nuclear-news

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

Venezuela charges Washington with ‘theft, piracy’ after seizure of oil tanker

The US had imposed sanctions on the vessel under claims it was involved in the Iranian oil trade.

The Cradle, DEC 11, 2025

Venezuela has accused the US government of “blatant theft” and “piracy,” following Washington’s seizure of a Venezuelan oil tanker off the Latin American country’s coast on 10 December. 

The Venezuelan Foreign Ministry strongly condemned what it said was a “blatant theft and an act of international piracy, publicly announced by the President of the US, who confessed to the assault on an oil tanker in the Caribbean Sea.”

“Already in his 2024 campaign, [US President Donald Trump] openly stated that his objective has always been to keep Venezuelan oil without paying any consideration in return, making it clear that the policy of aggression against our country responds to a deliberate plan to plunder our energy wealth,” the Venezuelan Foreign Ministry added. 

“The true reasons for the prolonged aggression against Venezuela have finally been revealed. It is not migration. It is not narcotics trafficking. It is not democracy. It is not human rights. It has always been about our natural wealth,” the statement went on to say. 

Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel Bermudez also condemned Washington’s theft of the oil tanker. 

“Cuba expresses its full support for the denunciation issued by the government of Venezuela and strongly condemns the assault on an oil tanker in the Caribbean Sea, carried out by the Armed Forces of the United States. This constitutes an act of piracy, a violation of international law, and an escalation in the aggression against that sister nation,” he said. 

The US announced the seizure on Wednesday. The move caused a jump in oil prices and has fanned the flames of an already tense situation between Caracas and Washington – which has recently targeted the Latin American country with brutal strikes under the pretext of stopping the flow of drugs into the US. 

Video footage of the seizure showed armed US soldiers descending onto the vessel from a helicopter. The Venezuelan oil tanker was subject to illegal US sanctions. ………………………………………………..

The seizure of the Venezuelan tanker comes as part of a massive military buildup in the Caribbean Sea and recent airstrikes on what Washington claims are “drug boats” responsible for the flow of Fentanyl into the US.

At least 87 people, among them innocent fishermen from Colombia, Ecuador, and Trinidad and Tobago, have been killed by the US attacks since September. https://thecradle.co/articles/venezuela-charges-washington-with-theft-piracy-after-seizure-of-oil-tanker

December 13, 2025 Posted by | SOUTH AMERICA, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Nuclear Notebook: The changing nuclear landscape in Europe

Bulletin, By Hans M. Kristensen, Matt Korda, Eliana Johns, Mackenzie Knight-Boyle | December 10, 2025

Evolving nuclear weapons postures in Europe

Since Russia annexed Crimea in 2014 and invaded Ukraine in 2022, the rhetoric, prominence, operations, and infrastructures of nuclear weapons in Europe have changed considerably and, in many cases, increased. This trend is in sharp contrast with the two decades prior that—despite modernization programs—were dominated by efforts to reduce the numbers and role of nuclear weapons.

During this period, Russia has fielded several new nonstrategic nuclear weapons systems, increased military exercises, issued a long list of nuclear signals and threats, and upgraded its nuclear doctrine in a way that gives the impression that it has broadened the role of nuclear weapons and potentially lowered its nuclear threshold.

NATO, for its part, is also modernizing its nuclear forces and has further reacted by increasing its strategic bomber operations and nonstrategic nuclear posture, changing its strategic nuclear ballistic missile submarine operations, and talking more openly and assertively about the role and value of nuclear weapons.

Each side believes it has good reasons for beefing up the nuclear posture, but the combined effect is that the role and presence of nuclear weapons in Europe are increasing again after decades of efforts to curtail them. Unless the governments and parliaments of European countries increase efforts to halt this trend, the region is likely to descend further into growing nuclear weapons competition and posturing over the next decade.

In this Nuclear Notebook, we provide an overview with examples of how the nuclear postures in Europe are evolving, especially the infrastructures and operations. The overview is focused on nonstrategic nuclear weapons but also includes examples of how strategic nuclear forces are operated. The intention is to provide a factual resource for the public debate about the evolving role of nuclear weapons in Europe. As such, this notebook is not intended to be comprehensive but informative.

Nine countries currently operate nuclear forces in Europe: Belarus, Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Russia, the United States, and the United Kingdom. The latter has announced plans to acquire nonstrategic nuclear weapons (see Figure 1), and a tenth country (Türkiye) hosts nuclear weapons on its territory.

Nuclear developments involving the Russian Federation…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Nuclear developments involving NATO………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

The United Kingdom…………………………………………………………………………………..

France…………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………….. copious references……………..https://thebulletin.org/premium/2025-12/the-changing-nuclear-landscape-in-europe/

December 13, 2025 Posted by | EUROPE, politics | Leave a comment

Nuclear Free Local Authorities Policy Briefing 330: NFLA Progress Report, October – December 2025.

NFLA, Richard Outram, NFLA / Mayors for Peace Secretary 11 December 2025

Key Developments:
UK Government: EN-7
The UK Government’s revised National Policy Statement for Nuclear Energy Generation (EN-7) was
finalised and published in November 2025 introducing a developer led, criteria-based approach for siting new fission gigawatt, SMR and AMR nuclear plants (but not fusion – this will be covered by EN-8 in development). The previous policy EN-6 was Government led, with a strategic assessment leading to the listing of specific sites for redevelopment.

