nuclear-news

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

Now is the Time for All Good Men and Women to Come to the Aid of Our Country USA

Our Constitution; Life, Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness… Economic Security, Being Sacrificed to Endless Wars

DENNIS KUCINICH, APR 22, 2024 https://denniskucinich.substack.com/p/now-is-the-time-for-all-good-men?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1441588&post_id=143867195&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=puo10&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

Dwight David Eisenhower, the Prophet-President of the United States, sixty-four years ago warned of the ascension of the military-industrial state, presently morphed into the military-industrial-intelligence complex, which, fully in control of our government, induces and manipulates our fears, creating serial enemies, justifying endless war for profit, openly canceling long-cherished constitutional rights, within  the hoary rubric of “National Security,” read: Plunder of the American taxpayer.  

Congress, as an Article One creation is in the thrall of  murderous interest groups which  are actively driving mass killings, assassinations, famine and ethnic cleansing, the progeny of genocide, in plain sight, recycling  U.S. taxpayers’ hard-earned money to tighten its grip on American politics, all the while using its media influence to deny any of this is happening, denying even the existence of a people, or how they died,  as  bodies pile up by the tens of thousands in Gaza.

The extent to which patriotic Americans are being cynically manipulated is exemplified by events of the past week.  Congress forfeited, by single votes in the House and Senate, our Fourth Amendment right to unreasonable search and seizure, passing the FISA extension and setting the stage for an official police state.   

Next, Congress cheered as members wildly waved the flag of another  nation inside the chamber of the House, (!) ignoring a $34 trillion deficit, adding  another reality-defying $95 billion for “foreign aid,” (war) on top of the nearly one trillion dollars which now goes ANNUALLY to the Pentagon and intelligence agencies to wage, on the national credit card, unrelenting war against countless innocents, while across this land anyone who dares exercise our Constitutionally-guaranteed  First Amendment right to speak out in protest on campus, at work, or  in the media,  is condemned, suspended, expelled, or fired.    

Our President and the leaders of foreign nations are in a deadly gandy-dance of denial and mass death, one theatrically begging the other to stop the bombing while providing bombs, not to escalate, while paying for escalation, thus enabling an ever more heartbreaking level of carnage, and collective punishment in open betrayal of our sacred quest for “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of. Happiness.”  Our government stands ready to defend almost any  country’s borders, but our own.

In our country, Americans are smothered in debt, having difficulty keeping up with inflation, seeing a middle class destroyed while trade agreements drove down wages and benefits, eliminated jobs, putting housing, education and health opportunities increasing out of the reach of more and more Americans, making a mockery of the America Dream.

We must break this deadly fealty to shadow-nations and corrupt and corrupting interest groups whose own leaders have without conscience enacted the worst example of man’s inhumanity to man in dark service of an ethno-religious project which is antithetical to every moral principle articulated in America’s founding documents. 

It is urgent that 2024 be the year when we, the American people, make a new beginning.

We must take up our Constitution as a shield and insist upon the Freedoms it guarantees.

We must align with those essentially spiritual values which support life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

We must stop licensing and financing genocide.

We must stop funding and fueling wars around the world.

We must stop building up the freedom- extinguising national debt.

We must take care of our own people here at home.

We must begin to pay attention to the one nation whose affairs should matter most to us:

The United States of America.

April 23, 2024 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

“Fiscally conservative” Congressman Sean Casten votes to squander $95 billion to further destroy Ukraine, enable genocide in Gaza, provoke military confrontation with China

 https://heartlandprogressive.blogspot.com/  WALT ZLOTOW, 22 Apr 24

Rep. Casten votes to squander $95 billion to further destroy Ukraine, enable genocide in Gaza, provoke military confrontation with China.

My pretend peace loving, fiscally conservative Congressman Sean Casten is anything but. Yesterday he voted with almost all House Democrats to print nearly a hundred billion dollars to further America’s decline on the world stage from military adventurism.

Normally, Casten doesn’t support any measure proposed by conservative, Bible thumping House Speaker Mike Johnson. But when Johnson struck a devil’s bargain with House Democrats to goose our economy with endless more Ukrainian and Palestinian blood, Casten jumped right in.


Johnson and House Democratic leaders devised a brilliant plan to split Biden’s gargantuan $95 billion dollar giveaway to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan into 3 separate bills of $61, $26 and $8 billion. That made it more politically expedient for all 3 to pass. The gambit worked as House Democrats, including Casten, cast a total of 590 of their 661 votes for war, war, possible war. The first ensures the destruction of Ukraine. The second ensures the genocidal ethnic cleansing of Gaza. The third makes war with China more likely. Casten voted aye on all three.

Congressman Casten knows Ukraine is being systematically destroyed by America’s refusal to negotiate its end. Congressman Casten knows the 2,300,000 Palestinians in Gaza are being devoured by US enabled Israeli genocide. Congressman Casten knows US provocations in the Far East put America on a collision course to war against China.

For my Congressman Sean Casten, loyalty to the Biden administration war agenda is more important than saving hundreds of thousands of lives.

April 23, 2024 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

The West now wants ‘restraint’- after months of fuelling a genocide in Gaza

A wider war, centred on Iran, would both distract from Gaza’s desperate plight and force Biden to back Israel unconditionally – to make good on his “iron-clad” commitment to Israel’s protection.  

The Middle East is on the brink of war precisely because western politicians indulged for decades every military excess by Israel

JONATHAN COOK, APR 16, 2024

Suddenly, western politicians from US President Joe Biden to British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak have become ardent champions of “restraint” – in a very last-minute scramble to avoid regional conflagration. 

Iran launched a salvo of drones and missiles at Israel at the weekend in what amounted a largely symbolic show of strength. Many appear to have been shot down, either by Israel’s layers of US-funded interception systems or by US, British and Jordanian fighter jets. No one was killed.

It was the first direct attack by a state on Israel since Iraq fired Scud missiles during the Gulf war of 1991. 

The United Nations Security Council was hurriedly pressed into session on Sunday, with Washington and its allies calling for a de-escalation of tensions that could all too easily lead to the outbreak of war across the Middle East and beyond. 

“Neither the region nor the world can afford more war,” the UN’s secretary general, Antonio Guterres, told the meeting. “Now is the time to defuse and de-escalate.”

Israel, meanwhile, vowed to “exact the price” against Iran at a time of its choosing. 

But the West’s abrupt conversion to “restraint” needs some explaining. 

After all, western leaders showed no restraint when Israel bombed Iran’s consulate in Damascus two weeks ago, killing a senior general and more than a dozen other Iranians – the proximate cause of Tehran’s retaliation on Saturday night.

Under the Vienna Convention, the consulate is not only a protected diplomatic mission but is viewed as sovereign Iranian territory. Israel’s attack on it was an unbridled act of aggression – the “supreme international crime”, as the Nuremberg tribunal ruled at the end of the Second World War. 

For that reason, Tehran invoked article 51 of the United Nations charter, which allows it to act in self-defence.

Shielding Israel

And yet, rather than condemning Israel’s dangerous belligerence – a flagrant attack on the so-called “rules-based order” so revered by the US – western leaders lined up behind Washington’s favourite client state. 

At a Security Council meeting on 4 April, the US, Britain and France intentionally spurned restraint by blocking a resolution that would have condemned Israel’s attack on the Iranian consulate – a vote that, had it not been stymied, might have sufficed to placate Tehran. 

At the weekend, British Foreign Secretary David Cameron still gave the thumbs-up to Israel’s flattening of Iran’s diplomatic premises, saying he could “completely understand the frustration Israel feels” – though he added, without any hint of awareness of his own hypocrisy, that the UK “would take very strong action” if a country bombed a British consulate.

By shielding Israel from any diplomatic consequences for its act of war against Iran, the western powers ensured Tehran would have to pursue a military response instead.

But it did not end there. Having stoked Iran’s sense of grievance at the UN, Biden vowed “iron-clad” support for Israel – and grave consequences for Tehran – should it dare to respond to the attack on its consulate.

Iran ignored those threats. On Saturday night, it launched some 300 drones and missiles, at the same time protesting vociferously about the Security Council’s “inaction and silence, coupled with its failure to condemn the Israeli regime’s aggressions”. 

Western leaders failed to take note. They again sided with Israel and denounced Tehran. At Sunday’s Security Council meeting, the same three states – the US, UK and France – that had earlier blocked a statement condemning Israel’s attack on Iran’s diplomatic mission, sought a formal condemnation of Tehran for its response.

Russia’s ambassador to the UN, Vasily Nebenzya, ridiculed what he called “a parade of Western hypocrisy and double standards”. He added: “You know very well that an attack on a diplomatic mission is a casus belli under international law. And if Western missions were attacked, you would not hesitate to retaliate and prove your case in this room.”

There was no restraint visible either as the West publicly celebrated its collusion with Israel in foiling Iran’s attack. 

Western leaders failed to take note. They again sided with Israel and denounced Tehran. At Sunday’s Security Council meeting, the same three states – the US, UK and France – that had earlier blocked a statement condemning Israel’s attack on Iran’s diplomatic mission, sought a formal condemnation of Tehran for its response.

Russia’s ambassador to the UN, Vasily Nebenzya, ridiculed what he called “a parade of Western hypocrisy and double standards”. He added: “You know very well that an attack on a diplomatic mission is a casus belli under international law. And if Western missions were attacked, you would not hesitate to retaliate and prove your case in this room.”

There was no restraint visible either as the West publicly celebrated its collusion with Israel in foiling Iran’s attack. 

Given the West’s new-found recognition of the need for caution, and the obvious dangers of military excess, now may be the time for its leaders to consider demanding restraint more generally – and not just to avoid a further escalation between Iran and Israel. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Top-dog client state

There is a reason why Israel has been so ostentatious in its savaging of Gaza and its people. And it is the very same reason Israel felt emboldened to violate the diplomatic sanctity of Iran’s consulate in Damascus.

Because for decades Israel has been guaranteed protection and assistance from the West, whatever crimes it commits.

Israel’s founders ethnically cleansed much of Palestine in 1948, far beyond the terms of partition set out by the UN a year earlier. It imposed a military occupation on the remnants of historic Palestine in 1967, driving out yet more of the native population. It then imposed a regime of apartheid on the few areas where Palestinians remained.

In their West Bank reservations, Palestinians have been systematically brutalised, their homes demolished, and illegal Jewish settlements built on their land. The Palestinians’ holy places have been gradually surrounded and taken from them.

Separately, Gaza has been sealed off for 17 years, and its population denied freedom of movement, employment and the basics of life. 

Israel’s reign of terror to maintain its absolute control has meant imprisonment and torture are a rite of passage for most Palestinian men. Any protest is ruthlessly crushed. 

Now Israel has added mass slaughter in Gaza – genocide – to its long list of crimes.

Israel’s displacements of Palestinians to neighbouring states caused by its ethnic cleansing operations and slaughter have destabilised the wider region. And to secure its militarised settler-colonial project in the Middle East – and its place as Washington’s top-dog client state in the region – Israel has intimidated, bombed and invaded its neighbours on a regular basis.

Its attack on Iran’s consulate in Damascus was just the latest of serial humiliations faced by Arab states. 

And through all of this, Washington and its vassal states have directed no more than occasional, lip-service calls for restraint towards Israel. There were never any consequences, but instead rewards from the West in the form of endless billions in aid and special trading status.

‘Something rash’

So why, after decades of debauched violence from Israel, has the West suddenly become so interested in “restraint”? Because on this rare occasion it serves western interests to calm the fires Israel is so determined to stoke.

The Israeli strike on Iran’s consulate came just as the Biden administration was finally running out of excuses for providing the weapons and diplomatic cover that has allowed Israel to slaughter, maim and orphan tens of thousands of Palestinian children in Gaza over six months.

Demands for a ceasefire and arms embargo on Israel have been reaching fever pitch, with Biden haemorrhaging support among parts of his Democratic base as he faces a re-run presidential election later this year against a resurgent rival, Donald Trump. 

Small numbers of votes could be the difference between victory and defeat. 

Israel had every reason to fear that its patron might soon pull the rug from under its campaign of mass slaughter in Gaza. 

But having destroyed the entire infrastructure needed to support life in the enclave, Israel needs time for the consequences to play out: either mass starvation there, or a relocation of the population elsewhere on supposedly “humanitarian” grounds. 

A wider war, centred on Iran, would both distract from Gaza’s desperate plight and force Biden to back Israel unconditionally – to make good on his “iron-clad” commitment to Israel’s protection.  

And to top it all, with the US drawn directly into a war against Iran, Washington would have little choice but to assist Israel in its long campaign to destroy Iran’s nuclear energy programme. 

Israel wants to remove any potential for Iran to develop a bomb, one that would level the military playing field between the two in ways that would make Israel far less certain that it can continue to act as it pleases across the region with impunity. 

That is why Biden officials are airing concerns to the US media that Israel is ready to “do something rash” in an attempt to drag the administration into a wider war. 

The truth is, however, that Washington long ago cultivated Israel as its military Frankenstein’s monster. Israel’s role was precisely to project US power ruthlessly into the oil-rich Middle East. The price Washington was more than willing to accept was Israel’s eradication of the Palestinian people, replaced by a fortress “Jewish state”.

Calling for Israel to exercise “restraint” now, as its entrenched lobbies flex their muscles meddling in western politics, and self-confessed fascists rule Israel’s government, is beyond parody. 

If the West really prized restraint, they should have insisted on it from Israel decades ago.  https://jonathancook.substack.com/p/the-west-now-wants-restraint-after?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=476450&post_id=143635791&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=ln98x&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

April 21, 2024 Posted by | Israel, politics, USA | Leave a comment

Leaked Cables Show Biden Pressuring Nations to Oppose Palestine’s UN Membership

“This is the evidence that President Biden’s talk about a two-state solution is nothing but idle talk,” said one former Lebanese diplomat.


BRETT WILKINS, Apr 17, 2024, Common Dreams,

As the United Nations Security Council prepares to vote Thursday on Palestine’s bid to become a full U.N. member, the Biden administration—which claims to support Palestinian statehood—is lobbying UNSC nations in an effort to wrangle enough “no” votes so that the United States can avoid resorting to a veto.

Leaked cables obtained by The Intercept show U.S. pressure on Security Council members including Malta—which currently presides over the body—and Ecuador.

While claiming that President Joe Biden backs “Palestinian aspirations for statehood,” one of the cables asserts that “it remains the U.S. view that the most expeditious path toward a political horizon for the Palestinian people is in the context of a normalization agreement between Israel and its neighbors.”

“We therefore urge you not to support any potential Security Council resolution recommending the admission of ‘Palestine‘ as a U.N. member state, should such a resolution be presented to the Security Council for a decision in the coming days and weeks,” the document advises.

The U.S. argument essentially is that the U.N. should not create an independent Palestinian state by fiat—even though that’s precisely how the world body voted in 1947 to establish the modern state of Israel.

The renewed push for Palestine’s U.N. membership comes as Israel wages a genocidal war on the Gaza Strip. The Palestinian Authority, which hasn’t controlled Gaza for nearly two decades, rejected the Biden administration’s requests to hold off on seeking full membership.

“We wanted the U.S. to provide a substantive alternative to U.N. recognition. They didn’t,” one unnamed Palestinian official toldAxios on Wednesday. “We believe full membership in the U.N. for Palestine is way overdue. We have waited more than 12 years since our initial request.”

