nuclear-news

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

Why should Scotland pay billions for nuclear when renewables exist?

 Dr Ian Fairlie: Why should Scotland pay billions for nuclear when
renewables exist?

Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Anas Sarwar this week
made further statements in support of more nuclear power in Scotland.
Scottish CND believe their claims about a “golden age of nuclear” are
pie in the sky and should be treated with a pinch (or more) of salt

A proper assessment of our energy situation requires us to look at what is
happening in the rest of the world. Last year, a record 582GW of renewable
energy generation capacity was added to the world’s supplies – but
there was almost no new nuclear. Indeed, each year, new renewables add
about 200 times more global electricity than new nuclear does.

Powerful economic arguments exist for renewables over nuclear. The main one is that the marginal (ie fuel) costs of renewable energy are next to zero, whereas nuclear fuel is extremely expensive. Nuclear costs – for both
construction and generation – are very high and rising, plus long delays
are the norm.

For example, the proposed Sizewell C nuclear station in
England is now predicted to cost £47 billion, with the UK Government and
independent experts acknowledging even this estimate may rise
significantly. And just this week, the Hinkley C station still under
construction in England added yet more costs to its anticipated huge bill.

Must Scotland follow these poor English examples? The reality is that new
nuclear power in Scotland would mean massive costs, a poisoned legacy to future generation and yet more radioactive pollution of our air and seas.
Given these manifest disadvantages, many independent commentators have questioned the UK Government’s seeming obsession with nuclear power.

 The National 15th Nov 2025, https://www.thenational.scot/politics/25624042.scotland-pay-billions-nuclear-renewables-exist/

November 16, 2025 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Nuclear for Wylfa the wrong way to go

Nuclear Free Local Authorities, 13th November 2025

Responding to today’s news that the UK Government intends to impose several so called ‘small modular reactors’ upon Wylfa, the Welsh NFLAs believe that this is the wrong way to go.

The money would be better spent on insulating Welsh homes to make them warmer and cheaper to run or used to develop more capacity in renewable technologies that can generate electricity cheaper and far quicker. And Ynys Mon can play a big part in that by becoming a centre of excellence for renewable technologies and so truly Wales’ ‘green energy’ island.

The Government’s nuclear delivery agency, Great British Energy – Nuclear recently concluded a ‘competition’ amongst SMR developers to select a preferred design. Unsurprisingly Rolls-Royce, which had already received a Government hand-out of £210 million during an earlier development stage and a Government hand-up by being fast-tracked onto the Generic Design Assessment process, won the competition. This was the equivalent of running a race with superior sports footwear, and starting the race much earlier, than the other participants. The company will now be awarded a further £2.5 billion of hard-pressed taxpayers money to build three pilot SMRs.

13th November 2025

Nuclear for Wylfa the wrong way to go

Responding to today’s news that the UK Government intends to impose several so called ‘small modular reactors’ upon Wylfa, the Welsh NFLAs believe that this is the wrong way to go.

The money would be better spent on insulating Welsh homes to make them warmer and cheaper to run or used to develop more capacity in renewable technologies that can generate electricity cheaper and far quicker. And Ynys Mon can play a big part in that by becoming a centre of excellence for renewable technologies and so truly Wales’ ‘green energy’ island.

The Government’s nuclear delivery agency, Great British Energy – Nuclear recently concluded a ‘competition’ amongst SMR developers to select a preferred design. Unsurprisingly Rolls-Royce, which had already received a Government hand-out of £210 million during an earlier development stage and a Government hand-up by being fast-tracked onto the Generic Design Assessment process, won the competition. This was the equivalent of running a race with superior sports footwear, and starting the race much earlier, than the other participants. The company will now be awarded a further £2.5 billion of hard-pressed taxpayers money to build three pilot SMRs.

Great British Energy – Nuclear also purchased the Wylfa and Oldbury sites off Horizon for £160 million for reuse as locations for these new SMRs, almost certainly at nil or minimal cost to the developer, and GNE – N recently advertised for a site manager with proficiency in the Welsh language letting slip that Wylfa was the preferred site.

The Government’s announcement refers to Wylfa becoming Britain’s first SMR ‘power plant’ with reactors plural, suggesting that the three initial reactors will all be co-located on the island. SMRs are an uncertain and unproven nuclear technology. The Rolls-Royce SMR design has yet to secure all the required regulatory approvals, no Rolls-Royce SMR have yet been built, let alone operated, and there is no experience of SMR modular assembly.  Any reactor will not even come on stream until the 2030’s and even then will only deliver electricity for customers that is vastly more expensive than that generated by renewables. Nor has any permanent solution to the intractible problem of managing high-level radioactive waste been found, but there has been some academic research which indicates that many SMR designs create more waste per kilowatt generated than traditional gigawatt plants. And as Ukraine has demonstrated, nuclear power plants are obvious targets in any future conflict.

Wylfa is a particularly problematic location. The Horizon bid was rejected in part because of the damage it would cause to nature and the beautiful environment of Ynys Mon and its impact on the island’s linguistic heritage. But the bid failed largely because the developer felt they were not receiving enough financial support from the taxpayer. How will this be different? The price tag for a single SMR is likely to be at least £4 billion. Will a public subsidy of £2.5 billion be deemed sufficient to Rolls Royce to incentivise them to proceed with buiding three? How will electricity be transmitted across and out of the island? It is very likely that we shall see a sea of new pylons spring up across the green fields of Ynys Mon and beyond. If parts for a modular reactor are made off-site, how will they be transported onto the island? And with ‘First of a Kind’ experimental SMRs at Wylfa, and a military neighbour at RAF Valley, surely the UK Government is making Ynys Mons an even higher-priority target for terrorists or a hostile power in time of war. How will islanders be evacuated quickly and safely should there be an attack or an accident?

The promised thousands of jobs ‘for the local community’ must also be questionable. ………………………………………………………………………………………………

The Welsh NFLAs would rather see the £2.5 billion dedicated to SMR development at Wylfa redirected by the UK Government to reduce the energy bills of Welsh citizens and move closer to making Wales a wholly renewable electricity nation. How? By funding an emergency programme of retrofitting insulation to Welsh homes and into supporting renewable energy projects……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/news/nuclear-for-wylfa-the-wrong-way-to-go/

November 16, 2025 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Wales Green Party responds to new nuclear power plans

 by Green Party, https://greenparty.org.uk/2025/11/13/wales-green-party-responds-to-new-nuclear-power-plans/

Responding to the announcement of plans for new nuclear power generation on Ynys Môn, leader of Wales Green Party Anthony Slaughter, said:

“It’s Groundhog Day yet again. Gordon Brown declared a bold future for nuclear power back in 2009, showing us nuclear is of no help in fighting the climate crisis.

“New nuclear power at Wylfa would be nothing but an expensive distraction from the clean, fast and cheap renewables already available to us. We need to cut emissions fast, but even the most optimistic backers admit it’ll take a decade for new nuclear to be up and running. 

“And there is still no answer to the safe disposal of nuclear waste.

“What Wales needs is a fast, ambitious roll-out of solar, wind and wave energy that will create jobs and cut energy bills.”

November 16, 2025 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Zelensky – Embroiled in war and embattled at home

    by beyondnuclearinternational, https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2025/11/13/embroiled-in-war-and-embattled-at-home/

Can president Zelensky survive a kickback scheme involving the state nuclear company that enriched associates and possibly even ministers in his own government, asks Linda Pentz Gunter

If you live in Ohio, and possibly even in Illinois and South Carolina, you might be getting a bit of a déjà vu feeling reading the news coming out of Ukraine about a corruption scandal involving Energoatom, Ukraine’s nuclear energy company. That’s because two independent Ukrainian anti-corruption bodies have just uncovered a massive graft scandal involving kickbacks from nuclear power projects.

In July 2020, then Speaker of the Ohio House, Republican Larry Householder, was arrested along with four others for involvement in what was described as “the largest bribery money-laundering scheme ever perpetrated against the people of the state of Ohio.”

In a year-long covert investigation by the US Attorney’s office and the FBI, a plot was uncovered that involved $61 million in dark money that flowed from FirstEnergy into the pockets of Householder and others to ensure a favorable vote in the House that would guarantee a $1.5 billion bailout of the company’s Davis-Besse and Perry nuclear reactors to keep them running. Once uncovered, indictments followed. Householder is currently serving a 20-year prison sentence.

Similar scandals rocked Illinois and South Carolina, also connected to nuclear power plant schemes and also leading to indictments and prison sentences.

In Ukraine, the two investigating agencies — the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) — have just named at least eight individuals who have reportedly been charged with bribery, embezzlement, and illicit enrichment, netting around $100 million off contracts with Energoatom.

Details about precisely how the scheme operated and which contracts were involved have not fully emerged. However, some sources have suggested it involved a wide range of Energoatom’s private subcontractors who were allegedly forced to pay kickbacks of 10-15% to secure or maintain their supplier status and ensure timely payments. 

These reportedly included work on constructing protective structures at the Khmelnytskyi nuclear power plant to defend against Russian air attacks, with Ukraine still struggling to defeat an invasion by Russia that began on February 24, 2022.

Both the Khmelnytskyi  and Rivne nuclear power plants were hit with a major strike by the Russians on November 8, raising new fears of a catastrophic nuclear disaster. To date, most of the concern has centered around the six-reactor site at Zaporizhzhia, which is located in the region of heaviest fighting and has been occupied by Russian forces since March 4, 2022. Zaporizhzhia has undergone many close calls and was recently without offsite power for a month, provoking widespread anxiety since power is essential to cool reactors and their fuel pools even if they are shut down as the Zaporizhzia reactors presently are.

“Nuclear safety and security in Ukraine remains extremely precarious during the military conflict,” the International Atomic Energy Agency said in a social media posting. “Two operating NPPs – Khmelnitskyy and Rivne – had to reduce electricity output after overnight attack on electrical substation critical for nuclear safety.”

The participants in the Energoatom corruption scheme, who used code names, were heard in conversations recorded by the investigators evaluating the Khmelnytsky fortifications as a business opportunity. 

Meanwhile the IAEA is at the COP30 climate summit in Brazil frantically peddling nuclear power as the answer to the climate crisis under its Atoms4Climate propaganda campaign while ignoring all the obvious safety and security risks so frighteningly on display in Ukraine, never mind the industry’s complete inability to deliver reactors in time or on budget.

Since the anti-corruption groups delivered their reports, two key ministers have resigned at President Volodymyr Zelensky’s request. They are Ukrainian Energy Minister Svitlana Grynchuk and Justice Minister German Galushenko. Galushenko, who preceded Grynchuk as energy minister, had already been suspended before he stepped down. Galushenko is reportedly implicated in the kickback scandal but has proclaimed his innocence.

The two agencies spent more than 15 months collecting evidence, including 1,000 hours of audio recordings and at least 70 searches. Zelensky had acted to curb the reach of NABU and SAPO several months earlier, prompting suspicions that he could have been aware that personal associates and his own ministers were about to be caught in their nets. Zelensky backed down then after being warned by the European Union that Ukraine’s bid to become a member would be in jeopardy if the corruption problem was not resolved.

European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen reportedly conveyed her strong concerns about Zelensky’s attempts to weaken the agencies’ powers. In a statement, a spokesperson for von der Leyen said: “The respect for the rule of law and the fight against corruption are core elements of the European Union. As a candidate country, Ukraine is expected to uphold these standards fully. There cannot be a compromise.”

The EU has spoken out again in light of the present revelations, urging Zelensky to clamp down on corruption, but has not withdrawn its support for the country’s war efforts against Russia’s invasion, now entering its 45th month.

According to an analysis in Kyiv Independent by Oleg Sukhov, the eight implicated also include Deputy Prime Minister Oleksiy Chernyshov, Rustem Umerov, former defense minister and current secretary of the National Security and Defense Council and Ihor Myroniuk, a former advisor to then Energy Minister Halushchenko.

Chernyshov allegedly financed the construction of high-end houses near Kyiv, echoing the way Householder used his bribery bonanzas to refurbish his second home in Florida.

The alleged ringleader, according to Sukhov and other news reports, is Zelensky’s close associate and former business partner, Timur Mindich, who has since fled the country, likely to Israel where he is a citizen and lending further credence to the charges. Mindich is a co-owner of the president’s Kvartal 95 production company. Zelensky transferred his stake to partners once he became president. 

Chernyshov allegedly financed the construction of high-end houses near Kyiv, echoing the way Householder used his bribery bonanzas to refurbish his second home in Florida.

The alleged ringleader, according to Sukhov and other news reports, is Zelensky’s close associate and former business partner, Timur Mindich, who has since fled the country, likely to Israel where he is a citizen and lending further credence to the charges. Mindich is a co-owner of the president’s Kvartal 95 production company. Zelensky transferred his stake to partners once he became president. 

Linda Pentz Gunter is the founder of Beyond Nuclear and serves as its international specialist. Her book, No To Nuclear. Why Nuclear Power Destroys Lives, Derails Climate Progress and Provokes War, can be pre-ordered now from Pluto Press.

November 15, 2025 Posted by | politics, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Rare US Peace President: Warren G. Harding.

Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL , 11 Nov 25

Growing up in the 50’s, we were taught by popular culture, even in school, that the worst president among America’s 34 thru Eisenhower, was Warren Gamaliel Harding (March 4, 1921 – August 2, 1923). Harding was ancient history to us school kids, having died in office 3 decades earlier in just his 29th month as president. We couldn’t be bothered seeking to understand his true governance.……………………………………………………..

 it was in foreign affairs that Harding’s words and deeds of peace resonated worldwide. He not only didn’t initiate a single international intervention, he made strides toward reconciliation with foreign targets of US interference. More importantly, he promoted disarmament, which was both successful and lasted over a decade after his death, only done in by German and Japanese expansionism.

Harding was America’s first Good Neighbor to Latin America long before FDR coined the phrase. He withdrew US troops from Cuba his predecessors sent multiple times to protect US business interests. He criticized his predecessor’s endless interference in Haiti, Dominican Republic and Nicaragua as well. He achieved a treaty with Columbia that payed them $25 million in reparations for TR’s fomented revolution there to build the Panama Canal. He also worked with Mexican President Alvaro Abregon to reestablish diplomatic relations with Mexico that had been severed by Woodrow Wilson as part of Wilson’s several Mexican interventions.

But his greatest legacy was promoting what today’s America wouldn’t dream of: disarmament. He achieved the largest global-disarmament agreement ever at the November 1921 Washington Naval Conference he convened with Secretary of State Charles Evans Hughes including representatives from Japan, Britain, France, Italy, China, Belgium, Netherlands and Portugal. It negotiated the halt of new battleship construction for over a decade. It achieved reduction in dozens of warships by the US, Britain and Japan, pegging the Navy’s future strength to parity with Britain and Japan. A reporter remarked that the Harding-Hughes duo “sank in 35 minutes more ships than all of the admirals of the world have sunk in centuries.” 

The conference produced six treaties and twelve resolutions on issues ranging from signatories agreeing to honor their respective territorial integrity in the Pacific, limiting tonnage of naval ships, and modernizing custom tariffs.

Back at home, Harding pardoned socialist presidential contender Eugene Debs, jailed by the anti free speech Woodrow Wilson for criticizing the WWI draft, and released 22 other antiwar dissidents as well. Julian Assange should have been so lucky to reveal America’s dirty foreign policy laundry under a President Harding.

A century after his death, only JFK, another short term president who pivoted to peace in just his last year, could arguably be judged as promoting such a profoundly peace agenda.

Wouldn’t the US be better off today if we had, occupying the Oval Office, a hard drinking, adulterous, poker playing president who promoted peace, instead of one with an infinitely more defective character who glories in prosecuting and provoking senseless war?


November 15, 2025 Posted by | history, politics | Leave a comment

Invest in existing clean energy solutions, not nuclear fantasy.


By Lynda Williams, 31 Oct 25, https://www.staradvertiser.com/2025/10/30/editorial/island-voices/column-invest-in-existing-clean-energy-solutions-not-nuclear-fantasy/

In the last legislative session, Hawai‘i lawmakers approved Senate Concurrent Resolution 136, directing the Hawai‘i State Energy Office (HSEO) to convene a Nuclear Energy Working Group to study whether “advanced” nuclear power could help meet the state’s 100% renewable energy goal.

I serve on that Working Group as a physicist representing the environmental organization 350 Hawai‘i. Other members include representatives from HSEO, the Departments of Health and Land and Natural Resources, the Public Utilities Commission and the University of Hawai‘i, along with invited members from the U.S. Navy, nuclear power lobby groups and environmental groups. No Kanaka Maoli-led organizations such as the Office of Hawaiian Affairs or KAHEA were included — a serious oversight in any discussion of Hawai‘i’s energy future.

Nuclear power is not feasible in Hawai‘i because it faces insurmountable legal and technical barriers. Article XI, Section 8 of the Hawai‘i State Constitution prohibits the construction or operation of any nuclear-fission reactor without a two-thirds vote of each house of the Legislature — an exceptionally high bar without sweeping political change. Hawai‘i law also defines renewable energy as sources that are naturally replenished, such as solar, wind, ocean and geothermal — not technologies dependent on mining that produce radioactive waste. By legal definition, nuclear power cannot contribute to meeting the state’s renewable energy goals unless the law is changed.

Technical barriers are even higher. Despite growing hype around so-called “advanced” nuclear reactors, in reality, there are no operating “advanced” reactors anywhere in the world, no reliable timeline for when any might come online, and a decades-long record of cost overruns, cancellations and failed promises. Every design being promoted — from small modular reactors (SMRs) to molten-salt and thorium systems — is still a nuclear reactor that splits uranium atoms, generates radioactive waste and requires extensive cooling, shielding and waste-management infrastructure.

At our first meeting in September, there was discussion of whether Hawai‘i’s constitutional requirement for a two-thirds legislative vote to approve the construction of any nuclear-fission plant could somehow be avoided. That notion reflects a deep confusion driving this conversation: that “advanced” nuclear systems are fundamentally different from the fission reactors banned under Article XI. They are not. Some advocates even suggested that small “plug-and-play” SMRs could one day be shipped to Hawai‘i, used briefly and sent back to the continent — a concept that exists only in fantasy. Any nuclear reactor unit requires installation, grid connection and refueling — all of which constitute the operation of a nuclear-fission facility under Hawai‘i’s Constitution.

The first draft of HSEO’s report is due Nov. 5, with a final version to be submitted to the Legislature by the end of the year — a challenging timeline for such a complex report. How can anyone produce a thorough feasibility analysis — including cost, safety and environmental assessments — for a technology that doesn’t even exist? Even HSEO warned lawmakers in its testimony against this resolution that “given the current lack of cost, production, safety and nuclear waste-management information on SMRs, the formation of a nuclear energy task force is premature.”

Hawai‘i’s path forward in clean energy lies not in nuclear fantasies but in strengthening the laws protecting the islands and investing in what already works — solar and wind — and in exploring tidal and ocean energy resources to achieve clean, safe and independent power generation.

To read my full responses with citations to the Nuclear Energy Working Group survey, visit nuclearfreehawaii.substack.com.

November 14, 2025 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

Labour’s ‘national security threat’ attacks on Scottish National Party are hypocrisy 101

 TO no one’s surprise, Anas Sarwar has lined up behind his UK bosses and doubled-down on claims that the Scottish Government is a “national security threat”. The Scottish Labour leader has meekly joined Defence Secretary John Healey, Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy, and Scottish
Secretary Douglas Alexander in deploying the inflammatory rhetoric against the SNP Government.

National security expert Professor Nick Ritchie pointed
out last week, Labour’s pro-nuclear rhetoric also undermines the international law that they are supposedly signed up to. The UK is a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which obliges Britain to “pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures” relating to nuclear disarmament.

But instead of uphold their obligations – which many top experts believe they are breaching – Labour ministers
are on the airwaves accusing the SNP of being a security threat for opposing nuclear weaponry.

 The National 10th Nov 2025, https://www.thenational.scot/news/25611206.labours-national-security-threat-attacks-snp-hypocrisy-101/

November 13, 2025 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Does Britain really need nuclear power? – Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament

, https://labouroutlook.org/2025/11/10/does-britain-really-need-nuclear-power-campaign-for-nuclear-disarmament/

With  funding confirmed for a new nuclear power station in Suffolk, Dr Ian Fairlie, CND Vice-President and science adviser, and a leading consultant on radioactivity in the environment, questions whether we actually need this development and the technology in general.


In recent months, the government has continued to promote nuclear reactors. For example, the Energy Secretary is now asking GB Energy to assess sites to be used to host new nuclear reactors. And the Prime Minister continues to push for so-called Small Modular Reactors and has backed the US President’s wishful thinking of ‘a golden age of nuclear’.

But these announcements and proposals are mostly pie-in-the-sky statements and should be treated with a pinch (or more) of salt, as the reality is otherwise.

Let’s look at what is happening in the rest of the world. Last year, a record 582 GW of renewable energy generation capacity was added to the world’s supplies: almost no new nuclear was added.

Indeed, each year, new renewables add about 200 times more global electricity than new nuclear does.

Of course, there are powerful economic arguments for this. The main one is that the marginal (i.e. fuel) costs of renewable energy are close to zero, whereas nuclear fuel is extremely expensive. Nuclear costs – for both construction and generation – are very high and rising, and long delays are the norm. For example, the proposed Sizewell C nuclear station is now predicted to cost £47 billion, with the government and independent experts acknowledging even this estimate may rise significantly. The upshot is that new nuclear power means massive costs, a poisoned legacy to future generations, and whopping radioactive pollution.

iven these manifest disadvantages, independent commentators have questioned the government’s seeming obsession with nuclear power. It is not that nuclear provides a good solution to global warming: it doesn’t. The United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports that renewables are now 10 times more efficient than new nuclear at CO2 mitigation. It’s not that AI centres will need nuclear: the International Energy Agency expects data centres will cause a mere 10% of global electricity demand growth to 2030. And it forecasts that the renewables will supply 10 to 20 times the electricity required for data-centre growth, with Bloomberg NEF predicting a 100-fold renewables expansion.

As for so-called Small Modular Reactors, the inconvenient truth is that these designs are all just paper designs and are a long way off. They would also be more expensive to run than large reactors per kWh – the key parameter. And as the former Chair of the US government’s Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) says, SMRs will produce more chemical and radioactive waste per KW produced than large reactors.

Given a UK Treasury strapped for cash, the unsolved problem of radioactive nuclear waste, the spectre of nuclear proliferation, and it’s being a target in future wars, many wonder why the government is so fixated with nuclear power.

Well, the answer was supplied in 2023 by the Rishi Sunak administration which admitted that the main reason for its continued eye-watering financial support for civil reactors was that they provided needed technical support and expertise for the government’s nuclear weapons programme.

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

Nuclear power will get the most Energy Department loans, Chris Wright says

Mon, Nov 10 2025, Spencer Kimball, CNBC

Key Points

  • Nuclear power plants will receive the bulk of the money from the Energy Department’s loan office, Secretary Chris Wright said.
  • The Trump administration struck a deal last month with the owners of Westinghouse to invest $80 billion to build nuclear plants across the U.S.

Nuclear power will receive most of the money from the Energy Department’s loan office as the Trump administration pushes to quickly break ground on new reactors, Secretary Chris Wright said on Monday.

“We have significant lending authority at the loan program office,” the Secretary of Energy said at a conference hosted by the American Nuclear Society in Washington D.C. “By far the biggest use of those dollars will be for nuclear power plants — to get those first plants built.”

President Trump signed an executive order in May that called for the U.S. to break ground on 10 large nuclear reactors by 2030. Alphabet, Amazon, Meta Platforms and Microsoft are investing billions of dollars to restart old nuclear plants, upgrade existing ones, and deploy new reactor technology to meet the electricity demand from artificial intelligence data centers.

Wright said he expects electricity demand from AI to attract billions of dollars in equity capital to build new nuclear capacity from “very creditworthy providers.” The Energy Department could match those private dollars by as much as four to one with low cost debt financing from the loan office, he said………..

Westinghouse deal

The Trump administration struck a deal last month with the owners of Westinghouse to invest $80 billion to build nuclear plants across the U.S. Westinghouse is owned by uranium miner Cameco and Brookfield Asset Management…………………………….

Cameco Chief Operating Officer Grant Isaac said last week that the U.S. government has a number of options available to facilitate the financing of Westinghouse reactors, including the Energy Department’s loan office.

“We’re assured that there is a lot of interest in investing this minimum $80 billion in order to begin the process,” Isaac told investors on Cameco’s third-quarter earnings call.

Under the terms of the October deal, Westinghouse could spin out as a separate, publicly-traded company with the U.S. government as a shareholder.

But Westinghouse has struggled in the past to build the AP1000 on time and on budget. It went bankrupt in 2017 from cost overruns at big nuclear projects in Georgia and South Carolina.

Two AP1000 reactors entered service at Plant Vogtle in Georgia in 2023 and 2024, years behind schedule and billions of dollars over budget. The South Carolina project was cancelled. https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/10/nuclear-power-energy-department-chris-wright-loan-westinghouse-ai-data-center.html

November 11, 2025 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

The dark side of Zelenskyy’s rule

Opposition lawmakers and civil society activists say Ukraine’s leadership is using lawfare to intimidate opponents and silence critics.

Politico, October 31, 2025, By Jamie Dettmer

As Russia began its full-scale invasion of Ukraine nearly four years ago, Volodymyr Kudrytskyi, then head of Ukraine’s state-owned national power company Ukrenergo, was scrambling to keep the lights on.

Somehow, he succeeded and continued to do so every year, earning the respect of energy executives worldwide by ensuring the country was able to withstand Russian missile and drone strikes on its power grid and avoid catastrophic blackouts — until he was abruptly forced to resign in 2024, that is.

Kudrytskyi’s dismissal was decried by many in the energy industry and also prompted alarm in Brussels. At the time, Kudrytskyi told POLITICO he was the victim of the relentless centralization of authority that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and his powerful head of office Andriy Yermak often pursue. He said he feared “corrupt individuals” would end up taking over the state-owned company.

According to his supporters, it is that kind of talk — and his refusal to remain silent — that explains why Kudrytskyi ended up in a glass-enclosed cubicle in a downtown Kyiv courtroom last week, where he was arraigned on embezzlement charges. Now, opposition lawmakers and civil society activists are up in arms, labeling this yet another example of Ukraine’s leadership using lawfare to intimidate opponents and silence critics by accusing them of corruption or of collaboration with Russia. Zelenskyy’s office declined to comment.

Others who have received the same treatment include Zelenskyy’s predecessor in office, Petro Poroshenko, who was sanctioned and arraigned on corruption charges this year — a move that could prevent him from standing in a future election. Sanctions have frequently been threatened or used against opponents, effectively freezing assets and blocking the sanctioned person from conducting any financial transactions, including using credit cards or accessing bank accounts.

Poroshenko has since accused Zelenskyy of creeping “authoritarianism,” and seeking to “remove any competitor from the political landscape.”

That may also explain why Kudrytskyi has been arraigned, according to opposition lawmaker Mykola Knyazhitskiy, who believes the use of lawfare to discredit opponents is only going to get worse as the presidential office prepares for a possible election next year in the event there’s a ceasefire. They are using the courts “to clear the field of competitors” to shape a dishonest election, he fears.

Others, including prominent Ukrainian activist and head of the Anti-Corruption Action Center Daria Kaleniuk, argue the president and his coterie are using the war to monopolize power to such a degree that it threatens the country’s democracy.

Kaleniuk was in the courtroom for Kudrytskyi’s two-hour arraignment, and echoes the former energy boss’s claim that the prosecution is “political.” According to Kaleniuk, the case doesn’t make any legal sense, and she said it all sounded “even stranger” as the prosecutor detailed the charges against Kudrytskyi: “He failed to show that he had materially benefited in any way” from an infrastructure contract that, in the end, wasn’t completed, she explained……………………………………………………………………………

for former Deputy Prime Minister Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze, the case “doesn’t look good from any angle — either domestically or when it comes to international partners.” The timing, she said, is unhelpful for Ukraine, as it coincides with Kyiv’s ongoing appeal for more European energy assistance ahead of what’s likely to be the war’s most perilous winter.

With Russia mounting missile and drone strikes on a far larger scale than before, Ukraine’s energy challenge is likely to be even more formidable. And unlike previous winters, Russia’s attacks have been targeting Ukraine’s drilling, storage and distribution facilities for natural gas in addition to its electrical power grid. Sixty percent of Ukrainians currently rely on natural gas to keep their homes warm.

Some Ukrainian energy executives also fear Kudrytskyi’s prosecution may be part of a preemptive scapegoating tactic to shift blame in the event that the country’s energy system can no longer withstand Russian attacks.

Citing unnamed sources, two weeks ago Ukrainian media outlet Ukrainska Pravda reported that former energy executives fear they are being lined up to be faulted for failing to do enough to boost the energy infrastructure’s resilience and harden facilities.

“They need a scapegoat now,” a foreign policy expert who has counseled the Ukrainian government told POLITICO. “There are parts of Ukraine that probably won’t have any electricity until the spring. It’s already 10 degrees Celsius in Kyiv apartments now, and the city could well have extended blackouts. People are already pissed off about this, so the president’s office needs scapegoats,” he said, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss the matter freely.

“The opposition is going to accuse Zelenskyy of failing Ukraine, and argue he should have already had contingencies to prevent prolonged blackouts or a big freeze, they will argue,” he added……..https://www.politico.eu/article/dark-side-zelenskyy-rule-ukraine/

November 11, 2025 Posted by | politics, Ukraine | Leave a comment

The ‘weird’ catch to Labour’s ‘national security threat’ attack on the Scottish National Party.

LABOUR’S “national security threat” attacks on the SNP reveal how deeply embedded support for nuclear weapons has become in UK politics, a leading security academic has said.

Nick Ritchie, a professor of international security at the University of York, said that by branding opposition to Trident as a danger to the nation, ministers risk “shutting down” democratic debate on defence.

Ritchie, who last year led research
on international nuclear security for the New Zealand government, spoke to
the Sunday National after Labour ministers ramped up their rhetoric against the Scottish Government, suggesting it poses a bigger danger to UK
interests than China.

In the past week, Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy,
Scottish Secretary Douglas Alexander, and Defence Secretary John Healey
have all described the SNP administration as a “threat” to UK national
security. The Labour ministers’ arguments hinge on the SNP’s opposition to
nuclear weaponry, which Ritchie said “really reduces how you can talk and
think about national security”.

He suggested that national security was
being “conflated with unequivocal support for nuclear weapons”. RITCHIE
said the “weird thing” is that the UK Government is technically legally
bound “under the Non-Proliferation Treaty to work towards the goal of
nuclear disarmament”. He went on: “Of course, the caveat is that the
time is not right now, it’ll be far too difficult and so on and so forth.


But the premise – that nuclear disarmament is where we need to end up – is a premise that is accepted, or has been accepted, by governments of all
stripes. “So there’s a tension there between accepting that on the one
hand and then chastising the SNP for a pretty legitimate position that
nuclear weapons are a security liability. This is the position that the
majority of countries in the world have taken.”

The National 9th Nov 2025, https://www.thenational.scot/news/25606016.weird-catch-labours-national-security-threat-attack-snp/

November 11, 2025 Posted by | politics, UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment

The US Empire Keeps Getting Creepier

Caitlin Johnstone, Nov 09, 2025, https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/the-us-empire-keeps-getting-creepier?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=82124&post_id=178388003&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

Secretary of War™ Pete Hegseth said during a speech on Friday that the US is at “a 1939 moment” of “mounting urgency” in which “enemies gather, threats grow,” adding, “We are not building for peacetime. We are pivoting the Pentagon and our industrial base to a wartime footing.”

Everything’s getting darker and creepier in the shadow of the empire.

Nate Bear has a report out on his newsletter titled “The AI Drones Used In Gaza Now Surveilling American Cities” about a new company called Skydio which “in the last few years has gone from relative obscurity to quietly become a multi-billion dollar company and the largest drone manufacturer in the US.” Bear reports that Skydio now has contracts with police departments in almost every large US city to use these Gaza-tested drones for surveillance of American civilians.

Haaretz reports that Israel’s efforts to manipulate American minds back into supporting the Zionist entity include pouring millions into influence operations targeting Christian churchgoers and efforts to change responses to Palestine-related queries on popular AI services like ChatGPT. It’s crazy how you can literally just be minding your own business in your own church on a Sunday morning and then suddenly find yourself getting throat fucked by propaganda paid for by the state of Israel.

The Intercept reports that YouTube, which is owned by Google, quietly deleted more than 700 videos documenting Israel’s atrocities in Gaza in a purge of pro-Palestine human rights groups from the platform. Mass Silicon Valley deletions like this combined with the sudden influx of fake AI-generated video content polluting the information ecosystem could serve to erase and obfuscate the evidence of the Gaza holocaust for future generations.

A new report from Reuters says that last year the US had intelligence showing Israel’s own lawyers warning that the IDF’s mass atrocities in the Gaza Strip could result in war crimes charges. This is yet more evidence that the Biden administration knew it was backing a genocide the entire time, including during election season when left-leaning Americans were being told they needed to vote for then-Vice President Kamala Harris if they wanted to save Gaza.

In Italy a journalist was fired from the news agency Nova for asking an EU official if she thought Israel should be responsible for the reconstruction of Gaza in the same way she’s said Russia should have to fund the reconstruction of Ukraine. A Nova spokesperson confirmed to The Intercept that the journalist was indeed fired for asking the inconvenient question on the basis that “Russia had invaded a sovereign country unprovoked, whereas Israel was responding to an attack.”

Reuters reports that the US is preparing to establish a military base in Damascus. For years the empire waged a complex regime change operation in Syria to oust Assad, first by backing proxy forces to destroy the country and then via sanctions and US military occupation to prevent reconstruction. And it worked. The empire’s dirty war in Syria will be cited by warmongering swamp monsters for years to come as evidence that regime change interventionism can succeed if you just stick at it and do whatever evil things need to be done.

These are just a few of the disturbing stories from the last few days that I hadn’t had a chance to write about yet. This is the kind of world we are being offered by the US empire. There is nothing on the menu for us but more war, more genocide, more surveillance, more censorship, more tyranny, and more abuse.

Things are going to keep getting more and more dystopian for everyone who lives under the thumb of the imperial power structure until enough of us decide that the empire needs to end.

November 10, 2025 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

British Nuclear Jets Programme Costs ‘Unrealistic’ – CND

“Just as we’ve seen the ‘blank cheque’ approach to the spiralling costs of replacing Britain’s nuclear submarines, so we see it again here with Britain’s new nuclear-capable jets.”

, by the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND), https://labouroutlook.org/2025/11/08/british-nuclear-jets-programme-costs-unrealistic-cnd/


The chair of the Government’s Public Accounts Committee (PAC), Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, has described the MoD’s cost forecast for the F-35 fighter jet programme as “unrealistic”.

The report also shines a spotlight on the repeated and systematic failure of the MoD to demonstrate financial responsibility or accountability. Just as we’ve seen the ‘blank cheque’ approach to the spiralling costs of replacing Britain’s nuclear submarines, so we see it again here with Britain’s new nuclear-capable jets.  

The Public Accounts Committee report states that the MoD ‘acknowledged that becoming certified for the NATO nuclear mission will add new requirements to training, personnel and possibly infrastructure.’ Yet, PAC reports that it was only once the Committee requested evidence about the F-35 programme that the MoD started discussions with ‘other partner nations’  to understand these requirements.  Therefore ‘the Department [MoD] did not provide any indication of forecast costs.’

The MoD had argued that buying the F-35A nuclear-capable fighter jets would be 20% to 25% cheaper than the F-35B non-nuclear fighter jets.  However, PAC’s report reveals that because the MoD had not familiarised itself with the technical implications of NATO integration before the decision was made to buy the F-35As, it had not allowed for additional costs associated with this. The report concludes ‘We believe it is a reasonable assumption that this may end up proving more expensive’.


This is the latest in a series of failures to forecast costs for the programme, resulting in substantially underestimating the scale of the spending needed. Back in 2013, when the decision was made to buy 138 F-35 fighter jets, the MoD set out the initial cost of £18.4 billion, which was only for the first 48 fighter jets. It was then discovered that the MoD had failed to update this figure following the extension of the programme from 2048 to 2069 – more than a 20 year extension. The MoD then revised this figure to £57 billion but did not include any of the far more costly sustainment expenditure such as personnel, infrastructure or fuel.

The National Audit Office calculates the full programme is likely to be £71 billion. However, this does not take into consideration the additional costs associated with the certification of the F-35A jets for NATO nuclear missions, so this figure will certainly increase. And there are still further questions about the purchases of an additional 63 F-35A jets, as whether these will also be part of NATO’s nuclear mission.


The committee also reveals the level of chaos, mis-manageable and lack of planning of the programme. For instance, the MoD underestimated the number of engineers it would need for the programme, failing to consider annual leave and staff working in other roles. Consequently staffing costs have had to be increased by 20%. 

A delay in upgrading the accommodation at RAF Marham, which has been the main operating base for the F-35s since 2013, means not all the accommodation will be ready in time for the 2029 delivery of the new F-35A fighter jets, likely causing delays and further costs in the programme.

This mismanagement, lack of financial accountability resulting in spiralling costs is typical of Britain’s nuclear weapons industry. The replacement of Britain’s nuclear submarines has been repeatedly rated ‘unachievable’ by the government’s Infrastructure and Projects Authority, due to cost overruns and delays.

Instead of pouring hundreds of billions more into this black hole of deadly weaponry – tying Britain even closer to NATO and Trump’s reckless nuclear war drive – the British government should redirect these funds to kick-start the British economy investing in transport, housing and healthcare, improving living standards and tackling the real threats we face from climate breakdown

The Committee – which scrutinises the financial accounts and holds the government to account for the delivery of public services’ – produced a report into the MoD’s management of its F-35 fighter jet programme, which will see Britain buy a total of 138 jets – likely to be 63 F-35B ‘stealth’ jets and 75 of the nuclear-capable F-35A fighter jets.  

Despite Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s announcement in June at the NATO summit that Britain, for the first time since the end of the Cold War, would be expanding its nuclear capability through the purchase of 12 F-35A jets, the Committee’s report reveals the Ministry of Defence had little understanding of the implications – both technical or financial – of NATO integration of its nuclear-capable fighter jets when this announcement was made.

November 10, 2025 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Trump and the Deep State: The Tomahawk deadlock and the illusion of presidential autonomy

This oscillation reflects, more than personal indecision, the tension between two competing power projects within the United States. On one hand, Trump seeks to maintain a more restrained foreign policy, focused on avoiding the strain of a direct confrontation with Russia. On the other hand, the military-industrial complex and its allies in Congress, the media, and the intelligence services continue to push for the escalation of the war in Ukraine.

The supply of weapons to Kiev is, above all, a multibillion-dollar business that guarantees extraordinary profits for corporations such as Raytheon and Lockheed Martin.

Lucas Leiroz, November 5, 2025, https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/11/05/trump-and-deep-state-tomahawk-deadlock-and-illusion-of-presidential-autonomy/

The Tomahawk issue is vital in determining Donald Trump’s political future.

The current controversy over the possible delivery of Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine reignites a crucial debate in American politics: to what extent does the president of the United States truly control his country’s strategic decisions? The episode suggests that Donald Trump, despite his rhetoric of independence and his supposed desire for a “pragmatic rapprochement” with Moscow, remains bound by the constraints of the so-called Deep State — the bureaucratic-corporate-military structure that has dictated the course of Washington’s foreign policy for decades.

According to Western media sources, the Pentagon had given the White House the green light to release the Tomahawks, arguing that the transfer would not harm U.S. stockpiles. The final decision, however, would rest with Trump. Initially, the president indicated that he did not intend to send the missiles, stating that “we cannot give away what we need to protect our own country.” A few days later, however, he reversed his stance — and then reversed it again, after a phone conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

This oscillation reflects, more than personal indecision, the tension between two competing power projects within the United States. On one hand, Trump seeks to maintain a more restrained foreign policy, focused on rebuilding the domestic economy and avoiding the strain of a direct confrontation with Russia. On the other hand, the military-industrial complex and its allies in Congress, the media, and the intelligence services continue to push for the escalation of the war in Ukraine.

The Deep State does not act solely out of abstract strategic interests. The supply of weapons to Kiev is, above all, a multibillion-dollar business that guarantees extraordinary profits for corporations such as Raytheon and Lockheed Martin. The Tomahawks, in particular, symbolize this economic power. Mass-produced and widely used in previous wars, they represent both a military tool and a currency of political influence. Allowing Ukraine to use them against strategic targets deep inside Russia would, however, be a dangerous act of escalation — something that Trump, in a rare moment of prudence, seems to understand.

Putin’s phone call to Trump, as reported by the press, was likely a direct reminder that the use of missiles with a thousand-mile range against cities such as Moscow or St. Petersburg would have incalculable consequences. Contrary to the Western narrative, which tries to portray Russia as isolated and vulnerable, Moscow maintains full retaliatory capability, including nuclear. By avoiding authorization for the Tomahawks’ transfer, Trump did not yield to “Russian blackmail” — as the Atlanticist media would claim — but rather to the elementary logic of global security.

Even so, the fact that the Pentagon and European allies pressured the White House to approve the delivery shows how the structure of real power in the U.S. transcends the president himself. The Deep State shapes not only foreign-policy decisions but also the perceptions of what is “possible” or “acceptable” for an American leader. When Trump seeks dialogue with Moscow, he is immediately accused of “weakness” or “complicity.” When he imposes sanctions, even tactical ones, he is praised for his “toughness.” Thus, a political siege is created in which any attempt at rationality is seen as betrayal of American hegemony.

Analyzing this episode, it becomes clear that presidential autonomy in the United States is largely an illusion. Trump, who came to power promising to break with globalism and restore national sovereignty, now finds himself in a dilemma: either he resists establishment pressure and risks political isolation, or he yields and becomes just another administrator of Washington’s perpetual wars.

The hesitation over the Tomahawks is, therefore, a symptom of the deeper struggle that defines contemporary American politics. Russia, for its part, watches cautiously, aware that the true interlocutor in Washington is not the president but the system surrounding him — a system that profits from war and fears, above all, peace.

November 9, 2025 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

The rise of the US ‘digital-military-industrial complex’

Xinhuanet, Editor Huang Panyue2 025-10-20 http://eng.chinamil.com.cn/2025xb/W/N/16416523.html

On Oct 13, Anduril Industries, an American defense technology company, unveiled its “Eagle Eye” headset at the Association of the United States Army (AUSA) annual meeting as part of the Army’s Soldier Borne Mission Command program. The system — offered in four variants — integrates multiple augmented-reality devices designed to provide timely, accurate battlefield information, enhance soldiers’ situational cognition, and improve both offensive and defensive decision-making. This unveiling highlights the growing trend of digital technology firms entering the US defense market, with Anduril emerging as one of the most typical representatives of this shift.

Over the past decade, the familiar concept of the “military-industrial complex” — coined by President Dwight D Eisenhower in 1961 — has evolved into a new hybrid: the “digital-military-industrial complex”. This variant revolves around firms that specialize in data, artificial intelligence and digital platforms, as well as startups deliberately positioned as defense-oriented technology providers. These entities are collaborating closely with the US military and traditional defense contractors to accelerate the digitization and intelligent transformation of military capabilities. Some analysts warn that this digital variant could drive large-scale US intervention abroad — potentially becoming a “new war machine”.

Traditional defense giants such as Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman and General Dynamics, now face intense competition from two kinds of digital players. The first category comprises big tech corporations — Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Oracle, HP, Dell, Motorola, IBM and others — many of which have secured sizable Pentagon contracts to supply advanced systems software and cloud, data and AI services. The second category consists of venture-backed startups, often funded by Silicon Valley investors that focus on AI, autonomy, sensing and networked command-and-control systems tailored to military and intelligence needs. These startups market “national security” as a core product attribute in pursuit of a share of US defense procurement.

Examples are plentiful. Anduril, founded in 2017 by investors including Palmer Luckey and Peter Thiel, now supplies autonomous systems that combine AI and robotics — from unmanned aerial systems (UAS) and counter-UAS solutions to semi-portable autonomous surveillance systems and networked command and control (C2) software. Palantir, founded in 2003, has long partnered with government agencies and has significantly expanded military collaboration in recent years. Its market capitalization soared in 2024, exceeding the combined valuations of several legacy defense giants. Other comparable companies include Rebellion Defense (AI military applications), Shield AI (autonomous flight and navigation), Skydio (drones for military and law enforcement), HawkEye 360 (satellite-enabled radio-frequency monitoring), Epirus (directed-energy and electromagnetic defense), and various private ventures targeting dual-use space capabilities.

At first glance, Silicon Valley’s deepening ties to the Pentagon may appear anomalous. For years, Silicon Valley projected liberal, antiwar values, resisting the militarization of its technologies. Yet the region’s militarized trajectory represents a return to its historical roots rather than a novel development. Since the 1950s, US federal agencies — particularly the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) — decisively shaped the development of transformative technologies like the Internet and GPS.

Traditional defense firms also played formative roles in Silicon Valley’s rise. Although these ties waned after the Cold War, in recent years, major tech figures have publicly embraced national-security collaboration. In 2019, Amazon’s Jeff Bezos publicly urged big tech to show greater patriotism and actively participate in defense cooperation with the Department of Defense. In June 2025, the Army formalized the fusion of tech expertise and military innovation by appointing four tech leaders as reserve lieutenant colonels to its newly established “Detachment 201”, also known as the “Executive Innovation Corps” — a symbolic merger of commercial tech leadership and military roles.

Three drivers underpin the rise of the digital-military-industrial complex. First, the advent of AI has made integration of commercial data and algorithms essential to military modernization. The Defense Innovation Unit (DIU), established by the Pentagon in Silicon Valley in 2015, channels venture-style procurements to accelerate conversion of commercial technologies for defense.

By September 2022, DIU had awarded roughly $1.2 billion in contracts to over 320 startups, and it was elevated in 2021 to report directly to the Secretary of Defense. Second, escalating global tensions such as the Russia-Ukraine conflict and turmoil in the Middle East have heightened US urgency to field technologies proven effective on modern battlefields. Third, China’s rapid advances in AI have fueled US concerns, prompting American policymakers to increasingly frame the competition as, in essence, an AI arms race.

Operationally, the digital-military-industrial complex differs from the traditional procurement model. Legacy contractors depend on large, long-term, bureaucratic contracts focused on platform performance. Tech firms, by contrast, move with commercial speed and market leverage, adapting civilian technologies for defense use — a model that strengthens their bargaining power and reduces regulatory constraints. To engage these new actors, the Department of Defense has adopted more agile acquisition mechanisms — notably “Other Transaction Agreements” (OTAs) — and established accelerators and programs to welcome nontraditional vendors.

n short, the US defense ecosystem is undergoing structural change: from a Washington-centered “contractor + Pentagon” system to a Silicon Valley-centric network combining venture capital, tech firms, legacy defense primes and the military. This emerging “Silicon Valley-Pentagon axis” is reshaping the tools, logic and ethical contours of warfare. The trend may intensify great-power rivalry and arms races, lower the threshold for war, obscure responsibility, and accelerate the militarization of technology — posing new threats to global peace and security.

Whether Silicon Valley will ultimately evolve into a cradle for militarism, and whether the digital-military-industrial complex will operate as a fully activated “war machine”, are questions that deserve the vigilance, concern, and reflection of people worldwide.

Shi Bowei is a lecturer from the Department of Political Science at the Party School of Zhejiang Provincial CPC Committee.

November 9, 2025 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »