- Satellite photos show North Korea leader’s train near compound
-
Kim’s two-week absence fuels speculation about his health Speculation about Kim Jong Un’s health intensified over the weekend after tantalizing — yet unverified — reports about a visit by a Chinese medical team and movements of the North Korean leader’s armored train.
China sent a team including doctors and senior diplomats to advise its neighbor and longtime ally, Reuters reported on Saturday, citing three people familiar with the matter. Meanwhile, a train resembling one long used by North Korean rulers was parked last week near a coastal leadership compound in Wonsan, according to an analysis of satellite imagery released Sunday by the website 38 North. A prominent South Korea adviser also rejected the notion that Kim was ailing or dead…….
Any leadership change in North Korea could increase the threat of instability on China’s border and raise questions about control of the country’s expanding nuclear arsenal. Kim has also been central to U.S. President Donald Trump’s so far unsuccessful efforts to get him to reduce his weapons stockpile. …..
Close to 100 USA Environmental Rules now removed by Trump govt: here’s the list
The Trump Administration Is Reversing Nearly 100 Environmental Rules. Here’s the Full List. NYT, By NADJA POPOVICH, LIVIA ALBECK-RIPKA and KENDRA PIERRE-LOUIS May 6, 2020
After three years in office, the Trump administration has dismantled most of the major climate and environmental policies the president promised to undo.
Calling the rules unnecessary and burdensome to the fossil fuel industry and other businesses, his administration has weakened Obama-era limits on planet-warming carbon dioxide emissions from power plants and from cars and trucks, and rolled back many more rules governing clean air, water and toxic chemicals. Several major reversals have been finalized in recent weeks as the country has struggled to contain the spread of the new coronavirus.
In all, a New York Times analysis, based on research from Harvard Law School, Columbia Law School and other sources, counts more than 60 environmental rules and regulations officially reversed, revoked or otherwise rolled back under Mr. Trump. An additional 34 rollbacks are still in progress.
With elections looming, the administration has sought to wrap up some of its biggest regulatory priorities quickly, said Hana V. Vizcarra, a staff attorney at Harvard Law School’s Environmental and Energy Law Program. Further delays could leave the new rules vulnerable to reversal under the Congressional Review Act if Democrats are able to retake Congress and the White House in November, she said.
The bulk of the rollbacks identified by the Times have been carried out by the Environmental Protection Agency, which repealed and replaced the Obama-era emissions rules for power plants and vehicles; weakened protections for more than half the nation’s wetlands; and withdrew the legal justification for restricting mercury emissions from power plants.
At the same time, the Interior Department has worked to open up more land for oil and gas leasing by cutting back protected areas and limiting wildlife protections……
All told, the Trump administration’s environmental rollbacks could significantly increase greenhouse gas emissions and lead to thousands of extra deaths from poor air quality each year, according to energy and legal analysts.
Below, [on original] we have summarized each rule that has been targeted for reversal over the past three years.
Are there rollbacks we missed? Email climateteam@nytimes.com or tweet @nytclimate. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/climate/trump-environment-rollbacks.html
South Korea sticking to its policy of phasing out nuclear power, switching to renewables
Seoul keeps to plan of weaning the country off nuclear fuel, expand renewables to 40%, Pulse, By Oh Chan-jong and Lee Eun-joo 8 May 20, South Korea on Friday kept its plan to phase out of nuclear fuel intact despite snowballing losses at state utility firms as the result, with a goal to replace energy sourcing with renewables to 40 percent by 2034 through retiring aged fossil and nuclear powered stations.
According to the ninth long-term plan announced by a working group under the Ministry of Trade Industry and Energy on Friday, the government plans to close all coal-fired power plants whose 30 years of operational years expire by 2034 and replace the fuel with liquefied natural gas (LNG). It will also reduce the number of nuclear power stations to 17 units by 2034 after a peak at 26 units in 2024.
Under the plan, the government will reduce dependence on nuclear and fossil fuel from current 46.3 percent to 24.8 percent by 2034 while expand dependence on renewables from 15.1 percent to 40 percent.
The plan was announced by a working group under the energy ministry that held 51 meetings since March to draw up the country’s basic energy supply plan. The latest announcement is a draft of the 2020-2034 plan that is established once every two years under the electricity enterprises act to stabilize energy supply. …….
Renewable energy will take up 40 percent of total power supply by 2034, up from 15.1 percent. In addition to the closing down of 10 coal-fired plants as announced during the previous roadmap, 14 additional units will shut down by 2030. The government expected to be able to reach its goal announced in July, 2018, to reduce domestic greenhouse gas emissions by 32.5 percent by 2030.