As The Intercept‘s Ken Klippenstein and Daniel Boguslaw noted:

Since 2011, the U.N. Security Council has rejected the Palestinian Authority’s request for full member status. On April 2, the Palestinian Observer Mission to the U.N. requested that the council once again take up consideration of its membership application. According to the first State Department cable, U.N. meetings since the beginning of April suggest that Algeria, China, Guyana, Mozambique, Russia, Slovenia, Sierra Leone, and Malta……………………………………. https://www.commondreams.org/news/palestinian-statehood

April 21, 2024 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

Analysis of Canada’s Budget 2024 provisions related to nuclear.


Budget 2024 proposes to provide $3.1 billion over 11 years, starting in 2025-26, with $1.5 billion in remaining amortization, to Atomic Energy of Canada Limited to support Canadian Nuclear Laboratories’ ongoing nuclear science research, environmental protection, and site remediation work.

 16 Apr 2024, Susan O’Donnell

There’s no new money announcements for nuclear reactor development such as more money in the Strategic Innovation Fund, a bit of good news.

Overall, a ton of references to nuclear stuff, it’s all over this budget.

The big money announcement, which is not a surprise if you’re following goings-on at Chalk River, is $3.1 billion over 11 years “to Atomic Energy of Canada Limited to support Canadian Nuclear Laboratories’ ongoing nuclear science research, environmental protection, and site remediation work.” see highlight in red below. I have no idea if this is the amount CNL asked for or more or less than that amount. I assume this is new money in addition to the $1.2B or so AECL already gets every year just to run the place.

There’s this one under Indigenous initiatives that could potentially mean funding for nuclear development, but it’s not enough to do anything much with: $36 million, over three years, starting in 2024-25, to renew support for the Strategic Partnerships Initiatives’ Clean Energy program to promote Indigenous participation in clean growth opportunities.

The other money stuff, refundable tax credits for new equipment, means a company needs to spend money to get the credit, which is not what the industry is looking for.

Unrelated to funding but of definite interest is the three-year target for nuclear project reviews and to avoid duplication between the CNSC and IAAC. I wasn’t aware there was duplication so if anyone has insight on the potential impact of this, please share.

Related is broad text for the revised IAA including “measures that include increasing flexibility in substitution of assessments to allow for collaboration and avoid interjurisdictional duplication” which I don’t like the sound of, maybe someone can offer insight.

There’s a long section on the “Canada-US Energy Transformation Task Force” which includes a worrying reference to that pre-written media release at COP 28 to triple nuclear energy, calling it an initiative between “government and like-minded partners” – I say this is worrying because I suspect there’s a battle royale going on as to whether this media stunt at the COP in Dubai by the nuclear industry is an official government commitment. Last time I looked, it wasn’t on the website of Environment and Climate Change Canada which is responsible for COP commitments. But it’s in the budget, so maybe that’s supposed to make it official.

Then there’s a nothing-statement about maintaining a robust Arctic presence, referring to Russia as “today’s most hostile nuclear power” which I guess it is from Canada’s perspective although most of the world’s countries would likely name a different candidate for that honour. Why this is concerning is the reference by PM Trudeau just a week or so ago about needing nuclear submarines to maintain Arctic sovereignty. A file to watch for sure.

So, in summary, a LOT of nuclear references in the budget which is interesting and unsettling but the only big money is for Canadian Nuclear Laboratories, that private company run by Atkins-Réalis/SNC Lavalin and two U.S. companies involved in nuclear weapons development.

So, that’s where our country is at, at this point in history.

Budget 2024 Fairness for every generation   https://budget.canada.ca/2024/home-accueil-en.html

Page numbers refer to the pdf page.

Page 29:

Extending for an additional year collaboration with our largest trading partner through the Canada-U.S. Energy Transformation Task Force, which is bolstering critical mineral and nuclear energy supply chain integration.

Page 200:

A 15 per cent refundable tax credit rate for eligible investments in new equipment or refurbishments related to: Low-emitting electricity generation systems using energy from wind, solar, water, geothermal, waste biomass, nuclear, or natural gas with carbon capture and storage.

Page 206:

Set a three-year target for nuclear project reviews, by working with the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and Impact Assessment Agency of Canada, and consider how the process can be better streamlined and duplications reduced between the two agencies. 

To advance the principle of “one project, one review”, Budget 2024 proposes to: Amend the Impact Assessment Act to respond to the October 2023 Supreme Court of Canada decision that ruled that elements of the Act are unconstitutional. The proposed amendments will ensure the Act is constitutionally sound, facilitating efficient project reviews while advancing Canada’s clean growth and protecting the environment. An amended Act will provide certainty for businesses and investors through measures that include increasing flexibility in substitution of
assessments to allow for collaboration and avoid interjurisdictional duplication, clarifying when joint federal-provincial review panels are possible, and allowing for earlier Agency screening decisions as to whether a full impact assessment is required after the Planning phase. The amended Act will remain consistent with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act;

Page 208

Advancing Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Research, and Environmental Remediation
Non-emitting, nuclear energy is one of the key tools in helping the world reach net-zero emissions by 2050. Canada stands out as one of the few countries to have developed and deployed its own nuclear technology, the CANDU. And the robust Canadian supply chains built around CANDU not only generate highskilled jobs and foster research and development but also play a role in creating affordable and clean electricity. Canada’s nuclear sector also produces medical isotopes essential for radiation therapy and diagnosing heart disease.

Page 209

Canada is a Global Nuclear Energy Leader

Continue reading →

April 19, 2024 Posted by | Canada, politics | Leave a comment

Wyden Says Spying Bill Would Force Americans to Become an ‘Agent for Big Brother’

“If you have access to any communications, the government can force you to help it spy,” said Sen. Ron Wyden.

JAKE JOHNSON, Apr 17, 2024, Common Dreams

Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden took to the floor of the U.S. Senate on Tuesday to speak out against a chilling mass surveillance bill that lawmakers are working to rush through the upper chamber and send to President Joe Biden’s desk by the end of the week.

The measure in question would reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) for two years and massively expand the federal government’s warrantless surveillance power by requiring a wide range of businesses and individuals to cooperate with spying efforts.

“If you have access to any communications, the government can force you to help it spy,” said Wyden (Ore.), referring to an amendment that was tacked on to the legislation by the U.S. House last week with bipartisan support. “That means anyone with access to a server, a wire, a cable box, a Wi-Fi router, a phone, or a computer. So think for a moment about the millions of Americans who work in buildings and offices in which communications are stored or pass through.”

“After all, every office building in America has data cables running through it,” the senator continued. “The people are not just the engineers who install, maintain, and repair our communications infrastructure; there are countless others who could be forced to help the government spy, including those who clean offices and guard buildings. If this provision is enacted, the government can deputize any of these people against their will, and force them in effect to become what amounts to an agent for Big Brother—for example, by forcing an employee to insert a USB thumb drive into a server at an office they clean or guard at night.”

Wyden said the process “can all happen without any oversight whatsoever: The FISA Court won’t know about it, Congress won’t know about it. Americans who are handed these directives will be forbidden from talking about it. Unless they can afford high-priced lawyers with security clearances who know their way around the FISA Court, they will have no recourse at all.”……………

Despite its grave implications for civil liberties, the bill has drawn relatively little vocal opposition in the Senate. A final vote could come as soon as Thursday.

Titled Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act (RISAA), the legislation passed the Republican-controlled House last week after lawmakers voted down an amendment that would have added a search warrant requirement to Section 702.

The authority allows U.S. agencies to spy on non-citizens located outside of the country, but it has been abused extensively by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and National Security Agency to collect the communications of American lawmakers, activists, journalists, and others without a warrant………………………………………..more https://www.commondreams.org/news/wyden-says-spying-bill-would-force-americans-to-become-an-agent-for-big-brother

April 19, 2024 Posted by | politics, secrets,lies and civil liberties, USA | Leave a comment

You will not BELIEVE what the Tories just gave Fujitsu ANOTHER government contract for

The ‘fallout’ could be disastrous.

 by Steve Topple, 11 April 2024,  https://www.thecanary.co/trending/2024/04/11/fujitsu-nuclear-uk-contract/

Disgraced Fujitsu – the company behind the Horizon software that helped the Post Office wrongly convict hundreds of subpostmasters – has just been given ANOTHER government contract by the Tories. However, that’s not the worst part – because unbelievably, the deal is for software to support UK nuclear experiments.

Yes. The fallout could be disastrous.

As LBC reported:

The National Nuclear Laboratory, which is owned and operated by the government, has awarded the firm a £155k contract for ‘software support’ until 2025…

The contract, published by procurement data provider Tussell, is for “software support” and is due to run until 31 March 2025.

Hairbrained Tories: we’ve got a great idea… why not give Fujitsu a nuclear contract?

The National Nuclear Laboratory does all sorts of stuff with nuclear energy. As it says on its website, this includes:

four strategic areas: Clean Energy, Environmental Restoration, Health and Nuclear Medicine and Security and Non-Proliferation.

That is, the laboratory dabbles in nuclear science and experiments – including nuclear power and weapons; note its ironic oxymoron that it deals with ‘security’ and ‘non-proliferation’. So, you’d think that the government would want to make sure that the National Nuclear Laboratory was a safe and secure environment.

Clearly fucking not, though – as they’ve now given Fujitsu a contract.

People on X were rightly outraged: (several quotes here)

Christopher Head was the youngest victim of the Horizon Post Office scandal. He told LBC:

When there is a pledge not to bid for contracts you kind of expect them to adhere to that. But the problem is these companies have shareholders, and these shareholders demand profitability. It is frustrating.

Fujitsu made this pledge that they wouldn’t voluntarily bid for contracts within the government while the inquiry is going on – but we all know the size of these companies makes it difficult.

Post Office scandal: you must have been in a nuclear bunker if you missed it

Unless you’ve been in a nuclear bunker for the past 12 months, then you can’t have missed the Post Office scandal.

As the Canary previously reported, Mr Bates vs the Post Office has brought the ongoing scandal over the Horizon IT system, and Post Office and politicians conduct at the time, back into the public eye.

More than 700 people running small local post offices received criminal convictions between 1999 and 2005 after faulty accounting software made it appear that money had gone missing from their branches.

The scandal has been described at an ongoing public inquiry as “the worst miscarriage of justice in recent British legal history”.

Fujitsu: giving the UK its very own Hulk moment?

Yet here we are, with the Tories STILL giving Fujitsu another contract. Worse still, they’ve given it to them on the basis of providing tech support for nuclear technology. So, unless the government fancies itself as creating a league of superhumans, then it needs to revoke the contract.

Fujitsu cannot be trusted to run a piss up in a brewery – let alone software support for a nuclear experiments lab. It could barely handle the tech for provincial Post Offices. The Canary can see an Incredible Hulk moment coming on if this goes ahead – and we hope everyone has their nuclear bunkers ready.

Sign the petition against the contract here.

April 17, 2024 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Post Office Horizon scandal: four reasons why the government’s model for outsourcing is broken

Alice Moore, Assistant Professor in Public Management and Public Policy, University of Birmingham, January 16, 2024 , https://theconversation.com/post-office-horizon-scandal-four-reasons-why-the-governments-model-for-outsourcing-is-broken-220919

For over a decade, the Post Office and its supplier, Fujitsu, insisted that the Horizon system used in its branches was completely “robust”. When discrepancies appeared in hundreds of branch accounts across the country, the Post Office refused to believe the system was at fault and didn’t challenge the information it got from Fujitsu. Instead, it blamed the shortfalls on sub-postmasters, made them pay the losses, and prosecuted over 700 of them.

The multimillion-pound contract between the Post Office and Fujitsu is at the heart of the scandal. The way the contract worked meant that Fujitsu was incentivised to fix bugs quickly rather than well. The Post Office didn’t have the expertise it needed to understand what was going wrong. The Post Office’s dependence on Fujitsu also meant that it protected its relationship with them at the expense of sub-postmasters and the public.

The problems with the Horizon contract underpin one of the most widespread miscarriages of justice in UK history. But they are also replicated across thousands of other government contracts, including for many essential services, from hip replacements on the NHS to school PE lessons.

These problems are in fact produced by fundamental features of the UK’s outsourcing model.

1. The systems are too complex to understand

The Horizon system was incredibly complex. It had to process all kinds of transactions, from selling travellers cheques to managing rent payments, across tens of thousands of disparate branches, using a complicated web of communications systems.

The problem is, by outsourcing such a complex service, the Post Office ended up without the expertise to understand how it worked and what Fujitsu was (or wasn’t) doing. The contract also limited the amount of information they could get from the system. This all meant that the Post Office lacked the understanding and information about Horizon it would have needed to challenge the story it was getting from Fujitsu.

In its most recent statement on the inquiry into what happened at the Post Office, Fujitsu said “the inquiry has reinforced the devastating impact on postmasters’ lives and that of their families, and Fujitsu has apologised for its role in their suffering … Fujitsu is fully committed to supporting the inquiry in order to understand what happened and to learn from it.”

2. Contracts generate perverse incentives

If a service is complex, like Horizon was, it is impossible to specify everything in a written contract. Any buyer has to miss things out. But then how do they get a supplier to do everything they need and not just the things in the contract?

One of the reasons Horizon had major problems was that it was impossible to say in advance how each bug in the system should be fixed. Instead, the contract just stipulated how quickly Fujitsu needed to resolve problems. Bugs either weren’t fixed properly or the fixes introduced different bugs into the system. This kind of “service level agreement” is still standard in many government contracts.

3. The buyer is locked in

Complex services also require a supplier to invest in things like software, equipment and training that are specific to that service. There’s an idea in economics that if a supplier needs to make these “specialised investments”, it’s very difficult to get rid of that supplier. They have a huge advantage over their competitors, because anyone else would need to make these investments all over again.

This is what happened with the Horizon contract. Once Fujitsu had built the system, it couldn’t be replaced by another supplier, even when things went wrong. In the original procurement, it scored bottom on eight of the ten quality criteria, but won the contract because it said it would pay for the up-front development costs. The contract has since changed, but Fujitsu carried on and has just had its contract renewed up to 2025.

Getting locked into complex contracts is quite common for government. In 2014 HMRC announced that it would end its £8 billion contract with Capgemini for the UK’s tax collection system. It had to assign a budget of £700 million just to pay for the cost of transferring the contract to new suppliers. Now, ten years on, Capgemini is still the supplier. Apparently unable to find an alternative, HMRC ended up extending the contract to at least 2025.

4. Suppliers are prioritised over workers and the public

Because it couldn’t replace them, the Post Office depended on Fujitsu. This was compounded by the fact that Horizon was also essential to the Post Office’s business. Horizon was responsible for processing all branch transactions and keeping track of all money coming in and going out.

Losing Fujitsu would cause huge cost and disruption to an essential system. The Post Office depended on keeping Fujitsu onside during contract negotiations and making sure they were financially healthy. Predictably, they protected that relationship over sub-postmasters, who were individually expendable. This also came at the public’s expense, who got a poor service and have had to foot the bill for the Post Office’s mistake.

Essential public services across the UK rely on a few “strategic suppliers”. Government bodies are dependent on protecting their relationships with these suppliers and are invested in their financial stability. The collapse of Carillion in 2018, at a time when it was contracted to build NHS hospitals, brought home just how bad things could be if a major supplier went under.

How far the government would go to protect other strategic relationships remains to be seen. But as long as UK government bodies outsource complex, essential services, it’s unlikely that the Horizon fiasco will be the last public scandal with a government contract at its heart.

April 17, 2024 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Keir Starmer doesn’t speak for Labour members on nuclear weapons

,   https://labouroutlook.org/2024/04/14/starmer-doesnt-speak-for-labour-members-on-nuclear-weapons/

‘I am opposed to the use of nuclear weapons. I am opposed to the holding of nuclear weapons. I want to see a nuclear-free world. I believe it is possible.’Keir Starmer, 2015

Labour CND has issued the following statement in response to Keir Starmer’s visit to Barrow, Friday 12 April

Keir Starmer used a visit to Barrow-in-Furness on 12 April to announce Labour’s ‘unshakeable absolute total’ commitment to Trident, Britain’s nuclear weapons system, and Labour’s plan to raise military spending to 2.5% of gross domestic product under a Labour government which means billions of pounds more public funds allocated to the military budget.1

Starmer should be under no illusions. He does not speak for the majority of Labour Party members, however, or even the public on these issues. Nor does this allay Tory voter fears that Labour is a safe pair of hands when it comes to defence.2


Trident is the ‘bedrock of Labour’s plan to keep Britain safe’, he said. The UK’s ‘nuclear deterrent’ was ‘maintained on behalf of NATO’. This was ‘a generational, multi-decade commitment’ from a Starmer government.

International tensions are growing, and with them the risk of nuclear confrontation. Politicians may believe Trident guarantees us a place at the top table. But the assurance of Labour and Tories alike that it brings safety for people in Britain is a cruel illusion. Meanwhile UK domestic politics continues to ignore the true international situation which is that Britain has not signed the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons which came into force in 2021.

Politicians may believe Trident guarantees us a place at the top table. But the assurance of Labour and Tories alike that it brings safety for people in Britain is a cruel illusion.

A picture of Labour CND placards at a demonstration

Starmer doesn’t speak for Labour members on nuclear weapons

Barrow, CND, International, Labour CND, nuclear weapons, starmer, TridentLeave a Commenton Starmer doesn’t speak for Labour members on nuclear weapons

Share

‘I am opposed to the use of nuclear weapons. I am opposed to the holding of nuclear weapons. I want to see a nuclear-free world. I believe it is possible.’Keir Starmer, 2015

Labour CND has issued the following statement in response to Keir Starmer’s visit to Barrow, Friday 12 April

Keir Starmer used a visit to Barrow-in-Furness on 12 April to announce Labour’s ‘unshakeable absolute total’ commitment to Trident, Britain’s nuclear weapons system, and Labour’s plan to raise military spending to 2.5% of gross domestic product under a Labour government which means billions of pounds more public funds allocated to the military budget.1

Starmer should be under no illusions. He does not speak for the majority of Labour Party members, however, or even the public on these issues. Nor does this allay Tory voter fears that Labour is a safe pair of hands when it comes to defence.2

Trident is the ‘bedrock of Labour’s plan to keep Britain safe’, he said. The UK’s ‘nuclear deterrent’ was ‘maintained on behalf of NATO’. This was ‘a generational, multi-decade commitment’ from a Starmer government.

International tensions are growing, and with them the risk of nuclear confrontation. Politicians may believe Trident guarantees us a place at the top table. But the assurance of Labour and Tories alike that it brings safety for people in Britain is a cruel illusion. Meanwhile UK domestic politics continues to ignore the true international situation which is that Britain has not signed the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons which came into force in 2021.

Politicians may believe Trident guarantees us a place at the top table. But the assurance of Labour and Tories alike that it brings safety for people in Britain is a cruel illusion.

The possession of a nuclear weapons system makes the UK a target. The decision to site United States nuclear weapons on British soil – taken without public or even parliamentary debate – puts us on the front line of any nuclear attack.

Britain’s nuclear weapons system is not independent as Starmer claims. Trident is dependent on US technology and know-how.

Even sections of the military recognise that the money spent on Trident would be better deployed elsewhere, arguing for increases in areas of conventional defence.

Disregarding these and many other arguments against nuclear weapons, in a statement shot through with jingoism, Starmer

has made three commitments which he argues will defend the UK economy and prioritise British jobs and skills:

  • to build all four new Dreadnought nuclear submarines in the UK, at Barrow-in-Furness;
  • to maintain Britain’s continuous at sea nuclear deterrent; and
  • to deliver all future upgrades needed to properly equip Trident.

A commitment to increase the military budget means cuts elsewhere in government investment and public spending. Figures released by the Treasury as part of the Spring Budget showed that Core Military Spending was £54.2 billion pounds for the year ending March 2024, around 2.3% of GDP.3 How else will a Labour government, committed to fiscal responsibility as well as lowering taxes, find the extra resources to fund Starmer’s commitment to increase the military budget? It will come at the expense of the NHS, education, and the ability to address child poverty or to abolish the two-child cap on child benefits. It will also come at the expense of dealing with the human security threat of climate change.Labour CND says the next Labour government should not allow its priorities to be dictated by the Conservative Party and their establishment friends. We need is a radical rethink about spending priorities and about British foreign policy.The incoming Labour government will face a range of challenges. None of them will be solved by nuclear weapons or spending ever more money on the military.

Notes

  1. Keir Starmer, My commitment to the UK’s nuclear deterrent is Unshakeable Absolute Total, Daily Mail exclusive, 11 April 2024 athttps://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13298999/Keir-Starmer-vows-Britains-nuclear-deterrent-safe-hands-promises-unshakeable-commitment- Trident-new-generation-nuclear-submarines-built-UK.htm ↩︎
  2. See for example the hundreds of reader comments in response to the above, which have appeared within hours of the article being posted online. ↩︎
  3. Dr Stuart Parkinson, Co-Chair GCOMS-UK (UK branch of the Global Campaign on Military Spending) and Executive Director of Scientists for Global Responsibility, Spring Budget 24: Military Spending Continues to Grow at the Expense of Climate Funds and Overseas Aid, at https://demilitarize.org.uk/spring-budget-24-military-spending-continues-to-grow-at-the-expense-of-climate-funds-and-overseas-aid/ ↩︎

April 16, 2024 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Government could still replace Fujitsu in key nuclear contract

Fujitsu’s first government contract of the year could be just a stay of execution as department says that all replacement options are still being considered.

Karl Flinders, Chief reporter and senior editor EME, 12 Apr 24  https://www.computerweekly.com/news/366580657/Government-could-still-replace-Fujitsu-in-key-nuclear-contract

Fujitsu’s controversial contract with the National Nuclear Laboratory (NNL) was renewed because there were no other suppliers that could meet the regulatory duties required, but the service could be taken in-house next year.

Following the announcement of Fujitsu’s first government contract of the year and a subsequent public backlash, the government has been quick to stress that all options to replace the supplier’s £155,000 software support contract with the NNL, including moving the service in-house, are being considered.

Reacting to criticism for awarding the contract to Fujitsu, which is under intense scrutiny over its role in the Post Office scandal, the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero outlined the reason for Fujitsu’s new deal. “NNL requires bespoke software to ensure its work remains compliant with operationally critical regulations. There are currently no other suitable suppliers and without re-awarding this contract, the NNL would be unable to fulfil its regulatory duties,” said a spokesperson.

But the department added that, “The NNL will consider all options once the contract comes to an end in March 2025, including exploring in-house solutions.

Fujitsu’s huge UK government business is under pressure following public anger at the IT giant’s role as supplier of the Horizon system at the heart of the Post Office scandal. The company has already seen a reduction in public sector contracts this year.

By April 2023, Fujitsu had signed a £25m deal with Bristol City Council, a £16m contract with the Post Office, a deal worth £13m with Northern Ireland Water, an £8m deal with the Ministry of Defence, two deals with the Department for Education totalling £3m, and a contract with Leeds City Council worth up to £100,000. This year the NNL is its sole government contract announced so far.

In another sign of possible reputational damage, earlier this month the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs ended Fujitsu’s role in providing a flood warning system for the UK, two months after signing an extension of up to 12 months. 

Read more about Fujitsu’s ‘hollow’ bidding pause

Fujitsu’s head of Europe, Paul Patterson, promised to pause bidding for government work until after the completion of the statutory public inquiry into the Post Office scandal, following the broadcast of the ITV drama, Mr Bates vs the Post Office, at the beginning of the year. 

During questioning by MPs at a business and trade select committee hearing in January, Patterson acknowledged Fujitsu’s part in the scandal, telling MPs and victims: “We were involved from the start; we did have bugs and errors in the system, and we did help the Post Office in their prosecutions of subpostmasters. For that, we are truly sorry.”

But the bidding pause, described as “hollow” by MP Kevan Jones, does not include deals with existing customers in the public sector, of which there are many. Last month, Computer Weekly revealed leaked internal communications that showed Fujitsu is still targeting about £1.3bn worth of UK government contracts over the next 12 months. Further leaked documents revealed that Fujitsu created a spreadsheet instructing staff how to get around its self-imposed ban.

Internal communications seen by Computer Weekly also revealed that Fujitsu is spending heavily on managing the current scandal fallout. It has sought external support in a project known as Holly, where it has engaged PR, ethical business experts and lawyers, at a cost of £27m so far.

The Post Office scandal was first exposed by Computer Weekly in 2009, revealing the stories of seven subpostmasters and the problems they suffered due to the accounting software (see timeline of Computer Weekly articles about the scandal below).

April 16, 2024 Posted by | business and costs, politics, technology, UK | Leave a comment

Ballooning costs and secret projects at Canada’s federal nuclear labs

by Ole Hendrickson, March 5, 2024, https://rabble.ca/columnists/ballooning-costs-and-secret-projects-at-canadas-federal-nuclear-labs/—

What does Canada get from its nuclear power corporation for its $1.54 billion budget?

Canada’s national nuclear power corporation – Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) – has no functioning nuclear reactors, unlike similar state-owned bodies in China, Russia, France, Korea, and the United Arab Emirates, and despite a $1.54 billion annual budget.

AECL’s three “prototype” CANDU reactors haven’t produced electricity for 37 years. Its three main research reactors are also shut down. Yet they must be maintained to protect nearby water bodies.

Section 9 of Canada’s 2023 Public Accounts indicates that AECL’s liability will require ongoing public expenditures for the next 162 years. It records “decommissioning of nuclear facilities” as a $9.3 billion “asset retirement obligation.”

In 2011, the Harper government sold AECL’s flagship CANDU division to SNC-Lavalin for a piddling $15 million. Then, in 2015 it contracted a multinational consortium to reduce AECL’s nuclear liabilities more quickly.

Under a “Government-owned, Contractor-operated” (GoCo) model, the public retains ownership of AECL’s federal lands, including the shut-down reactors and other radioactive waste. AECL funnels ever-increasing amounts of tax dollars to the “Canadian National Energy Alliance,” currently made up of Texas-based Fluor and Jacobs, and SNC-Lavalin (now rebranded as “AtkinsRéalis”).

The 2023-24 Main Estimates give AECL $1,541,555,307, with $1,140,509,721 earmarked for “Nuclear decommissioning and radioactive waste management.” For comparison, the current Parliamentary appropriation for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) is $1,287,169,435.

Despite billion-dollar annual cash outlays, AECL’s liabilities grew from $6.5 billion in 2015 to the current $9.3 billion figure.

AECL seems more interested in adding liabilities than reducing them. Its former Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) subsidiary – now owned by the consortium – is building new “Class 1” nuclear facilities at the Chalk River Laboratories, 150 km west of Ottawa. AECL boasts that these laboratories are “Canada’s largest science and technology complex.”

One Chalk River facility (the ANMRC) would enable research on “advanced” reactor fuels, including those made by extracting plutonium from high-level waste fuel rods. Another (the MCECE) would extract tritium, a radioactive form of hydrogen that builds up in the heavy water of CANDU reactors.

Despite concerns about costs and liabilities, both facilities are proceeding without Parliamentary or regulatory oversight.  In 2018, Canada’s complacent nuclear “regulator”, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, issued a licence authorizing CNL to “prepare a site for, construct, operate, modify, decommission or abandon” any nuclear facility on the Chalk River site. This effectively bypasses the normal licensing processes and regulations that govern Class 1 facilities.

Production of plutonium, tritium, and “clean” heavy water raises serious national security concerns. All are used in making nuclear weapons. Fluor and Jacobs are heavily involved in the weapons industry. They were prominent sponsors of the recent 16th Annual Nuclear Deterrence Summit in Washington DC – a “Global Warfare Summit.” As pillars of the military-industrial complex, they promote a new nuclear arms race. Canada has become an unwitting partner in this. Chalk River is an ideal location for training a new generation of weapons scientists, given its origins as a Cold War weapons plutonium production facility.

The only way for the public to find out and comment on what’s happening at Chalk River is through the Impact Assessment Act. AECL is a “federal authority” under sections 81 to 91 of the Act, it must determine that a project on federal lands “is not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects.” But AECL lets CNL post uninformative project descriptions on the Canadian Impact Assessment Registry and make its own determinations after a perfunctory 30-day comment period.

In the case of the MCECE project, CNL began site preparation without an AECL determination. The billion-dollar ANMRC project, which started before the Impact Assessment Act came into force, was never even posted as a project, even though section 67 of the previous Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 also required an AECL determination.

These questionable processes may be coming to an end. Section 84 of the Impact Assessment Act requires the federal authority to consider “any adverse impact that the project may have on the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.”

Kebaowek First Nation recently held a joint press conference with the Bloc Quebecois to oppose a massive radioactive waste dump on unceded Algonquin territory at Chalk River. It is also intervening in the MCECE project, aided by a report from Dr. Gordon Edwards of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility that concludes “there is no justification for the proposed facility.”

There has been far too much secrecy surrounding the goings on at AECL and Canada’s nuclear laboratories under the GoCo model. Parliament should scrutinize the $1.5 billion annual outlay to AECL, and determine who is benefiting – Canadians, or unregulated multinational corporations.

April 15, 2024 Posted by | Canada, politics | Leave a comment

The Scottish National Party support signing an international treaty banning nuclear weapons, post independence

THE SNP support signing an international treaty banning nuclear weapons
after independence – despite External Affairs Secretary Angus Robertson
refusing to say as much, The Sunday National understands. The news comes
after Robertson repeatedly declined to commit an independent Scotland to
signing the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) at the
launch of a government white paper on Scotland’s place in the world in
March. The SNP have been clear that the UK’s nuclear weaponry, which is
based on the River Clyde, would have to leave the country after a Yes vote.
Former first minister Nicola Sturgeon had said in 2021 that an independent
Scotland “would be a keen signatory” to the TPNW.

The National 14th April 2024

https://www.thenational.scot/news/24250138.snp-back-signing-tpnw-nuclear-ban-treaty-post-independence

April 15, 2024 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

In an Ontario town split over a nuclear dump site, the fallout is over how they’ll vote on the future

The town will hold an online vote, but an opposition group demands paper ballots

Colin Butler · CBC News Apr 14, 2024

A citizen’s group opposed to burying Canada’s stockpile of spent nuclear fuel half a kilometre below a southwestern Ontario farm town is demanding a paper ballot rather than an online vote in an upcoming referendum on whether it should welcome radioactive waste. 

Canada’s nuclear industry’s quest to find a place to store the growing amount of highly radioactive detritus it produces stretches back decades. The search has narrowed to two potential host communities in Ontario: Ignace (four hours northwest of Thunder Bay) and the Municipality of South Bruce (two hours north of London).

For years, South Bruce has found itself divided over being a potential host — split, between those who believe a new industry is a way to reclaim lost prosperity that lapsed with the glory days of farming, and those who think jobs and subsidies from the nuclear industry has blinded the others to the risks of welcoming radioactive waste into the community.  

On Monday, town councillors in South Bruce voted to accept the official question on the ballot: “Are you in favour of the Municipality of South Bruce declaring South Bruce to be a willing host for the Nuclear Waste Management Organization’s (NWMO) proposed deep geological repository?”

‘Our concern is the way that they’re holding the referendum’

“I have no issues with how the question is worded,” Michelle Stein, a member of the grassroots Protect Our Waterways — No Nuclear Waste, said.

“Our concern is the way that they’re holding the referendum as an online vote.”

Stein said unlike paper ballots, which can be audited and verified by anyone, she argues the way a computerized voting system sorts and tallies ballots is largely a mystery to laymen, hidden beneath source code that’s indecipherable to all who lack specialized knowledge. 

“This is a forever decision. Why wouldn’t they want tangible physical proof? We can go back and count those paper ballots and they can say, ‘look, here’s the ballots. This is what the people voted for.'”

The municipality of South Bruce is divided over a potential site for a nuclear waste storage facility deep below their community. A referendum to settle the matter is set for later this year. Host Colin Butler speaks with Michelle Stein, a member of Protect Our Waterways – No Nuclear Waste, to hear her concerns………………………………………………….

Errors or breaches can be difficult to detect

Still, critics say online voting is prone to cyber attacks and there’s no way to guarantee voter privacy, or the integrity of the vote. There is also no provincial standard in Ontario, or, for that matter, federally, when it comes to online voting systems. 

“There’s a lot of questions that this technology introduces around that. ‘How do I know my vote counted? How do I know it was kept secret?'” Aleksander Essex, a Western University professor who studies cyber security and crytography, said. 

At the same time however, Essex notes, he has never seen any evidence of fraud or tampering with the vote in all the years he has studied online voting. ………………………………………………………………………………………………..  https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/ontario-south-bruce-nuclear-dgr-referendum-online-voting-1.7168326—

April 15, 2024 Posted by | Canada, politics | Leave a comment

Keir Starmer slammed over staunch defence of nuclear weapons

“it’s increasingly clear that Starmer’s offer is just more of the same: billions of pounds wasted on nuclear weapons and nuclear power, and a belligerent foreign policy that includes support for the Aukus pact, Nato, and continuing arms sales to Israel, used to kill Palestinians.

“Putting billions of pounds into the pockets of arms companies and their investors will not reinvigorate the economy in any meaningful way.”

The National By Hamish Morrison @HMorrison97 Political Reporter, 10 Apr 24

KEIR Starmer has said Trident is the “bedrock” of Labour’s defence policy – despite growing concern over the state of the ageing nuclear fleet critics say is a “grotesque” waste of money.

The Labour leader launched a full-throated defence of Britain’s nuclear weapons in an attempt to stress the distance he has taken the party since its leadership under Jeremy Corbyn – who voted against the renewal of Trident while in charge.

During a visit to Barrow today, where nuclear submarines are being built, Starmer is expected to focus on increasing jobs and skills in defence.

Starmer said: “The changed Labour Party I lead knows that our nation’s defence must always come first. Labour’s commitment to our nuclear deterrent is total.

“In the face of rising global threats and growing Russian aggression, the UK’s nuclear deterrent is the bedrock of Labour’s plan to keep Britain safe.

“It will ensure vital protection for the UK and our Nato allies in the years ahead, as well as supporting thousands of high paying jobs across the UK………………………..

Labour will ensure that new UK leadership within Aukus helps make this national endeavour a success for Britain.”

The Aukus pact unites Australia, the UK and the USA in a military pact in the South Pacific, which critics say escalates tensions with the Chinese.

China’s government has described Aukus – which will see Australia provided with nuclear-powered submarines – as indicative of an “obsolete Cold War zero sum mentality”.

The SNP have said Labour’s commitment to Trident was “grotesque”.

Martin Docherty-Hughes (below), the party’s defence spokesperson, said: “Westminster has already wasted billions of pounds of taxpayer’s money on nuclear weapons and expensive nuclear energy.

“It is therefore grotesque that Sir Keir Starmer is prepared to throw billions more down the drain when his party claim there is no money to improve our NHS, help families with the cost of living or to properly invest in our green energy future.

“This money would be better spent on a raft of other things – not least investing in the green energy gold rush, which would ensure Scotland, with all its renewal energy potential, could be a green energy powerhouse of the 21st century.”

He blasted the “misfiring Trident missiles”, drawing attention to a high-profile blunder which saw a test missile dramatically fail to launch, landing just yards from the submarine carrying it.

Docherty-Hughes said the Government should provide more money for “underpaid and under-resourced” armed forces staff and conventional defence systems.

Alba general secretary Chris McEleny, who worked at HM Naval Base Clyde, where nukes are stored, said: “When one in four children in Scotland live in poverty it is obscene that resources are wasted to ensure that we have the best defended foodbanks in the world.”

He added that the “war-mongering Labour Party have now made it clear that independence is the only way to free Scotland of nuclear weapons”.

Healey, Labour’s shadow defence minister, said a “strong defence industrial strategy” would be “hardwired” in the party’s quest to promote economic growth if it gains power at the election.

He added: “We will make it fundamental to direct defence investment first to British jobs and British industry.”……………………………..

Kate Hudson, general secretary of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, said voters were “desperately looking for hope from the Labour Party”.

She added: “However, it’s increasingly clear that Starmer’s offer is just more of the same: billions of pounds wasted on nuclear weapons and nuclear power, and a belligerent foreign policy that includes support for the Aukus pact, Nato, and continuing arms sales to Israel, used to kill Palestinians.

“Putting billions of pounds into the pockets of arms companies and their investors will not reinvigorate the economy in any meaningful way.”  https://www.thenational.scot/news/24248069.keir-starmer-slammed-staunch-defence-nuclear-weapons/

April 14, 2024 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Ukraine fatigue: Kiev and the West are tiring of war and each other

The idea of some form of compromise solution to Kiev-Moscow conflict is creeping up on foreign hawks and on more and more locals

 Tarik Cyril Amar,  https://www.sott.net/article/490581-Ukraine-fatigue-Kiev-and-the-West-are-tiring-of-war-and-each-other 12 Apr 24

What a small band of objective-though-long-disparaged observers in the West have long warned about is now happening: Ukraine and the West are losing their war against Russia. The strategy of using Ukraine to either isolate and slowly suffocate Russia or to defeat and degrade it in a proxy war is coming to its predictable catastrophic end.

This reality is now being acknowledged even by key media and high officials that used to be uncompromising about pursuing the extremely ill-advised aim of military victory over Russia. A Washington Post article has explained that with ”no way out of a worsening war,”

Ukrainian President Zelensky’s options ”look bad or worse.” NATO General Secretary Jens Stoltenberg has discovered the option of ending wars by concessions – Ukraine’s concessions, that is. The sturdy old hardliner Edward Luttwak warns of a ”catastrophic defeat” – for the West and Ukraine. True, Luttwak is still spreading desperate illusions about a direct NATO deployment to avert the worst. In reality, it would, of course, only make things much, much worse again, as in World War III worse. But his fear, not to say panic, is palpable.

The fast-approaching outcome will be a disaster for Ukraine, even if Moscow should be generous regarding the terms of a postwar settlement (not a given, after the costs that Russia has incurred). Ukraine has already been ruined in terms of its demography, territory, economy, and, last but not least, political future. The damage incurred cannot simply be undone and will have long-lasting consequences.

For the West, this war will also mark a dismal turning point, in four main ways that can only be sketched here:

First, the US will have to absorb its worst defeat since Vietnam. Arguably, this latest fiasco is even worse because, even during the Vietnam War, America did not try to attack Russia (then, of course, leading the Soviet Union) as head-on as it does now. Washington’s most over-confident attempt ever to take Moscow off the “grand chessboard” once and for all has backfired perfectly. In general, that will diminish America’s capacity to impress and cajole globally. In particular, the goal of preventing the rise of regional hegemons in Eurasia, the holy grail of US geopolitics, is even farther out of reach than before. The “unipolar” moment and its illusions were passing anyhow, but the US leadership has added a textbook illustration of the West’s limits.

Second, the EU and its individual members – especially myopic warmongers such as Germany, Poland, and France – are far worse off again: Their foolish abandoning of geopolitically imperative caution and balancing (remember: location, location, location) will cost them dearly.

Third, in their own, different ways, cases such as Britain (not even an EU member anymore) and the Baltics (very exposed and very bellicose, a shortsighted combination) are in a class of their own: damage there will be galore. Damage control? The options are paltry.

And, finally, there is, of course, NATO: Over-extended, self-depleted, and having gratuitously exposed itself as much weaker than it would like to seem. Its defeat by Russia in Ukraine will trigger centrifugal tendencies and blame games. Not to speak of the special potential for tension between the US and its clients/vassals in Europe, especially if Donald Trump wins the presidency again, as is likely. And, by the way, he can only thank NATO for proving his point about what a dubious proposition it has become. If you believe that having added more territory on the map (Sweden and Finland) was a “win,” just remember what has happened to the mistaken celebrations of Ukraine’s territorial advances in 2022. Territory may be a price; it is not a reliable indicator of strength.

Yet what about Ukrainians? They have been used as pawns by their Western friends from hell. They are still living under a regime that has just decided to mobilize even more of them for a hopeless meatgrinder, while Zelensky is admitting that Ukraine is on the verge of defeat.

Some Western media are still telling a simplistic and false story about Ukrainians’ unflagging and united will to hold out for victory, as if every single one owed the West to play a Marvel hero to the bitter end. But in reality Ukraine is a normal, if badly misled country. Many of its citizens have long shown what they really think about dying for a toxic combination of Western geopolitics and the narcissism of a megalomanic comedian: by evading the draft, either by hiding in Ukraine or fleeing abroad. In addition, a recent poll shows that almost 54 percent of Ukrainians find the motives of the draft dodgers at least understandable. Kiev’s push for increased mobilization will not go smoothly.

But there is more evidence of the fact that Ukraine’s society is not united behind a Kamikaze strategy of “no compromise.” Indeed, under the title “The Line of Compromise,” Strana.ua, one of Ukraine’s most important and popular news sites, has just published a long, detailed article about three recent and methodologically sound polls.

They all bear on Ukrainians’ evolving attitudes to the war and in particular the question of seeking a compromise peace. In addition, Strana offers a rich sample of comments by Ukrainian sociologists and political scientists. It is no exaggeration to say that the mere appearance of this article is a sign that the times are changing: Under the subtitle “How and why attitudes to the war differ in the East and the West of Ukraine,” it even highlights “substantial” regional differences and, really, suppressed divisions. If you know anything about the extreme political – even historical – sensitivity of such divergences in Ukraine, then you will agree that this framing alone is a small sensation.

But that is not all. The article, in effect, dwells on ending the war by concessions – because that is what any compromise necessarily will take. Readers learn, for instance, that, according to the ‘Reiting’ agency polling on commission of Ukraine’s Veterans’ Affairs Ministry, in Ukraine’s West, farthest removed from the current front lines, 50% of poll respondents are against any compromise, while no less than 42% are in favor of compromise solutions as long as other countries (other than Ukraine and Russia, that is) are involved in finding them. For a region that, traditionally, has been the center of Ukrainian nationalism, that is, actually, a remarkably high share of those siding with compromise.

If you move east and south over the map, the compromise faction gets stronger. In the East, the proportions are almost exactly reversed: 41% against compromise and 51% in favor. In the South, it’s a perfect tie: 47% for both sides.

On the whole, Ukrainian sociologists are finding a “gradual increase” of those supporting a “compromise peace” in “one form or the other.” Even if, as one researcher plausibly cautions, this increase displays different rates in different regions, it still adds up to the national trend. One of its causes is “disappointment,” the loss of faith in victory, as the political scientist Ruslan Bortnik observes. In other words, the Zelensky regime is losing the information war on the home front. Notwithstanding its mix of censorship and showmanship.

The compromises imagined by Ukrainians include all conceivable solutions that do not foresee a return to the 1991 borders. In other words, there are ever more Ukrainians who are ready to trade territory for peace. How much territory, that is, of course, a different question. But it is clear that the maximalist and counter-productive aim of “getting everything back,” the all-or-nothing delusion, imposed for so long on Ukrainian society, is losing its grip.

The agency Socis, for instance, counts a total of almost 45% of respondents ready for compromise, while only 33% want to continue the war until the 1991 borders are re-established. But there are also 11% who still favor fighting on until all territories lost after February 2022 are recovered. That, as well, is now an unrealistic aim. It may have been closer to reality when Kiev dismissed an almost finished peace deal in the spring of 2022, on awful Western advice. That ship has sailed.

Polling results, it is important to note, do not all point in the same direction. The KMIS agency has produced results that show 58% of respondents who want to continue the war “under any circumstances” and only 32% who would prefer a “freeze,” if Western security guarantees are given. Such a freeze, while a favorite pipedream of some Western commentators, is unlikely to be an option now, if it ever was. Why should Moscow agree? But that is less relevant here than the fact that KMIS, for one, seems to have found a massive bedrock of pro-war sentiment.

And yet, even here, the picture is more complicated once we look closer. For one thing, the KMIS poll is comparatively old, conducted in November and December of last year. Given how quickly things have been developing on the battlefield since then – the key town and fortress of Avdeevka, for instance, finally fell only in February 2024 – that makes its data very dated.

KMIS also had interesting comments to offer: The agency notes that respondents’ proximity to the front lines plays an “important role” in shaping their opinions about the war. In other words, when the fighting gets close enough to hear the artillery boom, it concentrates the mind on finding a way to end it, even by concessions. As one Ukrainian sociologist has put it, “in the East and South … one of people’s main concerns is that the war must not reach their own home, their own home town.”

In addition, the executive director of KMIS has observed that the number of compromise advocates also grows when Western aid declines.

It remains difficult to draw robust conclusions from these trends, for several reasons: First, as some Ukrainian observers point out, the number of compromise supporters may be even higher – personally, I am sure it is – because the Zelensky regime has stigmatized any appeal to diplomacy and negotiations as “treason” for so long. Many Ukrainians are virtually certain to be afraid to speak their mind on this issue.

Second, what exactly the compromise camp understands by compromise is bound to be diverse. This camp may still include quite a few citizens who harbor illusions about what kind of compromise is available at this point.

Third, the current regime – which is de-facto authoritarian – is not answerable to society, at least not in a way that would make it easy to predict how shifts in the national mood translate into regime policies, or not.

And yet: There is no doubt that there is a groundswell in favor of ending the war even at the cost of concessions. Add the clear evidence of Western Ukraine fatigue – even a growing readiness to cut Ukraine loose – and the facts that the Russian military is creating on the ground, and it becomes hard to see how this basal shift in the Ukrainian mood could not become an important factor of Ukrainian – and international – politics

April 13, 2024 Posted by | politics international, public opinion, weapons and war | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »