Professor Paul Rogers – a witness explaining how Julian Assange is to be extradited for POLITICAL REASONS
Julian Assange clearly political, says extradition trial witness, https://www.theaustralian.com.au/world/julian-assange-clearly-political-says-extradition-trial-witness/news-story/735ef7d40551d52f4f7f12d9d6c318d7 JACQUELIN MAGNAY, FOREIGN CORRESPONDENT@jacquelinmagnay, THE TIMES, SEPTEMBER 10, 2020
Julian Assange’s nomination for the Senate during the 2013 federal election campaign and the establishment of the WikiLeaks political party the year before “clearly shows’’ the WikiLeaks founder has a political view and a libertarian standpoint, a witness has told the Old Bailey.
Professor Paul Rogers, the emeritus professor of peace studies at Bradford University, was called as a witness by Assange’s team to persuade the judge that Assange is being targeted for political means, and thus an extradition to the US should not be permitted under the Anglo-US extradition treaty.
In day three of the court hearing where Assange, 49, is objecting to extradition to the US, Professor Rogers said in written testimony that Assange’s expressed views, opinions and activities demonstrate very clearly “political opinions”. He cited how Assange had formed the political party to contest the Australian general election and “central of this is his view to put far greater attention to human rights’’.
He added: “The clash of those opinions with those of successive US administrations, but in particular the present administration which has moved to prosecute him for publications made almost a decade ago, suggest that he is regarded primarily as a political opponent who must experience the full wrath of government, even with suggestions of punishment by death made by senior officials including the current President.’’
But US prosecutor James Lewis QC said: “Assistant US Attorney Gordon D. Kromberg explicitly refutes that this is a political prosecution but rather an evidence-based prosecution.’’
In documents to the court, the prosecution says the investigation into Assange had been ongoing before the Trump administration came into office.
“Assange’s arguments are contradicted by judicial findings, made in the US District Court of the District of Columbia, that the investigation into the unauthorised disclosure of classified information on the WikiLeaks website remained ongoing when the present administration came into office,” the prosecution says.
Mr Lewis added: “If this was a political prosecution, wouldn’t you expect him to be prosecuted for publishing the collateral murder video?’’https://www.theaustralian.com.au/world/julian-assange-clearly-political-says-extradition-trial-witness/news-story/735ef7d40551d52f4f7f12d9d6c318d7
He said Assange was being extradited to face charges relating to complicity in illegal acts to obtain or receive voluminous databases of classified information, his agreement and attempt to obtain classified information through computer hacking; and publishing certain classified documents that contained the unredacted names of innocent people who risked their safety and freedom to provide information to the United States and its allies, including local Afghans and Iraqis, journalists, religious leaders, human rights advocates, and political dissidents from repressive regimes.
Professor Rogers told the court the motivation of Assange and WikiLeaks was to achieve greater transparency and was political. The trial continues.
The United States and its allies must learn how to live safely with a nuclear North Korea
On North Korea, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace,Toby Dalton, Co-director and Senior Fellow Nuclear Policy Program, 9 Sep 20,
The United States and its allies must learn how to live safely with a nuclear North
Three practical goals should inform a new U.S. policy toward North Korea:
- Prevent crises that could lead to war
- Cap North Korea’s arsenal of nuclear and long-range missiles and prevent their export
- Buffer the alliances with Japan and South Korea against likely North Korean provocations
Additional objectives—for instance, preventing illicit trafficking and improving human rights—are important but ultimately secondary. Though desirable, regime change is too risky and uncertain to pursue, as recent experiences in Iraq and Libya suggest.
Accomplishing these three goals will require new negotiations just to establish rules of the road. North Korean demands are bound to be distasteful, but the costs of a negotiated agreement would be far less than those incurred through war or through increased military deployments in East Asia and the construction of a more extensive missile defense shield.
The costs of a negotiated agreement would be far less than those incurred through war.
Reaching a deal will involve helping North Korea overcome its suspicious, hard-nosed attitude. But an even greater challenge will be changing how Washington thinks about detecting and addressing the Kim regime’s possible cheating on a deal……… https://carnegieendowment.org/2020/09/09/on-north-korea-pub-82524
India and China both have a nuclear no-first-use policy- nuclear war between them is less likely
India–China border dispute: the curious incident of a nuclear dog that didn’t bark, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, By Ramesh Thakur, Manpreet Sethi, September 7, 2020 On June 15, nuclear-armed China and India fought with fists, rocks, and clubs along the world’s longest un-demarcated and contested boundary. Twenty Indian soldiers were killed; Indian estimates put the Chinese dead at around 40. The two countries remain in a state of military standoff.
Like the case of the dog that didn’t bark, which interested the great fictional detective Sherlock Holmes, the nuclear dimension of the recent border clashes was conspicuous by its invisibility. This may be in part because of the nuclear no-first-use policy expressed in the official nuclear doctrines of both countries. At a time when geopolitical tensions are high in several potential nuclear theaters, the nuclear arms control architecture is crumbling, and a new nuclear arms race is revving, there is a critical need to look for ideas that can prevent potential crises from escalating. Other nuclear powers can learn from China’s and India’s nuclear policies.
The normalization of nuclear threats. Over the last few years, leaders of many of the nuclear weapons states have taken to nuclear bluster. After the outbreak of the Ukraine crisis and annexation of Crimea in 2014, facing hostile Western criticism, Russian President Vladimir Putin pointedly remarked, “Russia is one of the most powerful nuclear nations”—a subtle but clear nuclear warning to the West. In July 2016, asked in Parliament if she would be prepared to authorize a nuclear strike that could kill 100,000 people, British Prime Minister Theresa May unwaveringly answered, “Yes.” And who can forget the tit-for-tat exchange of belligerent rhetoric by US President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un in 2017 before the blossoming of their bromance in 2018?
In February 2019, after an attack on Indian paramilitary forces at Pulwama led to a clash between the air forces of India and Pakistan, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan warned of the possibility of a nuclear war. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, caught in the heat of an election campaign, responded that India’s nukes were not reserved for celebrating the fireworks festival of Diwali. After India revoked Kashmir’s autonomous status that August, Khan reiterated that nuclear war was a real risk. His foreign minister repeated the warning in Geneva later that same year.
This rhetoric, besides being dangerous, has given rise to another problem. The more the leaders of the nuclear armed states revalidate the role of nuclear weapons in their national security, the more they embolden calls of nuclear weapons acquisition in other countries like Germany, Japan, South Korea and Australia.
China and India’s nuclear reticence. This is where China and India, in the midst of a military crisis, provide a striking contrast. Neither side has drawn attention to its nuclear weapons in the 2020 border clashes. Nor have many analysts across the globe expressed alarm that the prolonged state of disquiet between the two could spiral out of control into a nuclear exchange……….
China, India, and no first use. An important dimension, however, that has been underestimated in explaining the two countries’ apparent nuclear sobriety is the similarity in their approach to nuclear weapons and deterrence.
They are the only two of the nine nuclear armed states with the stated commitment to a no-first-use policy, and the force postures to match. …….
In 2014, China and India called for negotiations on a no-first-use convention among the world’s nuclear powers. It might be time for the United States and other countries to give it a serious look. Indeed, the China–India border standoff demonstrates the practical utility of a nuclear policy centered on no-first-use and merits wider international attention. https://thebulletin.org/2020/09/india-china-border-dispute-the-curious-incident-of-a-nuclear-dog-that-didnt-bark/
IAEA Providing Support for Saudi Arabia as It Plans to Adopt Nuclear Energy
|
IAEA Providing Support for Saudi Arabia as It Plans to Adopt Nuclear Energy: Saudi TV, By Reuters, Sept. 7, 2020, https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2020/09/07/world/middleeast/07reuters-saudi-arabia-nuclearpower-iaea.html?auth=login-facebookDUBAI — The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) director general Rafael Grossi was quoted on Monday as saying that Saudi Arabia was preparing to adopt nuclear energy and the agency was providing support, Saudi state TV Al-Ekhbariya reported. “Saudi Arabia is interested in nuclear energy and we are working on providing it with the necessary support,” Al-Ekhbariya quoted Grossi as saying. The kingdom has said it wants to tap nuclear technology for peaceful purposes and use nuclear power to diversify its energy mix. (Reporting by Dahlia Nehme; Editing by Rania El Gamal and Susan Fenton) |
|
The hazards of nuclear reactors in the Gulf region, and Saudi Arabia’s ambiguous energy program
 Why US wants Saudis to follow UAE’s path to nuclear energy, Christian Science Monitor , 4 Sept 20, ” …… the Saudi energy program is shrouded in ambiguity, even confusion. Saudi rulers have shuffled the program between various government and royal agencies as it has stumbled to get off the ground, with few technical advancements.Concerned observers and veteran diplomats point to statements made by the crown prince during his visit to the U.S. in March 2018 that left no room for similar ambiguity over Saudi intentions should Iran pursue a nuclear weapon. “Without a doubt, if Iran ever developed a nuclear bomb, we would follow suit as soon as possible,” Crown Prince Mohammed told CBS in an interview. “Given Mohammed bin Salman’s statements and [Saudi Arabia’s] refusal to sign protocols on uranium enrichment, we cannot rule out the program being used for military reasons,” says Antonino Occhiuto, analyst at the U.S.-based Gulf States Analytics……… Regional hazardsThe mere presence of nuclear reactors in a Gulf region wracked with tensions, divisions, and asymmetrical warfare could be a security threat. The UAE will be shipping enriched uranium fuel and radioactive waste through the waters of the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, narrow shipping lanes between Gulf states and Iran that have recently witnessed acts of sabotage and are a flashpoint of U.S.-Iran tensions. And just last year, a series of crude drones struck at the heart of Saudi Arabia’s ARAMCO oil processing facilities, causing immense damage and bringing Saudi oil production offline. Missiles from neighboring Yemen fall onto Saudi territory on a regular basis, even striking the capital, Riyadh. Iran-backed proxies across Yemen and even Iraq have entrenched ballistic missiles pointed at Gulf cities and sites as a defensive line should Tehran feel threatened……. https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2020/0903/Why-US-wants-Saudis-to-follow-UAE-s-path-to-nuclear-energy?cmpid=shared-email&cmpid=shared-twitter |
|
South Korea adviser calls for ‘six-party security summit’ to discuss North Korea nuclear issue
Moon’s adviser calls for ‘six-party security summit’ to discuss N.K. nuclear issue, Korea Herald, By Yonhap, 4 Sept 20, SEOUL (Yonhap) —A special security adviser to President Moon Jae-in on Friday suggested reviving the six-party talks on North Korea’s nuclear program in the form of a six-way summit, saying the issue is not a matter only between Washington and Pyongyang.
Moon Chung-in, special adviser for diplomatic and security affairs, made the remark during a security forum hosted by the Korea Institute for National Unification, stressing the importance of a “top-down approach” in efforts to resolve the issue.
“We need to revise the six-party talks that we failed in the past and we need to hold a ‘six-party security summit’ so that the leaders can discuss the issue of security and come up with an agreement on common security,” he said.
Iran Nuclear Deal Parties ‘United in Resolve’ to Preserve Agreement
 Iran Nuclear Deal Parties ‘United in Resolve’ to Preserve Agreement https://www.voanews.com/middle-east/voa-news-iran/iran-nuclear-deal-parties-united-resolve-preserve-agreement, By VOA News, September 02, 2020 A European Union official leading talks among Iran and a group of five world powers Tuesday said the participants are committed to keeping alive the 2015 nuclear deal that restricted Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief.
Helga Schmid tweeted after the meeting in Vienna that “participants are united in resolve to preserve the #IranDeal and find a way to ensure full implementation of the agreement despite current challenges.” “All participants reaffirmed the importance of preserving the agreement recalling that it is a key element of the global nuclear non-proliferation architecture, as endorsed by United Nations Security Council Resolution 2231,” Schmid said in a later statement. The deal came under stress last year when Iran announced would take steps to walk away from its commitments, complaining it was not getting the promised economic relief after the United States imposed fresh sanctions. Those sanctions came after the Trump administration withdrew from the agreement in 2018, arguing it did too little to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons while giving the country too much in sanctions relief. Iran has denied it worked to build nuclear arms, and says it is able and prepared to reverse the actions it has taken to back away from the deal. Tehran has surpassed limits on the amount of enriched uranium it can hold at one time as well as the level to which it is allowed to enrich the material and has installed more advanced centrifuges. Representatives from Britain, China, France, Russia and Germany all took part in Tuesday’s talks, the latest in their efforts to salvage the agreement. Speaking with reporters after the meeting, Chinese representative Fu Cong called on Iran to return to full compliance with its requirements, but also said “the economic benefit that is due to Iran needs to be provided.” The U.N. Security Council resolution that enshrined the nuclear agreement includes mechanisms for participants to address non-compliance, and last month the United States sought to reinstate U.N. sanctions based on Iran’s violations of its requirements. The other signatories have rejected the U.S. move, something they reaffirmed at Tuesday’s talks. Schmid’s statement said that because the United States announced it was halting its participation in the nuclear deal and had not participated in any related activities since that time in May 2018, all of the remaining signatories agree it “therefore could not be considered as a participant state,” and thus “cannot initiate the process of reinstating U.N. sanctions.” The United States has argued that because it was an original member of the agreement, it retains the right to seek the snapback sanctions. The representatives at Tuesday’s talks also welcomed Iran’s decision last week to allow the U.N. atomic energy agency to inspect two sites where Iran is suspected of having stored or used undeclared nuclear material in the early 2000s. |
North Korea’s nuclear activity still a ‘serious concern’: UN watchdog
Nuclear activities in North Korea remain a cause for “serious concern,” and the rogue totalitarian state continues to enrich uranium, which could be used in an atomic weapon, the UN’s watchdog said in a recent report.
The activities by the country are in “clear violation of relevant UN Security Council resolutions,” the International Atomic Energy Agency wrote in the report that was released Tuesday.
The report also notes that what was once the heart of the country’s nuclear program, the Yongbyon site, has likely been shut down since 2018 — and that no plutonium has been produced there in the past year.
Nuclear activities in North Korea remain a cause for “serious concern,” and the rogue totalitarian state continues to enrich uranium, which could be used in an atomic weapon, the UN’s watchdog said in a recent report.
The activities by the country are in “clear violation of relevant UN Security Council resolutions,” the International Atomic Energy Agency wrote in the report that was released Tuesday.
The report also notes that what was once the heart of the country’s nuclear program, the Yongbyon site, has likely been shut down since 2018 — and that no plutonium has been produced there in the past year.
Still, the information it’s able to get about the program is “declining” because the agency’s been locked out of the hermit nation.
“Knowledge of the DPRK’s nuclear program is limited and, as further nuclear activities take place in the country, this knowledge is declining,” the report states.
If the arms treaty with Russia ends USA will spend even more than the planned $1.2 trillion on nuclear weapons
 US nuclear weapons budget could skyrocket if Russia treaty ends, Defense News, 27 Aug 20
By: Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― The New START nuclear pact’s demise could cost the Department of Defense as much as $439 billion for modernization, plus $28 billion in annual maintenance costs, the Congressional Budget Office said in a report published Tuesday.
That price estimate, as the United States and Russia remain at odds over the treaty, reflects a threefold increase in weapons production costs. With Washington and Moscow’s responses to the expiration of New START unclear, CBO explored several possible paths, including other less expensive options. “If the New START treaty expired, the United States could choose to make no changes to its current plans for nuclear forces, in which case it would incur no additional costs,” the CBO study found. “If the United States chose to increase its forces in response to the expiration of the treaty, modest expansions could be relatively inexpensive and could be done quickly. Larger expansions could be quite costly, however, and could take several decades to accomplish.” The New START treaty limits each country to no more than 1,550 deployed nuclear warheads and 700 deployed missiles and bombers. Signed in 2010 by then-U.S. President Barack Obama and then-Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, the pact would expire Feb. 5, but includes an option to extend it for another five years without needing the approval of either country’s legislature. The analysis comes amid predictions of flattening defense budgets and as the United States and Russia concluded two days of arms control talks in Vienna last week with some signs of a possible willingness to extend the existing New START deal. A key sticking point is the U.S. demand to include China in any new treaty, even as China has repeatedly refused…….. Russia has offered an extension without any conditions. U.S. negotiator Marshall Billingslea indicated the U.S. was willing to talk about an extension but only if there were a politically binding framework for making changes to New START, which he called “deeply flawed.” House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith, D-Wash., and Senate Foreign Relations Committee ranking member Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., said a failure to renew would drive the U.S. toward a dangerous and unaffordable arms race, as Russia would use a U.S. exit to “quickly expand its arsenal.” “Extending the New START Treaty for a full five years is clearly the right financial and national security choice,” they said in a joint statement. “America cannot afford a costly and dangerous nuclear arms race, particularly in the middle of our current financial, political, and health crises. We again call on the Trump Administration to extend the New START Treaty today.” Arms control advocates have likewise warned against the U.S. allowing the treaty to lapse with no limits on their nuclear arsenals, after both Moscow and Washington withdrew from the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty last year. “Ever-increasing spending on nuclear weapons without an arms control framework that bounds U.S. and Russian nuclear forces is a recipe for budget chaos, undermining strategic stability, and damaging the health of the global nonproliferation regime,” said the Arms Control Association’s director for disarmament and threat reduction policy, Kingston Reif. “Such an approach also flies in the face of longstanding bipartisan Congressional support for the pursuit of modernization and arms control in tandem.” An expansion in nuclear weapons spending would likely place pressure on other parts of the national defense budget. CBO previously concluded the U.S. will spend $1.2 trillion over the next three decades on nuclear-weapons. Meanwhile, the Pentagon is not budgeting for New START’s expiration, according to a recent GAO report. U.S. lawmakers of both parties are pressuring the White House to extend the pact. ………. https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/08/25/cbo-us-nuclear-weapons-budget-could-skyrocket-if-russia-treaty-ends/ |
|
Iran to grant IAEA inspectors access to suspected ex-nuclear sites
|
Iran to grant IAEA inspectors access to suspected ex-nuclear sites, BBC News, 26 Aug 20, Iran has agreed to give International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors access to two suspected former nuclear sites.A joint statement said Iran was doing so in good faith to resolve outstanding issues related to nuclear safeguards.
The agreement came during a visit to Tehran by the IAEA’s director general. The global watchdog has criticised Iran for not answering its questions about possible undeclared nuclear material and nuclear-related activities at the two locations, and denying it access. It is thought the activities took place long before 2015, when Iran struck a landmark deal with world powers that placed limits on its nuclear programme. Iran insists it has never sought nuclear weapons, but evidence previously collected by the IAEA suggests that until 2003 it conducted “a range of activities relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device”…………. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-53922717 |
|
Senators Warn Trump Saudi-Chinese Uranium Plant Risks Spread of Nuclear Weapons
Senators Warn Trump Saudi-Chinese Uranium Plant Risks Spread of Nuclear Weapons, WSJGroup of Democratic and Republican lawmakers request briefings on the matter, in letter to the president, By Warren P. Strobel, Aug. 19, 2020 , WASHINGTON—A bipartisan group of U.S. senators warned President Trump on Wednesday that Saudi Arabia’s undeclared nuclear and missile programs pose a serious threat to efforts to stop the spread of nuclear weapons in the region and requested briefings on the subject.
The letter follows a Wall Street Journal report earlier this month that the Saudis, with Chinese help, had constructed a facility for extracting uranium yellowcake from uranium ore, an advance in the oil-rich kingdom’s drive to master nuclear technology, according to Western officials.
“Saudi Arabia is positioning itself to develop the front-end of the [nuclear] fuel cycle. These technologies, if unchecked, would give Riyadh a latent capacity to produce fissile material for nuclear weapons,” Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D., Md.), along with two other Democratic and three Republican senators, wrote in a letter to the president.
The Saudi Energy Ministry earlier this month categorically denied having built a uranium ore facility in the area of northwest Saudi Arabia described by some of the Western officials. It said that extraction of minerals—including uranium—is a key part of the country’s economic diversification strategy.
Manufacturing uranium yellowcake, a milled form of uranium ore, is a relatively early step in the nuclear cycle. It takes multiple additional steps and technology to process and enrich uranium sufficiently for it to power a civil nuclear energy plant. At very high enrichment levels, uranium can fuel a nuclear weapon……. (subscribers only) https://www.wsj.com/articles/senators-warn-trump-saudi-chinese-uranium-plant-risks-spread-of-nuclear-weapons-11597860000
UK relations with China at a low point; bad news for nuclear power projects
|
UK nuclear power: The next Huawei? DW, 21 Aug, 20Once a key part of the UK’s energy plans, nuclear power faces rising costs, cheaper renewables and domestic opposition. It also finds itself at the center of a row between London and Beijing that could prove fatal.
London’s relations with China — hailed as entering a “golden era” only four years ago — have deteriorated badly over Hong Kong, hitting a nadir when the UK finally bowed to US pressure to ditch Huawei’s involvement in its new-generation internet (5G) rollout. In late 2019, the US published a list of companies linked to the Chinese military, and after Huawei came the China General Nuclear Power Group (CGN). The state-owned Chinese firm has invested 3.8 billion pounds (€4.1 billion, $4.3 billion) in Britain to date, mainly in the Hinkley Point nuclear plant under construction in Somerset, southwest England, and the Sizewell plant in eastern England. It is also seeking UK regulatory approval to build its own nuclear reactor at Bradwell in Essex, east of London. China warned the UK it would face “consequences if it chooses to be a hostile partner” after London announced its Huawei’s decision. Liu Xiaoming, the Chinese ambassador to the UK, reportedly said China could cut its backing for UK nuclear plants altogether. Years of Chinese involvement in UK nuclear industryCGN’s involvement in the UK nuclear industry began in 2016 when a deal was signed with French state-owned utility Electricite de France (EdF) to collaborate on three reactors totaling 8.7 gigawatts (GW) of power generation, starting with Hinkley Point. The agreement spoke of CGN’s “progressive entry” into the UK’s “resurgent” nuclear ambitions. The UK currently has 15 operational nuclear reactors at seven locations. At its height in 1997, 26% of the country’s power was generated from nuclear, but this has slipped since to 19%. In the Sizewell and Hinkley projects, CGN is providing cash, holding 66% stakes, but with Bradwell it wants to build the reactor itself, using its own technology, and it wants to operate it. Observers say Bradwell is the prize CGN is really seeking: the first Chinese-built nuclear plant outside China. In May, EdF outlined its plans to start work on Sizewell by the end of next year. The project would create 25,000 jobs, it said. But EdF’s continued involvement could be thrown into doubt if no other investor came forward to replace CGN. This is especially troubling given the project is also expected to result in cost overrun. Hinkley Point now costs about 3 billion pounds more than the 20 billion pounds originally planned. Sizewell is also slated to cost 20 billion pounds. “Several projects were planned but only Hinkley Point will likely go ahead,” Jonathan Marshall, Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU), told DW. “Bradwell would be a Chinese project, but is now unlikely for political reasons.” Bradwell looks surplus to requirements for the reasons the National Infrastructure Assessment (NIC), a government advisory body, outlined in its most recent long-term assessment: “Given the balance of cost and risk, a renewables-based system looks a safer bet at present than constructing multiple new nuclear power plants,” it read. Financing of nuclear plans unclear“Sizewell is not dependent on CGN investment,” a spokesman from the the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) said. But not many agree. “Equity funding for nuclear power stations is very difficult for private actors,” Rob Gross, director of the UK Energy Research Centre, told DW. The government’s offer in 2018 to Hitachi to take a third of the equity at the Wylfa nuclear project wasn’t enough to keep the company interested, for example. As Paul Dorfman of University College London’s energy institute and founder of the Nuclear Consulting Group told environmental news platform electrictyinfo.org, it was hard to see who else might invest in Sizewell if the Chinese pull out. “The market won’t touch nuclear with a barge pole. You only see nuclear being built in command-and-control economies, like China and Russia, and a few outliers,” he said. One option would be for the government to take either a majority or minority stake in Sizewell. Another option is a Regulated Asset Base (RAB) model, where consumers are charged a fixed price to cover infrastructure costs. But this would hike energy prices in the long term and make it politically hard to justify. …….https://www.dw.com/en/uk-nuclear-power-the-next-huawei/a-54631808 |
|
The Prospects of Nuclear Disarmament in the New Nuclear Architecture,
The Prospects of Nuclear Disarmament in the New Nuclear Architecture, Modern Diplomacy August 21, 2020, By Hamzah Taoqeer
The debate for arms control and nuclear disarmament has been unfortunately for long has been played as self-serving and hollow pledges by the major NWS which have failed to deliver upon them. The withdrawal from the INF would lead to further lowering of the nuclear threshold as the US would actively develop and deploy tactical nuclear weapons in regions of interest including Asia Pacific and Eastern Europe. The new nuclear architecture developed by the actions of major powers further weaken and deteriorate the efficacy of institutional norms. The efficacy and credibility of new initiatives such as CEND among other remains questionable as the P5 have failed to deliver measurable progress upon the existing arms control and disarmament initiatives.
The emerging nuclear architecture blur the legitimacy of the arms control initiatives and further encourage NNWS to pursue for alternative measures including nuclear weapons program to secure their interests. Thus, resulting in proliferation of nuclear weapons which threaten world peace and security. The major powers should for once initiate a robust implementation upon their aforementioned commitments in good faith rather than devising frameworks for achieving their limited interests……………. https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2020/08/21/the-prospects-of-nuclear-disarmament-in-the-new-nuclear-architecture/
Report: Israel ‘deeply concerned’ by Saudi Arabia, China alleged nuclear cooperation,
|
Report: Israel ‘deeply concerned’ by Saudi Arabia, China alleged nuclear cooperation, MEMO, Middle East Monitor, August 21, 2020 Israel’s Walla news website revealed that Tel Aviv has informed the United States that it was “gravely” concerned by alleged nuclear cooperation between Saudi Arabia and China.The website said senior Israeli intelligence officials had called their American counterparts to express their “grave concern” about the cooperation between Riyadh and Beijing.
According to the site, “unnamed” Israeli officials said there was a secret factory of primitive materials used in uranium enrichment in Saudi Arabia near the capital, Riyadh, explaining that the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times were the first to report on it, including satellite images of the factory. The officials pointed out that the office of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu deals with the file as “very sensitive” politically since Israel considers Saudi Arabia an important ally in the face of Iran. The officials added that the Israeli intelligence services, the ministries of foreign affairs, intelligence and defence, and the Atomic Energy Commission are following the developments of the Saudi nuclear program………. According to Israeli officials, Saudi Arabia has cooperated with China, because the Chinese did not ask for guarantees that the programme would be purely civilian, which is what the United States always demands. https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20200821-report-israel-deeply-concerned-by-saudi-arabia-china-alleged-nuclear-cooperation/ |
|
China feels India’s nuclear weapons programme driven by prestige: US report
China feels India’s nuclear weapons programme driven by prestige: US reportThe Carnegie report stressed China’s views on the issue are largely unknown
The Chinese state-run media continues to play up deployment of new artillery and other weapon systems near the border with India. However, despite the tension, references to nuclear weapons have been subdued in both nations.
A US think tank, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, on August 19 published a report on the Chinese perspective on nuclear weapons in the context of ties with India.
The Carnegies report noted while India’s perspectives on nuclear weapons are “relatively well documented,” China’s views on the issue are largely unknown.
The Carnegie report is based on interviews with “dozen Chinese academics, researchers, and military officers who work either on South Asia or on nuclear policy” and review of Chinese literature published in the last decade……..
Nukes for prestige?
On the issue of India’s nuclear weapons, the Chinese experts interviewed in the Carnegie report felt the systems are “for general deterrence and not for actual employment”……….
The experts interviewed in the Carnegie study felt a border conflict between India and China was unlikely to escalate into a nuclear exchange. Both India and China have declared ‘no first use’ of nuclear weapons.
………. The US factor
A point of concern expressed by the Chinese analysts was the possibility of India and the US strengthening strategic ties.
“While Chinese analysts largely dismiss India’s homegrown development of new military capabilities, they express concern about the prospect of US-India collaboration on defence projects. Chinese experts are particularly wary of US-India missile defence cooperation and the possibility that it could create a networked system. If such a system was to emerge, they would see India as a de facto security ally of the United States,” the Carnegie report noted. https://www.theweek.in/news/world/2020/08/19/china-feels-indias-nuclear-weapons-programme-driven-by-prestige-us-report.html
1 This Month
26 April – Chernobyl: Inside the Meltdown airs on National Geographic on Sunday 26th April from 4pm
29 April – Nuclear Expert Webinar #1 – Radiation Impacts on Families with Mary Olson and Cindy Folkers
- 12:15 PM MT – 1:45 PM MT
- Location: Virtual – REGISTER TODAY
4 May -West Suburban Peace Coalition to discuss Iran war at May Educational Forum
Monday, May 4, 7:00 – 8:00 PM Central Standard Time
Title: : How Trump’s Narrative Tries to Shape the Reality of the War on Iran.
Contact Walt Zlotow, zlotow@hotmail.com 630 442 3045 for further information
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
Pine Ridge Uranium is the real threat, not Tehran- Tell Burgum: Stop the Extraction.
Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes – A good documentary on Chernobyl on SBS available On Demand for the next 3 weeks– https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/tv-program/chernobyl-the-lost-tapes/2352741955560
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- April 2026 (317)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 