Trump plans to divert development aid for poor countries, to promoting the nuclear industry
|
In a list of official recommendations to President Trump last month, the Nuclear Fuels Working Group argued the U.S. needs to sell nuclear power technology abroad and battle the influence of countries like China and Russia that have become dominant suppliers. One way to do that, the group said, is to lift restrictions at the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) to let the agency fund nuclear projects alongside other development work. But development groups worry that tapping the DFC to greenlight nuclear projects will do more to promote American interests than alleviate poverty.
“I struggle to see it as something they should be doing,” Conor Savoy, executive director of the Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network. There’s also a concern that the projects won’t benefit the poorer countries the DFC is charged with helping. Setting up nuclear power systems requires a higher level of infrastructure, meaning overseas projects might be more likely to find a home in Eastern Europe than Sub-Saharan Africa. “The DFC was supposed to invest in those countries very sparingly,” Savoy said of wealthier nations.
To access DFC funds for an initiative of this kind, the agency would have to lift its prohibition on supporting nuclear projects, a move that only requires an internal policy change, without any congressional action. The agency has signaled a willingness to make that change. “DFC welcomes the recommendation in the administration’s Nuclear Fuel Working Group report to remove DFC’s prohibition on financing nuclear power projects in developing countries. Access to affordable and reliable power is essential for developing countries to advance their economies,” the agency said in a statement Monday…….
The DFC was started in 2019, replacing its predecessor — the Overseas Private Investment Corporation — with double the funding and fewer restrictions on how to spend it. But the $60 billion agency also has an expanded mission: elevating the world’s poorest countries while also advancing U.S. foreign policy. Development experts, however, say there’s been an imbalance between those two goals in the agency’s short history…….
There’s been a skewing toward more national security areas. They’ve tried to counter that by highlighting their more development-focused projects, but in terms of volume of commitments, in terms of sheer volume of money, it does seem to be skewing more toward national security priorities and less toward development,” Savoy said…….. https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/496295-trumps-push-to-use-global-aid-for-nuclear-projects-alarms
|
|
U.S. Congress kept in the dark about government nuclear negotiations with Saudi Arabia
U.S. should keep Congress informed about nuclear talks with Saudis: GAO, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-saudi-nuclearpower/us-should-keep-congress-informed-about-nuclear-talks-with-saudis-gao-idUSKBN22G2X Timothy Gardner
6 May 20, WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Departments of State and Energy should commit to regular briefings to relevant committees in Congress on talks about nuclear power cooperation with Saudi Arabia, a congressional watchdog said in a report on Monday.
The Government Accountability Office, or GAO, report said Congress should consider amending the 1954 Atomic Energy Act, or AEA, to require the briefings for the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations about negotiations on nuclear power sharing.
Lawmakers concerned about nonproliferation issues associated with nuclear power development had complained they were being kept in the dark about Trump administration talks with Saudi Arabia, many of which were led by former Energy Secretary Rick Perry. Concern grew after Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman told CBS in 2018 that the kingdom did not want to acquire a nuclear bomb, but would do so if its rival Iran did so.
Riyadh could announce a tender this year for two nuclear power reactors, its first commercial ones. Russia, China, South Korea and France have also been in talks about building reactors there.The State Department is required by the AEA to keep Congress “fully and currently informed” about the talks. But the GAO found it was “unclear” whether the department did so. “Congressional staff provided us with examples of having to find information on the negotiations from other sources, such as press articles,” the GAO said.
Some U.S. lawmakers want the United States to insist that Saudi Arabia agree to a so-called gold standard that restricts enrichment and reprocessing, potential pathways to making fissile material for nuclear weapons. The United States struck such an agreement with the United Arab Emirates in 2009. If Saudi Arabia develops nuclear power without the gold standard, the UAE would likely seek to be released from its agreement.
The GAO said Congress should consider whether to amend the AEA to require briefings, perhaps on a quarterly basis, and to specify expectations for the content of the briefings.
Senators Robert Menendez, a Democrat, and Marco Rubio, a Republican, had asked the GAO last year to review U.S. agency negotiations with Saudi Arabia on nuclear power, partially because they were concerned the Energy Department, not the State Department took the lead.
The senators said they would explore legislative changes recommended by the GAO. “Congress must reassert its critical role in reviewing nuclear cooperation agreements to ensure these agreements do not pose an unnecessary risk to the United States” they said.
Senators Robert Menendez, a Democrat, and Marco Rubio, a Republican, had asked the GAO last year to review U.S. agency negotiations with Saudi Arabia on nuclear power, partially because they were concerned the Energy Department, not the State Department took the lead.
The senators said they would explore legislative changes recommended by the GAO. “Congress must reassert its critical role in reviewing nuclear cooperation agreements to ensure these agreements do not pose an unnecessary risk to the United States” they said.
Reporting by Timothy Gardner in Washington; Editing by Matthew Lewis and Cynthia Osterman https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-saudi-nuclearpower/us-should-keep-congress-informed-about-nuclear-talks-with-saudis-gao-idUSKBN22G2XV
Big drop in France’s nuclear power generation.
French nuclear power generation fell 15.5% year-on-year in April PARIS, May 6 (Reuters) – French nuclear power generation fell 15.5% year-on-year in April to 26.9 terawatt hours (TWh) due to the impact of the coronavirus outbreak on electricity demand, utility EDF said on Wednesday.State-controlled EDF, which operates France’s 57 nuclear reactors, said cumulative nuclear power generation since the start of the year added up to 128.1 TWh, down 10.7% compared with the same period last year.
The fall in output is “due to a drop in demand and prolonged (nuclear reactor) outages linked in particular to the health crisis,” EDF said.
Electricity consumption has plunged across Europe due to shutdown measures ordered by governments to halt the spread of the virus.
EDF has said it expects its nuclear power output in France this year to fall to a record low of around 300 TWh, from an initial expectation of 375 to 390 TWh before the outbreak.
The utility added that its nuclear generation in Britain fell 18.7% year-on-year in April to 3.7 TWh, while total output since January was at 15.6 TWh, down 5.3% compared with the same period in 2019.
EDF’s subsidiary in Britain, EDF Energy has been asked to temporarily reduce output at its Sizewell B nuclear plant in the east of England to help balance the grid and prevent blackouts, due to the fall in energy demand, EDF and grid operator National Grid said separately on Wednesday. (Reporting by Bate Felix; Editing by GV De Clercq and Elaine Hardcastle) AT TOP https://af.reuters.com/article/commoditiesNews/idAFL8N2CO843
SPD, junior partner in Germany’s coalition government, calls to withdraw US nuclear arms
|
Germany: SPD call to withdraw US nuclear arms stokes debate, DW, 4 May 20, The parliamentary leader of the SPD, the junior partner in Germany’s coalition government, has called for US atomic weapons to be withdrawn from the country. But other parties remain opposed to such a move.The presence of US nuclear weapons on German soil is a danger to Germany’s security and should be terminated, according to the parliamentary leader of the Social Democratic Party (SPD), Rolf Mützenich.
Read more: US military in Germany: What you need to know Mützenich, whose party is junior partner to Chancellor Angela Merkel’s conservative CDU/CSU bloc in Germany’s coalition government, told the paper Tagesspiegel am Sonntag that “atomic weapons on German territory do not heighten our security, on the contrary.” “It is time that Germany ruled out their deployment in future,” he added, stressing that such a move would not call Germany’s membership in NATO into question. Read more: US set to upgrade controversial nukes stationed in Germany Changed US nuclear strategy He justified his call largely by referring to the change in US nuclear strategy under President Donald Trump, saying that Trump’s administration saw atomic weapons not solely as deterrents but as weapons of aggression, making the risk of escalation “incalculable.”……. https://www.dw.com/en/germany-spd-call-to-withdraw-us-nuclear-arms-stokes-debate/a-53314883 |
|
|
Raytheon selected to Build New Nuclear Cruise Missile [ Trump has shares]
Raytheon to Build New Nuclear Cruise Missile , Arms Control Association, May 2020, By Kingston Reif
The U.S. Air Force announced last month that it plans to continue development of a new fleet of nuclear air-launched cruise missiles (ALCMs) with Raytheon Co. as the sole contractor.
“After an extensive evaluation of contractor programmatic and technical approach during…preliminary design reviews, the Air Force decided to focus on Raytheon’s design,” according to an April 17 service press release.
In August 2017, the Air Force awarded a $900 million contract to Raytheon and a $900 million contract to Lockheed Martin Corp. to proceed with development of the ALCM replacement, known as the long-range standoff (LRSO) weapon. (See ACT, October 2017.) The contracts were intended to cover a 54-month period of development after which the Air Force would choose one of the contractors to complete development and begin production.
The service’s rationale for focusing on one contractor roughly two years earlier than planned is unclear………The Trump administration is requesting $1.5 billio
n for the missile and warhead in fiscal year 2021.https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2020-05/news/raytheon-build-new-nuclear-cruise-missile
Could President Trump launch a nuclear attack via Twitter?
|
The proverbial “big red button” is one of the most important responsibilities that a U.S. President has. But Americans know very little about it.
Last week, he said that is ordering the Navy to “shoot down and destroy” Iranian boats that get too close to U.S. ships, and then the Pentagon turned it into a reminder that “our ships retain the right of self-defense.” Do you see any situations where the President says something ambiguous, and then the military has to figure out whether he meant to use nuclear weapons, or some other similarly drastic measure?…….. The modern military has long adapted to the idea that nuclear weapons are a relatively clunky think to imagine using in practice. They might work as a strategic threat, but the United States benefits a lot more from not using them, and from using our many conventional options that are very diverse and capable, instead.
If we normalize the use of nuclear weapons, we are a very big target…….
I do worry about—it’s somewhat clear that the President and the military have a complicated communications relationship. There have a number of things that the President announced via Twitter, that he clearly did not get full consent from the military on or did not even inform them on……. Maybe your secure phone lines don’t work. Maybe your regular phone lines don’t work. You could imagine a situation in which Twitter is the only channel by which the President can communicate with the military, and he would tweet out an order on it, but it would have to be a very well-formed order. ……
if the President’s Twitter account suddenly started tweeting legitimate nuclear authentication codes and nuclear launch orders, I think that would raise a lot of questions for the military. Even in that situation, assuming they don’t see incoming missiles coming at them—which is to say, they’re not under any belief that this is a true, obviously unambiguous nuclear war situation—I think that would go through rather extreme efforts to contact the White House, or the Secretary of Defense, and/or anybody around there, just to find out if this was real or not.
That would definitely be a weird way for the world to end. |
|
South Korea’s government dismissed rumours about North Korean leader Kim Jong Un being gravely ill
North Korean leader Kim Jong-un health rumours dismissed by South Korean intelligence, ABC News, 27 Apr 20, South Korea’s Government has dismissed rumours that North Korean leader Kim Jong-un is in a fragile condition, as speculation about his health intensifies amid the North’s silence on his whereabouts.
Unification Minister Kim Yeon-chul told a closed-door forum in Seoul that South Korea had “enough intelligence to confidently say that there are no unusual developments” in rival North Korea that would back up speculation about Mr Kim’s health, his ministry said.
The minister did not reveal what specific intelligence led to that conclusion, but stressed that it was reached after a thorough analysis.
His comments are a reiteration of earlier South Korean statements that Mr Kim appeared to be handling state affairs normally and that no unusual activities had been detected in North Korea.
Those comments, however, failed to dispel the rumours about Mr Kim, partly because past outside intelligence reports on developments in North Korea have sometimes turned out to be wrong. …..
As the absolute leader of a country with a nuclear weapons program, Mr Kim’s health is a matter of intense interest both regionally and globally.
If something were to happen to him, it could lead to instability in North Korea. Mr Kim hasn’t publicly anointed a successor, and that has prompted questions about who would take control of North Korea if he is gravely ill or dies…..
serious unrest could occur if a power struggle erupts between those supporting the Kim dynasty and those who want non-Kim rule…….. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-28/kim-jong-un-health-rumours-south-korea-intelligence/12191504
U.S. govt disregards nuclear diseconomics, pushes new nuclear power to support nuclear weapons
On April 23 the strongly pro-nuclear results of the Nuclear Fuel Working Group (NFWG) were made public by the US Department of Energy (DoE)
Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette announced the NFWG’s results and urged:
- Taking immediate and bold action to strengthen the uranium mining and conversion industries and restore the viability of the entire front-end of the nuclear fuel cycle.
• Utilizing American technological innovation and advanced nuclear RD&D investments to consolidate technical advances and strengthen American leadership in the next generation of nuclear energy technologies.
• Ensuring that there will be a healthy and growing nuclear energy sector to which uranium miners, fuel cycle providers, and reactor vendors can sell their products and services.
• Taking a whole-of-government approach to supporting the U.S. nuclear energy industry in exporting civil nuclear technology in competition with state-owned enterprises.”
Brouillette’s announcement also undermines the long-cultivated narrative that ‘peaceful / civil use’ and military application of nuclear power would be separate – instead, it explicitly references the connection between the civil and military nuclear sectors:
“The United States currently has two well-defined future defense needs for domestic uranium supply: low-enriched uranium needed to produce tritium required for nuclear weapons in the 2040s, and highly-enriched uranium needed to fuel Navy nuclear reactors in the 2050s.
The Strategy also recognizes that U.S. national security is truly integrated with the health of the front-end of the nuclear fuel cycle – the United States needs a strong civil nuclear industry to enable national defense.” (underlining not in the original)
US DoE at the same date published a NFWG Factsheet: Strategy to Restore American Nuclear Energy Leadership
Poll shows that Americans favour a no-first-use of nuclear weapons policy
|
Poll: What the American public likes and hates about Trump’s nuclear policies, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Jonathon Baron, Stephen Herzog, April 27, 2020 It is difficult to overstate the importance of nuclear policy in determining a US presidential candidate’s fitness to be commander-in-chief. Such priorities are evident in the Bulletin’s recently published special issue dedicated to discussing nuclear weapons policy ahead of the 2020 election. Nuclear issues played a prominent role in the 2016 election, but despite some anomalies, they have hardly factored into the 2020 campaign. This is almost certain to change even as priority is given to the COVID-19 pandemic response. Nevertheless, very few recent polls (with one notable exception) have attempted to identify preferences among the US population for President Donald Trump’s nuclear policies.
To fill this gap, we worked with the firm YouGov in late 2018 after the release of the Trump administration’s Nuclear Posture Review to conduct a nationally representative survey of 1,000 Americans. Previous surveys have illuminated US public attitudes on nuclear energy, extending the New START treaty, and even hypothetical nuclear retaliatory scenarios. It isn’t clear, however, how Americans view the core elements of the Trump administration’s nuclear policy: its Nuclear Posture Review and its overall strategies toward Iran and North Korea. We report our study results publicly for the first time here, offering insights for policymakers and presidential candidates as they weigh their positions on nuclear issues Nuclear Posture Review. The study highlights how the US public as a whole and various demographic groups view Trump’s positions on nuclear weapons. To begin, we asked respondents to indicate whether they supported, opposed, or were unsure about key parts of the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review. Of course, many elements of the Trump administration’s nuclear posture are continuations of longstanding US policy that have been preserved by Republican and Democratic presidents alike. Our survey questions did not indicate the current US administration’s policy on different parts of the Nuclear Posture Review. So the results convey the respondents’ natural preferences for the policies themselves, not for the current occupant of the White House. Such data should prove useful to politicians staking out campaign stances on nuclear weapons that would have broad public appeal. Our findings reveal that Americans overall express fairly low support for the administration’s nuclear weapons policies, though indecision also runs high among the public. Further, the table of group preferences indicates—with a few surprising exceptions—that males, Republicans, and older Americans are the most likely groups to back President Trump on nuclear issues. Even so, support is relatively modest among Trump’s base, and several elements of the Nuclear Posture Review do not receive majority or even plurality support from Republicans……. Only 34 percent of Americans support the longstanding policy of providing the nuclear umbrella in principle, and that number drops to 27.9 percent for nuclear deployments in Europe. …..men and Republicans remain the most supportive of the nuclear umbrella and forward-deployed B61 nuclear bombs. Women, Democrats, and Independents respond less favorably. Additionally, Americans who came of age during the Cold War are more favorable toward these policies than their Millennial and Generation Z counterparts……. fewer than 20 percent of Americans support possible US first use of nuclear weapons. By contrast, disapproval stands at 63.5 percent……The public is also broadly unsupportive of using nuclear weapons in response to cyberattacks……. a majority of every demographic group of Americans—whether by gender, political party, age, race, education, income, or region of residence—oppose a first-use doctrine. Public opinion may accordingly present opportunities for presidential candidates to favor a policy of no first use of nuclear weapons………. https://thebulletin.org/2020/04/poll-what-the-american-public-likes-and-hates-about-trumps-nuclear-policies/# |
|
|
Under cover of Coronavirus constraints, EDF could speed application for £14 billion Sizewell nuclear reactor build, without pubic consultation
East Anglian Daily Times 27 April 2020 Suffolk MP has joined growing concern that EDF Energy will submit its planning application for the Sizewell C nuclear power station during the coronavirus crisis.
Already 54 town and parish councils, along with campaign groups, have voiced their frustration at the possibility – amid concerns that it would be “intolerable and unfair” to add extra anxiety
to people at this time. Now Central Suffolk and North Ipswich MP, Dr Dan Poulter has written to Government ministers saying the Covid-19 restrictions would inhibit full and proper consideration of the application and it would “not be appropriate” yet.
EDF has already delayed its submission of a Development Consent Order (DCO) for the £14 billion twin reactor for a month but there are worries it could submit the documents in
May. Dr Poulter has been contacted by a large number of residents who have
a number of concerns in regards to the DCO. He is concerned there would be
pressure on council officers dealing with Covid-19 to respond to issues and
questions raised by the submission and opportunities for public
consultation curtailed as public meetings are not permitted.
https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/mp-dan-poulter-sizewell-c-letter-to-ministers-1-6624715
North Korea: Expert reveals ‘power struggle’ for ‘control of nuclear weapons and military’
NORTH KOREA’s lack of a formal succession plan for Kim Jong-un could spark a “power struggle” in the region as speculation continues to grow surrounding the supreme leader’s health, according to foreign policy expert Bruce Klingner. Express UK, By SVAR NANAN-SEN, Apr 27, 2020
Bruce Klingner, a senior researcher for Northeast Asia at The Heritage Foundation told Fox News that there could be a power struggle in North Korea regarding who succeeds Kim Jong-un. The Supreme Leader of North Korea has not been seen for over two weeks and his absence has led to speculation over his health and the future of his country.
Mr Klinger said: “As was the case when his father passed away, there is no formal succession plan in the North Korea constitution.
“We don’t know if they have anything planned behind the scenes. So right now, we are all speculating who the next leader might be.
“We are speculating that his sister may be the next leader. In the last couple of years, she has gained power, she has gained authority, we have seen her coming out of the shadows in the last couple of years…….. https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1274376/North-Korea-Kim-Jong-Un-death-health-successor-nuclear-weapons-military-latest-news
Kim Jong Un Mystery Grows on Reports of Train, Medical Team
Kim Jong Un Mystery Grows on Reports of Train, Medical Team, Bloomberg By Kanga Kong and Ros Krasny, Where is North Korea’s Kim Jong Un?
Kim Jong-un’s death may lead to brutal power struggle and unknown finger on nuke button, https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1273890/Kim-Jong-un-dead-North-Korea-nuclear-weapon-news-latest-death-USKIM JONG-UN’S death could spark a power struggle in nuclear-armed North Korea and even an attack on its neighbour in the South, according to an expert on conflict in the Korean peninsula.By GERRARD KAONGAKim Jong-un’s death could result in multiple worst-case scenarios according to Korean expert and senior research fellow Bruce Klingner of think tank The Heritage Foundation. Chinese and Japanese media outlets have claimed the North Korean dictator has died following complications from heart surgery earlier this month. The North Korean state is yet to confirm whether the nation’s leader has died.
While on Fox News Mr Klingner said if the reports of Kim Jong-un’s death were correct the resulting power vacuum would be a cause for international concern.
Mr Klingner warned the death of the leader could result in power struggles, military faction infighting, and even the nation lashing out at its neighbour in the South.
He insisted this was particularly concerning as he said North Korea was a nation with nuclear weapon capabilities.
Mr Klingner said: “There is always a concern when you have a nuclear weapon state if you don’t know who the next leader is.
“It could be a smooth transition or it could be a power struggle where everyone is trying to grab the ring of power. “Then it is a question of who has control over nuclear weapons and the military.”
Mr Klingner also outlined the worst possible scenarios that could occur if Kim Jong-un is confirmed, by North Korea, to be dead.
He continued: “There are a lot of worst-case scenarios.
“Things like a regime collapse and a struggle for power or unknown actions from military factions warring against each other. “There is a concern that there could be an explosion in the sense of North Korea lashing out against its neighbours.
“Or even an implosion with the regime collapse and instability.”
Mr Klingner closed by insisting nations remain concerned similarly to the last death of a North Korean leader.He said: “We were equally concerned during the two previous successions of the father and the grandfather when they passed away.
“The system worked and there was a maintaining of stability so it is more likely the regime will maintain itself.”
There have been conflicting reports regarding the death of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un.
Earliest reports of his death came from the vice director of HKSTV Hong Kong Satellite Television Shijan Xingzou who claimed a very solid source told her the North Korean leader had died.
Japanese weekly magazine Shukan Gendai argued the dictator had not yet died but is currently in a vegetative state and will not recover.
1 This Month
Shut down the radiation-damaged Heysham nuclear reactors now
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
-
Archives
- October 2026 (279)
- September 2026 (339)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
-
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