The NFLAs have been critical of this approach as it provides for new nuclear power stations to be built at sites that have not previously hosted such infrastructure, raising the prospect of a market led free-for-all. Energy Minister Michael Shanks described the new policy as ‘agile’ meaning there is
much not to like as very few criteria in the new policy explicitly rule out development; the emphasis is more upon facilitation with the caveat that there shall be a ‘mitigation of impacts on the host community’.

Two silver linings are that the Government has:

1. (For now) Retained the Semi-Urban Population Density Criterion (SUPDC), much to the chagrin of developers, meaning that reactors cannot be built near populated areas; developers, claiming their unproven, unbuilt reactor designs, are safer would much prefer this be lifted as it would permit them to co-locate new plants near to large industrial consumers.

2. Placed a focus upon developments being designed to be resilient to climate change. These are both issues the NGO community, and NFLAs, have made representations to Government upon.

Nuclear Regulatory Taskforce
John Fingleton’s Nuclear Regulatory Taskforce , mostly comprising nuclear industry representatives, has just published its final report (unsurprisingly) calling for a radical reset of the ‘overly complex’ nuclear regulatory system. The report makes 47 recommendations to speed up nuclear projects at a lower cost. It says the UK has become the “most expensive place in the world” to build nuclear plants.

Shockingly, contrary to the commitment in EN-7, the NRT recommended that nuclear plants should be built closer to urban areas and should be allowed to harm the local environment.

This confirms the fears of the NFLAs and NGO community that the Taskforce was charged with dispensing with regulation in the industry to make it cheaper and quicker for developers to build new nuclear plants with the risk that safety and environmental and human protection will be compromised. (A similar approach contributed to the accident at Three Mile Island)………………….

The Office for Nuclear Regulation has previously rigorously contested the claims of EDF and others like Britain Remade that over regulation led to a significant increase in costs at the Hinkley Point C development. And Nuclear Consult Chair, Dr Paul Dorfman, writing in The National said the report
does not provide any evidence that regulation is responsible for huge delays and ballooning costs, rather these can be attributed to the incompetence of the builders and the issues with designs.

However, at the recent ONR NGO Forum we were informed that the government intends to establish one overarching regulatory commission with the ultimate power to make determinations upon nuclear projects. At its head will be the Chief Nuclear Inspector as Chair of this prestigious new body. In response to the report, the ONR issued a statement casting its former criticism to the winds and instead warmly welcoming the recommendations; coincidence, surely?

Worryingly, the report also recommends limiting legal challenges to a ‘single bite of the cherry’ and talks of ‘indemnifying’ nuclear developers from ‘damages’ incurred because of judicial reviews.

And, in another move by the Labour Government to curtail the rights of lawful protestors, Chancellor Rachel Reeves has ordered courts to open hearings on judicial review processes which could threaten to block critical infrastructure projects within four months of an application being made.

Nuclear can access green finance
The Treasury has published an updated Green Financing Framework which adds nuclear energy-related expenditures to the list of Eligible Green Expenditures.
Worryingly it permits the employment of public money invested from November 2025 in the Government’s Green Bonds scheme into nuclear power; this is something we need to raise public awareness of…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/briefings/nfla-policy-briefing-330-nfla-progress-report-october-december-2025/

December 13, 2025 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

The Authoritarian Stack – How Tech Billionaires Are Building a Post-Democratic America — And Why Europe Is Next

[Superb graphics on original]

The Authoritarian Stack
A project led by Prof. Francesca Bria with xof-research.org, 12 December 2025. https://www.authoritarian-stack.info/

Research and editorial team: Francesca Bria, José Bautista
Data analysis: Autonomy Institute
Map development and design: xof-research.org
Web development: José Núñez
Supported by: Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung
Funded by: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES) Future of Work

The Contract That Changed Everything

In late July 2025, deep within the Pentagon’s bureaucratic machinery, the U.S. Army quietly signed away a piece of its sovereignty.

A ten-billion-dollar contract with Palantir Technologies—one of the largest in the Department of Defense’s history—was framed as a move toward “efficiency.”

It consolidated seventy-five procurement agreements into a single contract.

A strategic handover of core military functions to a private company whose founder, Peter Thiel, has declared that “freedom and democracy are no longer compatible.”

The Authoritarian Tech Network:
The Kingmakers

J.D. Vance, propelled to the vice-presidency by $15 million from Peter Thiel, became the face of tech-right governance. Behind him, Thiel’s network moved into the machinery of the state.

Under the banner of “patriotic tech“, this new bloc is building the infrastructure of control—clouds, AI, finance, drones, satellites—an integrated system we call the Authoritarian Stack. It is faster, ideological, and fully privatized: a regime where corporate boards, not public law, set the rules.

Our investigation shows how these firms now operate as state-like powers—writing the rules, winning the tenders, and exporting their model to Europe, where it poses a direct challenge to democratic governance.

Silicon Valley isn’t building apps anymore.
It’s building empires.

State Capture: Personnel Pipeline

To understand why this capture is happening so rapidly, follow the personnel. The revolving door no longer spins between government and industry—it locks them together into a new architecture of power.

Detachment 201: The Army’s Executive Innovation Corps

This goes further—commissioning Silicon Valley executives directly into military ranks. In June 2025, four tech executives were sworn in as lieutenant colonels:
The line between contractor and commander has been erased.

The Pipeline Made Visible

Unlike old authoritarianism built on fear and force, this new system rules through code, capital, and infrastructure — making resistance feel architecturally impossible.

It’s a self-reinforcing loop:
Ideology fuels venture capital → capital captures the state → the state feeds the same private systems that built it. A new model of power — privatized sovereignty.

Each layer reinforces the others. Ideology justifies investment. Investment captures state power. State power secures contracts. Contracts build infrastructure. Infrastructure becomes indispensable. Indispensability generates returns. Returns fund more ideology.

The Capital Machine: Financial Flows — From Taxpayers to Venture Capital

Follow the Money

Funding

Government

Tech Companies

Venture Capital

Founders Fund, Thiel’s $17 billion flagship, led Anduril’s $1 billion round at a $30.5 billion valuation. It was the first institutional investor in both Palantir and SpaceX. Palantir’s quarterly revenue now exceeds $1 billion—up 53 percent in government contracts. 1789 Capital epitomizes dynasty.

Founded by Thiel’s confidants and joined by Donald Trump Jr., it grew from $150 million to over $1 billion. It channels tens of millions into Musk’s empire—SpaceX for orbital dominance, xAI for military AI. 

Andreessen Horowitz (a16z), through its “American Dynamism” fund, backs defense tech and what it calls builders of the American state. Andreessen rallied Silicon Valley’s billionaire class to Trump’s 2024 campaign.

Smaller giants like 8VC and General Catalyst reinforce the pattern. 8VC poured $450 million into Anduril; General Catalyst led a $1.48 billion round.

The Stack: Five Domains of Privatized Sovereignty

Critical state infrastructures are being privatized across five domains—data, defense, space, energy, and money—the foundations of democratic power. These domains form the architecture of privatized sovereignty: a technological regime where power flows through laws, infrastructure and automated platforms.

Crypto Sovereignty

The Nuclear AI Complex

SpaceX: Orbital Infrastructure

Anduril: Autonomous Warfare

Palantir: The Operating System of Government

Privatizing the state’s data and decision making.

Systems

  • Gotham (intelligence)
  • Foundry (DOGE budget automation)
  • ImmigrationOS (ICE tracking)
  • NHS Federated Data Platform

Contracts

ICE Immigration Platform (2025)

$10 B U.S. Army Enterprise Agreement

Europe’s Deepening Trap

y mid-2025, its reverberations were already felt across Europe. In Rome, Italian defense officials moved to integrate Elon Musk’s Starlink into military communications. In Berlin, Rheinmetall and Anduril expanded their joint venture to deploy autonomous drone swarms for NATO. The German variants of its drones still run on Californian code. Musk livestreams with the AfD’s Alice Weidel, endorsing the German far-right while supplying NATO infrastructure.

In London, the NHS scaled Palantir’s £330 million Federated Data Platform across tens of millions of patient records, By May 2025, the government had to pay KPMG £8 million just to encourage hospital adoption. Meanwhile, a £1.5 billion defense partnership binds Britain to Palantir’s AI systems.

None of these decisions provoked real debate. Few reached front pages. Together, they reveal the systematic outsourcing of European sovereignty to American oligarchs whose ideology openly undermines democracy.

It is a paradox with devastating implications: pursuing digital sovereignty while ceding control through every signed contract.

Each new contract deepens the trap. Once Palantir becomes indispensable, once Anduril’s drones are NATO standard, once nuclear facilities power AI that runs everything else— the transformation is irreversible.

Europe faces an existential choice: build genuine technological sovereignty now, or accept governance by platforms whose architects view democracy as an obsolete operating system.

The Infrastructure of Control

ilicon Valley’s Authoritarian Tech Right is not theorizing this world. They are already building it. The pipelines are operational. The feedback loops are functioning. The sovereignty transfers are completing.

Democracy persists as a legacy interface— maintained for stability, while being systematically hollowed out and replaced.

The question now is whether democratic societies can recognize this formation for what it is—and build alternatives before the infrastructure of control becomes too deeply embedded to dislodge.

The Authoritarian Tech Complex

Explore the Map [by clicking on graphic on original]

December 13, 2025 Posted by | EUROPE, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Rosyth earmarked as temporary repair base for new fleet of UK submarines

Herald, 11th December

Work is underway to design an emergency planning zone as plans progress for Rosyth to be the temporary repair base for the UK’s new fleet of nuclear deterrent submarines.

Rosyth has been earmarked as a temporary contingent for the UK Government’s Dreadnought class of submarines – the first of which is expected to launch towards the end of the decade.

Members of Fife Council’s South and West Fife area committee were given an update on the proposals at their meeting on Wednesday where it was explained that “non-nuclear” repairs would be carried out from the dockyard when required.

Grant Reekie, head of radioactive waste and health physics at Babcock International in Rosyth, told councillors: “The next generation of submarines is going to be launched from Barrow towards the end of this decade.

“The intention is these will be maintained at the HM Naval base Clyde however the Clyde facilities will not be available until mid 2030s.

“We have been asked to provide a contingent facility by the MoD to bridge a gap of submarines coming into service in late 2020s from 2029 through to mid 2030s when they will no longer be required as it will be done in Faslane.

“Rosyth is the only location in the UK where this can be done due to the facilities, the expertise and the availability of the dock in Rosyth.”……………………..

Mr Reekie said the next step would be defining a “detailed emergency planning zone” which would then be sent to Fife Council.

“As soon as we have done the consequence assessment, which we are looking at the middle of next year, we need to go to the local authority and need to offer engagement to the local authority,” he said………………….

Rosyth councillor Brian Goodall questioned why there was no public consultation.

“For something as significant as this, something that would lead to a significant percentage of the population of Rosyth being told there will be Potassium iodate tablets available in the event of an emergency, why is there no public consultation on this?”………………………….

When probed, Ian Brown, from the MoD, also told councillors that policy would mean there would be no confirmation of if nuclear weapons were on board.

“My position is we do not comment on the condition of the boat whether it is armed or not,” he added.

………………….. Committee convener David Barratt was less pleased with the plans.

“Morally, and as a CND member, I find the existence of nuclear weapons abhorrent,” he said.

“I was going to ask if there is anything in the powers of council to frustrate, delay or in any way stop nuclear weapon activities and I take it from the answers the answer to that is an absolute no.

“Yes this will create jobs but war tends to do that. I don’t think we would advocate for war and job creation doesn’t lead me to advocate for nuclear weapons.” https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/25689769.rosyth-earmarked-temporary-repair-base-new-fleet-submarines/

December 13, 2025 Posted by | UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment

As the UK looks to invest in nuclear, here’s what it could mean for Britain’s environment

In this week’s newsletter:​ The government’s bid to speed up nuclear construction could usher in sweeping deregulation, with experts warning of profound consequences for nature.

Helena Horton, Guardian, 12 Dec 25

When UK prime minister Keir Starmer announced last week that he was “implementing the Fingleton review”, you can forgive the pulse of most Britons for failing to quicken.

But behind the uninspiring statement lies potentially the biggest deregulation for decades, posing peril for endangered species, if wildlife experts are to be believed, and a likely huge row with the EU.

Earlier this year, John Fingleton, a lively, intelligent Irish economist, was commissioned by the government to lead a “taskforce” with a mission to come up with a way to build nuclear power faster and cheaper. It’s accepted by experts that we need more nuclear if we are to meet net zero, and that Britain is the most expensive place in the world to build it. In the end, Fingleton turned in a review with 47 recommendations aimed at speeding up the process. So far, so snoozeworthy.

However, his recommendations, if adopted, could well lead to the biggest divergence from retained EU habitat and environment law since Brexit. Changes could be made to the habitats directive, which Britain helped write when we were in the EU, and which protect rare species and the places they live. The government could also make it more costly for individuals and charities to take judicial reviews against infrastructure projects……………

Legal advice is that removing these rules for nuclear power will inevitably lead for other infrastructure projects to be subject to the same, weaker regulatory system. Expert planning lawyer Alexa Culver said: “It’s a clever move to sneak broadbrush environmental deregulation, as the government can point to ‘net zero’ as being the ultimate driver. In reality, though, if you don’t protect ecosystems while reducing emissions, you’ve lost the battle. We’re gone anyway.”

It’s not surprising Starmer is clinging to anything which might increase economic growth……..  OBR has predicted an anticipated average GDP growth of 1.5% over the next five years. This is despite the controversial Planning and Infrastructure Bill which Starmer introduced in order to “get Britain building” and experts say it will weaken environmental protections.

Nature also continues to decline. The recently released biodiversity indicators show species numbers continue to decrease in the UK, which is extremely concerning when you consider just how much wildlife has dropped off since the 1970s. Some species, including one-fifth of mammals, are facing extinction, and recent figures show wild bird numbers are in freefall.

Of the review, Georgia Dent, CEO of Somerset Wildlife Trust said: “The government seems to have adopted a simple, reductive narrative that nature regulations are blocking development, and this is simply wrong. Nature in the UK is now in steep decline and the government has legally binding targets for nature’s recovery, and is failing massively in this at the moment. To reduce the hard-won protections that are allowing small, vulnerable populations of species to cling on for dear life is absolutely the wrong direction to take.”

…………………………. the UK is negotiating an energy deal with the EU. There are competition and non-regression clauses in the newest free trade agreement, which prevent either side from weakening environmental law. Government sources tell me their legal advice has been that implementing the Fingleton review could put the free trade agreement at risk……………

………..When MPs, environmental experts and the EU look past the boring title and read the detail, Starmer may have a fight on his hands. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/series/down-to-earth

December 13, 2025 Posted by | environment, UK | Leave a comment

Delays in constructing Hinkley C nuclear power station highlighted by protestors

 ANTI-nuclear campaigners have staged an annual Christmas
protest outside the Hinkley Point C (HPC) construction site to highlightthe years-long delay in completing it. Members of the campaign group Stop Hinkley took a giant stuffed turkey and set up a traditional Christmas dinner complete with sprouts on a table outside the site. They unveiled a banner reading ‘It is now 2025, where is the lecce for the HPC Turkey’,
‘lecce’ being local slang for electricity.

The stunt, which started eight years ago, was prompted by a claim made in 2007 by then-EDF Energy plc chief executive Vincent de Rivas that by 2017 people would be eating their turkeys cooked with electricity provided by Hinkley C.

West Somerset Free Press 11th Dec 2025, https://www.wsfp.co.uk/news/delays-in-constructing-hinkley-c-nuclear-power-station-highlighted-by-protestors-860631

December 13, 2025 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

US House passes $800mn aid package for Ukraine

New military assistance has been signed off on a month after Kiev was shaken by a major corruption scandal.

The US House of Representatives has passed a defense spending bill that would provide $800 million in military aid to Ukraine through 2027.

The 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) was approved 312-122 on Wednesday and will now advance to the Senate, where it is expected to receive bipartisan support, according to The Hill.

Some legislators objected to directing more taxpayers’ money to help Ukraine fight Russia. “I thought we were getting out of Ukraine. I don’t know why we still need to spend money there,” Thomas Massie, a Republican from Kentucky, said.

On Wednesday, US President Donald Trump slammed what he described as a “massive corruption situation” in Kiev, referring to the recently uncovered $100 million kickback scheme in the country’s energy sector, which heavily relies on Western aid.

Prosecutors named Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s longtime associate and former business partner Timur Mindich as the ringleader. Mindich fled the country to evade arrest after apparently being tipped off.

The scandal led to the resignation of two government ministers, and further anti-corruption raids prompted Zelensky to fire chief of staff Andrey Yermak last month.

Ukraine’s military procurement system has also been shaken by several graft and embezzlement scandals, one of which led to the resignation of Defense Minister Aleksey Reznikov in 2023.

The bill was approved as Trump has been pressuring Ukraine to sign a peace deal with Russia, with some reports suggesting that he hopes to reach an agreement by Christmas.

Russia considers Western military cooperation with Ukraine one of the root causes of the conflict and has listed ending foreign weapons deliveries as a condition for a ceasefire. President Vladimir Putin has argued that otherwise, Ukraine would use the pause in the fighting to rearm and regroup, as he says happened when Ukraine refused to implement the 2014-2015 Minsk

December 13, 2025 Posted by | politics, Ukraine, USA | Leave a comment

Zelensky resists ceding Donbas, after abandoning it years ago

Zelensky objects to ceding the Donbas region under Trump’s peace plan. But when offered the chance to keep the region under a compromise with Russia, he adamantly refused.

Aaron Maté, Dec 13, 2025

Since the Trump administration began pressuring him to reach a peace deal with Russia last month, Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky has refused to cede any territory to Moscow. On Thursday, after a new round of salvos from President Trump, Zelensky appeared to leave some wiggle room. “The Russians want the whole of Donbas — we don’t accept that,” Zelensky told reporters. However, for the first time, he floated the idea of putting the issue to a national vote: “I believe that the Ukrainian people will answer this question. Whether in the form of elections or a referendum, the Ukrainian people must have a say.”

Any Ukrainian-administered referendum on the fate of the Donbas would exclude most of its population, who now live under Russian rule. While Zelensky insists that he will not reward what he sees as an illegal Russian land grab, the Ukrainian leader has squandered several opportunities to keep his borders intact. The February 2015 Minsk accords would have left the Donbas within Ukraine by granting it limited autonomy and abandoning Kyiv’s chances of joining NATO. Under the threat of ultra-nationalist violence, successive Ukrainian governments instead opted to retake Donbas by force and demonize the ethnic Russians who live there……………………………………………………………(Subscribers only) https://www.aaronmate.net/p/zelensky-resists-ceding-donbas-after?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=100118&post_id=181439166&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=ln98x&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

December 13, 2025 Posted by | politics, Ukraine | Leave a comment

The Moral Urgency of Compromise in Ukraine.

George Beebe, December 05, 2025

At the heart of the public debate over the latest twists and turns in the Trump administration’s ongoing discussions with Russian and Ukrainian negotiators is a fundamental moral question on which there is no consensus: Is it wrong to seek a compromise to end the war in Ukraine? To judge from the anguished reactions to the leak of the White House’s “28-point plan”—which was not really a plan so much as a rough snapshot in time of what US negotiators thought might bridge the gaps between Ukrainian and Russian demands—much of the Western commentariat believes the answer is yes.   

In fact, the foreign policy establishments in Europe and Washington—which until recent years had presided over the West’s post-Cold War foreign policies—appear to view compromise itself as anathema. They insist that Russia should not gain in any way from its invasion of Ukraine, arguing that any other outcome would reward aggression, which would not only tempt Russia to resume its military conquests at some future date, but also invite similar aggression by China and others. 

As a result, they argue, Ukraine should not withdraw from territory in Donetsk it now holds, even if that is reciprocated by Russian withdrawals outside the Donbass region, as Moscow has offered. 

Nor should Russian-occupied territory be recognized as Russian in any way. Moscow should have no say in how Ukraine treats its linguistic and religious minorities or over whether Ukraine joins NATO, hosts Western combat forces, or has caps on its military holdings. All of these, it is argued,  should be sovereign Ukrainian decisions, regardless of whether Russia drops its objections to Ukraine joining the European Union, as President Vladimir Putin has pledged. Moreover, Russia must pay war reparations, and its leaders must face trial for war crimes.  

……………………………….. There are three big problems with this uncompromising stance. First, there is a yawning gap between what the opponents of a compromise insist must happen in Ukraine and their willingness to undertake the risks and sacrifices necessary to make it so.  Neither the United States nor Europe has been willing to go to war with Russia to force its unconditional surrender, understanding that this would very likely end in nuclear conflict………………………..

Second, having ruled out both direct military intervention and compromise, Ukraine’s rejectionist benefactors assume that they can sustain a prolonged battlefield stalemate that will ultimately exhaust Russia’s resources or its patience. That assumption is wishful thinking at best. Ukraine’s military efforts suffer from two increasingly problematic shortages: manpower and air defenses. The West cannot remedy Ukraine’s recruitment and desertion problems without sending hundreds of thousands of its own forces to fight. 

It cannot plug Ukraine’s growing air defense gap because Russia is building attack missiles, drones, and glide bombs faster than Western factories can manufacture air defense systems. This is not a formula for a prolonged stalemate; it is a recipe for Ukraine’s collapse, probably within months rather than years. 

Third and most important: The principle that lies at the root of the Ukraine conflict, which the opponents of compromise claim to defend—the principle that every nation has a sovereign right to choose its military allies—was never intended to be absolute, and the United States historically has not treated it as sacrosanct.

……………………………………………… That [the Cuban missile]crisis was resolved through a compromise in which the Soviets agreed to remove their missiles from Cuba in return for America’s pledge to remove its own missiles from Turkey and to refrain from efforts to overthrow the Castro regime.

……………………………….A truly principled approach to ending the war in Ukraine cannot be uncompromising.  It has to find a reasonable balance between principles that are by their very nature in tension with one another, such as Ukraine’s freedom to choose its allies and Moscow’s insistence that this freedom be limited by Russia’s security concerns………………………………………….. https://www.compactmag.com/article/the-moral-urgency-of-compromise-in-ukraine/

December 12, 2025 Posted by | politics international, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Nuclear Kills Kids

most significant of all there is now solid evidence of increased rates of leukaemia in children living close to nuclear power plants.

 Tony Webb | April 28, 2025, https://www.fabians.org.au/nuclear_kills_kids

One moment from my work in the USA in the early 1980s stands out in my memory.  I’d driven from Chicago to Cleveland at the invitation of the Health and Safety Officer of the US Boilermakers Union. The purpose was to speak to the members meeting held on the night ahead of the recruitment of members for work on the annual ‘clean-up’ of the local Nuclear Power plant.  The hired workers would be ‘radiation sponges’ – short-term casuals recruited for the ‘dirty jobs’ that would result in significant radiation exposures sometimes up to the permitted annual exposure limit and ‘let go’ if they reached that limit.  The practice offered some protection to the company’s full -time employees whose skills would be needed on an ongoing basis and whose exposures needed to be kept below the limit.   The meeting was well attended , rowdy, with a lot of questions and discussion which spilled over into the carpark after the meeting closed.  I noticed one man hanging back from the circle and invited him to join and share his thoughts.  As I recall them the essence was:

“I will be going in to apply for work tomorrow.  I understand what you shared about the risks . . . no safe level of exposure and chance of getting cancer perhaps 20 years from now . . .  It will put a roof over my family’s heads and food on the table . . . BUT my wife and I have had all the family we want.  If we hadn’t, what you shared about the genetic risks, the damage to our children and future generations . . . no I wouldn’t be going . . . “

It is a sad fact that workers, both men and women will choose, often from necessity, to put their health at risk from the work environment.  What is however consistent in my experience of working on radiation and other occupational health and safety issues is that they are far more concerned, cautious and likely to prioritise safety when it comes to risks to their children.

We now have solid evidence(1) that workers in nuclear power plants routinely exposed to radiation face significantly increased cancer risks, risks of cardiovascular disease including heart attacks and strokes, dementia and potentially other health effects. There is also an increased risk of genetic damage that can be passed on to their children and future generations. But perhaps most significant of all there is now solid evidence of increased rates of leukaemia in children living close to nuclear power plants.

To put it simply and in language that will resonate with workers and their families in the communities around the seven nuclear power plant sites the federal Liberal-National Coalition proposes to build if elected to government, nuclear kills kids.  It matters little whether or not these nuclear plants can be built on time, within budget, make a contribution to climate change, reduce electricity prices, or secure a long-term energy future; these nuclear power plants will likely kill kids who live close by. They cannot operate without routine releases of radioactive material into the environment and our young will be exposed and are particularly susceptible to any exposure that results.  

Now add to that if you care that women are more susceptible than men; that workers in these plants face greater exposure and health risks than adults in the community; that nuclear plants have and will continue to have both major accidents and less major ‘incidents’ resulting in radiation releases, community exposures and health damage. Add also that quite apart from the workers and others exposed when these plants need to be decommissioned, the radioactive wastes resulting from perhaps 30-50 years life will need to be safely stored and kept isolated from human contact for many thousands of years longer than our recorded human history.    And, again if you care, also add in the concerns around proliferation of nuclear weapons which historically has occurred on the back of, enabled by and sometimes concealed by countries’ developing so called peaceful nuclear power.

All these arguments add weight to the absurdity of Australia starting and the world continuing down this nuclear power path.  But if we want a single issue that strikes at the heart of human concerns it is this – and forgive me saying it again, it needs to be repeated many times until the electorate in Australia hears it loud and clear – Nuclear Kills Kids. 

SOURCES……………………………………………………………………………………………………

December 12, 2025 Posted by | health | Leave a comment

Japan rejects EU plan to steal Russian assets – Politico.

09 Dec 2025, https://www.sott.net/article/503419-Japan-rejects-EU-plan-to-steal-Russian-assets-Politico 

The bloc wants to use Moscow’s funds immobilized in the West to cover Ukraine’s budget deficit.

Japan has reportedly dismissed a European Union initiative to tap frozen Russian sovereign assets to help finance Ukraine’s massive budget shortfall.

Brussels hopes to issue a so-called “reparation loan” backed by Russian funds immobilized in the West – a plan that Moscow has denounced as outright theft. Belgium, where most of the money is held by the Euroclear clearinghouse, has refused to greenlight the proposal unless other nations agree to share associated legal and financial risks.

Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever has said broader international backing, particularly from non-EU countries holding Russian assets, would bolster the European Commission’s case for what he called the effective confiscation of a foreign state’s funds. But at a meeting of G7 finance ministers on Monday, Japan’s Satsuki Katayama made clear her government would not support the plan due to legal constraints, Politico reported, citing EU diplomatic sources.

Officials told the outlet they believe Japan’s stance aligns with that of the United States, which also opposes the EU approach and views the frozen assets as leverage in negotiations with Moscow.

France has reportedly likewise declined to touch any assets held on its soil, while Canada and the UK have signaled possible participation if the EU ultimately pursues the scheme.

Ukraine’s parliament last week adopted a 2026 budget with a staggering $47.5 billion deficit, expecting foreign donors and creditors to fill the gap. Roughly half that anticipated support – an estimated $23.6 billion – remains uncertain pending the fate of the EU loan plan.

Ukrainian media noted that lawmakers pushed the budget through despite unresolved questions over foreign financing, in part to project stability following the removal of Andrey Yermak, formerly the most powerful aide to the country’s leader, Vladimir Zelensky. Yermak was dismissed as a corruption scandal engulfed Kiev’s political establishment.

December 12, 2025 Posted by | business and costs, EUROPE, Japan, politics international | Leave a comment

Israel’s biggest con trick: Hiding the true numbers it has killed in Gaza

10 December 2025, https://www.jonathan-cook.net/blog/2025-12-10/israel-con-numbers-killed-gaza/

Israel has penned us all into a ‘debate’, one entirely divorced from reality, that relates only to those killed directly by its bombs and gunfire – not the genocide it is waging by other means

The biggest con trick Israel has managed to pull off over the past two years is imposing entirely phoney parameters on a “debate” in the West about the credibility of the death toll in Gaza, now officially standing at just over 70,000.

It is not just that we have been endlessly bogged down in rows about whether Gaza’s medical authorities can be trusted, or how many of the dead are Hamas fighters. (Despite Israeli disinformation campaigns, the Israeli military itself believes more than 80 per cent of the dead are civilians.)

Or even that these “debates” always ignore the fact that, early on, Israel wrecked Gaza’s capacity to count its dead by destroying the enclave’s governmental offices and its hospitals. The 70,000 figure is likely to be a drastic under-estimate.

No, the biggest con trick is that Israel has successfully penned us all into a “debate”, one entirely divorced from reality, that relates only to those killed directly by its bombs and gunfire.

The truth is that far, far larger numbers of people in Gaza have been actively killed by Israel not through these direct means but through what statisticians refer to as “indirect” methods.

These people were killed by Israel destroying their homes and leaving them with no shelter. By Israel destroying their water and electricity supplies and their sanitation systems. By Israel levelling their hospitals. By Israel starving them. By Israel creating the perfect conditions for disease to spread. The list of ways Israel is killing people in Gaza goes on and on.

Imagine your own societies levelled in the way Gaza has been.

How long would your elderly parents survive in this hellscape?

How well would your diabetic child fare, or your sister with asthma, or your brother with cancer?

How well would you cope with catching pneumonia, or even a common cold, if you hadn’t had more than one small meal a day for months on end?

How would your wife deal with a difficult childbirth if there were no anaesthetics, or no hospital nearby, or a barely functioning hospital overwhelmed with victims from Israel’s latest bombing run.

And what would be the chances of your baby surviving if its mother could produce no milk from her starvation diet? And if you could not give the baby formula feed because Israel was blocking supplies from entry into the enclave? And if, anyway, the contaminated water supply could not be mixed into the formula powder?

None of these kinds of deaths are included in the figure of 70,000. And all precedents show that many, many times more people are killed through these indirect methods than directly through fatal injuries from bombs and bullets.

According to a letter from experts in this field to the Lancet, studies of other wars – most of them far less destructive than Israel’s on the tiny enclave – indicate that between three and 15 times more people are killed by indirect, rather than direct, methods of warfare.

The authors conservatively estimate an indirect death toll four times greater than the direct death toll. That would mean, at a minimum, 350,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza through Israel’s actions.

The reality is likely to be even worse. That is without even mentioning the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who have been left with horrific injuries and psychological trauma.

Israel’s war planners know exactly how this direct-to-indirect ratio works. Which is why they chose to destroy nearly every home in Gaza, to bomb the power, sanitation and water facilities, to level the hospitals, and to block aid month after month.

They knew this would be the way Israel could carry out a genocide while offering its allies – western governments and its army of lobbyists – a “get out of jail card” for their active complicity.

Donald Trump’s so-called “ceasefire” is just another layer of deception in this endless game of smoke and mirrors. The UN’s child protection agency, Unicef, reports that less than a quarter of aid trucks are getting into Gaza, past Israel’s continuing starvation blockade, despite Israeli commitments agreed as part of the “ceasefire”. Apparently, this doesn’t register as a gross ceasefire violation. It goes unnoticed.

Unicef reports further that in October alone, at the start of the “ceasefire”, nearly 18,000 new mothers and babies had to be hospitalised in Gaza from acute malnutrition.

The genocide isn’t over. Israel may have slowed the rate of direct killings it is committing by bombing Gaza, but the indirect killings continue unabated. And so does the Israeli-engineered “debate” in the West, one designed to obscure and excuse the mass murder of Gaza’s population.

December 12, 2025 Posted by | Atrocities, Gaza, Israel | Leave a comment

Cashing in on war: Why stealing Russia’s assets actually makes things worse for the EU.

 

The loan is also, implicitly, seen as an invitation to keep the war going – thus not only keeping the Kiev regime afloat but complicating the prospects for a comprehensive settlement.

03 Dec 2025 , https://www.sott.net/article/503422-Cashing-in-on-war-Why-stealing-Russias-assets-actually-makes-things-worse-for-the-EU

For bloc taxpayers, it could mean Brussels has walked them into a fait accompli where they simply have to stump up for funding a corrupt regime in Kiev.

After a week of humiliation in which her much-touted plot to sequester Russian assets to fund Kiev’s war chest was outright rejected by both Belgium and the European Central Bank, European Commission boss Ursula von der Leyen has told EU member states they have two choices, both of which would send cash to Kiev’s coffers.

According to the embattled EC president, either EU countries will have to borrow cash for Ukraine and make their taxpayers foot the bill, or allow her to push through her – potentially illegal – “reparations plan” and kick the repayment can down the road.

Let’s take a look at what all the talk is about.

Russia’s frozen assets: How much is where?

It is known that Belgium-based clearinghouse Euroclear holds some €180 billion in Russian central-bank funds. Reports that Luxembourg held some €20 billion in Russian assets was denied by the country itself, which claimed it holds “less than €10,000.”

Switzerland, which is in neither the EU nor G7 and thus not subject to von der Leyen’s demands, has declared some 7.45 billion Swiss Francs (€8 billion).Germany has refused to disclose what it holds, citing data protection laws. Japan is thought to hold some €30 billion, while former French Finance Minister Bruno de Maire has spoken about immobilizing some €22.8 billion. The US is believed to hold around $5 billion.

What are the Russian assets frozen in the EU?

The assets mainly consist of European short- and mid-duration bonds that have mostly already come due. When the bonds matured, the principal was paid. Because Euroclear wasn’t prepared to hold that much money itself, the proceeds were invested by Euroclear’s house bank in an account at the European Central Bank. The money is earning interest that legally belongs to Euroclear, although in ordinary circumstances the clearinghouse would send those funds (minus fees) to the client (the Russian central bank).

What is the proposed reparations loan?

The plan entails the EU loaning Ukraine up to €140 billionusing the Russian assets as collateral. Technically, this would involve Euroclear making an interest-free loan of the same value as the Russian assets it holds.

The EU would sign for the cash and give it to Kiev where it would ostensibly be used to fight the war and cover budget expenses, although past experience indicates that much of it could end up in offshore accounts belonging to insiders close to Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky.

The sweetener for Kiev is that Ukraine only has to pay back the EU in the highly unlikely event that Russia loses the war and agrees to pay Ukraine reparations. In that case, Kiev would then have to pass those reparations back to Brussels, which would pay back Euroclear, which, in turn, would be able to honor its liability to the Russian central bank.

Why is Belgium afraid to go through with the scheme?

Continue reading →

December 12, 2025 Posted by | business and costs, EUROPE, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Why this nuclear energy stock could face a meltdown in 2026

by Devesh Kuma, Dec 9, 2025, https://invezz.com/news/2025/12/09/why-this-nuclear-energy-stock-could-face-a-meltdown-in-2026/

  • Nuclear stocks soared in 2025 as AI-driven energy demand boosted investor enthusiasm.
  • Licensing deadlines, dilution, and execution challenges threaten its 2027–2028 targets.
  • High valuation and rising losses make this stock one of the most vulnerable nuclear plays in 2026.

At a time when the stock markets across the world are focusing on artificial intelligence, long-term players are also looking at sectors that will power the future of the AI space, most notably nuclear energy.

The year 2025 was massive for nuclear energy stocks, which saw exponential growth on the backs of AI boom and high-profile partnership.

Oklo stock (NYSE: OKLO) exploded nearly 379% in 2025 on soaring enthusiasm for small modular reactors, but is facing sharp headwinds next year in the form of regulatory approvals, dilution risks, and execution challenges.

As Oklo races against a July 2026 Department of Energy deadline and faces a fresh $1.5 billion share offering, 2026 will reveal whether the company’s promise is genuine or merely speculative froth.

Will Oklo stock clear the final hurdles?

Oklo’s entire business model hinges on clearing one of the nuclear industry’s most daunting challenges: winning approval from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission while delivering a first-of-a-kind reactor on time and on budget.

The company completed Phase 1 of the NRC’s pre-application readiness assessment in July and plans to submit its Combined Operating License Application by late 2025, but the real tests arrive in 2026.

The agency is expected to issue a draft evaluation of Oklo’s Principal Design Criteria in early 2026, a shortened timeline compared to traditional reviews, yet still unproven territory.

Any regulatory surprise or request for additional design modifications could cascade into months of delays, directly threatening the company’s stated goal of reaching commercial operation at Idaho National Laboratory by late 2027 or early 2028.

What amplifies the risk is that Oklo remains entirely pre-revenue and dependent on federal support.

Cash burn is accelerating, with operating losses widening from $17.8 million in Q2 2024 to $28 million in Q2 2025, even as the company boasts a $683 million cash buffer.

Sky-high valuation and the reversal risk

The market has priced in perfection. Oklo’s stock has swung wildly from a low of $17.42 to a peak of $193.84 in 2025.

Analyst price targets diverge sharply, ranging from $14 to $175, reflecting deep uncertainty about whether the company can justify a $16.3 billion market capitalization without any revenue streams visible before 2027 at the earliest.

In his latest article in The Motley Fool, analyst Adam Spatacco outlined that the nuclear energy sector has already priced in a lot of future optimism.

In 2026, I think investors will witness sharp corrections across a number of nuclear energy stocks, with Oklo being by far the most vulnerable in my opinion.

Oklo’s aggressive dilution, boosting share count by roughly 50% since 2024, creates a precarious scenario.

Even if the Aurora reactor succeeds, the accumulated shareholder dilution may offset long-term returns.

Investors should weigh Oklo’s long-term promise against the near-term gauntlet of approvals and capital raises.

December 12, 2025 Posted by | business and costs | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »