were told that the Japanese surrendered because of the nuclear weapons. This is false. Anyone who has studied World War II carefully will understand that the Japanese forces were already surrendering. So why was there a need to use nuclear weapons? The reason is that the US was running a secret project called the ‘Manhattan Project.’ Under this project, Americans were developing both uranium and plutonium bombs. So, the US wanted to test its weapon and thus bombed Japan. That’s why two bombs were dropped; however, only one could be enough. And thus, the US claimed itself as the number one military power in the world.

Later on, in the 1950s, Americans once again found that Soviet military dominance had surpassed them. So, the US introduced the tactical nuclear weapons to surpass the Soviet’s conventional superiority. However, till the 1970s, Soviets also developed tactical nuclear weapons in large numbers. In retaliation, the US started investing in space projects to develop long-range conventional missiles. By 2010, now the US military concluded that the Chinese military had become equal to ours. So, now the US is introducing artificial intelligence and autonomy in its military. But the PLA, without any doubt, has significantly outpaced the US military in this regard. This clears one thing: the US establishment did not want President Trump to sign an MoU with Iran, which was a clear surrender of the US military. So, as the US has completely failed against Iran in conventional terms, it might opt for some unconventional means to maintain its military superiority in the region.

Why the U.S. Might Opt for Tactical Nuclear Weapons

As of now, it is clear that there is no way to stop Iran through conventional capabilities. So, the statement made by Greene actually depicts the current strategic thinking inside the US: that even if the 50,000 US troops stationed at the 19 airbases in West Asia withdraw, if they do, and the US maintains control of the Strait of Hormuz, which could then be declared as US territory, then the petrodollar will remain intact. Therefore, the plan is to move out of the region and capture the Hormuz region through tactical nukes.

The next question then becomes, how is this going to be done? When one talks of tactical nuclear weapons, they mean the weapons whose power ranges from sub-kilotons to 50 kilotons. Just to remind you, the weapons the US dropped on Japan during WWII were tactical and weighed 15 kilotons. But now through modern technology, one can create a critical mass with just using a few kgs of uranium or plutonium, which could result in a chain reaction, and a nuclear weapon can be used.

Technically, this is possible today. If the Strait of Hormuz’s chokepoint could be opened with the use of a very small, limited-range, sub-blast, or sub-kiloton nuclear weapon. So, the US could capture the Strait of Hormuz in this way, declare it its own territory, and continue to generate petrodollars. This is the reason President Donald Trump recently said, “After we finish defeating Iran, which is being very badly defeated, pretty soon I’ll be declaring the Hormuz Strait a territory of the United States.”

The Devastating Consequences

Elbridge Colby, Under Secretary of War for Policy, has recently warned, “What I would fear more is a regional war, a kind of local war, a conventional war that might have local employment, God forbid, of nuclear weapons that could escalate from there as it expanded outward.” The consequences would be catastrophic. We know that many countries in the world today possess nuclear weapons, and we are also aware that North Korea has openly declared that if nuclear weapons are used against Iran, it will stand in solidarity with Iran. In addition, many analysts are of the view that Iran might have already developed nuclear weapons. But here the question is, could Iran have done this?

There are two reasons for which it can be concluded that Iran would not have done it. First, Iran is trying to develop a regional security framework, and the Mecca Defense Pact is its best manifestation, which could be expanded in the near future. Iran wants every regional country to see it as a partner nation. Thus, if Iran pursues developing nukes, it could start an arms race in the region where countries like Saudi Arabia would also demand a bomb. Second, Iran is a signatory of the NPT. So, Iran would first announce its withdrawal from the treaty, and then it will head forward in this direction.

China’s Role and Supremacy

Here China can play a pivotal and powerful role. Today China has approximately $800 billion in US Treasury bonds. If the Chinese were to tell Americans today that they were selling half or a large amount of their Treasury bonds, it would create problems with the US’s indebted economy. Inflation would spike, the stock market would crash, and the economy would be in dire condition. Moreover, China also has dominance over the world’s rare earth minerals, on which American conventional capabilities are highly dependent. Also, the PRC could also pressurize the US over the upcoming visit of Chinese President Xi Jinping to the US in September 2026. Thus, China has a lot to do in this regard, and it’s already doing it in one way or another to preserve the world’s peace.

A Nuclear Strike is not a Solution

A nuclear attack against Iran is not an answer; it is a recipe for disaster that is bound to happen sooner rather than later. This policy of desperation would be a betrayal of principles and a failure of our ideals and would not help to bring peace. The rest of the world should make its voice heard and condemn such rhetoric before it normalizes something unimaginable. There are reasons that dictate that we should rely on diplomacy and patience, no matter how desperate the situation becomes. The unthinkable should remain unthinkable; to think about such an option is to play with fire.

August 28, 2026 Posted by | Iran, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Japan to Reuse Fukushima Soil in Regional Cities

  Tokyo, Aug. 25 (Jiji Press)
https://jen.jiji.com/jc/eng?g=eco&k=2026082500738 —

The Japanese government decided Tuesday to begin the reuse of soil generated from decontamination work following the 2011 accident at Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc.’s Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant in regional cities.


   At a meeting at the prime minister’s office in Tokyo, the government decided to begin the soil reuse program at an early date for flowerbeds at buildings in Sendai in Miyagi Prefecture, northeastern Japan, and the city of Saitama, north of Tokyo, where central government branch offices are located.


   It will be the first time for the soil from decontamination work to be used outside Tokyo, except for its use in demonstration projects in Fukushima Prefecture, home to the TEPCO plant, which suffered a triple meltdown following the massive earthquake and tsunami that mainly struck northeastern Japan in March 2011.


   Chief Cabinet Secretary Minoru Kihara said at the meeting that the reuse of soil from decontamination work will be key to achieving the government’s goal of completing the final disposal of the soil outside Fukushima by March 2045.
   Kihara urged attendees to expand the reuse of the soil to regional branch offices in other cities and strengthen public communication about its safety.

August 28, 2026 Posted by | Japan, wastes | Leave a comment

How the Media Sells Genocide

 Joy to the World – by Mr. Fish

Chris Hedges ScheerPost, August 25, 2026, https://scheerpost.com/2026/08/25/how-the-media-sells-genocide/

Western media, by employing double standards, censorship, deceptive language, amplifying Israeli lies and dehumanizing Palestinians, facilitates the genocide in Gaza.

Chris Hedges ScheerPost

The Western media manufactures consent for genocide. It normalizes Israel’s decades-long military occupation and apartheid. It erases Israel’s flagrant violations of international law. It perpetuates the fallacy of Israeli victimhood. It betrays, discredits and demonizes the work of Palestinian journalists and media workers in Gaza, at least 220 of whom have been killed by Israel between Oct. 7, 2023, and August 2025. It supinely accepts draconian Israeli censorship. It acquiesces with tepid letters of protest at Israel’s refusal to allow foreign reporters in Gaza — an effort by Israel to mask its war crimes. It amplifies Israeli lies, from beheaded babies to widespread sexual assault of Israeli women on Oct. 7, to obfuscate the truth.

When writing about Gaza, verbs are in the passive tense. There is no subject. No one is accountable. Genocide, it seems, is an act of God. No different from an earthquake or tsunami. Clichés and opaque adjectives such as the “cycle of violence” or “clashes” distort and falsify reality.

“If thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought,” George Orwell warned.

Terms such as “genocide,” “atrocity,” “ethnic cleansing” and “occupied territories” magically disappear from media reports on Palestinians, whose resistance is routinely described as “savage” and “barbaric.” New York Times reporters are instructed by editors to avoid terms such as “Palestine,” “genocide,” “carnage,” “refugee camp,” “slaughter” and “massacre,” when referencing Palestinians.

The media slavishly regurgitates what Israel feeds it. Saturation bombing becomes “surgical air strikes.” Israel’s weaponization of famine becomes a “food shortage.” The killing of unarmed civilians — including children — becomes “clashes.” The hilltop fortress-like compounds of Jewish colonists becomes “neighborhoods.” Extrajudicial assassination of a journalist or a doctor becomes “died.”

Genocide, referred to as the “Israel-Hamas war” is justified as “self-defense,” part of the mantra of Israel’s “right to defend itself.” When schools, hospitals, clinics, ambulances, mosques, churches and other civilian targets are obliterated, they are labeled “Hamas command centers” or targeted because Hamas is “using civilians as human shields” — something Israel does routinely, when the army binds detained Palestinians and forces them to enter potentially booby-trapped buildings and tunnels ahead of Israeli troops.

When Israelis are held by Hamas, they are “hostages,” even if they serve in the military. When Palestinians — including children — are held without charges or trial and disappeared into Israeli detention centers, where torture is “widespread” and “systematic,” they are “prisoners.”

Missile attacks on tent cities or hospitals are blamed on Palestinian armed groups firing errant rockets. If Israel acknowledges the attacks — which very rarely happens — they are described as a “tragic mistake.”

Civil institutions in Gaza are characterized as “Hamas-run” to cast doubt on the veracity of what they report. The New York Times routinely qualifies announcements from the Gaza Health Ministry by noting it “does not distinguish between civilians and combatants,” masking the slaughter of tens of thousands of civilians.

The result is some of the most convoluted writing in the history of journalism, including the Nov. 5, 2023 New York Times headline that reads: “Explosions Gazans Say Was Airstrike Leaves Many Casualties in Dense Neighborhood.”

“When Middle East Eye journalists Mohamed Salama and Ahmed Abu Aziz, along with Reuters photojournalist Hussam al-Masri, and freelancers Moaz Abu Taha, and Mariam Dagga — who had worked with several media outlets, including the Associated Press — were killed in a “double tap” strike — designed to kill first responders arriving to treat casualties from initial strikes — at Nasser Medical Complex, how did Western news agencies respond?” I asked in my column The Betrayal of Palestinian Journalists.


“Israeli military says strikes on Gaza hospital targeted what it says was a Hamas camera,” the Associated Press reported.

“IDF claims hospital strike was aimed at Hamas camera,” announced CNN.

The camera belonged to Reuters, which said Israel was “fully aware” the news agency was filming from the hospital.

“When Al Jazeera correspondent Anas Al Sharif and three other journalists were killed on Aug. 10 in their media tent near Al Shifa Hospital, how was it reported in the Western press?” I asked.

“Israel Kills Al Jazeera Journalist It Says Was Hamas Leader,” Reuters titled its story, despite the fact al-Sharif was part of a Reuters team that won a 2024 Pulitzer Prize.

The German newspaper Bild, published a front page story headlined: “Terrorist disguised as a journalist killed in Gaza.”

“The linguistic gymnastics employed by the media went as far as redefining words, making them meaningless,” writes Assal Rad in “Don’t Say Palestine: How the Media Manufactured Consent for Genocide:”

‘Mainstream media failed to describe Israel’s repeated breaches of the ceasefire with the language of violation. Instead, the coverage followed the same patterns of rationalizing Israel’s attacks and uncritically parroting Israel’s claims to justify its actions. As Palestinians continued to be killed — during a ‘ceasefire’ — and the flow of aid did not reach the level of need or what was agreed to, Western media framed these flagrant violations as ‘tests’ or ‘challenges’ to a ‘shaky ceasefire.’ As leading human rights organizations like Amnesty International warned that the genocide was, in fact, not over, legacy media continued to frame it as a war with a ‘fragile ceasefire.’

Words matter. Words justify actions. If there is no genocide, if Israel is defending itself in a war, the U.S. and Israel’s European allies have the right to provide tens of billions of dollars in military aid. If this is a war begun by Hamas on Oct. 7 then it is possible to lament the obliteration of Gaza and mass slaughter by Israel as the regrettable result of the Hamas attack.

This corruption of language is designed, as Orwell noted, to defend the indefensible:

“Things like the continuance of British rule in India, the Russian purges and deportations, the dropping of the atom bombs on Japan, can indeed be defended, but only by arguments which are too brutal for most people to face, and which do not square with the professed aims of political parties. Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness. Defenseless villages are bombarded from the air, the inhabitants driven out into the countryside, the cattle machine-gunned, the huts set on fire with incendiary bullets: this is called pacification. Millions of peasants are robbed of their farms and sent trudging along the roads with no more than they can carry: this is called transfer of population or rectification of frontiers. People are imprisoned for years without trial, or shot in the back of the neck or sent to die of scurvy in Arctic lumber camps: this is called elimination of unreliable elements.“

Adam Johnson in “How to Sell a Genocide: The Media’s Complicity in the Destruction of Gaza,” examined over 12,000 articles from The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN.com, Politico, Axios, USA Today, and The Associated Press, along with 5,000 TV segments aired on CNN and MSNBC. His carefully researched book is a damning indictment of the “liberal” media’s justification of the genocide.“

CNN and The New York Times instructed their editors and journalists that attacks could only be attributed to Israel after confirmation from the IDF and GPS coordinates. Johnson quotes a source at CNN:

Whether it’s in the newsroom or in the field, we couldn’t credit anything to Israel unless we were held to this impossibly high bar of having to call it an “explosion,” until we geolocated the site of the explosion, sent the coordinates to the Israelis and asked them for comment.

You can see an interview with Johnson about his book at The Electronic Intifada here.

CNN journalists reporting on Israel and Palestine must submit their work for review to the network’s Jerusalem bureau prior to airing. The CNN bureau, like all news bureaus in Israel, is required to abide by restrictions imposed by Israeli military censors.

The very few Palestinians who appear on CNN and other legacy media outlets, are routinely asked — usually before they are even permitted on air — if they “condemn” Hamas. Guests who express even tepid criticism of Israel are asked whether Israel “has a right to exist.”

No one is ever asked if they condemn Zionism, apartheid, ethnic cleansing, genocide or Israel’s 100 year war on Palestine. Nor are they asked if the Palestinians have a right to defend themselves — which under international law they do, including with weapons.

Our domesticated journalists and news organizations are, as Robert Fisk pointed out, “prisoners of the language of power.” They dutifully parrot the official lexicon. This makes them not only propagandists, but accomplices to genocide.

Those who protest the genocide, including students on university campuses — many of whom are Jewish — are smeared as “Hamas supporters” and “antisemites.” Journalists ferret out Zionist students, usually found esconced in campus Hillel houses, who claim to be “fearful for their safety,” because of the protests. The media pays little attention to the rise in anti-Muslim bigotry or the repression meted out to student protestors, which includes not only police brutality and 3,000 detainments and arrests, but suspensions, probations, expulsions, withholding of diplomas and the firing of sympathetic faculty.

Slogans which call for Palestinian liberation — including “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” — along with the Palestinian flag, have been criminalized.

The message is clear: Jewish lives matter. Palestinian lives do not.

“The reports of UN agencies, of respected human rights monitors, of medical journals, and of professional medical personnel, are generally treated with respect and given prominence in the mainstream media,” writes the historian Rashid Khalidi in the introduction to Robin Anderson’s book, “The Complicit Lens: US Media Coverage of Israel’s Genocide in Gaza:”

“Not in this war: instead, if such sources are cited at all, equal media treatment is given to the outrageous slanders and calumnies against these organizations and individuals, smears that are produced in profusion by Israel’s legion of professional propagandists and its myriad of defenders in the US. Besides smearing critics of Israel’s genocide as supporters of Hamas or terrorist sympathizers, the main weapon in their arsenal of defamation is their systematic and outrageous misuse of the deadly accusation of antisemitism.”

The massive defections of readers and viewers from mainstream media to social media platforms that do not filter news through the Israel lobby, the U.S. government or corporations, are a stark indicator of the media’s bankruptcy. The response to these defections has been “platformicide” — the use of algorithms, shadow banning, restriction of live streaming capabilities and the closing of accounts by social media giants such as Facebook, Instagram, X, YouTube and TikTok, to dramatically reduce the reach of reporting on Palestine.

This censorship is part of a coordinated effort to hide the horror of the genocide from the public.

By constantly referencing Oct. 7, the Western media decontextualizes the genocide. It ignores Israel’s 19-year siege of Gaza. Oct. 7 is characterized in the Western media as “unprovoked.” Israel’s massacres of unarmed Palestinians in Gaza in the winter of 2008 and 2009, along with its attacks on Gaza in 2012, 2014 and during the Great March of Return in 2018 and 2019 are ignored.

The 1948 Nakba — when European Zionists seized more than 78 percent of historic Palestine, violently expelled 750,000 Palestinians, destroyed more than 530 Palestinian villages and killed 15,000 Palestinians — is rarely referenced. Seventy percent of those driven from their homes in 1948 were forced into Gaza.

The Zionist project is predicated on fostering historical amnesia.

“Once Hamas was established as a brutal, terrorist group whose members gleefully tortured, dismembered, and beheaded babies without conscience, no further explanation was needed,” writes Anderson in her book. “The media simply avoided reporting Israel’s history of violence and as a result, establishment media also avoided the conditions of everyday life for Palestinians.”

The fiction that there is currently a ceasefire in Gaza — Israel has killed at least 1,286 Palestinians and injured 4,257 since it supposedly went into effect — has become the excuse used by Western media to turn its back on Gaza. This genocide denial has characterized the coverage since its inception. It masks not only Israel’s crimes, but Israel’s stated intention to ethnically cleanse all Palestinians from Gaza. It effectively neuters international law. And it makes a mockery of the profession of journalism.

When the last act of ethnic cleansing happens, Western media will, I am sure, continue to bombard us with Israeli agitprop, euphemisms and clichés.

It will justify the genocide until the end.

August 28, 2026 Posted by | Israel, media, Reference | Leave a comment

Israel Took Another Major Step Towards West Bank Annexation

 August 25, 2026, Qassam Muaddi, Mondoweiss. https://scheerpost.com/2026/08/25/israel-took-another-major-step-towards-west-bank-annexation/

Settlers besiege Palestinian families in Qusra.

Israel’s government responds by handing settlement security to the police of hardline minister Ben-Gvir- a move seen to further entrench Israeli annexation of the West Bank.

Israel’s Defense Minister, Israel Katz, has moved to transfer security authority over Israeli settlements and settlers in the occupied West Bank from the Israeli army to the civil police, a decision Palestinians read as a decisive step toward the de facto annexation of the territory, and one that places the settler movement, in effect, in charge of policing itself.

Katz gave the Israeli army two weeks to draft a plan to transfer powers to the police, while the army’s role in the West Bank would be limited to “managing” Palestinians and controlling borders.

The announcement, made last Monday, came after ten days of settlers besieging three Palestinian families in the village of Qusra, south of Nablus. Since August 9, Israeli settlers have cordoned off the families — including three women, one of whom is elderly, and two children — inside three houses, cutting off water, electricity, and blocking access by Palestinians and Israeli anti-occupation activists who tried to deliver food to them.

The Israeli army deployed troops to the area and declared it a closed military zone, evacuating the settlers’ tent, only for the settlers to re-establish it the following day. Israeli soldiers were filmed praying and shaking hands with the settlers, sparking a public controversy over the collusion between the army and the settlers.

While the army’s failure to resolve the crisis is seen by some to have triggered Katz’s decision, the decision’s implications extend far beyond Qusra.

Another step to annexation

On the surface, transferring security powers from the army to the civil police looks like a measure to restore order and rein in settler violence that has spiked since 2022 — well before October 7 — and sparked global condemnation, even from Israel’s staunchest allies.

However, in his first public response to Katz’s announcement, Mustafa Barghouti, leader of the Palestinian National Initiative, called the move “the actual beginning of Israel’s de facto annexation of the West Bank.” Talking to Alaraby TV, Barghouthi also noted that the Israeli police is controlled by Israel’s National Security Minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir, who is a hardline settler himself. “All security powers over settlers in the West Bank will pass into the hands of settlers themselves,” Barghouthi said.

Ben-Gvir, a key ally of Benjamin Netanyahu, has systematically expanded settlers’ influence within the Israeli police since taking power.

More broadly, the decision fits a pattern that has been accelerating since the current Israeli government took office. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who holds sweeping authority over the West Bank’s civilian administration, has systematically inserted Israeli settlers into the decision-making structures of the occupation. In 2024, Smotrich said that he had “changed the DNA of the system” by creating a civilian body — staffed by settlers — inside the Israeli army’s Civil Administration, the body responsible for running the occupation’s civilian affairs in the West Bank.

This effectively replaced the military with a settler-run civilian government in an occupied territory, treating the West Bank as sovereign Israeli territory rather than occupied land. After assigning civilian governance of the West Bank to settlers and transferring security authority to police, which is all in line with the path to annexation, what remains is the formal imposition of Israeli law on the territory.

Opportunism or election politics?

The timing of Katz’s announcement is not coincidental.

The ongoing siege of Palestinian families in Qusra attracted international attention over the past week, after U.S. Ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, slammed the actions of Israeli settlers in Qusra, calling them “terrorists” — an unusually sharp reaction from an official in U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration. The apparent trigger for the stern criticism is that several of the Palestinians trapped inside the three homes in Qusra were U.S. citizens.

On Monday, Palestinian-American Luai Abu Ridah arrived in Qusra from Ohio to join his family in their besieged house in the village. Once inside, Abu Ridah raised a U.S. flag on the rooftop, asserting his U.S. citizenship and deepening the crisis.

Although the logical end to the crisis would be the removal of settlers from the area surrounding the three houses and ending the siege, the political price associated with removing them is one that the current Israeli government wants to avoid at all costs, particularly with decisive Israeli elections being months away. Given that the settler movement is a main part of the voter base that is keeping Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition in power, images of Israeli forces evacuating settlers — however violent or illegal their conduct is — a few months ahead of Israeli elections, would cost the contested prime minister crucial votes.

In that sense, transferring security powers to the Israeli police, as a move, gives the impression that the Israeli government is taking decisive action. In practice, it does nothing to end the siege in Qusra: the settlers remain, and the Palestinian families stay trapped, and the new framework hands authority to a force whose minister is ideologically aligned with the settler movement. Simultaneously, the move manages the international optics of the crisis while advancing the annexation agenda, without resolving either.

Larger plan

Despite the media emphasis on the siege of Palestinian families in Qusra, it is only a moment of a sustained settler offensive, targeting and reshaping the eastern part of the West Bank.

Following October 7, Israeli settler groups launched a systematic campaign against  Palestinian Bedouin communities in the eastern slopes of the Nablus and Ramallah hills, displacing almost all Palestinians from the area, and cutting off the central West Bank from the Jordan Valley.

Since last year, settler attacks have begun to focus more on the villages east of Ramallah and Nablus, particularly in the southeast of the Nablus governorate.

In July, Israeli settlers seized a house in Jaloud, southeast of Nablus, located in Area B, the 22% of the West Bank which falls under Palestinian Authority (PA) civil jurisdiction and Israeli security control under the 1993 Oslo Accords. Such attacks on built-up houses in these villages, which have escalated dramatically over the past year, achieve the strategic logic of establishing a continuous settler presence east of Nablus. This isolates the city from both the east and the south, thereby achieving geographic contiguity for settlements across the northern West Bank. This, ultimately, further fragments any prospect of a coherent Palestinian territory.

As settler violence intensified and went unchecked, the displacement of families from their houses became the defining feature of this phase. The siege of the two families in Qusra is its most extreme expression and its most internationally visible.

But beyond the immediate crisis, the Israeli government and its settler support base are claiming every opportunity to entrench annexation measures that would be very difficult for any future government to undo or reverse.

Transferring security powers in settlements to the Israeli police is one such measure. It is not an emergency response to a local incident, but a continuation of a plan that has been in the making for years.

August 28, 2026 Posted by | Israel, politics | Leave a comment

Hormuz Catastrophe: Netanyahu & Trump Knew Risks, Escalated Anyway

 SCHEERPOST, August 25, 2026, Dan Steinbock Informed Comment

Iran has not collapsed, while Hormuz has become a global economic choke point. The central failure was not ignorance of the risks, but the political decision in Washington and Tel Aviv to gamble that coercive military power could overcome them.

So, why did they set the stage for the catastrophe that was both unwarranted and unnecessary?

The Israeli conventional war game      

In February 2024 – after 4 months of the Israeli obliteration of Gaza – over 100 senior military and government officials participated in a report by Reichman University’s Institute for Counter-Terrorism which outlined in painful detail how unprepared the Israeli home front was for an all-out war with Hezbollah.

This lethal scenario was written long before Hamas’ October 7th attack on Israel. It is the result of a three-year study. The 130-page report was the work of six think tanks made up of over 100 terrorism experts, former senior security officials, academics, and government officials who examined critical aspects related to the level of preparedness for the IDF and the home front in the event of a multi-front war.

The project was led by Professor Boaz Ganor, a world-renowned counter-terrorism expert. In the months leading up to October 7, he presented his research to relevant military and political authorities in an attempt to rouse intelligence and decision-makers from complacency and misconceptions.

The Netanyahu government ignored him and the analysis.

The Israel-Iran nuclear war game         

In late 2023 – almost in parallel with the Hamas attack – a high-level U.S. war game was conducted in Washington. The participants included members of U.S. executive branch, Republicans and Democrats in the Congress, leading academics, think-tank experts and Pentagon officials. The game started in 2027 with Israeli intelligence reports that Iran was mating nuclear warheads to its long-range missiles. Consequently, Israel targets Iran’s key nuclear and missile sites with U.S. standoff hypersonic missiles.

Intriguingly, initially the U.S. participants presumed that self-restraint would prevail in this high-level war game. Yet, the simulation’s cold logic compelled them into a sequence of steps that quickly went nuclear. The adverse consequences were felt by millions of civilians in both Israel and Iran.

The lessons of the war game were ignored by both the Netanyahu government and the Trump administration.

Why did Netanyahu court the U.S. into the Iran conflict fully knowing the consequences?     

Both war games were common knowledge among the US and Israeli military elites well before October 7, 2023. I referenced each in my book The Fall of Israel (2024). So, why were the lessons of these games effectively ignored?

The evidence points less to strategic ignorance than to political and strategic risk-taking. In particular, The Fall of Israel shows that Netanyahu’s government repeatedly treated regional escalation as a means of escaping an increasingly untenable post-October 7 position: prolong Gaza invasion, weaken Hezbollah, expand Israel’s northern security zone and ultimately confront Iran.

I argued that Netanyahu rejected a Gaza ceasefire while expecting Trump’s return to provide greater freedom of action against Gaza, Lebanon and Iran.

But the risks were hardly invisible even in 2023. The high-level U.S. war game in late projected that an Israel-Iran confrontation could rapidly escape Israeli and American control and go nuclear. The Hezbollah scenario likewise anticipated thousands of rockets, saturation of Israeli defenses, attacks on infrastructure and paralysis of ports and trade.

Netanyahu’s calculation therefore appears brutally simple: the risks of escalation were judged preferable to the political risks of de-escalation. A wider war could restore deterrence, destroy adversaries, preserve his coalition and keep the strategic initiative.

The catastrophic externalities—Lebanon, Iran, Hormuz, the Gulf and the world economy—were treated as manageable collateral risks. They were not Israel’s problem. They were the world’s problem.

Why did Trump take the bait when Washington understood the stakes?        

Trump inherited an enormous institutional warning system. U.S. officials, Pentagon planners and bipartisan experts had already modeled escalation from an Israeli attack on Iran through retaliation, Israeli counterstrikes, nuclear signaling and ultimately nuclear exchange.

The war game initially assumed rational self-restraint; but its own sequence demonstrated how quickly that assumption could collapse.

Yet Trump appears to have made the classic great-power error: confusing overwhelming tactical superiority with strategic control.

To the interventionists, the political attractions were obvious—destroy Iran’s nuclear capacity, reinforce Israel, demonstrate American dominance and claim a decisive victory where previous administrations had failed.

But the premise that Iran could be compelled to surrender under bombardment underestimated asymmetric retaliation, regional proxies, geography and the extraordinary leverage of Hormuz.

The result is the opposite of the promised quick victory. By August, Trump’s approval had fallen to 33%, while 80% of Americans said they expected the war to be prolonged. Earlier Pew polling found 59% of Americans believed using force against Iran was the wrong decision and 62% disapproved of Trump’s handling of it.

Ironically, Washington has converted a military operation into a strategic endurance contest in which Iran possesses an exceptionally powerful economic weapon: Hormuz.

Soaring oil/gas prices, plunging growth, 6+ million displaced……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

What options remain and how badly has America damaged itself         

There are four remaining trajectories. First, negotiated de-escalation: reopen Hormuz, freeze attacks, restore oil/LNG flows and negotiate Iran’s nuclear status.

Second, prolonged managed conflict: intermittent strikes, sanctions and restricted shipping, producing structurally higher energy prices.

Third, regional expansion: Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen and Gulf infrastructure become increasingly active fronts.

Fourth, the tail risk: escalation toward nuclear confrontation—the scenario the war games warned could arise from supposedly controlled conventional operations.

What is urgently needed is an internationally mediated settlement involving Iran, the Gulf states, Europe, China, Russia and the UN—not another unilateral U.S. military ultimatum. As I argued in The Fall of Israel, unipolar solutions are increasingly incapable of managing a multipolar Middle East………………………………………………… https://scheerpost.com/2026/08/25/hormuz-catastrophe-netanyahu-trump-knew-risks-escalated-anyway/

August 28, 2026 Posted by | Iran, Israel, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Russia signals willingness to consider new Ukraine peace ideas but insists any deal reflect battlefield conditions

[your]NEWS, Fri, 21 Aug 2026 , https://www.sott.net/article/508073-Russia-signals-willingness-to-consider-new-Ukraine-peace-ideas-but-insists-any-deal-reflect-battlefield-conditions

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said Moscow remains willing to hear new U.S. proposals for ending the war in Ukraine, while maintaining that any settlement must account for Russia’s stated objectives and the territorial situation created by nearly 4½ years of fighting.

Russia says it remains prepared to consider new proposals for ending the war in Ukraine, but Moscow is continuing to insist that any potential settlement account for what it calls the “realities on the ground.”

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov made the comments in an interview with News.ru published Friday, signaling that Moscow is still open to negotiations with Washington even as diplomatic efforts to end the conflict have largely stalled amid the war in Iran.

Ryabkov said the United States has demonstrated both a willingness to engage in “constructive dialog” and an “understanding of Russia’s position.”

He suggested, however, that Moscow believes the larger question is whether the United States can influence Ukraine and its European allies.

“At this stage, it is more important to what extent Washington is able to influence the decisions of the Kyiv regime and its European sponsors, who still dream of a ‘strategic defeat’ of Russia,” Ryabkov said.

Russia and the United States have held negotiations aimed at finding a path toward ending the Ukraine war, but those efforts have lost momentum as international attention has shifted toward the conflict involving Iran.

The Kremlin said Thursday that it had no information about when U.S. presidential envoys Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff might next travel to Moscow.

Kushner and Witkoff have previously played leading roles in U.S. negotiations with Russian officials.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio reiterated Washington’s interest in ending the Ukraine conflict last month following a meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Manila.

Rubio cautioned at the time that a rapid breakthrough should not be expected and said the United States was attempting to “find a middle ground.”

Ryabkov responded that Moscow remains prepared to consider new ideas from Rubio and to continue discussions with the Trump administration:

“The Russian Federation is ready to listen to any reasonable proposals and ideas that are in line with the goals set by the Russian president and meet the ‘realities on the ground,'”

That formulation reflects a longstanding Russian position that any eventual agreement must take into account territorial changes resulting from the war.

After almost 4½ years of fighting, Russian forces control approximately one-fifth of Ukraine’s internationally recognized territory.

Moscow has repeatedly said it is willing to negotiate but has maintained that talks must acknowledge what Russian officials describe as the “new realities on the ground.”

The territorial question remains one of the central obstacles to reaching a negotiated settlement.

Ukraine and its international supporters have continued to regard the areas seized by Russia as sovereign Ukrainian territory, while Moscow has sought to make its control of occupied regions part of the framework for any eventual peace agreement.

Ryabkov’s remarks indicate that Russia is not rejecting further American diplomatic initiatives but is setting clear parameters for what it would regard as a viable proposal.

His comments also place renewed emphasis on Washington’s ability to persuade Kyiv and European governments to accept compromises that Moscow considers necessary.

The diplomatic opening comes as U.S.-Russian negotiations over Ukraine have slowed considerably from earlier efforts.

Although Rubio has publicly reaffirmed Washington’s commitment to finding a way to end the conflict, he has also acknowledged the substantial differences separating the parties.

Ryabkov’s interview addressed another major area of U.S.-Russian relations as well: nuclear arms control.

The New START nuclear weapons treaty expired in February, leaving the United States and Russia without binding limits on their strategic nuclear arsenals for the first time in more than 50 years.

The treaty had imposed restrictions on deployed strategic nuclear warheads and delivery systems held by the world’s two largest nuclear-armed powers.

Despite its expiration, Moscow has said it intends to continue observing the treaty’s limits on missiles and warheads as long as Washington does the same.

Ryabkov indicated that Russia wants to keep diplomatic channels open on nuclear weapons even without a formal treaty currently in force.

“We remain open in the future to find political and diplomatic ways to stabilize this area,” he said.

His comments suggest that Moscow sees room for continued U.S.-Russian engagement on two of the most consequential issues between the countries: ending the Ukraine war and establishing a new framework for managing their strategic nuclear arsenals.

For Ukraine negotiations, however, Russia continues to make clear that it will judge any American proposal against both President Vladimir Putin’s stated objectives and the military situation that now exists after years of war.

August 28, 2026 Posted by | Russia, Ukraine, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »