nuclear-news

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

Australian government hypocrisy about its small nuclear reactor deal with China

Double standards on research cooperation with China, Independent Australia 4 January 2021,   The Government is hypocritical in its approval of Australia’s nuclear research body to work with China on the development of nuclear reactors, writes Noel Wauchope.

PRIME MINISTER Scott Morrison’s Liberal Coalition Government seems to remain in silent approval of the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation’s (ANSTOpartnership with a Chinese company to develop Generation IV nuclear technologies such as small nuclear reactors.

But it’s a different story when it comes to the Morrison Government’s concern to put a stop to the Victorian Labor Government’s cooperation with China in developing agricultural, communications and medical research.

We hear very little about the Australian Government’s research connections with China, managed under the Australia-China Science and Research Fund (ACSRF), which has the aim of ‘supporting strategic science, technology and innovation collaboration of mutual benefit to Australia and China’.

One remarkable collaboration between Australia and China is in the strategic partnership between ANSTO and the Shanghai Institute of Applied Physics (SINAP) to develop the Thorium Molten Salt Nuclear Reactor (TMSR) and other Generation IV nuclear reactor designs.

In March 2019, Dr Adi Paterson, then CEO of ANSTO, welcomed renewal of this agreement and was reported as stating that it was “consistent with ANSTO and Australia’s interest in and support of Generation IV reactor systems”. This statement was made at a time when Australia’s federal and state laws clearly prohibited the development of nuclear reactors.

The Age quoted anonymous senior Federal Government sources who reveal that the Australian Government may use its powers to tear up a research agreement between the Victorian Government and China’s Jiangsu province. This agreement was signed in 2012 and renewed in 2019……….

The USA partly funds the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, which strongly advises against cooperative research with China. And, of course, Victorian Liberal Opposition leader Michael O’Brien was quick to join in the chorus, condemning the Labor Government for having the deal with China.

All this makes it all the more inexplicable as to why the Australian Government should have an agreement with China to develop nuclear reactors. Under federal law, Australia prohibits establishing nuclear installations.  ……..

There has been virtually no media coverage of Dr Adi Paterson’s deal with China, which goes back to 2015. I have previously written about this and the secrecy under which it was conducted.

Indeed, ANSTO’s operations and its funding have been conducted in secrecy, under the comfortable shroud of national security.

Right now, there is a move to corporatise the nuclear medicine facility at Lucas Heights as a separate entity to ANSTO. At the same time, the Government is in an unseemly rush to set up a nuclear waste dump near Kimba in South Australia. In the midst of all this came the sudden unexplained resignation of the CEO, Dr Adi Paterson.

The silence on all this is disturbing. It must be especially so for the small rural community of Kimba and for the Indigenous Title Holders as they wait in limbo for the vexed question of the nuclear waste dump to be solved. For the rest of South Australia, that is a concern, too. Victorians may well wonder why their medical research cooperation with China is seen as so dangerous. Meanwhile, is it okay for Australia’s nuclear research body, ANSTO, to work with China on the development of small nuclear reactors?  https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/double-standards-on-research-cooperation-with-china,14664

January 7, 2021 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, politics international, secrets,lies and civil liberties | 1 Comment

Restoring Iran nuclear deal is good for Israel

Restoring Iran nuclear deal is good for Israel – opinion,  Economic pressure is of no value if it is not accompanied by a diplomatic route that will allow Iranian leaders to justify a policy change. Jerusalem Post By NADAV TAMIR   JANUARY 6, 2021 

The Biden administration, to be sworn in on January 20, will have to deal with many urgent issues at home and abroad and to repair the rubble left behind by the Trump administration. For Israel, despite the existential importance of reaching a two-state solution with the Palestinians and preventing a binational catastrophe, there is no more urgent priority at the moment than a return to the 2015 nuclear agreement known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) between the world powers (P5 +1) and Iran. This will immediately stop the prospect of Iranian nuclear breakout, which has become a very real possibility since the Trump administration’s abandonment of the agreement……..
Contrary to what the detractors say, the Biden administration has no intention of allowing Iran to reach military nuclear capabilities. The Biden approach is that in order to prevent Iran from achieving military nuclear capabilities, diplomacy is needed alongside economic pressure. To this end, it is necessary to renew the international coalition vis-à-vis Iran and its expansion, and it is necessary to strengthen the pragmatic side in Iranian regime that favor the good of the Iranian economy over efforts to achieve Shiite hegemony in the Middle East.  ……
The Israeli government needs to learn from the mistakes of its policies vis-à-vis the Obama administration. We must be a player that contributes to the international effort to stop Iran and refrain from pursuing a unilateral and confrontational policy toward the US and other powers. The Israeli confrontation with the Obama administration meant we were not part of the process of building the agreement, turning Israel into a divisive issue in American politics and tearing up the Jewish community, which largely supported Obama’s approach.

In order to stop Iran and to restore Israeli relations with the US and with the American Jewish community, the Israeli government must cooperate with the Biden government in its efforts to return to diplomacy with Iran from its first day in office, on January 20, not a moment too soon.

The writer is a former diplomat and foreign policy adviser to president Shimon Peres, a current senior adviser for international affairs at the Peres Center for Peace and Innovation, and a member of the board of the Mitvim regional foreign policy think tank and the steering committee of the Geneva Initiative. He served at the Israeli Embassy in Washington and as consul general to New England. https://www.jpost.com/opinion/restoring-iran-nuclear-deal-is-good-for-israel-opinion-654501

January 7, 2021 Posted by | Iran, Israel, politics international | Leave a comment

Multinational effort could help solve U.S.-Russia nuclear issue

January 7, 2021 Posted by | 2 WORLD, politics international | Leave a comment

Donald Trump left a hawkish nuclear weapons mess, but Joe Bideb can make alot of improvements, on his own

January 4, 2021 Posted by | politics international, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

How a Soviet spy helped to avoid nuclear war

January 4, 2021 Posted by | politics international, Russia, secrets,lies and civil liberties, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Biden Wants US Back in Iran Nuclear Deal (Video) 

Biden Wants US Back in Iran Nuclear Deal (Video)   https://www.voanews.com/episode/biden-wants-us-back-iran-nuclear-deal-4531861
January 03, 2021,  
 President-elect Joe Biden says he wants the United States to return to the 2015 Iran nuclear deal — if Tehran also resumes compliance. VOA’s Diplomatic Correspondent Cindy Saine reports from Washington that experts say they expect a shift away from the Trump administration’s maximum pressure campaign of crippling economic sanctions on Iran, but a U.S. return to the nuclear deal will not be easy.

January 4, 2021 Posted by | Iran, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Trump’s nuclear construction deal with Poland – strained with Biden victory ?

Poland plays down fears over nuclear power plans despite Biden victory.  Rightwing government’s relations with incoming US administration strained after Trump construction deal, Ft.com 3 Jan 2021, 

  Joe Biden’s victory in the US presidential election will not derail Washington’s co-operation with Warsaw on plans to develop its own nuclear energy sector, Poland’s climate minister has said. Donald Trump’s administration built close ties with Warsaw, where the rightwing government is led by Jaroslaw Kaczynski’s Law and Justice party.
In October the US signed an agreement to draw up a design for Poland’s proposed nuclear programme, which envisages constructing six nuclear plants with a capacity of 6-9GW in 2033-43. But relations with Mr Biden’s incoming administration have been cooler.
During his campaign, Mr Biden sparked consternation in Poland by mentioning the country in the same breath as Belarus — where Alexander Lukashenko cracked down brutally last year after claiming victory in a flawed election — and “the rise of totalitarian regimes around the world”. Poland’s president Andrzej Duda — like his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin — was among the few world leaders who did not congratulate Mr Biden on his November 3 victory until it was confirmed in mid-December by the US electoral college.

However, Michal Kurtyka, climate minister, played down concern that the change would have a significant impact on Poland’s plans.

 ……France’s EDF has held talks with Poland over the project. But the frontrunner is the US, which Poland regards as its security guarantor. The Trump administration has been pushing for American companies such as nuclear reactor maker Westinghouse and engineering group Bechtel to be involved.  ……
 Despite the climate ministry’s enthusiasm, big questions remain. One issue is timing. Many nuclear projects in the EU are far behind schedule, and just 12 years before the first plant is due on line Poland has yet to choose a location or confirm its financing model.
 “Assuming that we can have the first nuclear plant up and running in 2033 is beyond optimistic,” said Joanna Flisowska, head of Greenpeace’s climate and energy unit in Poland. “We need to replace coal power stations now, because most are already set to close by 2035 at the latest . . . So nuclear is just the wrong answer. It’s too late. It’s too expensive and it’s not really a technology that works well with renewables.”  ……  https://www.ft.com/content/5c42b1c2-f790-49ee-af0b-b3e8419be8c1
A comment on original
The nuclear nuts have found a sucker—Poland which apparently wants an investor to share risk. Which risk? The long-run risk of nuclear contamination? Where are they going to store the spent fuel? They could ask Japan. Poland sees a nuclear future just as Germany is shutting nuclear power down due to the risks. In the UK the nuclear power gambit cannot find investors because none wants the risks. The investors want indemnity from the risks. 

January 4, 2021 Posted by | EUROPE, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Turkey’s aspirations to become a nuclear weapons power

January 4, 2021 Posted by | politics international, Turkey, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Glenn Greenwald: Julian Assange’s Imprisonment Exposes U.S. Myths About Freedom

January 4, 2021 Posted by | legal, politics international, secrets,lies and civil liberties, UK | Leave a comment

India and Pakistan exchange list of nuclear installations

India, Pakistan exchange list of nuclear installations

The exchange was made in accordance with Article-II of the Agreement on Prohibition of Attacks against Nuclear Installations and Facilities between Pakistan and India.   Hindustan Times, INDIA  Jan 01, 2021,  Press Trust of India by Kunal Gaurav Islamabad   

Pakistan and India on Friday conducted the annual practice of exchanging the list of their nuclear installations under a bilateral arrangement that prohibits them from attacking each other’s atomic facilities.

The exchange was made in accordance with Article-II of the Agreement on Prohibition of Attacks against Nuclear Installations and Facilities between Pakistan and India, signed on December 31, 1988, the Foreign Office (FO) said in a statement here.

It said that “the list of nuclear installations and facilities in Pakistan was officially handed over to a representative of the Indian High Commission at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs today, at 1100 hrs (PST).” “The Indian Ministry of External Affairs in New Delhi handed over the list of Indian Nuclear installations and facilities to a representative of the Pakistan High Commission at 1130 hrs (IST),” it added.

The agreement contains the provision that both countries inform each other of their nuclear installations and facilities on January 1 every year.

This has been done consecutively since January 1, 1992, according to the FO.

The exchange of information comes despite the ongoing tensions between India and Pakistan…….. https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/india-pakistan-exchange-list-of-nuclear-installations/story-UGFFx7sfYdK4QWTLKNYtxM.html

January 2, 2021 Posted by | India, politics international, safety | Leave a comment

Brexit: UK and Euratom have signed a Nuclear Cooperation Agreement (NCA)

World Nuclear News 29th Dec 2020, The UK and the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) have signed a
Nuclear Cooperation Agreement (NCA). This is separate from the wider UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement that was also announced on 24 December and which has since been approved by ambassadors from the 27 EU Member States, paving the way for it to take effect on 1 January. UK lawmakers will tomorrow return to the House of Commons, the lower chamber of parliament,
to vote on the so-called post-Brexit trade deal.

https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/UK-and-Euratom-sign-Nuclear-Cooperation-Agreement

December 31, 2020 Posted by | politics international, UK | Leave a comment

How the marketing of American weapons determines U.S. foreign policy on China

Key Pentagon Official Turned China Policy Over to Arms Industry & Taiwan Supporters  October 28, 2020,  The triumph of corporate and foreign interests over one of the most consequential decisions regarding China is likely to bedevil U.S. foreign policy for years to come, writes Gareth Porter. https://consortiumnews.com/2020/10/28/key-pentagon-official-turned-china-policy-over-to-arms-industry-taiwan-supporters/   By Gareth Porter
The Grayzone   

When the United States finalized a set of seven arms sales packages to Taiwan in August, including 66 upgraded F-16 fighter planes and longer-range air-to-ground missiles that could hit sensitive targets on mainland China, it shifted U.S. policy sharply toward a much more aggressive stance on the geo-strategic island at the heart of military tensions between the United States and China.

Branded “Fortress Taiwan” by the Pentagon, the ambitious arms deal was engineered by Randall Schriver, a veteran pro-Taiwan activist and anti-China hardliner whose think tank had been financed by America’s biggest arms contractors and by the Taiwan government itself.  

Since assuming the post of assistant secretary of defense for Asian and Pacific security affairs in early 2018, Schriver has focused primarily on granting his major arms company patrons the vaunted arms deals they had sought for years.

The arms sales Schriver has overseen represent the most dangerous U.S. escalation against China in years. The weapons systems will give Taiwan the capability to strike Chinese military and civilian targets far inland, thus emboldening those determined to push for independence from China.

Although no U.S. administration has committed to defending Taiwan since Washington normalized relations with China, the Pentagon is developing the weapons systems and military strategy it would need for a full-scale war. If a conflict breaks out, Taiwan is likely to be at its center.

Returning Favors

Schriver is a longtime advocate of massive, highly provocative arms sales to Taiwan who has advanced the demand that the territory be treated more like a sovereign, independent state. His lobbying has been propelled by financial support from major arms contractors and Taiwan through two institutional bases: a consulting business and a “think tank” that also led the charge for arms sales to U.S. allies in East Asia.

The first of these outfits was a consulting firm called Armitage International, which Schriver founded in 2005 with Richard Armitage, a senior Pentagon and State Department official in the Reagan and George W. Bush administrations.

Schriver had served as Armitage’s chief of staff in the State Department and then as deputy sssistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific affairs. (Armitage, a lifelong Republican, recently released a video endorsement of Joseph Biden for president).

As a partner in Armitage International, Schriver was paid consulting fees by two major arms contractors — Boeing and Raytheon — both of which hoped to obtain arms sales to Taiwan and other East Asian allies to compensate for declining profits from Pentagon contracts.

Schriver started a second national-security venture in 2008 as president and CEO of a new lobbying front called The Project 2049 Institute, where Armitage served as chairman of the board. The name of the new institution referred to the date by which some anti-China hawks believed China intended to achieve global domination.

From its inception, The Project 2049 Institute focused primarily on U.S. military cooperation with Northeast Asian allies — and Taiwan in particular — with an emphasis on selling them more and better U.S. arms.

Schriver, known as the Taiwan government’s main ally in Washington, became the key interlocutor for major U.S. arms makers looking to cash in potential markets in Taiwan. He was able to solicit financial support for the institute from Lockheed Martin, General Atomics, BAE and Raytheon, according to Project 2049’s internet site, which provides no figures on the amounts given by each prior to 2017.

Equally important, however, is The Project 2049 Institute’s heavy dependence on grants from the government of Taiwan. The most recent annual report of the institute shows that more than a third of its funding in 2017 came either directly from the Taiwan government or a quasi-official organization representing its national security institutions.

Project 2049 received a total of $280,000 from the Taiwan Ministry of Defense and Taiwan’s unofficial diplomatic office in Washington (TECRO) as well as $60,000 from the “Prospect Foundation,” whose officers are all former top national-security officials of Taiwan.  In 2017, another $252,000 in support for Schriver’s institute came from the State Department, at a time when it was taking an especially aggressive public anti-China line.

By creating a non-profit “think tank,” Schriver and Armitage had found a way to skirt rules aimed at minimizing conflicts of interest in the executive branch.

The Executive Order 13770 issued by President Donald Trump in early 2017 that was supposed to tighten restrictions on conflicts of interest barred Schriver from participation for a period of two years “in any particular matter that is directly and substantially related to my former employer or former clients….”

 

However, the financial support for Project 2049 from Boeing, Lockheed-Martin, General Atomics, Northrop Grumman and Raytheon, and from Taiwanese official and quasi-official bodies were considered as outside that prohibition, because they were not technically “clients.”

Big Wins for Supporters

Brought into the Pentagon at the beginning 2018 to push China policy toward a more confrontational stance, Schriver spent 2018 and the first half of 2019 moving proposals for several major arms sales to Taiwan — including the new F-16s and the air-to-ground missiles capable of hitting sensitive targets in China — through inter-agency consultations.

He secured White House approval for the arms packages and Congress was informally notified in August 2019, however, Congress was not notified of the decision until August 2020. That was because Trump was engaged in serious trade negotiations with China and wanted to avoid unnecessary provocation to Beijing.

Lockheed Martin was the biggest corporate winner in the huge and expensive suite of arms sales to Taiwan. It reaped the largest single package of the series: a 10-year, $8 billion deal for which it was the “principal contractor” to provide 66 of its own F-16 fighters to Taiwan, along with the accompanying engines, radars and other electronic warfare equipment.

The seven major arms sales packages included big wins for other corporate supporters as well: Boeing’s AGM-84E Standoff Land Attack Missile (SLAM), which could be fired by the F-16s and hit sensitive military and even economic targets in China’s Nanjing region, and sea-surveillance drones from General Atomics.

In February 2020, shortly after Schriver left the Pentagon, the Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen received the lobbyist in her office in Taipei and publicly thanked him for having “facilitated the sale of F-16V fighter jets to Taiwan and attached great importance to the role and status of Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific region.” It was an extraordinary expression of a foreign government’s gratitude for a U.S. official’s service to its interests.

Having delivered the goods for the big military contractors and the Taiwan government, Schriver returned to The Project 2049 Institute, replacing Armitage as chairman of the board.

Neocon Vision

The arms sales to Taiwan represented a signal victory for those who still hoping to reverse the official U.S. acceptance the People’s Republic of China as the legitimate government of all of China.

Ever since the 1982 U.S.-China Joint Communique, in which the United States vowed that it had “no intention of interfering in China’s internal affairs or pursuing a policy of “two China’s” or “one China, one Taiwan,” anti-China hardliners who opposed that concession have insisted on making the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act, which called for the United States to sell Taiwan such arms “as may be necessary to enable Taiwan to maintain a sufficient self-defense capability” as keystone of U.S. Taiwan policy.

The neoconservative Project for a New American Century (PNAC) led by William Kristol and Robert Kagan wanted to go even further; it pushed for the United States to restore its early Cold War commitment to defend Taiwan from any Chinese military assault.

Thus a 1999 PNAC statement called on the United States to “declare unambiguously that it will come to Taiwan’s defense in the event of an attack or a blockade against Taiwan, including against the offshore islands of Matsu and Kinmen.”

After leaving the World Bank in 2008 amidst a scandal involving his girlfriend, Paul Wolfowitz – the author of that 1999 statement on East Asia – turned his attention to protecting Taiwan.

Despite the absence of any business interest he was known to have in Taiwan, Wolfowitz was chairman of the board of the U.S.-Taiwan Business Council from 2008 to 2018. The Project 2049 Institute was a key member of the council, along with all the major arms companies hoping to make sales to Taiwan.

During the first days of Wolfowitz’s chairmanship, the U.S.-China Business Council published a lengthy study warning of a deteriorating air power balance between China and Taiwan.  The study was obviously written under the auspices of one or more of the major arms companies who were members, but it was attributed only to “the Council’s membership” and to “several outside experts” whom it did not name.

The study criticized both the George W. Bush and Obama administrations for refusing to provide the latest F-16 models to Taiwan, warning that U.S. forces would be forced to defend the island directly if the jets were not immediately supplied.  It also called for providing Taiwan with land-attack cruise missiles capable of hitting some of the most sensitive military and civilian targets in the Nanjing province that lay opposite Taiwan.

The delicacy of the political-diplomatic situation regarding Taiwan’s status, and the reality of China’s ability to reunify the country if it chooses to do so has deterred every administration since George H.W. Bush sold 150 F-16 fighter jets to Taiwan. That was, until Shriver’s provocative “Fortress Taiwan” sale went through.

The triumph of corporate and foreign interests in determining one of the most consequential U.S. decisions regarding China is likely to bedevil U.S. policy for years to come.  At a moment when the Pentagon is pushing a rearmament program based mainly on preparation for war with China, an influential former official backed by arms industry and Taiwanese money has helped set the stage for a potentially catastrophic confrontation.

Gareth Porter is an independent investigative journalist who has covered national security policy since 2005 and was the recipient of Gellhorn Prize for Journalism in 2012.  His most recent book is The CIA Insider’s Guide to the Iran Crisis, co-authored with John Kiriakou, just published in February.

This article is from The Grayzone

December 29, 2020 Posted by | investigative journalism, marketing of nuclear, politics, politics international, Reference, secrets,lies and civil liberties, USA, weapons and war | 4 Comments

China rejects reports of hitch in investment pact talks with EU

China rejects reports of hitch in investment pact talks with EU, By Reuters Staff 25 Dec 20, 

BERLIN/BEIJING (Reuters) – The Chinese foreign ministry on Thursday denied that talks on an investment pact between the European Union and China had run into complications due to Chinese demands on nuclear power investment.

Negotiations have stalled at the last stretch because China is raising additional demands on nuclear energy, German magazine WirtschaftsWoche reported on Wednesday.

“As I understand, talks are goings smoothly,” Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin told a news briefing on Thursday.

“The news about talks being stuck because China has put up more requests about nuclear energy is fake,” Wang said.

He did not deny or confirm that China had made fresh demands on nuclear energy investment.

The issue of nuclear power is controversial among EU countries because such investments could put sensitive infrastructure under Chinese control………https://www.reuters.com/article/eu-china-trade-nuclear-idUSKBN28Y0OC

December 25, 2020 Posted by | China, politics international | Leave a comment

South Korea: mayors and governors of all 17 major cities and provinces call on Japan not to dump Fukushima radioactive water into the ocean

Korea JoongAng Daily 22nd Dec 2020, The mayors and governors of all 17 major cities and provinces in Korea adopted a joint statement warning against Japan releasing contaminated water into the ocean from its crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant. In a joint statement Tuesday, the Governors Association of Korea, which includes cities that are administered as provinces, called on the Japanese government to “immediately halt discussions to release the radioactive water from Fukushima” and to “share information to the public in a transparent manner.”

The governors’ statement comes as Japan is nearing a decision on plans to release over 1.2 million tons of contaminated water
from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant into the Pacific Ocean.
https://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/2020/12/22/national/socialAffairs/Fukushima-nuclear-plant-radioactive-water/20201222180600475.html

 

December 24, 2020 Posted by | politics international, South Korea | Leave a comment

Chinese demands on nuclear power investment complicate EU talks

Chinese demands on nuclear power investment complicate EU talks – WiWo, Reuters Staff   BERLIN (Reuters) 23 De 20, – Negotiations between the European Union and China on an investment agreement have stoche reported on Wednesday.

The issue of nuclear power is controversial among EU countries because such invealled at the last stretch because China is raising additional demands on nuclear energy, German magazine WirtschaftsWstments could put sensitive infrastructure under Chinese control.

“China wants to invest in European nuclear power plants and use Chinese technology in this area,” WirtschaftsWoche cited EU sources as saying.

During the negotiations, China had indicated to its European counterparts that it viewed its own technology in this field as more advanced, the report said

December 24, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, EUROPE, politics international | Leave a comment