nuclear-news

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

In Ukraine, a proxy war on the planet

As the Ukraine crisis causes global havoc, US officials won’t negotiate with Russia to end the fighting — and are even willing to “countenance” mounting hunger as a result.

Aaron Maté, Jul 17, 22

In 2015, one year after a US-backed coup ushered in a US-friendly, far-right-dominated government in Kiev, University of Chicago professor John Mearsheimer issued a stark warning. “The West is leading Ukraine down the primrose path,” he said. “And the end result is that Ukraine is going to get wrecked.”

Mearsheimer’s cause for concern was what he identified as a US-led campaign to convert Ukraine into a NATO proxy on Russia’s border. The events since have proved him to be both tragically prescient, and understated.

In using Ukraine to “fight Russia over there”, as Adam Schiff put it in January 2020, the US has not only sacrificed countless Ukrainian lives. Four months into Russia’s invasion, the Biden administration is signaling its willingness to sacrifice the rest of the planet, particularly the most vulnerable areas.

In an article headlined “Ukraine War Pushes Millions of the World’s Poorest Toward Starvation,” the Wall Street Journal summarizes the impact of the Ukraine war on global hunger:………………………..

By invading Ukraine rather than exhausting all diplomatic solutions, Russia bears obvious responsibility for the crisis. Ukraine’s grain exports, which feed multiple countries, have plummeted. Russia has denied blocking Ukrainian grain, instead faulting Kiev’s extensive mining of its Black Sea ports. Ukraine has refused to de-mine those ports on self-defense grounds, claiming that doing so could invite further Russian incursions. Turkey, which has been brokering talks between the two sides, has just announced a pending deal to break the impasse.

But even if the Turkey-backed deal is implemented, a major cause of the food crisis will remain. 

By invading Ukraine rather than exhausting all diplomatic solutions, Russia bears obvious responsibility for the crisis. Ukraine’s grain exports, which feed multiple countries, have plummeted. Russia has denied blocking Ukrainian grain, instead faulting Kiev’s extensive mining of its Black Sea ports. Ukraine has refused to de-mine those ports on self-defense grounds, claiming that doing so could invite further Russian incursions. Turkey, which has been brokering talks between the two sides, has just announced a pending deal to break the impasse.

But even if the Turkey-backed deal is implemented, a major cause of the food crisis will remain. The US-led sanctions regime against Russia has blocked international payments for Russian goods and necessary export licenses, including food shipments……………………

Rather than seek a diplomatic solution in Ukraine that could end the war and its worldwide deprivations, the US has shunned talks with Russia and made clear that it is even willing to tolerate global starvation………….

Left unquestioned is why a group of officials in Washington have arrogated themselves the right to “countenance” a global recession and mounting hunger – including pushing millions toward famine — on behalf of the rest of the planet.

Because the Biden administration is willing to countenance hunger, Africa is now being pushed into what a recent New York Times article describes as a major “dilemma.” African countries who seek to accept Russian grain imports, the Times notes, “potentially face a hard choice between, on one hand, benefiting from possible war crimes and displeasing a powerful Western ally, and on the other, refusing cheap food at a time when wheat prices are soaring and hundreds of thousands of people are starving.”

Under policies set by Washington, it is apparently a “dilemma” for Africa to have to choose between feeding hundreds of thousands of people or risk “displeasing” its “powerful Western ally,” — which would presumably prefer that they starve. https://mate.substack.com/p/in-ukraine-a-proxy-war-on-the-planet

July 19, 2022 Posted by | 2 WORLD, politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Documents show Australian Labor government supports Assange’s extradition to the US

as far as the Labor government is concerned, Assange’s extradition is a done deal.

the greatest mistake defenders of Assange could make would be to harbour illusions that Labor will act to free the WikiLeaks founder.

as far as the Labor government is concerned, Assange’s extradition is a done deal.

 the greatest mistake defenders of Assange could make would be to harbour illusions that Labor will act to free the WikiLeaks founder.

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2022/07/18/rqbf-j18.html Oscar Grenfell @Oscar_Grenfell, 18 July 22,

Documents obtained by lawyer Kellie Tranter and published on the Declassified Australia website cast a damning light on the Australian Labor government’s role in facilitating the continued imprisonment of WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange and his extradition to the US.

The material gives the lie to the claims of Labor supporters that the newly-elected government may be seeking to secure Assange’s freedom through backroom diplomacy, despite the refusal of Labor ministers to condemn the attempted US extradition and prosecution.

They show that Labor is willing to let Assange be sent to the US, despite doctors and his family warning that it would be a death sentence. A successful extradition would also set a sweeping precedent for attacks on journalists and political dissidents globally.  

Assange faces 17 charges under the Espionage Act, and 175 years imprisonment, for publishing true information exposing massive US-led war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Tranter, a longstanding legal advisor to Assange, has for many years filed freedom of information requests aimed at acquiring official documents revealing the role of Australian governments in the persecution of Assange. Those released by Declassified Australia are the first she has published since the Labor government was installed after the May 21 federal election.

The two documents are redacted. What is present, however, gives a sufficient picture of Labor’s acquiescence to Assange’s extradition, and the cynical, duplicitous character of the ambiguous public statements its leading representatives have made.

The first are internal “talking points” prepared for Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus on June 2. It is entitled: “Julian Assange – International Transfer of Prisoners process – talking points and background.” Its heading indicates the central preoccupation of the document, which states:

“Prisoner transfers cannot be agreed between governments in advance of a person being a prisoner (after a criminal trial, conviction and sentencing) in a particular country, and require the consent of the prisoner;  

“International prisoner transfers to Australia are initiated by an application from a prisoner after the prisoner has been convicted and sentenced;  

“If surrendered, convicted and sentenced in the US, Assange could apply under the ITP scheme to serve his sentence in Australia;”

In other words, Assange is to be extradited to the US, where the former Trump administration and the CIA plotted to kidnap or assassinate him from London in 2017, before settling on a pseudo-legal criminal indictment. He would be hauled before a kangaroo court in the District of Virginia, with a jury stacked by the very same CIA officers and their relatives. The hearings would proceed in secret and Assange’s detention regime would be one of total isolation.

With this hanging over his head, the document suggests that perhaps Assange will feel compelled to plead guilty to the “crime” of journalism revealing the illegal killings of civilians, torture and other violations of international law.  

Tranter notes that following a redacted section, the document continues: “However, the UK High Court’s judgment does note that the US has provided an assurance that they will consent to Mr Assange being transferred to Australia to serve any custodial sentence on him if he is convicted.”

The US “assurances” are not worth the paper they are written on. Their sole aim was to overcome an earlier British court ruling, which found that Assange’s extradition would be “oppressive” because of his deep on-going health issues and the horrific conditions in which he would be held in a US prison.

The assurances, accepted by a British High Court as bona fide last October, asserted that Assange’s conditions of detention would not be as bad as his lawyers claimed. But those very assurances made plain that the intelligence agencies, including the CIA, would have complete control over the circumstances of Assange’s imprisonment, which could be changed at any time.

The second, June 8 document, is a “ministerial submission,” entitled “Julian Assange – extradition request from the United States to the United Kingdom.” It recommends that Dreyfus “note” the situation confronting Assange, in the lead up to an announcement by British Home Secretary Priti Patel on whether she would approve extradition. Several weeks later, Patel gave her green light.    

The submission to Dreyfus bluntly stated: “The UK Home Secretary is due to make a final decision on Mr Assange’s extradition to the US by 20 June. Mr Assange will have one final avenue of appeal with the leave of the High Court, otherwise he must be extradited within 28 days of the Secretary of State’s decision.”

And again: “If Mr Assange is extradited, convicted and sentenced in the US, he may apply for transfer to Australia under the International Transfer of Prisoner’s Scheme. This will require the consent of the US and Australian authorities.  

“The UK High Court’s judgment notes that the US has provided an assurance that it will consent to Mr Assange being transferred to Australia to serve any custodial sentence imposed on him if he is convicted.”

Later on, the document stated: “‘If Mr Assange is convicted and sentenced to imprisonment in the US, it will be possible for him to apply under the ITP scheme to serve the remainder of his sentence in Australia. A transfer would also require the consent of the US, the Australian Government (through you as Attorney-General), and the relevant minister in the state into whose prison Mr Assange would be transferring.  

“In making any such decision, the department would provide you with advice on factors such as the extent to which the transfer would assist the prisoner’s rehabilitation, sentence enforcement, community safety and any relevant humanitarian considerations, in addition to any conditions of transfer required by the US.’”

In other words, as far as the Labor government is concerned, Assange’s extradition is a done deal.

 Also striking is the fact that the documents do not countenance the possibility that he would be found “not guilty” in a US court. The entire thrust of the two documents is that the extradition and successful prosecution have already been stitched up, in a conspiracy involving the British government, the UK courts, the American authorities and the Labor administration.

Once Assange were in the US, moreover, the documents acknowledge that any “prison transfer” would be dependent upon the acquiescence of the American government whose President, Joe Biden, has previously branded Assange as a “high-tech terrorist.” A prison transfer, even in the unlikely event that it occurred, would mean years more of Assange’s incarceration, in Britain, the US and then Australia.

The contempt of the government for Assange is summed up by the reference to “factors such as the extent to which the transfer would assist the prisoner’s rehabilitation.” Assange does not need to be rehabilitated. He is a heroic journalist who has done a major service to humanity. It is the war criminals he has exposed who need to be placed in an institution.

Obviously it is unknown what is contained in the redacted section. It may deal with the elephant in the room, which is excluded from the rest of the documents. Assange’s doctors, lawyers and family have all testified that the WikiLeaks founder would take his life if he were to be extradited to the US. That judgment was effectively upheld by the British District Court, before it was overturned on the basis of the bogus US assurances.


All of the talk about “prison transfers” and the like is therefore window dressing for what would amount to a death sentence.

The documents reveal the sinister character of statements by Labor leaders, including Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, Foreign Minister Penny Wong and Dreyfus, that the Assange case has ‘gone on for too long,” and “needs to be brought to a close.” When asked by journalists, each has refused to elaborate on what this precisely means.

One thing that is entirely absent from the documents is any suggestion that Labor has so much as suggested the US government drop the charges against Assange and end the extradition proceedings. The continuation of the judicial frame-up and victimisation is taken as given.

The documents vindicate the warnings of the Socialist Equality Party that the greatest mistake defenders of Assange could make would be to harbour illusions that Labor will act to free the WikiLeaks founder.

The 2010-2013 Gillard Labor government initiated Australia’s collaboration with the persecution of Assange. Gillard slandered Assange by falsely claiming that he had broken Australian laws. Assange publicly accused Gillard and other senior ministers of secretly collaborating with the American state against him and other Australian citizens associated with WikiLeaks.

Those actions were bound up with the Gillard government’s full-throated support for the “pivot to Asia,” a vast military build-up aimed at preparing for an aggressive US-led war against China.

A decade on and the military preparations are far advanced. The new Labor government is functioning as an attack dog of the Biden administration throughout the region. Last week, during a visit to Washington, Defence Minister Richard Marles hailed the US-Australia alliance as “unbreakable,” as he outlined a further massive military-build up.

The documents confirm that the fight for Assange’s freedom requires a political struggle by the working class, the social constituency for democratic rights, against the Labor government and all of its defenders. A Labor government will only intervene diplomatically and legally to free Assange, if it is forced to do so by a mass movement from below.

July 19, 2022 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, civil liberties, Legal, politics international | Leave a comment

Earthling: Was Obama right about Russia-Ukraine?

NonZero Newsletter, 18 July 22, If President Obama’s successors had stuck with his policy toward Ukraine, would there be a war there now?

That question is raised by a 2015 New York Times article that Glenn Greenwald unearthed this week. And, though the answer, as with other great historical what-ifs, is “We’ll never know for sure,” you could make a case for “Probably not.” In any event, pondering the question has benefits—such as reminding us how constricted discourse about war becomes once a war is underway.

The Times article was about Obama’s refusal, in the face of bipartisan pressure, to send arms to Ukraine. Obama, the Times reported, “has told aides and visitors that arming the Ukrainians would encourage the notion that they could actually defeat the far more powerful Russians, and so it would potentially draw a more forceful response from Moscow.” 

An anonymous source paraphrased Obama as asking questions like, “Okay, what happens if we send in equipment – do we have to send in trainers?” And, “What if it ends up in the hands of thugs? What if Putin escalates?” In the absence of satisfactory answers, Obama confined aid to things like helmets and night vision goggles.

After he left office, Washington reversed course and sent lethal military aid to Ukraine—billions of dollars worth. And, to answer Obama’s questions: Yes, that turned out to involve sending trainers to Ukraine—as well as conducting NATO-Ukraine military exercises on Russia’s doorstep; and yes, Putin escalated. This doesn’t mean that the former caused the latter, but the sequence of events leaves that possibility quite open.

By early fall of 2021, some American observers were warning that the kinds of fears Obama expressed were being born out. Ted Galen Carpenter of the CATO institute noted that Biden had continued and in some ways accelerated the flow of weapons started under Trump, including weapons that “Russia considers especially destabilizing.” Galen said Ukraine had become “a NATO member in all but name” and called this policy “arrogant, unwise, and potentially very dangerous.”  

In Putin’s famously intense speech on February 21, a few days before the invasion, the flow of western weapons to Ukraine, and Ukraine’s increasingly close relationship to NATO, were central themes. ………………………….

given the power wielded within the Ukrainian military by its famously zealous Azov battalion, it’s certainly possible that assertiveness on the part of American-equipped Azov officers was a factor.  

In any event, these are all good questions. So it’s unfortunate that, since the invasion, they’ve become virtually off limits. If you suggest that things like arming Ukraine or encouraging Ukraine to join NATO raised the chances of war, you’re accused of “reciting Putin talking points” or “justifying” Putin’s invasion (even if you explicitly and repeatedly say that the invasion was wrong and unjustified)………………………..  https://nonzero.substack.com/p/earthling-was-obama-right-about-russia?utm_medium=email

July 18, 2022 Posted by | politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Iran critical of President Biden telling Israelis that USA is ready to use force against Iran

Tehran Times, 18Juy 22, TEHRAN – Nasser Kanaani, the spokesman for the Iranian foreign ministry, has reacted to the U.S. president’s threat against Iran over American-Israeli allegations of Iran seeking nuclear bombs, saying that Iran has never sought to build such bombs.

That U.S. President Joe Biden threatens Iran over nuclear allegations while visiting an “outlaw regime” possessing nukes is an “irony of our times,” Kanaani said on Twitter. 

“Irony of our times: just on the anniv. of 1st US nuke test & after visiting an outlaw regime that possess clandestine nukes, Mr. Biden stresses that he would not ‘allow’ Iran to build bombs,” he said. 

The spokesman considered the U.S. commitment not to allow Iran develop nuclear weapons a “sales pitch” aimed at charming Israel. “Sales pitch to charm the Israeli apartheid regime by bombs that Iran has never sought,” he said. 

During his visit to Israel, U.S. President Joe Biden issued threats against Iran and spoke in such a way as to signal Washington’s readiness to use force against Iran.

In Jerusalem, President Biden signed a document called “The Jerusalem U.S.-Israel Strategic Partnership Joint Declaration,” which makes two references to Iran in the context of the U.S.’s commitment to preserving Israel’s security. 

The Declaration accused Iran of pursuing nuclear weapons and highlighted a U.S. commitment to “use all elements of its national power to ensure” that Iran does not acquire nuclear weapons.

Biden continued to make allegations during his visit to Saudi Arabia. 

The spokesman touched upon the past record of the United States as the first country to have used A-bombs and pointed to its relentless interference in the internal affairs of the regional countries, military aggression and occupation, large sales of weapons and promotion of militarism in the region.

“Once again by resorting to the failed policy of promoting Iranophobia, the United States seeks to create tensions and crisis in the region,” he noted, according to an Iranian foreign ministry statement.

The spokesman further underscored several decades of Washington’s blind and unflinching support for the usurper Israeli regime.

“Indubitably, the U.S. government is the key contributor to the ongoing occupation of the Palestinian land and holy Qods, the regime’s day-to-day crimes against Palestinians and apartheid and systematic violation of human rights with regards to the oppressed and resistant Palestinian nation,” he explained………………………………….  https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/474778/Iran-has-never-sought-nuclear-bombs-spokesman

July 18, 2022 Posted by | Iran, politics international | Leave a comment

Biden proved that Israel is a US proxy in the Middle East

Biden went on to stress that the US needs Israel to stand beside it in its fight in the Middle East, which America is returning to in order to prevent the Russian and Chinese influence.

Biden’s words have proven that Israel is an American proxy in the Middle East.

 https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20220715-biden-proved-that-israel-is-a-us-proxy-in-the-middle-east/1

Motasem A Dalloul, July 15, 2022 

American President Joe Biden landed in Israel on Wednesday and started his four-day tour of the Middle East, the first since he took office. Moments after landing in Tel Aviv, he delivered a speech which outlined his intentions during this controversial tour.

Biden has visited Israel several times before becoming president, with his first trip being in 1973 when he was a senator. He has repeatedly expressed his absolute support for Israel, regardless of its daily abuses of Palestinians and continuous violations against their legitimate rights.

In his speech on Wednesday, he repeated his support for the occupation state, highlighting that he is a Zionist Christian; emphasising that supporters of Israel don’t need to be Jews.

He also told the journalist: “As president, I’m proud to say that our relationship with the State of Israel is deeper and stronger, in my view, than it’s ever been. And with this visit, we are strengthening our connections even further. We’ve reaffirmed the unshakable commitment of the United States to Israel’s security, including partnering with Israel on the most cutting-edge defence systems in the world.”

Biden stressed that “generation after generation” the “connection grows,” adding: “We invest in each other. We dream together. We’re part of what has always been the objective we both have.” Thus highlighting that the two states have been working to achieve shared objectives and address global challenges.

The US president failed, once again, to mention Israeli violations and aggression against Palestinians and other countries in the region. “We’ll continue to advance Israel’s integration into the region; expand emerging forums and engagement,” he said.

He mentioned the two-state solution, which remains, in his view, “the best way to ensure the future of equal measure of freedom, prosperity and democracy for Israelis and Palestinians alike.” This, while Israeli occupation forces confiscated large swathes of Palestinian land slated for the potential Palestinian state just a few miles away.

Biden stated that Israel is united with the US, stressing that they have “shared values” and a “shared vision”. While making efforts to extend the US’ domination over the world, Biden wished America and Israel could “continue to grow and prosper together for the benefit of the entire world.”

The following day, Biden met with Israel’s caretaker Prime Minister Yair Lapid in Jerusalem, where Israel has been working to evict Palestinians and force them from their homes. There they signed “The Jerusalem US-Israel Strategic Partnership Joint Declaration” in which the US pledged to protect Israel and meet its security demands. “The United States and Israel reaffirm the unbreakable bonds between our two countries and the enduring commitment of the United States to Israel’s security,” the declaration stipulated.

Ignoring Israel’s abuses of human rights and violations of international law, it adds that the US and Israel share “unwavering commitment to democracy and the rule of law” in order to “repair the world.”

The declaration reiterated the US “commitment to Israel’s security, and especially to the maintenance of its qualitative military edge.” As part of the declaration, the US reiterated “its steadfast commitment to preserve and strengthen Israel’s capability to deter its enemies and to defend itself by itself against any threat or combination of threats.”

Touching on the alleged Iranian threat, it said the US is committed to “never allow Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon, and that it is prepared to use all elements of its national power to ensure that outcome.” The declaration also stipulated that the US will continue to help Israel in its attack on the non-violent grass roots Palestinian Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign, calling it an act of “self-defence” to do so.

“The United States and Israel affirm that they will continue to work together to combat all efforts to boycott or de-legitimise Israel, to deny its right to self-defence,” the declaration stated, stressing that “they firmly reject the BDS campaign.”

Biden went on to stress that the US needs Israel to stand beside it in its fight in the Middle East, which America is returning to in order to prevent the Russian and Chinese influence.

As part of this pledge, the US is working to integrate the occupation state in the Arab world, Biden said, adding that the US will not allow any of the region’s countries to have nuclear weapons or arms more qualitative than those in Israel’s possession in order to give Tel Aviv the military edge.

Biden’s words have proven that Israel is an American proxy in the Middle East.

July 16, 2022 Posted by | politics international, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

US, Israel sign joint anti-Iran nuclear declaration – US will use “all elements of national power”

Aljazeera, 14 July 22, US President Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Lapid sign joint declaration during meeting in Jerusalem.

United States President Joe Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid have reiterated their anti-Iran positions in a joint declaration committing to preventing Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

The two leaders signed the statement earlier after holding a one-on-one meeting on Thursday morning in West Jerusalem on the second day of Biden’s four-day Middle East tour, followed by a virtual summit with the leaders of India and the United Arab Emirates.

The statement says that the US will use “all elements of national power” available to it to deny Iran the ability to arm itself with nuclear weapons.

The joint declaration also includes a pledge by Washington to continue US military aid to Israel.

A record 10-year $38bn aid package was signed in 2016 under the administration of former US President Barack Obama when Biden was vice president.

Speaking at a news conference following the signing, both Biden and Lapid spoke of their support for the US-Israeli relationship, and the perceived threat from Iran.

“The only way to stop a nuclear Iran is if Iran knows the free world will use force,” Lapid said……………………………………………….  https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/7/14/us-israel-to-commit-to-stopping-iran-nuclear-ambitions

July 13, 2022 Posted by | Israel, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Noam Chomsky: Biden’s Middle East Trip Contains Echoes of Trump’s Policies

C.J. Polychroniou, Truthout,15 July 22, After 18 months in office, President Joe Biden decided to pay a visit to the Middle East region. Oil is most likely what is dragging him back to the Middle East, and why for months now he had been warming up to Saudi Arabia, despite having said as a presidential candidate that he would make the Saudis “pay the price, and make them in fact the pariah that they are,” while saying that there was “very little social redeeming value in the present government in Saudi Arabia.”

As Noam Chomsky notes in this exclusive interview for Truthout, Biden is carrying on a U.S. tradition: Relations with Saudi Arabia “have always proceeded amicably, undisturbed by its horrifying record of human rights abuses, which persists.”

 Security also likely figures in the equation of Biden’s trip, particularly with regard to Israel. He will also visit the West Bank and meet with Palestinan leaders, but it’s hard to say what he hopes to accomplish there. As Chomsky points out, “Palestinian hopes lie elsewhere.”…………………………………………………….more https://truthout.org/articles/noam-chomsky-bidens-middle-east-trip-contains-echoes-of-trumps-policies/?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=d682ca02-74e2-4ef3-a856-28d3b4293907

July 13, 2022 Posted by | politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Former National Security Advisor John Bolton boasts openly about USA government overturning foreign governments

The Empire Is Showing More And More Of Its True Face

Caitlin Johnstone 14 July 22

Genocide walrus John Bolton outright admitted to planning foreign coups with the US government in conversation with CNN’s Jake Tapper on Wednesday. That’s coups, plural.

While arguing that the Capitol riot on January 6th of last year was not an attempted coup but rather just Trump stumbling around trying to look after his own interests, Bolton hastened to pull authority on the matter when Tapper suggested that he might not be correct about how coups work.

“I disagree with that,” Bolton said. “As somebody who has helped plan coups d’etat — not here, but, you know, other places — it takes a lot of work, and that’s not what [Trump] did.”

Places. Plural.

Tapper just let Bolton’s remark slide like he didn’t just admit to something extraordinarily fiendish, but did eventually follow up with a request that the former National Security Advisor elaborate.

“I do want to ask a follow up,” Tapper said. “When we were talking about what is capable, or what you need to do to be able to plan a coup, and you cited your expertise having planned coups.”

“I’m not going to get into the specifics,” replied Bolton with a chuckle. 

“Successful coups?” Tapper asked.

“Well, I wrote about Venezuela in the book,” Bolton answered. “And it turned out not to be successful – not that we had all that much to do with it, but I saw what it took for an opposition to try and overturn an illegally elected president, and they failed. The notion that Donald Trump was half as competent as the Venezuelan opposition is laughable.” 

“I feel like there’s other stuff you’re not telling me, though,” Tapper responded.

“I’m sure there is,” Bolton said, grinning like he just finished boiling a puppy.

Tapper pursued the matter no further, because he is a propagandist first and a journalist second, and he would be acutely aware that Bolton was saying things that you are not supposed to admit to on television.

Bolton’s sole admission to coup plotting runs counter to his comments about the US government’s failed attempt to oust President Nicolas Maduro while he was facilitating that bizarre operation under the Trump administration, telling reporters in 2019 that the empire’s Venezuela shenanigans were “clearly not a coup.”…………………..   https://caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p/the-empire-is-showing-more-and-more—

July 13, 2022 Posted by | politics international, secrets,lies and civil liberties, USA | Leave a comment

The Nuclear Ban Treaty Had a Conference. Now it Has a Plan.

 https://allthingsnuclear.org/jknox/the-nuclear-ban-treaty-had-a-conference-now-it-has-a-plan/ Jennifer Knox July 13, 2022 The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) entered into force in early 2021, for the first time defining nuclear weapons as illegitimate tools of war under international law. In Vienna from June 21-23, states parties gathered for the first time alongside other state observers, civil society groups, and survivors of nuclear use, testing, and development to define concrete steps towards implementing the obligations of the treaty. At its conclusion, states parties adopted the Vienna Declaration and 50-point Action Plan.  

The Vienna Declaration 

The Vienna Declaration is a forceful statement against nuclear weapons. It reaffirms the treaty’s goal of a world without nuclear weapons and asserts “that the risk of a nuclear weapon detonation by accident, miscalculation or design concerns the security of all humanity.”  

The Declaration also addresses the growing risks of nuclear war. Members were divided on whether to explicitly condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and escalating threats of nuclear use; many participating states issued statements condemning Russian aggression, but others did not. Ultimately, while the Declaration acknowledged an environment of “increasingly strident nuclear rhetoric,” it did not single out Russia. Instead, the Declaration “[condemns] unequivocally any and all nuclear threats, whether they be explicit or implicit and irrespective of the circumstances.”

While Russia’s recent nuclear threats are particularly egregious and irresponsible, they are unfortunately not unique. Other nuclear powers engage in similar rhetoric, using the threat of nuclear use not for their own defense but as a coercive tool of policy. Former US President Donald Trump repeatedly issued such threats during his administration. National populist leaders like Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump are more likely to resort to dangerous rhetoric and take risks in pursuit of their goals. As national populism continues to rise in nuclear-armed states, norms of nuclear restraint will continue to erode.

However, nuclear threats do not only come from national populists through speeches or tweets. The threat of nuclear use is fundamental to the security of every nuclear-armed state and any other state that relies on nuclear deterrence. Nuclear deterrence is the threat of nuclear use, issued in the hope that the risk of catastrophic humanitarian disaster will disincentivize conflict. Helplessness, uncertainty and terror are foundational to theories of nuclear deterrence – this is how the system works by design. 

The Vienna Declaration denounces not a single bad actor but the very practice of nuclear deterrence, a system which both permits and perpetuates Russia’s nuclear coercion. While nuclear powers and their allies recommit indefinitely to global terror through nuclear deterrence, the Vienna Declaration is a timely reminder that most states have explicitly rejected the threat of mass destruction as a form of security. Nine states possess nuclear weapons. Another 33 states have or will soon have collective security relationships with nuclear powers. They include: 

  • 6 of which host US nuclear weapons) 
  • Soon-to-be NATO members Finland and Sweden 
  • Australia, Japan, and South Korea, which have military alliances with the United States 
  • Belarus, which may soon host Russian nuclear weapons

That leaves 151 states that do not rely on nuclear weapons in any form for their security. All but one of those states (South Sudan) have committed to never develop or possess nuclear weapons as members of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). 114 of those states are members of regional nuclear-weapons-free zones. 66 (so far) have signed and ratified the TPNW – for many, joining the TPNW is the third time they have formally affirmed their commitment to abstain from nuclear weapons.  

Nuclear weapons are not inevitable or irreplaceable. Most governments and most people in the world have chosen not to seek their own security through the threat of mass destruction.

The Action Plan

State parties also adopted a 50-point Action Plan. This document contains concrete actions for members of the TPNW to advance nuclear disarmament and fulfill their obligations under the treaty. Many of these provisions relate to the treaty’s ‘positive obligations:’ measures to reduce both the past, present, and future harm caused by nuclear weapons. The treaty obliges its members to provide victim assistance and environmental remediation for frontline communities impacted by nuclear use, testing, and development. 

The humanitarian impacts of nuclear weapons are widespread, affecting people all over the world. The nuclear age began with the destruction of the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, creating hundreds of thousands of casualties and leaving behind generations affected by the consequences. In the following 70 years, over 2,000 nuclear tests were conducted throughout North America, Eurasia, Africa, and the Pacific. Further environmental contamination resulted from mining, development, production, waste storage, and disposal activities related to nuclear weapons. Indigenous communities and people of color have disproportionately born the health and environmental consequences of nuclear weapons, and, in most cases, those harms have not been addressed. In the Action Plan, states parties committed to 

  • consult closely with affected communities and international organizations to develop sustainable, effective, and detailed plans for victim assistance and environmental remediation. 
  • appoint government officials and adopt national laws and policies required to carry out that work. 
  • establish voluntary reporting on national initiatives and progress. 
  • provide technical, material, and financial assistance to states in need of additional support that have been affected by nuclear weapons. 
  • develop guidelines for how to address age- and gender-specific nuclear harm. 

The Action Plan also emphasizes the role of scientific and technical expertise in creating a shared understanding of the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons and guiding implementation of the treaty. The Action Plan calls for states parties to  

  • establish

The Action Plan also emphasizes the role of scientific and technical expertise in creating a shared understanding of the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons and guiding implementation of the treaty. The Action Plan calls for states parties to  

  • establish a Scientific Advisory Group to advise treaty members and aid in achieving the treaty’s goals.  
  • create a broad network of experts from relevant fields that are diverse in terms of geography and gender.

Beyond the immediate objectives of the Action Plan, this document is also meaningful as a sign of forward momentum on nuclear disarmament issues. It represents the first conclusive plan of work to result from multilateral disarmament efforts in over a decade. In the past, review conferences for the NPT have been seen as important opportunities to make progress on nuclear disarmament, a key pillar of the treaty. The 2010 NPT Review Conference produced an action plan for the first time, but it was never fully implemented.  The 2015 Review Conference failed to produce a consensus document, in large part because of a lack of progress on the 2010 action plan. Prospects for a better outcome during the 2022 Review Conference this August are bleak.  Beyond the immediate objectives of the Action Plan, this document is also meaningful as a sign of forward momentum on nuclear disarmament issues. It represents the first conclusive plan of work to result from multilateral disarmament efforts in over a decade. In the past, review conferences for the NPT have been seen as important opportunities to make progress on nuclear disarmament, a key pillar of the treaty. The 2010 NPT Review Conference produced an action plan for the first time, but it was never fully implemented.  The 2015 Review Conference failed to produce a consensus document, in large part because of a lack of progress on the 2010 action plan. Prospects for a better outcome during the 2022 Review Conference this August are bleak.  

Meanwhile, the Conference on Disarmament, established to be the primary forum for disarmament negotiations, has not produced an arms control agreement since the 1996 Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. As tensions between nuclear powers rise, there is little hope of a breakthrough in the foreseeable future.

The TPNW’s first meeting of states parties was not just a review of treaty progress but an international forum for states to work collaboratively on nuclear disarmament issues and to create a plan for moving forward. While states possessing nuclear weapons have boycotted the TPNW, several states that rely on nuclear deterrence through NATO engaged constructively with the conference as observers. Hopefully that meeting will only be the first among many such opportunities, and the action plan that resulted will be the first of many such action plans. 

The states parties expressed in the Vienna Declaration that they “have no illusions about the challenges and obstacles that lie before us,” but that they will “move ahead with optimism and resolve.” They offer no false hope that the destination is easy or close, but at least one more pathway is open.

July 13, 2022 Posted by | 2 WORLD, politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

By classifying nuclear as ”green”, Europe benefit’s Putin’s Russia – a major supplier of nuclear fuel

By classifying gas and nuclear as “green” investments the EU has
indirectly handed Putin a pay check. More must be done, including sanctions
on uranium, to end his grip on Europe’s power supply.

At least a fifth of the uranium for Europe’s nuclear reactors comes from Russia

Tortoise 12th July 2022

https://www.tortoisemedia.com/2022/07/12/putins-other-nuclear-project/

July 13, 2022 Posted by | EUROPE, politics international | Leave a comment

NATO’S 2022 PLAN DECLARES SECOND COLD WAR ON RUSSIA AND CHINA

NATO’s 2022 “Strategic Concept,” Its First New Plan Since 2010, Declares Russia A “Threat” And China “Systemic Challenge.”

It demonizes the Eurasian powers as “authoritarian actors” and “strategic competitors,” essentially declaring a second cold war to maintain Western hegemony.

The US-led NATO military alliance has published a historic new plan outlining its goals. The document, officially titled the 2022 “Strategic Concept,” is the first such blueprint NATO has released since 2010.

The 2022 Strategic Concept is essentially a call for a new cold war on both Russia and China.

In the document, NATO condemned Russia and China as “authoritarian actors” and “strategic competitors” that pose “systemic challenges.”

NATO referred to the Russian Federation specifically as “the most significant and direct threat.” It also claimed China “challenge[s] our interests, security and values” and “strives to subvert the rules-based international order.”

The plan made it clear that the US-led military cartel is very concerned about the growing Eurasian alliance between Beijing and Moscow.

“The deepening strategic partnership between the People’s Republic of China and the Russian Federation and their mutually reinforcing attempts to undercut the rules-based international order run counter to our values and interests,” NATO wrote.

The document euphemistically refers to this new cold war climate as an “environment of strategic competition.”

NATO’s Madrid Summit: New Cold War On Russia And China, Continued Expansion, More Military Spending

The 2022 Strategic Concept was adopted unanimously by the leaders of NATO member states in a summit in Madrid, Spain in late June……………………….

The Madrid summit showed how the US-led military cartel is expanding, and not just in Europe, but also in the Pacific region.

Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand – all of which are very far from the North Atlantic region – attended the NATO summit for the first time…………

After the Madrid summit, NATO boasted that it had agreed to “the biggest overhaul of Allied collective defence and deterrence since the Cold War.”

The US-led cartel announced more common funding, and said member states agreed to increase their national military spending to 2% or more of GDP……………….

Like the NATO conference, the G7 summit was clearly aimed at coordinating tactics in a new cold war to weaken Russia and China. At that meeting, the G7 pledged $600 billion in spending on public-private partnerships to challenge Beijing’s global Belt and Road Initiative.

NATO Portrays Second Cold War On Russia And China As Supposed Battle Between ‘Democracy’ And ‘Authoritarianism’

While dubbing Russia its top “threat” and China a “systemic challenge” and “strategic competitor,” NATO’s 2022 Strategic Concept portrays the second cold war that it is waging as a supposed battle between “democracy” and “authoritarianism.”………………………….

In addition to focusing on Russia and China, the Strategic Concept portrayed Iran, Syria, and North Korea as threats.

The document asserted that NATO exists to “safeguard our freedom and democracy” and is based on “shared democratic values,” in order to protect a “rules-based international order.”

Left completely unmentioned was that numerous authoritarian regimes are currently members of NATO, including Turkey, Hungary, and Poland.

Portugal’s former fascist dictatorship was likewise a founding member of NATO in 1949.

NATO’s insistence that it is supposedly dedicated to protecting democracy, and not US hegemony, is especially ironic considering that the Madrid summit prominently featured Turkey’s autocratic leader Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Western officials’ constant refrain at the Madrid summit that NATO exists to defend democracy was similarly undermined by the fact that Sweden and Finland refused to hold popular referenda on membership, meaning their people had no voice in the process and no opportunity to vote on whether or not they think joining the US-led military cartel is a good idea.

NATO’s democratic window dressing was even more transparently contradicted by the opening of the summit on June 28, which featured a “special address” by Spain’s King Felipe VI.

“The long-standing global struggle between tyranny and democracy is as relevant as ever,” Spain’s unelected hereditary monarch declared, without a hint of irony………………………

In the plan, the US-led military cartel also emphasized its commitment to continue expanding.

“NATO’s enlargement has been a historic success,” it insisted, underlining, “We reaffirm our Open Door policy.”……………

The 2022 Strategic Concept described NATO as a “defensive alliance,” despite its offensive wars on Libya in 2011, Afghanistan from 2001 to 2021, and Yugoslavia in the 1990s.……

The US-led military cartel hinted it is ready for World War III if deemed necessary, underscoring that it is prepared for “high-intensity, multi-domain warfighting against nuclear-armed peer-competitors.”

The Strategic Concept emphasized its firm commitment to nuclear weapons, describing them as unnegotiable: “As long as nuclear weapons exist, NATO will remain a nuclear alliance.”

……………………………… The US-led military cartel claimed “NATO does not seek confrontation and poses no threat to the Russian Federation,” although the alliance has surrounded Moscow with hostile military bases and repeatedly expanded right up to its borders.  https://popularresistance.org/natos-2022-plan-declares-second-cold-war-on-russia-and-china/

July 11, 2022 Posted by | 2 WORLD, politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Europe divided over “greenwashing” gas and nuclear energy, but parliament ready to support the bill

 https://en.mercopress.com/2022/07/11/europe-divided-over-greenwashing-gas-and-nuclear-energy-but-parliament-ready-to-support-the-bill—

For the European Parliament natural gas and nuclear power plants have been designated as climate-friendly investments. The European Commission released the proposal, formally called the EU taxonomy, in December as a list of economic activities that investors can label and market as green in the EU.

A motion to block the proposal received 278 votes in favor and 328 against, while 33 lawmakers abstained.

Unless 20 of the EU’s 27 member states oppose the proposal, it will be passed into law. The proposal was initially met with resistance among some EU member states, with one camp led by France strongly backing the green label for natural gas and nuclear energy, while Germany which has been phasing out its nuclear power plants — had opposed the plan.

Some environmental groups and EU lawmakers have also criticized the plan for “greenwashing” fossil fuel and nuclear energy.

Austria and Luxembourg have even pledged to sue the EU if the plan becomes law. Still, the proposal had the backing of the majority of the center-right European People’s Party, the European Parliament’s biggest lawmakers’ group.

Lawmakers of the centrist Renew Europe group were largely in favor of the proposal, while the Greens and Social Democrats mostly opposed it.

A total of 353 lawmakers — a majority of the Parliament’s 705 lawmakers — are needed to reject a plan for it to fail. The ongoing conflict over Russian gas supply to Europe has fueled opposition to the plan to label gas as environmentally friendly.

“It’s dirty politics and it’s an outrageous outcome to label gas and nuclear as green and keep more money flowing to Vladimir Putin’s war chest,” Greenpeace EU sustainable finance campaigner Ariadna Rodrigo said. “We will fight this in the courts,” she added.

Paul Tang, a Dutch EU lawmaker with the center-left Social Democrats, had criticized the plan as influenced by “the lobby from Gazprom and Rosneft,” both Russian state-owned energy companies.

Tang also slammed the move as “institutionalizing greenwashing.”

“It is now important to prevent this vote from setting a precedent for other countries to temper climate ambitions,” he wrote in a statement.

Bogdan Rzonca, a Polish member of the European Parliament (MEP) for the right-wing Law and Justice party (PiS), said less wealthy EU countries need private investments in gas and nuclear power to be able to move away from coal.

Gilles Boyer, a French MEP with the Renew group, said that meeting energy demand with renewable energy in the long-term “would be ideal, but it’s not possible right now.”

Czech Prime Minister Petr Fiala, whose country has just taken over the rotating EU presidency, said Wednesday’s vote was “excellent news” for Europe.

July 11, 2022 Posted by | climate change, EUROPE, politics international | Leave a comment

Nationalisation of French energy giant EDF means it is unlikely to spearhead future nuclear power projects in UK, according to top industry insider

By FRANCESCA WASHTELL, FINANCIAL MAIL ON SUNDAY,

The nationalisation of French energy giant EDF means it is unlikely to spearhead future nuclear power projects in the UK, according to a top industry insider.

The Hinkley Point C developer will instead focus investment on reactors in France, the source said. 

French Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne announced last week that the state would buy the 16 per cent of shares in EDF it does not already own. 

EDF, one of Britain’s big household energy suppliers, will continue work on Hinkley in Somerset, as well as Sizewell C in Suffolk, which is still being approved by the UK Government. 

But the source said EDF would now shift its focus to France as it battles the energy crisis sweeping Europe, adding: ‘The odds of it putting money into another UK plant are incredibly small. 

‘This has been a long time coming because being fully nationalised means it can put more money into French projects without having to worry about state aid.’ ………………………………   https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-10998301/Nationalised-EDF-wont-build-new-nuclear-sites-UK.html

July 11, 2022 Posted by | business and costs, politics international, UK | Leave a comment

European parliamentarians vote nuclear and gas as ”green” – another step in the sinister lobbying process of the desperate nuclear industry.

Réseau sortir du nucléaire. 7 July 22, It is a dark day for the environment and the climate. Meeting in plenary in Strasbourg, European parliamentarians validated by 328 votes against 278 the European Commission's proposal to include nuclear and gas in the green taxonomy. We strongly denounce the maneuvering lobbies and the major deleterious role played by France.

This vote marks the culmination of a sinister soap opera marked by unprecedented pressure from lobbies and pro-nuclear states. Bankrupt and ready for any maneuver to benefit from new money, the nuclear industry had laid siege to the European Commission and obtained the order of a report shamelessly minimizing the harmful effects caused by the atom. 

Emmanuel Macron himself was famous for his duplicity, posing as a climate champion while pleading for the inclusion of fossil gas and allying himself with leaders who care little for human rights, such as Viktor Orban, provided that they support the atom. A few days before the vote, the Minister for Energy Transition, Agnès Pannier-Runacher, had again signed a pro-nuclear platform with ministers from other Member States far removed from ecological issues.

The European Parliament, which had initially come out against the inclusion of nuclear power and gas in this text, had the possibility of contesting the delegated act published at the beginning of 2022 by the European Commission, which classified these polluting energies among the technologies "of transition ". But while the "Environment" and "Economy and Finance" committees had refused this classification, the parliamentarians meeting in plenary seem to have finally yielded to the sirens of the lobbies. The elected French Macronists of “Renew” bear an overwhelming responsibility for this catastrophic decision.

To qualify nuclear and fossil gas as “transitional” energies is to make words lose all meaning and totally empty of its meaning a tool initially intended to fight against greenwashing. How can gas, a greenhouse gas emitter, fit into this category? Not to mention nuclear, which is dangerous, polluting even in regular operation, producing unmanageable waste, and too slow and too expensive to be a relevant tool in the face of the climate emergency! Any euro spent on the pursuit of nuclear power will be a wasted resource at the expense of the real solutions to climate change: sobriety, efficiency and renewable energies.

July 7, 2022 Posted by | climate change, EUROPE, politics international | 1 Comment

EU Votes to Label Gas and Nuclear Power Investments as ‘Green’

 https://www.ecowatch.com/eu-gas-nuclear-investments-green.html— 6 July 22,

In a setback for the fight against climate change, 328 of 639 members of the European Parliament (MEPs) have voted in favor of plans to label investments in gas and nuclear power plants as “green,” reported Reuters. Unless 20 of the 27 European Union (EU) member states oppose the proposals adopted by the European Commission in the Complementary Delegated Act, they will pass it into law.

This means that some nuclear and gas projects would be added to the EU taxonomy of economic activities that are considered environmentally sustainable, with some conditions, The Guardian reported. Investors would then be able to label and market investments in the gas and nuclear projects as green, reported Reuters.

Experts said the vote sets a dangerous precedent for other countries, according to The Guardian. Ukraine, as well as climate activists, had appealed to parliament to reject the proposals, saying they would be beneficial to Russian president Vladimir Putin.

“This will delay a desperately needed real sustainable transition and deepen our dependency on Russian fuels,” said environmental and climate activist Greta Thunberg on Twitter.

The proposals allow investments in gas-powered projects to be designated as sustainable as long as “the same energy capacity cannot be generated with renewable sources” and there are plans to transition to renewable sources or gases that are considered “low-carbon,” The Guardian reported. Nuclear power can be classed as renewable if a project pledges to take care of its radioactive waste.

European Commissioner for Financial Stability, Financial Services and the Capital Markets Union Mairead McGuinness said the proposals adopted in the Complementary Delegated Act “ensure that private investments in gas and nuclear, needed for our energy transition, meet strict criteria,” as reported by The Guardian.

Some EU member states view gas — a fossil fuel that produces dangerous carbon dioxide emissions — as an interim substitute for coal during the transition to more sustainable power sources, Reuters reported. Nuclear power, while free of carbon dioxide emissions, results in hazardous radioactive waste.

“By clearing the way for this delegated act, the EU will have unreliable and greenwashed conditions for green investments in the energy sector,” said Dutch MEP Bas Eickhout, who is the vice-president of the European Parliament’s environment committee, as reported by The Guardian.

Austria and Luxembourg, which don’t support nuclear energy or putting a “green” label on gas, vowed to fight the law.

Greenpeace also said it would contest the law in court.

“I am in shock. Russia’s war against Ukraine is a war paid for by climate-heating fossil fuels and the European parliament just voted to boost billions of funding to fossil gas from Russia. How in the world is that in line with Europe’s stance to protect our planet and stand with Ukraine?” said Ukrainian climate scientist and member of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Svitlana Krakovska, as The Guardian reported.

July 7, 2022 Posted by | climate change, EUROPE, politics international | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »