The Building of the First Atomic Bombs Impacted Workers and Residents, Too
Eighty years after the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, workers who mined the uranium and people who lived near the test sites are still dying from exposure to radiation.
by Jim Carrier, August 7, 2025, https://progressive.org/magazine/the-building-of-the-first-atomic-bombs-impacted-workers-and-residents-too-carrier-20250807/
The road to Nagasaki was littered with radiation.
Eighty years after an atomic bomb called Fat Man was dropped, killing and poisoning about 100,000 people in Nagasaki, at least a dozen sites around the world—sites that contributed to the bomb’s creation—are still dealing with its deadly legacy.
Under the pressure to win World War II, U.S. military leaders pulled out all stops to prioritize the creation and testing of an atomic bomb, indifferent to the cost on the lives and livelihood of everyday people. Landscapes were polluted, workers were exposed to radiation, and civilian neighbors to the nuclear test sites—the first “downwinders”—were ignored or lied to.
The Manhattan Project—a top-secret research and development program created by the U.S. government during World War II to develop a nuclear bomb—sourced nearly all of its much-needed uranium from the Belgian Congo’s Shinkolobwe mine. Located in the modern-day Haut-Katanga province in the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Shinkolonwe mine was the world’s richest source of high-grade uranium, radium, and other valuable minerals. First opened in 1921, the Belgian-owned mine employed artisanal miners who dug the radioactive ore with handheld tools and carried it out in sacks on their shoulders, further exposing them to the toxic substance. While the environmental impact was visible and more difficult to conceal, any known records of lasting health impacts were disappeared by the authorities or never recorded at all.
In 1939, fearing Adolf Hitler and the German discovery of nuclear fission in uranium—with its potential to create a bomb—the mine’s manager shipped more than 1,000 tons of ore from Katanga to a warehouse on Staten Island, New York. Spilled ore contaminated a portion of the site where it sat for three years. A 1980 study later determined that the site might harm trespassers beneath the Bayonne Bridge, but by that time the site had already been demolished.
President Franklin Roosevelt’s January 19, 1942, decision to build an atomic bomb touched off the $2 billion Manhattan Project with its extraordinary mix of secret research at Los Alamos, New Mexico, and massive construction projects at Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and Hanford, Washington. All of these needed hundreds of tons of uranium to make a few pounds of plutonium.
In November 1942, the U.S. Army discovered and bought the Staten Island uranium stockpile and shipped 1,823 drums by barge and railroad to the Seneca Army Depot in Romulus, New York, where it was put into large concrete igloos before being shipped to various refineries. Now part of an Environmental Protection Agency Superfund site, the depot stored all kinds of munitions and even some classified military equipment that was burned and buried. Most of the site was cleaned up in the early 2000s and opened for recreation and industrial warehousing.
The Army’s search for uranium ore also uncovered 500 tons among vanadium tailings in western Colorado, and 300 tons at Port Hope, Ontario, Canada, where the Eldorado Gold Mines refinery processed ore into more pure concentrations. Eldorado’s own mine, on Great Bear Lake in the Northwest Territories of Canada, employed First Nations Dene workers who would later suffer cancers and die from handling sacks of ore. Their community of Délı̨nę became known as a “village of widows.” Without contemporary health records, a re-created exposure study found that overall cancer rates for Délı̨nę were “not statistically significantly different from the Northwest Territories.”
Port Hope, on the northern shore of Lake Ontario, which processed all the African and North American uranium ore for the Manhattan Project, spread tailings in neighborhoods and in the lake, eventually requiring a $1.3 billion cleanup that did not begin until 2018. Residents blame the contamination for cancers, although a 2013 study found no statistical evidence of greater radiosensitive cancers.
An enduring and poetic legend links the labors of Délı̨nę villagers to the Japanese bombs, a story told in A Village of Widows, a documentary film that followed ten Dine to Hiroshima in 1998 where they paid their respects and shared mutual sorrow with hibakusha, the Japanese word for the survivors of the atomic bombs. The uranium ore from Great Bear Lake did, in fact, contribute to the Manhattan Project—a U.S. government history found that Great Bear Lake ore amounted to one-sixth of the uranium used in the Manhattan Project, Colorado ore contributed one-seventh, and the rest came from the Belgian Congo. However, a detailed 2008 analysis of the ore’s movements concluded that “the fissile material in the Nagasaki weapon was almost certainly derived from oxide processed by Eldorado which would have been mostly of Belgian Congo origin. The same is probably true for the Hiroshima weapon. It is also possible that there was some uranium of U.S. origin in both of these weapons.”
After Port Hope, the uranium was further refined at nineteen industrial sites including: Linde Air in Tonawanda, New York; Dupont’s Deepwater Works in New Jersey; Metal Hydrides Inc. in Beverly, Massachusetts; Harshaw Chemical in Cleveland, Ohio; and at Mallinckrodt Chemical Company in St. Louis, Missouri. All of these sites have undergone expensive remediation. Mallinckrodt, whose radiation contamination caused numerous cancers in children and adults, has yet to be scrubbed clean.
Uranium salts were then delivered to either Oak Ridge, Tennessee, where the Y-12 refinery produced enriched uranium for the bomb dropped on Hiroshima, or to Hanford, Washington, where refineries produced the plutonium used in both the Trinity test bomb and the Nagasaki bomb. Both reactor sites deliberately released radioactive material into the air and water. Cleaning the mess has cost much more than the original Manhattan Project. The cost to clean Hanford, considered the most radioactive spot in the world, is estimated at $640 billion. Oak Ridge’s cleanup won’t be finished until 2050. Hanford’s effort to meld radioactive sludge into glass containers and bury them in salt caves is only beginning.

The first atomic bomb blast in history, the Trinity test of the plutonium implosion “gadget” in the Alamogordo, New Mexico, desert on July 16, 1945, left permanent marks on the land and the people downwind. The airborne plume from Trinity drifted across the Tularosa Basin, landing on vegetables, cattle, and water, poisoning residents who would later report leukemia, cancers, and heart disease. Subsequent studies have found Trinity fallout reached forty-six states, Canada, and Mexico. After five years of lobbying, the Tularosa Basin Downwinders Consortium won a two-year window—until December 31, 2028—to be included in the federal Radiation Exposure Compensation Act which covers U.S. uranium workers and downwinders exposed at the Nevada Test Site during the Cold War. As of June 24, 2025, 42,575 people have received $2.7 billion dollars. Tourists can visit the test site one day a year, on the third Saturday in October. Radiation at ground zero is ten times the region’s natural radiation.
The area around Los Alamos, where brilliant physicists and world-class machinists created the bombs that fell on Japan eighty years ago, has realized that the work of those scientists also left plutonium contamination close to home. Wartime practices that dumped raw radioactive waste into Acid Canyon continued until 1951, and despite several cleanup efforts, measurable plutonium remains. The Los Alamos National Laboratory says the risks to humans walking the canyon are “tiny.” However, plutonium has a half-life of 24,000 years.
For more on the story of Nagasaki, Japan, today, see Jim Carrier’s article “The Bombs Still Ticking” from the August/September 2025 issue of The Progressive.
Ending a War That Never Should Have Started.

09/02/2025•Mises Wire•Kevin Rosenhoff
Six months after Zelenskyy’s historic humiliation in the Oval Office, Trump’s meeting with Putin hopefully signals an end of the Russia-Ukraine war. From a moral point of view, this is to be welcomed, as the war—from both sides—has been morally illegitimate from the outset.
A Morally Justified War Must Be Proportionate
The central framework for evaluating the morality of war is the so-called just war theory—an ancient tradition shaped by various philosophers. Within it, a fundamental requirement for starting and continuing a war is proportionality. Generally, this means the evils caused must stand in due proportion to the evils prevented. American philosopher Jeff McMahan differentiated this idea with his distinction between narrow and wide proportionality. Simply put, while narrow proportionality concerns the appropriate harms inflicted on aggressors (e.g., Russian soldiers), wide proportionality deals with harms inflicted on innocents (e.g., Ukrainian and Russian civilians)……………………………………………………………………………
“To the Last Man”—Why Ukraine’s War is Disproportionate
The reasons for Russia’s invasion are contested. Some point to Putin’s imperial ambitions and fear of Ukrainian democracy, others to NATO’s expansion. Still, there is broad agreement: Russia’s invasion is not only a violation of international law but also of morality. Waging war in the absence of a prior or imminent attack is reprehensible from every perspective. Participating Russian soldiers who threaten innocent lives can neither complain about being harmed nor demand compensation or an apology. Since they are therefore not wronged, their killing is proportionate in the narrow sense and, in principle, also morally legitimate as a means of warding off the threat……………………………………………………………………..
The problem of Ukraine’s war is not the harming of Russian invaders, but the harming of innocents by the Ukrainian state—that is, wide proportionality. These innocents include, not only the over 7,000 civilians in Russian-occupied areas of Ukraine presumably injured or killed by Ukrainian bombing attacks, but especially the many men forcibly recruited and held trapped. Since the war’s beginning, men between the ages of 18 and 60 have not only been prevented from fleeing the country but have increasingly been seized from their families and sent to the front—where they are highly likely to be killed or wounded. “A woman screamed for the army to spare her husband from conscription. A soldier slapped her and took her husband,” reported US journalist Manny Marotta, describing one of the forced mobilizations at the war’s outbreak. His account stands pars pro toto for the broader problem of the widespread unwillingness to fight and die for the Ukrainian state. According to former presidential adviser, Oleksiy Arestovych, half of Ukrainian men have refused to submit their data to recruitment centers. Over half a million men of military age have fled to the EU—and thousands more have been caught while trying to escape.
While initially there were still volunteers, their numbers have dwindled to zero. “There are no more volunteers,” complained military police officer Roman Boguslavskyi to Der Spiegel in November 2023. To avoid running into people like Roman, Ukrainians use Telegram channels to warn each other. The Kyiv-based group—Kyiv Povestka—alone now has close to 250,000 members. However, dodging the recruiters does not always work: the internet is flooded with videos showing military officers grabbing men off the street and trying to force them into minibuses like cattle. Accordingly, the term coined for this practice—“busification”—was named Ukraine’s Word of the Year in 2024. The cutesy term, however, should not obscure the repressive reality. In her 2024 essay Mobilisation, Ukrainian writer Yevgenia Belorusets reveals the world behind the videos—a world in which women hide their husbands and a brutal state no longer spares even those suffering from cancer or HIV. Ukrainians are thus not only victims of Russia, but also of their own state. Or, to quote the Ukrainian doctor Semyon from Belorusets’s essay: “We are in a situation we never imagined. We are devouring ourselves. Shelled by Russia, at war with Russia, and now at war with those who have decided we must question nothing.”
How should the actions of the Ukrainian state be judged morally? Unless the civilians harmed by Ukrainian bombing have consented, the state is wronging them—no differently than someone who injures or kills bystanders while fending off a mugger in the street. The same applies to the forcibly conscripted men: anyone who sees and hears how they are hunted down and torn from their loved ones should intuitively judge the state’s actions as a violation of their moral rights—and those of their families. After all, such conduct would be regarded in virtually any other context as an injustice requiring justification.
If I were attacked in my home and abducted you to defend me at risk to your life, I would be committing a moral wrong, both against you and your loved ones. Consistently, the actions of the Ukrainian state should be judged in the same way. It treats human beings as material to be used and consumed—a clear violation of their dignity and rights. The possible counterargument of a “duty to fight” seems unconvincing given the risk involved. According to reports by the Financial Times, Ukrainian commanders estimate that between 50 and 70 percent of new frontline soldiers are killed or wounded within just a few days. Yet we are normally not required to take significant personal risks to save others. If you could save my life by playing Russian roulette, doing so would be noble—but not your duty. To compel you anyway would still be a rights violation.
the Ukrainian war suffers from a more fundamental problem. Zelenskyy declared—both before and during the war—his intention to fight “to the last man” and “whatever the cost,” thereby rejecting proportionality itself. The Ukrainian state acts like someone who deliberately diverts a runaway train onto a track without caring how many people are on it. On this premise, all Ukrainians—and potentially humanity—become fair game to be sacrificed for Ukraine’s cause. Such conduct, which explicitly denies proportionality, can hardly be considered proportionate and morally justified. Under Zelenskyy, Ukraine has waged a war that has been morally unbounded from the start, with no regard for any losses.
It would therefore be right to end this war. Two morally illegitimate wars should be brought to a close—Russia’s war under Putin and Ukraine’s war under Zelenskyy. https://mises.org/mises-wire/ending-war-never-should-have-started
UK Labour must not award Elbit a £2 billion military deal
Why are Israel’s largest arms firm and a company mired in a corruption scandal even being considered for training British troops?
DECLASSIFIED UK, ANDREW FEINSTEIN, PAUL HOLDEN and JACK CINAMON, 28 August 2025
Britain’s Ministry of Defence might imminently award a 15 year contract, worth £2.5bn, to a consortium headed by the British subsidiary of the Israeli arms firm Elbit Systems and including the US management consultancy firm, Bain and Company.
If successful, Elbit’s consortium would be responsible for training as many as 60,000 members of the UK military.
The consortium seems well-placed to win the contract; it is, in fact, one of only two shortlisted and preferred bidders.
The Ministry of Defence has already given the consortium a £2m contract so that it can develop its proposals further.
This is unacceptable. And it is frankly unbelievable that this consortium is even in the running considering its track record.
Elbit Systems UK is the fully-owned subsidiary of Elbit Systems Limited. Elbit Systems Limited is headquartered in Tel Aviv and is listed on both the Israeli and US stock exchanges.
Elbit is one of the two largest Israeli weapons manufacturers and is central to the IDF’s operations, providing 85% of its drones. Elbit International is also a major contributor to the F-35 fighter jet program, bragging that it plays a ‘critical role’ in the ‘success of the world’s most advanced fighter jet.’
In July 2025, Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur for the Occupied Palestine Territories, published an excoriating report setting out corporate complicity in Israel’s “plausibly” genocidal conduct in Gaza – for which she was subsequently sanctioned by Donald Trump.
Her report is clear that Elbit forms a central part of Israel’s military-industrial complex, which has become “the economic backbone of [Israel].”
“Elbit has cooperated closely on Israeli military operations, embedding key staff in the Ministry of Defence,” Albanese points out, further noting that Elbit provides “a critical domestic supply of weaponry.”
Bain
But we’re also deeply concerned about Elbit’s partner, Bain and Company.
Bain and Company (not to be confused with the mega hedge fund Bain Capital, which confirmed to us that it is not involved in the Elbit consortium) is a US-based management consultancy firm.
Bain’s inclusion in the consortium’s bid was first reported in 2023 by the UK military magazine, Shephard News, based on unpublished behind-the-scenes documents.
Bain has a sordid and shocking history. In August 2022, the Cabinet Office placed Bain and Company on a ‘blacklist’, preventing it from getting any Cabinet Office contracts. ………………………………………………………………………………………………
In July this year it was confirmed that Bain had shut down its South African consultancy operations, with the Financial Times reporting insiders saying that the company’s local reputation had been destroyed by the scandal.
The carcass of Bain’s South African business would be repurposed as a ‘hub’ to support Bain’s other international work.
These are the types of companies that the UK is poised to mainline into the very DNA of the British military and the British state: Elbit, its parent company one of the most important partners to the IDF in Gaza; and Bain and Company, only recently blacklisted for serious professional misconduct for its role in undermining the fabric of South Africa’s democracy.
The idea that the UK would award this consortium, and these companies, any sort of contract, never mind a 15 year contract of such importance, is an outrage. It must be stopped. https://www.declassifieduk.org/labour-must-not-award-elbit-a-2-billion-military-deal/
Holy See tells nations at UN to end threat of nuclear weapons, even as deterrence.

Vatican Vatican News by Gina Christian, United Nations — September 8, 2025, https://www.ncronline.org/vatican/vatican-news/holy-see-tells-nations-un-end-threat-nuclear-weapons-even-deterrence
Amid a global arms race, ending the threat of nuclear war — and even the testing of nuclear weapons — is imperative, said the Holy See’s diplomat to the United Nations.
Archbishop Gabriele Caccia, the Holy See’s U.N. permanent observer, shared his thoughts in a statement he delivered Sept. 4 at U.N. headquarters in New York, during the General Assembly High-level Plenary Meeting to Commemorate and Promote the International Day Against Nuclear Tests, observed that same day.
“The pursuit of a world free of nuclear weapons is not only a matter of strategic and vital necessity, but also a profound moral responsibility,” Caccia in his remarks.
He pointed to the introduction of nuclear weapons — first detonated by the U.S. in 1945 over the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, killing an estimated 110,000 to 210,000 people, during World War II — as unveiling to the world “an unprecedented destructive force.
“This event changed the course of history and cast a long shadow over humanity, unleashing grave consequences for both human life and creation,” Caccia said in his statement.
“The devastating aftermath of this dramatic event led to the problematic assumption that peace and security could be maintained through the logic of nuclear deterrence — a notion that continues to challenge moral reasoning and the international conscience,” he said.
That challenge has intensified in recent years, with more than 120 conflicts now taking place throughout the world, according to the International Committee of the Red Cross.
Military spending has soared worldwide, with the global total reaching a record high of close to $2.5 trillion in 2024, up more than 7% from 2023 and averaging just under 2% of nations’ gross domestic product. The European Union, United Kingdom and Canada have accelerated defense investments, as the U.S. under the Trump administration has unsettled longstanding defense alliances.
The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, adopted by the U.N. in 2017, serves as a legally binding instrument towards the total elimination of nuclear weapons. But while there are 94 state signatories and 73 states party to the treaty, neither the U.S. nor Russia, which together account for approximately 88% of the world’s nuclear weapons, have signed on.
That trend is “particularly concerning,” said Caccia.
“Rather than advancing towards disarmament and a culture of peace, we are witnessing a resurgence of aggressive nuclear rhetoric, the development of increasingly destructive weapons and a significant rise in military expenditure,” he said, “often at the expense of investment in integral human development and the promotion of the common good.”
The very prospect of nuclear testing is problematic, he said, noting that since the first nuclear weapons test in 1945, more than 2,000 tests have been conducted “in the atmosphere, underground, beneath the oceans and on land.”
“These actions have affected everyone, particularly indigenous peoples, women, children, and the unborn,” he said. “The health and dignity of many continue to be affected in silence, and all too often without redress.”
The archbishop stressed the Holy See’s call to reflect on “the urgent shared responsibility to ensure that the terrible experiences of the past are not repeated.”
He affirmed the Holy See’s support for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, which bans all nuclear test explosions, whether for military or civilian purposes, as well as the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.
“It is imperative that we move beyond a spirit of fear and resignation,” said Caccia.
The archbishop quoted the exhortation of Pope Leo XIV in his June 18 general audience, saying, “We must never become accustomed to war. Indeed, the temptation to place our trust in powerful and sophisticated weapons must be firmly rejected.”
Israeli Lawmakers Demanded Better PR to Conceal Gaza Famine. Google Obliged.
Exclusive look at Israeli government contracts for online ads claiming that there is no hunger or starvation in Gaza.

Israel’s advertising bureau, which reports to the prime minister’s office, has since embarked on a mass advertising and public messaging effort to conceal the hunger crisis. The push includes the use of American influencers widely reported on last month. It also includes a high-dollar spending spree on paid advertising, yielding tens of millions for Google, YouTube, X, Meta, and other tech platforms.
Lee Fang and Jack Poulson, Sep 04, 2025
Investigation published in partnership with Drop Site News.
On March 2, 2025, hours after the Israeli government announced the blockade of all food, medicine, fuel, and other humanitarian supplies from entering Gaza, lawmakers in Jerusalem demanded answers—not on the devastating human toll of such a decision, but on how Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office was preparing to handle the public relations fallout.
“I began with the example of the cessation of humanitarian aid—did you prepare for this thing this morning?” asked Knesset member Moshe Tur-Paz, the chair of a subcommittee on Foreign Affairs in Israel’s parliament.
Avichai Edrei, a spokesperson for the Israel Defense Forces who was asked the same question later in the hearing, assured the legislators work was underway, stating, “We could also decide to launch a digital campaign in this context, to explain that there is no hunger and present the data.”
Publicly available government contracts show that Israel’s advertising bureau, which reports to the prime minister’s office, has since embarked on a mass advertising and public messaging effort to conceal the hunger crisis. The push includes the use of American influencers widely reported on last month. It also includes a high-dollar spending spree on paid advertising, yielding tens of millions for Google, YouTube, X, Meta, and other tech platforms.
“There is food in Gaza. Any other claim is a lie,” asserted a propaganda video published by Israel’s foreign ministry to Google’s YouTube video sharing platform in late August and viewed more than 6 million times.
Much of the video’s reach results from an ad placed during an ongoing and previously unreported $45 million (NIS 150 million) advertising campaign initiated between Google and Netanyahu’s office in late June. The contract—which is with both YouTube and Google’s advertising campaign management platform, Display & Video 360—explicitly characterizes the ad campaign as hasbara, a Hebrew word whose meaning is somewhere between public relations and propaganda.
Records show that the Israeli government similarly spent $3 million (NIS 10 million) for an advertising campaign with X. The French and Israeli advertising platform Outbrain/Teads is also set to receive roughly $2.1 million (NIS 7 million)
The ads have aired in response to increasing global outcry over the deteriorating situation in Gaza. In August, the UN formally declared a famine in Gaza governorate, which includes Gaza City. The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC), the leading global authority on food security, projected the threshold for famine would be crossed in Deir al-Balah and Khan Younis in the coming weeks, stating “this Famine is entirely man-made, it can be halted and reversed.”
The UN aid coordination office OCHA further warned on Friday of “a descent into a massive famine” in the Gaza Strip.
At least 367 Palestinians, including 131 children, have died as a result of hunger and malnutrition since the war began, according to the health ministry in Gaza.
The existence of an Israeli Google ads campaign to discredit the UN’s primary aid agency for Palestinian refugees, UNRWA, was similarly reported by WIRED last year. Hadas Maimon, head of public awareness for Israel’s diaspora ministry, stated during the March 2 Knesset hearing that, “For almost a year now, we have been leading a major campaign on the issue of UNRWA.”
Other Israeli government ads on Google’s platforms accused the United Nations of “deliberate sabotage” of aid delivery into Gaza and promoted the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, which is backed by Israel, the U.S., and unnamed European countries. One campaign promoted prosecution of the militant group Hamas, which governs the Gaza Strip, for debunked allegations of mass sexual violence as a result of a controversial report published by the Israeli advocacy group Dinah Project.
Despite the denial about the famine, prominent Israeli government voices have championed the effort to cut off food and water to Gazans as a strategy for inducing mass migration out of the territory. “In my opinion, you can besiege them,” said Bezalel Smotrich, the Israeli Finance Ministry and a coalition partner to Netantayu’s government, according to Channel 12. “No water, no electricity, they can die of hunger or surrender,” Smotrich said.
Amichay Eliyahu, the Knesset member who leads the Heritage Ministry in Netanyahu’s government, has similarly called for starving the Palestinian population of Gaza. “There is no nation that feeds its enemies,” Eliyahu said during a radio interview in July. In May, the minister argued the Palestinians “need to starve” and added, “If there are civilians who fear for their lives, they should go through the emigration plan.”…………………………………………………………..(Subscribers only) https://www.leefang.com/p/israeli-lawmakers-demanded-better?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1239256&post_id=172710128&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=ln98x&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
Pakistan nuclear weapons, 2025

Bulletin, By Hans M. Kristensen, Matt Korda, Eliana Johns, Mackenzie Knight-Boyle | September 4, 2025
Pakistan continues to slowly modernize its nuclear arsenal with improved and new delivery systems, and a growing fissile material production industry. Analysis of commercial satellite images of construction at Pakistani army garrisons and air force bases shows what appear to be newer launchers and facilities that might be related to Pakistan’s nuclear forces, although authoritative information about Pakistan’s nuclear units is scarce.
We estimate that Pakistan has produced a nuclear weapons stockpile of approximately 170 warheads, which is unchanged since our last estimate in 2023 (see Table 1). The US Defense Intelligence Agency projected in 1999 that Pakistan would have 60 to 80 warheads by 2020 (US Defense Intelligence Agency (1999, 38), but several new weapon systems have been fielded and developed since then, which leads us to a higher estimate. Our estimate comes with considerable uncertainty because neither Pakistan nor other countries publish much information about the Pakistani nuclear arsenal.
With several new delivery systems in development, four plutonium production reactors, and an expanding uranium enrichment infrastructure, Pakistan’s stockpile has the potential to increase further over the next several years. The size of this increase will depend on several factors, including how many nuclear-capable launchers Pakistan plans to deploy, how its nuclear strategy evolves, and how much the Indian nuclear arsenal grows. We estimate that the country’s stockpile could potentially grow to around 200 warheads by the late 2020s. But unless India significantly expands its arsenal or further builds up its conventional forces, it seems reasonable to expect that Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal will not grow significantly, but might level off as its current weapons programs are completed.
………………………………….. Analyzing Pakistan’s nuclear forces is particularly fraught with uncertainty, given the lack of official state-originating data. The Pakistani government has never publicly disclosed the size of its arsenal and does not typically comment on its nuclear doctrine. Unlike some other nuclear-armed states, Pakistan does not regularly publish any official documentation explaining the contours of its nuclear posture or doctrine. Whenever such details emerge in the public discourse, they usually originate from retired officials commenting in their personal capacities. The most regular official source on Pakistani nuclear weapons is the Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR), the media wing of the Pakistan Armed Forces, which publishes regular press releases for missile launches and occasionally couples them with launch videos.
Occasionally, other countries offer official statements or analysis about Pakistan’s nuclear forces. ……………………………………………………………………
Pakistan’s nuclear doctrine
Pakistan has historically maintained a deliberately ambiguous nuclear doctrine, including through refusal to endorse or reject a no-first-use policy.
…………………………..Within its broader philosophy of “credible minimum deterrence,” which seeks to emphasize a defensive and limited but flexible nuclear posture, Pakistan operates under a nuclear doctrine that it calls “full spectrum deterrence.” This posture is aimed mainly at deterring India, which Pakistan identifies as its primary adversary.
…………………………..Pakistan’s nuclear posture—particularly its development and deployment of tactical nuclear weapons—has created considerable concern in other countries, including the United States, which fears that it increases the risk of escalation and lowers the threshold for nuclear use in a military conflict with India.
…………………………..Nuclear security, command-and-control, and crisis management
Over the past decade-and-a-half, the US assessment of nuclear weapons security in Pakistan appears to have changed considerably from confidence to concern, particularly because of the introduction of tactical nuclear weapons in the Pakistani arsenal. ……………………………………………………………………..
2025 India-Pakistan conflict
In May 2025, India and Pakistan engaged in a brief conflict, during which India launched conventional missile strikes against several Pakistani military facilities. The conflict, which lasted days, included an escalatory exchange of fire from both sides following the April 22 terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Indian-administered Kashmir.
In the aftermath of the conflict, the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) and the Military Engineer Services—which conducts construction and maintenance operations for all branches of the Pakistani military—issued a series of public procurement contracts for post-strike repairs at a variety of military bases, indicating which facilities suffered damage due to the conflict (Mishra 2025). ……………………
……………………….One study concluded that although the “mutual possession of nuclear weapons heavily conditioned the response of both sides” and “overt nuclear signaling was lower than in many prior India-Pakistan crises, … the crisis underscores that South Asia is one of the most likely theaters for nuclear war, even if that prospect was not imminent in this instance” (Clary 2025).
Fissile materials, warheads, and missile production
Pakistan has a well-established and diverse fissile material production complex that is expanding. This includes four heavy-water plutonium production reactors at the Khushab Complex, three of which were completed in the past 15 years. ………………………………………….
We estimate that Pakistan currently is producing sufficient fissile material to build 14 to 27 new warheads per year, although we estimate that the actual warhead increase in the stockpile probably averages around 5 to 10 warheads per year.[2]…………………………………………..
Nuclear-capable aircraft and air-delivered weapons…………………………………………………………………………………..
Land-based ballistic missiles…………………………………………………………………………….
Land-based missile garrisons…………………………………………………………………………..
Ground- and sea-launched cruise missiles…………………………………………………………………….. https://thebulletin.org/premium/2025-09/pakistan-nuclear-weapons-2025/?utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Pakistan%20s%20nuclear%20arsenal&utm_campaign=20250904%20Thursday%20Newsletter%20%28Copy%29
One by one, leaders learn that grovelling to Trump leads to disaster. When will it dawn on Starmer?

Simon Tisdall 7 Sept 25, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/sep/07/donald-trump-keir-starmer-world-leaders-state-visit-uk
As the US president’s state visit looms, he’s leaving a trail of broken promises across the globe. Britain can’t afford to look like a lackey state.
Sucking up to Donald Trump never works for long. Narendra Modi is the latest world leader to learn this lesson the hard way. Wooing his “true friend” in the White House, India’s authoritarian prime minister thought he’d conquered Trump’s inconstant heart. The two men hit peak pals in 2019, holding hands at a “Howdy Modi” rally in Texas. But it’s all gone pear-shaped thanks to Trump’s tariffs and dalliance with Pakistan. Like a jilted lover on the rebound, Modi shamelessly threw himself at Vladimir Putin in China last week. Don and Narendra! It’s over! Although, to be honest, it always felt a little shallow.
Other suitors for Trump’s slippery hand have suffered similar heartbreak. France’s Emmanuel Macron turned on the charm, feting him at the grand reopening of Notre Dame Cathedral. But Trump cruelly dumped him after they argued over Gaza, calling him a publicity-seeker who “always gets it wrong”. The EU’s Ursula von der Leyen, desperate for a tete-a-tete, flew to Trump’s Scottish golf course to pay court. Result: perhaps the most humiliating, lopsided trade deal since imperial Britain’s 19th-century “unequal treaties” with Peking’s dragon throne.
The list of broken pledges and dashed hopes is lengthy. Relationships between states normally pivot on power, policy and strategic interests. But with faithless, fickle Trump, it’s always personal – and impermanent. Disconcertingly, he told Mexico’s impressive president, Claudia Sheinbaum, that he “likes her very much” – then threatened to invade her country, ostensibly in pursuit of drug cartels. Leaders from Canada, Germany, Japan, South Korea and South Africa have all attempted to ingratiate themselves, to varying degrees. They still haven’t fared well.
All this should set red lights flashing for Britain’s Keir Starmer ahead of Trump’s state visit in 10 days’ time. The prime minister’s unedifying Trump-whisperer act has produced little benefit to date, at high reputational cost. Starmer apparently believes his handling of the US relationship is a highlight of his first year in office. Yet Trump ignores his Gaza ceasefire pleas and opposes UK recognition of a Palestinian state. He hugely boosted Putin, Britain’s nemesis, with his half-baked Alaska summit. US security guarantees for postwar Ukraine are more mirage than reality. His steel tariffs and protectionist policies continue to hurt UK workers.
His second state visit is an appalling prospect. The honour is utterly undeserved. It’s obvious what Trump will gain: a royal endorsement, a chance to play at being King Donald, a privileged platform from which to deliver his corrosive, divisive populist-nationalist diatribes at a moment of considerable social fragility in the US and UK. Polls suggest many Britons strongly oppose the visit; and most don’t trust the US. So what Starmer thinks he will gain is a mystery. The fleeting goodwill of a would-be dictator who is dismantling US democracy and wrecking the global laws-based order championed by the UK is a poor return.
As he demands homage from abject subjects, this spectacle will confirm the UK in the eyes of the world as a lackey state, afraid to stand up for its values. Starmer’s government is now so morally confused that it refuses to acknowledge that Israel, fully backed by Trump, is committing genocide in Gaza, while at the same time making the wearing of a pro-Palestine T-shirt a terrorist act. The Trump travesty will be an embarrassment, signalling a further descent into colonial subservience. As next year’s 250th anniversary of US independence approaches, the chronically unhealthy “special relationship” has finally come full circle.
Not everyone is genuflecting to Trump – and evidence mounts that resistance, not grovelling, is by far the best way to handle this schoolyard bully. Modi’s geopolitical fling in China showed he’s learned that when dealing with Trump, firm resolve, supported by alternative options, is the better policy. Last week’s defiant speech by China’s leader, Xi Jinping, reflected a similar realisation. Both he and Putin have discovered that when they dig their heels in, whether the issue is Ukraine, trade or sanctions, Trump backs off. Xi has adopted an uncompromising stance from the start. Putin uses flattery, skilfully manipulating Trump’s frail ego. The result is the same. Like cowards the world over, Trump respects strength because he’s weak. So he caves.
The bigger the wolf, the more sheepishly Trump responds. Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, like Putin, an indicted war criminal, has shown that by sticking to his guns (literally, in his case), he can face down Trump. More than that, Trump can be co-opted. After Netanyahu attacked Iran in June, against initial US advice, he induced the White House to join in – although, contemptibly, Trump only did so once he was certain who was winning. Then, typically, he claimed credit for a bogus world-changing victory. North Korea’s dictator, Kim Jong-un, similarly bamboozled Trump during his first term. Having learned nothing, and nursing his implausible Nobel peace prize ambitions, Trump is again raising the prospect of unconditional engagement with Kim.
Brazil’s president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has the right idea. The more Trump tries to bully him with 50% tariffs and a barrage of criticism, the more he resists. Trump is particularly exercised over the fate of Jair Bolsonaro, Lula’s hard-right predecessor, who, like Trump, mounted a failed electoral coup. But Lula is not having any of it. “If the United States doesn’t want to buy [from us], we will find new partners,” he said. “The world is big, and it’s eager to do business with Brazil.”
That’s the spirit! And guess what? Lula’s poll ratings are soaring. Wake up, Keir Starmer – and dump Trump.
Europe has discombobulated Trump’s Ukraine war peace plan.

they’re still floating Ukraine NATO membership, the promise of which triggered the February 2022 invasion.
Big problem. Russia is gobbling up more Ukrainian territory every day NATO keeps the war going.
Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL , 8 Sept 25.
President Trump’s pledge to end the war in one day has been extended now for 230 days. A big reason is America’s European NATO partners are determined to keep degrading their economies to further destroy Ukraine by keeping the war going in perpetuity.
They agree with Ukraine President Zelensky that Ukraine must never concede lost territory gone forever. Indeed, they’re still floating Ukraine NATO membership, the promise of which triggered the February 2022 invasion.
Alas, NATO is still ingesting stupid pills, declaring a ‘coalition of the willing’ at a meeting with Zelensky hosted by French President Macron. He announced 26 coalition members are willing to send troops to Ukraine as a “reassurance force” after a peace deal is reached to prevent any further Russian aggression.
Big problem. Russia is gobbling up more Ukrainian territory every day NATO keeps the war going. It says there will be no peace deal that does not include Russian input into security both for what remains of Ukraine, and Russia from renewed NATO encroachment. Such a coalition without Russian involvement is simply NATO membership for Ukraine by other means. It’s DOA.
Trump has 1,230 days left in his term. If he can’t turn Europe away from their crazed lust to win a lost war, it will still be raging when Trump packs up again for Mar a Lago in January 2029. He’s not dealing with a coalition of the willing. It’s a coalition of the delusional.
South Carolina’s dormant nuclear volcanoes

by beyondnuclearinternational, https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2025/09/07/south-carolinas-dormant-nuclear-volcanos/
Resuming construction of the abandoned V.C. Summer reactors is rife with challenges, says a new report from Savannah River Site Watch
The proposal to restart the failed nuclear reactor construction project in South Carolina faces a host of unexamined challenges, according to a just-released report. The report, prepared by the nuclear policy expert who led the intervention against the project since its inception in 2008 through its collapse and termination in the face of ratepayer outrage 2017, outlines major stumbling blocks to the revival of the nation’s most shocking failure of a nuclear reactor construction project in the United States in the 21stcentury.
The V.C. Summer project involved the botched attempt by now-defunct South Carolina Electric & Gas (SCE&G) to construct two large Westinghouse AP1000 nuclear reactors 2 – units 2 & 3 – 25 miles north of Columbia, South Carolina. Over $10 billion was wasted on the construction of project.
Its abrupt termination was one of the most impactful and costly nuclear construction-project collapses in U.S. history, which was the death knell for the so-called “nuclear renaissance” in the U.S. Customers were hit hard and are still left holding the bag with nothing in return for a reported $2 billion payment so far, for financing costs, an amount that grows daily. Though far-fetched, project restart is now being discussed.
The report – presenting 14 unanalyzed challenges to the restart idea and prepared by the Columbia-based public-interest, non-profit group Savannah River Site Watch – is titled Economic, Technical and Regulatory Challenges Confound Restart of the Terminated V.C. Summer Nuclear Reactor Construction Project in South Carolina.
The 24-page report was written by Tom Clements, director of SRS Watch, who led interventions before the PSC by the environmental group Friends of The Earth beginning in 2008 and running through the bankruptcy of SCE&G and its takeover by Dominion Energy South Carolina in January 2019.
“As the public was so abused during the V.C Summer construction project, they now deserve a voice in raising concerns about proposals concerning rebirth of the project in which they still have financial ownership and that’s for whom this report speaks” said Clements. “We reveal in the report that Dominion ratepayers are right now paying 5.22% of the bill for the terminated project and are paying, since 2019, an additional $2.8 billion over 20 years. The restart effort could once again saddle customers with additional massive costs if VCSummer 2.0 proceeds.”
The 5.22% monthly rate hidden in the Dominion monthly bill was revealed in a Freedom of Information Act document provided by the S.C. Office of Regulatory Staff to SRS Watch on August 7, 2025. In January 2019, the S.C. Public Service Commission ordered Dominion customers to pay an additional $2.8 billion over the next 20 years for the cost of the bungled project. That monthly fee should be eliminated and consumer investment rebated, especially if restart is pursued, according to SRS Watch.
Themes covered in the “restart challenges” report include:
Nuclear Advisory Council restart report not a reliable guidepost;- Nuclear Regulatory Commission license terminated in 2019, hard to regain a new license;
- Reestablishing NRC certification for equipment will be difficult;
- Environmental permits must be secured anew or renewed;
- Unclear how much equipment remains and if it’s to be resold for reuse or just scrap;
- Dominion and Santee Cooper not interested in involvement in restart;
- Westinghouse plans for new AP1000s unclear, rhetoric might not be accurate;
- Cost and schedule of new Westinghouse AP1000s unclear; Last-of-a-Kind (LOAK) reactor?
- Ratepayers in South Carolina could be put on the hook again;
- S.C. Public Service Commission and Dominion ratepayers will be involved, can’t be sidelined;
- Federal rhetoric supporting nuclear power won’t carry the day or overcome big obstacles;
- Reactor restart fails to secure funds or protection from South Carolina legislature;
- Highly radioactive spent fuel at new units a challenge;
- When will the community near V.C. Summer be consulted?
Project 2025 agenda revives Nevada’s Yucca Mountain fears

By Judy Treichel, Thursday, Aug. 21, 2025, https://lasvegassun.com/news/2025/aug/21/project-2025-agenda-revives-nevadas-yucca-mountain/ Judy Treichel is the executive director of the Nevada Nuclear Waste Task Force.
A meeting was held in Las Vegas last month, paid for by a Department of Energy grant and hosted by Mothers for Nuclear and Native Nuclear .
The host groups tried to put a friendlier slant on the DOE message, but it was clear that the government and commercial nuclear industry have never gotten out of the rut they have been in from the start: advertise the glory of nuclear power and never get very far into the problem of what to do with the waste.
The purpose of the invitation-only event was to “elicit public feedback on consent-based siting and management of spent nuclear fuel…”
But my takeaway was that they hoped to get the audience to love new nuclear power more than we hate its waste.
The presenters sang the praises of nuclear power and shared frustration with many audience members about how the public was frightened of or opposed to nuclear power after watching “The Simpsons” on TV! There was a brief mention of the disastrous events at Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima, but the impression left was that those were now over and that current public fears arose from “The Simpsons”!
Thirty years ago, the DOE was a huge presence in Nevada, studying Yucca Mountain 80 miles northwest of downtown Las Vegas, as the site for underground disposal of the nation’s high-level nuclear waste. Public meetings at that time brought out many longtime residents who related stories about the damage older family members or friends had suffered from widespread exposure to radiation from nuclear weapons testing at the Nevada Test Site. They described how they had been lied to about safety and how there was a lack of accountability for human and property damage. They wanted no part of any future nuclear experiments, be it nuclear power plants or a disposal site for the nation’s high-level nuclear waste.
The Yucca Mountain nuclear waste disposal program was determined to be “unworkable” by the Energy secretary in 2010. It has remained unfunded by Congress since then, but it has not been terminated by law.
When the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 became public, my colleagues and I were dismayed when we saw the recommendation to resume licensing the “unworkable” Yucca Mountain project. It was as if a switch could be flipped and the site’s safety flaws and the long-enduring opposition of Nevadans could be ignored.
Independent scientists determined that Yucca Mountain could not isolate the dangerous radiation for the long time period necessary. Those findings are reflected in the more than 200 contentions filed by Nevada that would have to be adjudicated during any future licensing proceeding.
Project 2025 would give us two unwanted nuclear-related gifts: a nuclear waste repository and a restart to nuclear weapons testing, side by side! The assurances we heard from the DOE at those long-ago meetings were that it had learned lessons during weapons testing. The DOE claimed that safety comes first now. But I’m not so sure.
Were Project 2025’s nuclear goals to be realized, there would be an operating repository at Yucca Mountain. It would have above-ground facilities and a decadeslong national nuclear waste transportation campaign flowing into Nevada on a currently nonexistent 200-plus-milelong rail access corridor to the repository site. Next door would be ground-blasting nuclear weapons testing. and flying over both of those operations would be the training and testing of military planes and drones from Creech Air Force Base. This would surely be a dangerous and untenable combination.
Project 2025 was not friendly to Southern Nevada. In addition to its calls for increased use of nuclear power, it also calls for — and President Donald Trump has largely followed through on — removing federal government support and incentives for solar power. This is shortsighted, as rooftop solar shades the underlying buildings while generating power and drastically reduces the power bills of consumers. Perhaps most importantly, solar power generation does not leave a legacy of lethal waste.
The Department of Energy was right 16 years ago when it announced that a national high-level nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain was unworkable. It still is. Convention attendees and visitors come to our great hotels and meeting venues. Nuclear waste shipments on the railroad tracks behind the hotels and through our downtown area may make some of that business choose other locations. If there was any sort of accident or incident on the tracks within Clark County, the national news services would blast out the images far and wide, and economic damage would occur whether there was radiation released or not.
Las Vegas has a fragile economy, and it is highly dependent on fun and enjoyment. We are becoming a major sports destination, continuing to be home to important conventions and putting on the best shows in the world. We must find ways to make our precious resources available for the worthwhile activities we have, with no backdrop of dreaded nuclear contamination and waste. We need to apply a compatibility test that honors our past and preserves our future.
Is fishmeal from Fukushima-affected fish the source of Indonesian shrimp’s radioactive contamination?

J. P. Unger, 8 Sept 25
It just hit me earlier, while thinking about the recently exposed case of radioactive shrimp being recalled in the US, and in particular why one Indonesian shrimp farming business’s harvests would be contaminated with radioactive Cesium and not those from other Indonesian shrimp farms: it’s probably the feed they used!
Cheap, radioactive fishmeal, perhaps made from fish impacted by contamination from Fukushima, I suspect could well be the source. This is why:
Shrimp farming has traditionally used fishmeal as a high-protein source to feed the shrimp -with fishmeal normally consisting of smaller fish, fishing “by-catch” and fish-processing byproducts, all shredded and ground to a texture like coarse sand or pellets to feed farm animals and aquaculture operations.
As ocean fish populations become increasingly strained and global demand for fish keeps increasing, fishmeal has become increasingly expensive and in shorter supply
Therefore, it’s quite likely that fishmeal from contaminated fisheries -for example, with high levels of radioactive pollution- would be offered at a comparatively low price. That would be quite attractive for a business that’s more concerned with profit margins than with what happens to consumers down the line.
If this was the case, and given that many businesses around the world likely prioritize profit margins over long-term effects in far-removed consumers (or might not even be aware of the contamination of the feed), this case could be the tip of a very worrisome iceberg and open up a big can of worms….
It certainly demands a careful inspection of food imports AND of food “precursors”, in particular imported fishmeal and food from animals raised on it. Also, international cooperation and vigilance, to know who might be selling contaminated fishmeal and where, who has been buying and using it, and what land- or water-farmed meat production it might be affecting.
Unless I hear concerns or suggestions to the contrary, I’ll prepare and send a slightly different articulation of these thoughts to a handful of government officials and media here and in the US who might be interested in investigating, as precautions should probably be ramped up for a variety of food products…
This would not be the first time radioactively contaminated foodstuff circulates at bargain prices… When I was starting as a science and environment journalist in Peru in the 1980’s I wrote about the post-Chernobyl arrival of radioactive powdered milk from Europe (a “generous” 12,000 ton donation from the European Community…), and radioactive meat from Germany (sold at a bargain price!). I received brush-offs, threats and warnings from corrupt government officials profiting from it, as well as ignorance and disinterest among other journalists and the general population, all with other “more immediate concerns” at the time, as the country faced five-digit inflation and the expansion of a brutally violent Maoist insurgency -nobody wanted to hear about yet more dangers then, and everywhere I was met by a frustrating fatalistic denial or avoidance mantra along the lines of “one has to die from something anyway.” Anyways… JPU
The Nuclear Waste Problem Haunting UK Energy Expansion
Oil Price, By Felicity Bradstock – Sep 07, 2025
Effective nuclear waste management is a critical global challenge, particularly for countries like the UK looking to expand their nuclear power sectors.- The UK has a substantial amount of existing radioactive waste and is struggling to implement a long-term disposal solution, with the proposed underground geological disposal facility facing significant hurdles and cost concerns.
- Public and local community pushback against potential nuclear waste sites further complicates the development of new disposal facilities, making finding a solution an ongoing and difficult process.
One of the biggest hurdles to expanding the global nuclear power sector is the concern over how best to manage nuclear waste. While some believe they have found sustainable solutions to dispose of nuclear waste, there is still widespread debate around how safe these methods are and the potential long-term impact of waste disposal and storage. In the United Kingdom, the government has put nuclear power back on the agenda, after decades with no new nuclear developments; however, managing nuclear waste continues to be a major barrier to development.
There are three types of nuclear waste: low-, intermediate-, and high-level radioactive waste. Most of the waste produced at nuclear facilities is lightly contaminated, including items such as tools and work clothing, with a level of around 1 percent radioactivity. Meanwhile, spent fuel is an example of high-level waste, which contributes around 3 percent of the total volume of waste from nuclear energy production. However, this contains around 95 percent of the radioactivity, making adequate waste management of these products extremely important.
In the U.K., the government continues to battle with how best to dispose of its nuclear waste,……………………………………………..
the U.K. Treasury believes the government’s plan for the waste dump is “unachievable”, rating the project as “red”, or not possible, in a recent assessment. ……………………………….. https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/The-Nuclear-Waste-Problem-Haunting-UK-Energy-Expansion.html
Pentagon Document: U.S. Wants to “Suppress Dissenting Arguments” Using AI Propaganda.
August 25, 2025, The Intercept
https://theintercept.com/2025/08/25/pentagon-military-ai-propaganda-influence/
The United States hopes to use machine learning to create and distribute propaganda overseas in a bid to “influence foreign target audiences” and “suppress dissenting arguments,” according to a U.S. Special Operations Command document.
SOCOM is looking for a contractor that can “Provide a capability leveraging agentic Al or multi LLM agent systems with specialized roles to increase the scale of influence operations.” So-called “agentic” systems … can be used in conjunction with large language models, or LLMs, like ChatGPT, which generate text based on user prompts.
While much marketing hype orbits around these agentic systems and LLMs for their potential to execute mundane tasks like online shopping and booking tickets, SOCOM believes the techniques could be well suited for running an autonomous propaganda outfit. Whether AI-generated propaganda works remains an open question, but the practice has already been amply documented in the wild.
In May 2024, OpenAI issued a report revealing efforts by Iranian, Chinese, and Russian actors to use the company’s tools to engage in covert influence campaigns, but found none had been particularly successful. The military has a history of manipulating civilian populations for political or ideological purposes. A troubling example was uncovered in 2024, when Reuters reported the Defense Department had operated a clandestine anti-vax social media campaign.
IAEA chief notes progress in Iran talks over nuclear site inspections
Head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog, Rafael Grossi, says he hopes for a ‘successful conclusion’ in the coming days.
Aljazeera, 8 Sept 25
Talks on resuming International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspections of Iran’s nuclear sites have made progress, but its chief warned that there was “not much” time remaining.
On Monday, the director general of the United Nations nuclear watchdog, Rafael Grossi, told the 35-nation IAEA Board of Governors in Vienna, Austria, that “Progress has been made”…….
He did not elaborate on what the timeframe meant exactly.
While Tehran allowed inspectors from the IAEA into Iran at the end of August, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said no agreement had been reached on the resumption of full cooperation with the watchdog…….. ………………………….. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/9/8/iaea-chief-notes-progress-in-iran-talks-over-nuclear-site-inspections
-
Archives
- January 2026 (183)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS



