politics international « nuclear-news

Iran intends to restart activities at Arak heavy water nuclear reactor

Iran intends to restart activities at Arak heavy water nuclear reactor, CNBC, JUL 28 2019

Heavy water can be employed in reactors to produce plutonium, a fuel used in nuclear warheads.
In May Iran announced planned measures to breach the nuclear agreement with major world powers following the U.S. withdrawal from deal……..

On July 3, President Hassan Rouhani said Tehran would increase its uranium enrichment levels and start to revive its Arak heavy-water reactor after July 7 if the nations in the nuclear pact did not protect trade with Iran promised under the deal but blocked by the U.S. sanctions.

Foreign forces would stoke regional tension: Rouhani

The presence of foreign forces would be the main source of tension in the Gulf, said on Sunday in a meeting with Oman’s foreign minister in Tehran, according to the official presidency website……….

Britain’s seizure of Iranian tanker is a violation of the nuclear deal: Iranian deputy foreign minister……….https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/28/iran-intends-to-restart-activities-at-arak-heavy-water-nuclear-reactor.html

July 29, 2019 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Iran, politics international | Leave a comment

Constructive talks between Iran and Europe, but no definite result

Emergency talks on nuclear deal constructive but inconclusive, Iranian minister says WP, By Adam Taylor, July 28

DUBAI — Iran’s deputy foreign minister said Sunday that an emergency meeting in Vienna between Tehran and its partners in the Iran nuclear deal had yielded positive developments but had not “resolved everything.”

“The atmosphere was constructive, and the discussions were good,” Abbas Araghchi told reporters.

Araghchi said he and his partners from Germany, France, Britain, China, Russia and the European Union remain determined to save the deal.

The fate of the agreement remains uncertain after the Trump administration pulled out last year and reimposed sanctions on Iran. That move prompted Tehran to scale back its commitments under the pact.

Iran said this month it had breached a stockpile limit for low enriched uranium allowed under the deal and was enriching uranium at a higher levelthan permitted. Officials have said they will continue to reduce their obligations if the remaining parties to the deal do not help alleviate Iran’s economic isolation.

Salehi also said Iran was moving to restart activity at the heavy-water nuclear reactor at its Arak facility, according to the reports.

Iran’s uranium enrichment capabilities and its heavy-water nuclear reactor were restricted under the 2015 deal, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, for fear that they could be used by Iran to pursue a nuclear weapons program.

To be used in nuclear weapons, uranium must be highly enriched. The JCPOA placed a limit on the amount of enriched uranium Iran could possess and the level to which it could be enriched.

The claim that Iran’s enriched-uranium stockpile had exceeded the 300-kilogram limit was subsequently confirmed by the International Atomic Energy Agency. But in Iranian media on Sunday, Salehi was reported to have said that it went further than this………

The IAEA did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Analysts see Arak’s heavy-water reactor as a risk for proliferation because it could allow Iran to produce weapons-grade plutonium. The nuclear deal required Iran to pour concrete into the pipes of the reactor’s core as part of a redesign.

Salehi said last week that the redesign, in partnership with China and Britain, was making progress. Britain replaced the United States in the project after the Trump administration pulled out of the nuclear deal.

In his meeting with lawmakers on Sunday, Salehi was reported to have said that the developments were not indicative of an intent to produce nuclear weapons.

“We do not intend to produce nuclear weapons because of religious reasons,” lawmaker Mehrdad Lahouti quoted Salehi as saying, according to the Iranian Students News Agency.

Though Iran and Britain are working together on the heavy-water reactor, relations between the countries have been tense in recent weeks, since British marines helped seize an Iranian-flagged tanker near Gibraltar and Iran seized a British-flagged tanker that was passing the Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/iran-has-24-tons-of-enriched-uranium-and-is-preparing-to-restart-heavy-water-nuclear-reactor-official-claims/2019/07/28/485d387e-b111-11e9-b071-94a3f4d59021_story.html?utm_term=.5388ca6823bf

July 29, 2019 Posted by Christina Macpherson | EUROPE, Iran, politics international | Leave a comment

Iran links tanker row to nuclear deal

At crisis talks, Iran links tanker row to nuclear deal, Aljazeera 29 Jul 19
Envoys from UK, Germany, France, Russia, China and Iran met in Vienna to discuss how to salvage historic 2015 pact. Iran considers Britain’s seizure of an Iranian oil tanker a breach of the 2015 nuclear deal, a senior official said on Sunday, as remaining signatories to the ailing accord met in the Austrian capital for emergency talks.

Britain, France, Germany, Russia, China and Iran have been trying to salvage the landmark pact since the United States withdrew from it in May 2018 and re-imposed sanctions on Tehran, crippling an already weak economy.

Iran-Europe ties are under strain, however, after British authorities detained an Iranian oil tanker carrying two million barrels of crude off the coast of Gibraltar earlier in July. They cited alleged violations of European Union sanctions against Syria for the move.

Days later, Iranian forces impounded a British-flagged ship in the Strait of Hormuz. …….. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/07/crisis-talks-iran-nuclear-deal-set-kick-vienna-190728072008700.html

July 29, 2019 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Iran, politics international | Leave a comment

New report: nuclear energy cannot be classified as “clean”, nor as economic

Nuclear: A poor investment strategy for clean energy https://www.pv-magazine.com/2019/07/24/nuclear-a-poor-investment-strategy-for-clean-energy/

Study claims that investment in a new 1GW nuclear power plant leads to average losses of approximately 4.8 billion euros. It further argues that the technology’s dangerous radioactivity emissions and proliferation risks do not qualify it as a ‘clean’ energy solution to be considered for addressing climate change. Yet still, governments are incorporating the technology into clean energy plans around the world.

JULY 24, 2019 ERICA JOHNSON Nuclear energy has always been unprofitable in the private economy, according to a new report from one of Germany’s leading economic research institutes, DIW Berlin. Its historical analysis explains that large state subsidies have been provided in cases where private capital financing has been used for the nuclear industry in the past, and goes on to further examine the current and future profitability of nuclear power plants.

The study undertook an empirical survey of the 674 nuclear plants that have ever been built to demonstrate that private economic interests were not the motive, but instead have been driven by military interests.

“Nuclear power was never designed for commercial electricity generation; it was aimed at nuclear weapons. That is why nuclear electricity has been and will continue to be uneconomical,” says Christian von Hirschhausen, coauthor of the study.

In its Monte Carlo simulation model developed for the net present value of a 1 GW nuclear plant, the study found that expected loss of revenues range between 1.5 and 8.9 billion euros. The model built in a variety of factors including the wholesale cost of electricity (20-80 euros/MWh), specific investment costs (4,000-9,000 euros/kW) and the weighted average cost of capital (4-10%). In the Monte Carlo analysis, researchers argue that, in all cases, nuclear investment would generate significant financial losses.

Expanding beyond lacking economic sustainability, the report goes on to further undermine international debates and policies which support nuclear as a part of climate action strategies. “Nuclear energy is by no means clean. Its radioactivity will endanger humans and the natural world for over one million years,” says von Hirschhausen.

The report calls out the International Energy Agency for recently suggesting nuclear energy in a clean energy system and for its encouragement of subsidies to the technology and its suppliers. Policies and frameworks around the world have incorporated nuclear power into the mix of future energy production. The EU Clean Energy Package built to support climate protection contains service life extensions for a number of nuclear plants and also recommends building more than 100 new plants by 2050.

“Describing nuclear energy as “clean” ignores the significant environmental risks and radioactive emissions it engenders along the process chain and beyond,” the report concludes.

Despite DIW’s warnings against costs and dangers, nuclear power capacity is increasing worldwide, even though solar and wind are taking front-runner positions as the cheapest grid-connected sources of energy. According to the World Nuclear Association, there are currently 50 reactors under construction, with more than 100 nuclear power reactors are on order or planned, and more than 300 additional plants proposed.

July 25, 2019 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 2 WORLD, politics international, Reference | Leave a comment

A dangerous idea to abandon nuclear arms treaties with Russia

Abandoning nuclear arms treaties with Russia is bad idea https://www.yorkdispatch.com/story/opinion/contributors/2019/07/22/op-ed-abandoning-nuclear-arms-treaties-russia-bad-idea/1795240001/

Ivo Daalder, Chicago Tribune July 22, 2019 For more than 50 years, the United States and Russia have agreed that their own security required negotiating agreements limiting their nuclear weapons deployments and capabilities. In that time, the two countries have successfully concluded seven major agreements to reduce their nuclear arsenals. The last of these, the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or New START, was signed in 2010 and capped each side’s deployed warheads at 1,550.

Yet, the nuclear arms control edifice that was built up over half a century is in danger of coming apart. The Trump administration has decided to withdraw from one major agreement, the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, citing Russian violations. And it has shown no interest in extending New START before it expires 18 months from now.

Behind both decisions is the idea that U.S.-Russian arms control has become an anachronism, and that future arms control efforts must now also include Chinese capabilities. While Russia’s apparent deployment of a banned ground-based nuclear missile provided the formal reason for abandoning the INF Treaty, President Donald Trump also cited China’s unconstrained deployment of intermediate-range missiles as a justification for ending the agreement. And rather than extending New START for five years, administration officials suggest that any future accord must also limit Chinese nuclear weapons.

After more than 50 years of U.S.-Russian arms control negotiations and agreements, there is scope for thinking anew about how best to reduce nuclear dangers. But abandoning long-standing agreements and conditioning any new negotiations on including China are not the best way to do that.

It took the United States and Soviet Union standing at the very brink of nuclear war, at the height of the Cuban missile crisis in 1962, to understand the importance of managing their nuclear capabilities through negotiations.

After the crisis, both countries instituted a hotline so they could communicate to avert misunderstandings. They agreed to ban above-ground nuclear testing and negotiated a treaty to limit the spread of nuclear weapons. And they began the effort to limit and ultimately reduce the number and type of weapons each side could deploy. As important, both accepted intrusive inspection regimes designed not only to verify compliance with the terms of the agreements but to enhance mutual confidence that neither side was seeking a decisive nuclear advantage.

The true lesson of the Cuban missile crisis was that countries could miscalculate each other’s actions and intentions, raising the very real risk of nuclear confrontation. The commitment to dialogue, to engage in extensive talks on strategic stability and negotiate real limits on capabilities, and to open each country up to foreign inspectors, helped create confidence that for all the differences between them, the United States and Russia shared an overriding need to avoid a nuclear war.

That effort has proven exceedingly successful. Nuclear arsenals, though still far too large, have been sharply reduced. Nuclear crises like Cuba have been avoided. And while there have been questions about compliance, none of the violations ever constituted a threat so dire as to heighten the risk of nuclear confrontation.

U.S.-Russian arms control has worked in its most fundamental aim — to reduce the chance of war, especially nuclear war. That is why the decision to withdraw from the INF Treaty next month is a mistake. The new Russian missile deployment is a violation and has to be addressed, and the treaty contains procedures for doing so. If the violation persists, there are ways to punish Russia, through sanctions and other means. But withdrawing from a treaty that has served the United States and its European allies well for decades risks an arms race that is destabilizing and unwinnable.

The same is true for New START. Russia has indicated it is willing to extend its terms for five years. The United States has nothing to lose by agreeing to its extension, thus limiting Russian nuclear deployments and extending the highly intrusive inspection measures that provide real insight into Russian capabilities.

There is a case to be made for including China in future nuclear negotiations, though its nuclear deployments of some 200 weapons is but a small fraction of what the United States and Russia still possess. Russia, moreover, will no doubt also insist on including the similarly-sized French and British nuclear forces in such a multilateral negotiation, a prospect that neither Paris nor London is likely to welcome.

It will no doubt take time, and real effort, to decide on a new negotiating framework beyond the two major nuclear powers. Until such time, both Washington and Moscow will be much better off if the nuclear framework they have developed over the past 50 years remains in place.

— Ivo Daalder is the president of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and a former U.S. ambassador to NATO.

July 23, 2019 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 2 WORLD, politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Dangerous nuclear arms race to follow, if New Start Treaty is not renewed

Clock’s ticking on one of world’s most important nuclear treaties. A dangerous arms race may be next, By Eliza Mackintosh, CNN, July 20, 2019 This week, senior American officials traveled to Switzerland to deliver President Donald Trump’s “vision for a new direction in nuclear arms control.” That vision is to strike a wide-ranging deal that would limit the arsenals of not only the US and Russia, but also China for the first time.

At a meeting with their Russian counterparts in Geneva on Wednesday, the US delegation relayed their concerns over Moscow’s development of “non-strategic nuclear weapons,” the State Department said. Another concern is the fact that China, which did not participate in the talks, has rejected negotiations out of hand.

But the President’s ambition for an all-encompassing deal is clouded by his track record, and observers are increasingly worried that the unraveling of existing accords under the Trump administration could lead to a more unstable future for nuclear proliferation globally.

In May 2018, Trump quit the Iran nuclear deal, sparking an ever-widening rift with Tehran and heightened tensions in the Middle East. In February, the US suspended the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), a key pact with Russia that has been a centerpiece of European security since the Cold War, saying Moscow had violated its terms.

And as the talks were taking place in Geneva, the clock continued to run down on the last remaining major nuclear deal between the US and Russia, which control 90% of the world’s nuclear warheads.

The New Start treaty, signed by Presidents Barack Obama and Dmitry Medvedev in 2010, restricts the US and Russia to 1,550 deployed strategic nuclear warheads across 700 delivery systems. While Russia has signaled an interest in renewing the pact, Trump has previously described it as a “bad deal,” and there is no sign that it will be extended beyond 2021, when it expires.

If the New Start deal is scrapped, experts fear a return to a world without limits on nuclear stockpiles……..

The presence in the administration of National Security Advisor John Bolton — a longstanding hawk and critic of arms control agreements — also has some observers concerned that the White House’s true goal may be to find an exit strategy for a nuclear pact it sees as constraining and outdated.

President Vladimir Putin, who has suggested Russia would be open to renewing the New Start treaty, has warned that letting the pact lapse could risk an arms race……..

The ditching of nuclear treaties by the Trump administration has already contributed to the weakening of norms, and casts other multilateral agreements, like the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) into doubt, experts said.

Under the NPT, one of the world’s most important foundational nuclear treaties, nuclear-weapon states — the US, Russia, China, France and the UK — commit to ending the arms race and achieving nuclear disarmament, while non-nuclear-weapons states agree to forgo developing or seeking nuclear weapons…….. https://edition.cnn.com/2019/07/20/world/us-russia-new-start-nuclear-weapons-analysis-intl/index.html

July 22, 2019 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 2 WORLD, politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

World security needs nuclear New Start agreement – USA-Russia, not a distraction about China

Nobody wins a nuclear war — especially not two nuclear behemoths. https://thehill.com/opinion/international/453576-nobody-wins-a-nuclear-war-especially-not-two-nuclear-behemoths BY DANIEL R. DEPETRIS,— 07/17/19 U.S. and Russian officials met this week in Geneva for what one hopes will be new strategic arms reduction talks. Trump administration officials are cautiously optimistic the discussions could lead to a more substantive negotiation about capping — and perhaps even decreasing — the number of nuclear weapons both countries have in their stockpiles. This matters for U.S. and global security because these two nations possess more than 90 percent of all nuclear weapons.

President Trump, however, wants to go further than a simple extension of the 2010 The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) agreement or a new bilateral treaty with the Russians. Instead, he is prodding China to join a trivariate arrangement. But in prefacing or linking an extension of New START to a fresh accord that includes the Chinese, the administration is increasing the possibility of ending up with neither.

For one, pushing Beijing to into a three-way deal is like pushing on a locked door. The Chinese have shown no interest in a three-way deal, in large measure because their nuclear arsenal is a fraction (roughly 2 percent) of the globe’s entire inventory.

At roughly 290 warheads, Beijing’s nuclear weapons program is minuscule when compared to the thousands of combined warheads Washington and Moscow have stockpiled. Indeed, China stockpile is less than 1/20th the size of the United States and about 1/22th the size of Russia’s.

To expect the Chinese to participate in a new arms control negotiation with two nuclear superpowers when the numbers are so steadily stacked against them is a fool’s errand. Beijing’s no-first use nuclear policy, in place since its first ever nuclear explosive test in 1964, was recently reaffirmed just last year.

An offensive nuclear strike is not something U.S. officials in Washington have to worry about. To focus on a U.S.-Russia-China nuclear agreement at the expense of keeping an already existing New START accord alive is the wrong priority.

New START, signed in April 2010, was a win-win, pragmatic arms control agreement for both sides. The pact cut the U.S. and Russian stockpiles byaround one-third; capped the amount of nuclear warheads on deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles at 1,550; limited the number of deployed and non-deployed ICBM launchers to 800; and allowed each country to verify compliance with the treaty, including on-site inspections, information exchanges and advanced notices. Unlike the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, inspectors have verified Moscow’s compliance with the letter of the deal.

For two countries that possess a combined 12,675 nuclear weapons, New START is a critical enforcing mechanism for nuclear parity and a stable balance of power.

It is now the only functional arms control accord preventing the U.S. and Russia from entering another costly, risky arms race. The deal expires in February 2021 but could be extended for another five years if both Presidents Trump and Putin agree to do so. Putin has already expressed his interest. Trump, someone who considers himself a transactional pragmatist, shouldn’t waste any more time before doing the same.

An extension of New START, however, is not only important for strategic stability between the two nuclear superpowers (without New START, there is nothing stopping either the United States or Russia from building and deploying more and better nuclear warheads). but also valuable for stabilizing the entire U.S.-Russia relationship in desperate need of improvement. For this reason, a constructive relationship with Moscow is unquestionably a good thing for U.S. security. Extending New START is a no-brainer and indeed could very well be an opportunity to mend relations.

It’s not hyperbole to describe U.S.-Russia relations as being at their lowest since the land-based missile build-up in Europe in the early 1980s. From Syria and Ukraine to NATO and cybersecurity, Washington and Moscow are often on opposite sides of the issue. Even though both nations share some interests, including arms control and countering terrorism, Washington has become the epicenter of anti-Russia sentiment, where condemning Putin and advocating for sanctions is sport.

Good politics, however, doesn’t necessarily correspond with good statecraft or foreign policy.

Talking with adversaries, rivals, or competitors is a critically important component of effective foreign policy. We must engage with the world as it is, not as we wish it to be. Simply ignoring the Russians, pretending they don’t exist, or believing that using the stick unreservedly against Moscow will force it to cry uncle and change its policies to our liking makes conflict between nuclear superpowers more likely.

Giving New START another five years of life is perhaps the only issue Washington and Moscow can agree on in today’s political climate. It’s perhaps the most important reason the U.S. and Russia must find a way to co-exist.

Ensuring New START survives should be pursued aggressively for the sake of U.S. and global security Nobody wins a nuclear war — especially especially not two nuclear behemoths with thousands of warheads apiece.

Daniel R. DePetris is a fellow at Defense Priorities, a foreign policy think tank focused on promoting security, stability and peace.

July 20, 2019 Posted by Christina Macpherson | China, politics international, Russia, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Iran makes ‘substantial’ nuclear offer in return for US lifting sanctions

Iran makes ‘substantial’ nuclear offer in return for US lifting sanctions, Guardian Julian Borger in New York , 18 July 19,

Plan would allow enhanced, permanent nuclear inspections
Foreign minister: ‘It’s not about photo ops. We want substance’

Iran has offered a deal with the US in which it would formally and permanently accept enhanced inspections of its nuclear programme, in return for the permanent lifting of US sanctions.

The offer was made by the Iranian foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, on a visit to New York. But it is unlikely to be warmly received by the Trump administration, which is currently demanding Iran make a range of sweeping concessions, including cessation of uranium enrichment and support for proxies and allies in the region…… https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/18/iran-nuclear-deal-trump-mohammad-javad-zarif-sanctions

July 20, 2019 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Iran, politics international | Leave a comment

Iran’s diplomatic offer on nuclear inspections meets with USA scepticism

Iran floats offer on nuclear inspections; U.S. skeptical

Arshad Mohammed, Steve Holland, WASHINGTON (Reuters) 18 Jul 19- Iran on Thursday signaled a willingness to engage in diplomacy to defuse tensions with the United States with a modest offer on its nuclear program that met immediate skepticism in Washington.

Iran’s foreign minister told reporters in New York that Iran could immediately ratify a document prescribing more intrusive inspections of its nuclear program if the United States abandoned its economic sanctions, media organizations reported.

The document, known as the Additional Protocol, gives U.N. inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) more tools to verify that a nuclear program is peaceful.

While U.S. officials suggested they viewed the idea as a non-starter, analysts said it could provide an opening for U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration to pursue diplomacy.

…….. ‘A CREATIVE OPENING’?

Former U.S. officials saw a diplomatic opening.

“If the foreign minister has suggested that the Majlis (the Iranian parliament) would ratify the additional protocol now, that is a serious step,” said Wendy Sherman, a former Obama administration official who negotiated the 2015 nuclear deal.

“Of course, Iran will want something serious in return. Nonetheless, a creative opening,” she added.

……… Trump on Thursday said a U.S. Navy ship had “destroyed” an Iranian drone in the Strait of Hormuz after the aircraft threatened the ship. But Zarif told reporters at the United Nations he was not aware of any Iranian drone being downed.https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-iran-usa-zarif/iran-floats-offer-on-nuclear-inspections-us-skeptical-idUSKCN1UD310

July 20, 2019 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Iran, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

U.S. Slaps Sanctions On Nuclear Supply Network for Iran’s Enrichment Program

U.S. Slaps Sanctions On Nuclear Supply Network for Iran’s Enrichment Program, Radio Farda, WASHINGTON 18 Jul 19, — The U.S. Treasury Department on July 18 imposed additional sanctions on Iran that target its nuclear-enrichment program.They are the first restrictive measures since Tehran said earlier this month that it would increase enriched uranium levels to above those allowed under the terms of a 2015 nuclear accord.

The blacklist includes five people and an international group of companies in Iran, Belgium, and China that acted as a supply network for Iran’s nuclear program.

The individuals and entities are subject to asset freezes within the United States and will be denied access to the U.S. financial system as well as listed as “weapons of mass destruction proliferators,” U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said in a statement.,,,,,,, https://en.radiofarda.com/a/u-s-slaps-sanctions-on-nuclear-supply-network-for-iran-s-enrichment-program/30064135.html

July 20, 2019 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics international, USA | Leave a comment

North Korea, angered by US military exercises, plans to resume nuclear, missile, testds

Irate Over Military Exercises, North Korea Threatens To Resume Nuclear, Missile Tests https://www.npr.org/2019/07/16/742129952/irate-over-military-exercises-north-korea-threatens-to-resume-nuclear-missile-te, July 16, 2019, SASHA INGBER

North Korea warned Tuesday that negotiations with the United States could falter and that its nuclear and missile tests might resume if the U.S. and South Korea move forward with planned military exercises.

An unnamed North Korean Foreign Ministry spokesperson accused the U.S. of “unilaterally reneging on its commitments” in a statement released Tuesday by the Korean Central News Agency. The spokesperson said North Korea is “gradually losing our justification to follow through on the commitments we made with the U.S.” and that verbal pledges are not “a legal document inscribed on a paper.”

After President Trump’s historic summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un last year in Singapore, Trump announced that he would call off large military exercises with South Korea as a goodwill gesture to help kickstart negotiations.

North Korea has not tested long-range missiles since 2017.

Tuesday’s letter comes after Trump made a sudden visit to see Kim in June. They sat together in the Demilitarized Zone between the two Koreas as cameras flashed, and Trump became the first sitting U.S. president to set foot into North Korea. He called it “a great honor.”

They agreed to resume talks, but little progress has been made toward denuclearization, and no diplomatic meetings are known to have taken place since that June sit-down.

The U.S.-South Korean combined military exercises, called Dong Maeng, are expected to take place in August.

North Korea has long denounced such military drills, viewing them as a threat to its sovereignty. “It is crystal clear that it is an actual drill and a rehearsal of war aimed at militarily occupying our Republic by surprise attack,” the spokesperson said Tuesday.

Joint military exercises have taken place for decadesbecause the Korean peninsula was still technically in a state of war since the signing of an armistice agreement in 1953.

Although the United States has vowed to “indefinitely suspend” certain drills, smaller exercises are still help for South Korean and U.S. troops.

Pyongyang tested suspected short-range missiles in May. American officials drew a distinction between those tests and the launches of long-range ballistic missiles, which may be capable of reaching the U.S. mainland.

July 18, 2019 Posted by Christina Macpherson | North Korea, politics international | Leave a comment

Iran still committed to the nuclear accord, but will decrease its commitment if other signatories cannot help

Iran Threatens to Revert to Pre-2015 Nuclear Development Levels, By VOA News, July 15, 2019 Iran threatened Monday to revert its nuclear development program to pre-2015 levels before it agreed to restraints under an international accord if the European countries and the United States that were signatories to the deal fail to help its economy.

“If the Europeans and the Americans don’t want to carry out their duties… we will decrease our commitments and… reverse the conditions to four years ago,” the Iranian state news agency IRNA quoted atomic agency spokesman Behrouz Kamalvandi as saying.

“These actions are not out of obstinacy,” Kamalvandi said. “It is to give diplomacy a chance so that the other side [can] come to their senses and carry out their duties.”

The international pact called for sanctions relief for Tehran as it agreed to curbs on its nuclear program. But U.S. President Donald Trump withdrew from it in May 2018 and reimposed tough punitive measures against the Islamic republic that have hobbled its economy and cut its international oil exports. Tehran has contended that Europe has not done enough to help it overcome the effects of the U.S. sanctions.

In the last month, Iran has exceeded the size of the uranium stockpile and the uranium enrichment level permitted under the pact. The deal also was signed by Britain, France, Germany, the European Union, China and Russia, all of which have remained in the pact even as they have criticized Iran for deviating from its provisions.

Iran’s foreign ministry said it would stay committed to the accord at the same level as the other signatories stay committed to it.

British Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt said the deal “isn’t dead yet,” and that while the opportunity to find a resolution to the current crisis surrounding the agreement is closing, it is still possible to keep it alive.

He spoke ahead of talks with other European Union foreign ministers in Brussels where they planned to discuss the Iran situation.

Iran has long said its nuclear program was solely for peaceful purposes, and it won badly needed relief from sanctions in return for limiting its nuclear activity far below what would be needed to make a weapon.

Hunt said Monday that Iran was more than a year away from having the capability to build a nuclear device.

Hunt’s comments came a day after the publication of cables from former British ambassador to the U.S. Kim Darroch, who was critical of Trump’s decision to withdraw from the nuclear deal, saying he did it as a snub to his predecessor, former President Barack Obama.

In a May 2018 cable, Darroch wrote that the Trump administration, in abrogating the Iran deal last year, “is set upon an act of diplomatic vandalism, seemingly for ideological and personality reasons — it was Obama’s deal.”

The Mail on Sunday published Darroch’s message back to London, days after he resigned and a week after the newspaper published other leaked cables. In the earlier memos, the diplomat described the U.S. leader as “inept,” “insecure” and “incompetent” and his administration as “uniquely dysfunctional.”

Darroch resigned from his post Wednesday, saying his three-year posting in Washington had become untenable with the disclosure of his cables.

The leaked cables were meant to be seen only by senior British ministers and civil servants. British officials launched an investigation of the leaks but did not deny the accuracy of Darroch’s comments, expressing the opinion that the person likely responsible for the leak was someone inside the British government, not a foreign power…….. https://www.voanews.com/middle-east/iran-threatens-revert-pre-2015-nuclear-development-levels

July 16, 2019 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Iran, politics international | Leave a comment

Iran says reducing nuclear deal commitments to save it from ‘total collapse

Iran says reducing nuclear deal commitments to save it from ‘total collapse’, Press TV, Jul 5, 2019 Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif says Tehran’s decision to scale down its commitments under the JCPOA is indeed aimed at protecting the multilateral deal, not killing it.

Back on May 8, Iran notified its remaining partners in the 2015 nuclear deal that it would suspend the implementation of some of its commitments in reaction to the US’ unilateral withdrawal and Europe’s failure to live up to its commitments.

Speaking in an exclusive email interview with The New York Times published on Thursday night, Zarif said Iran made the decision as it “can indeed prevent the deal from total collapse.”

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) “was and remains the best POSSIBLE agreement on the nuclear issue,” Zarif said, adding that its total collapse “will be detrimental to the interests of all, including the US.”

He said Iran “will remain committed to the deal as long as the remaining participants (EU, France, Germany, UK, Russia and China) observe the deal.”

“Survival or collapse of the JCPOA depends on the ability and willingness of all parties to invest in this undertaking. In a nutshell, a multilateral agreement cannot be implemented unilaterally,” Zarif said.

He also said that Iran’s decision to reduce its commitments was taken in line with its legal rights under paragraphs 26 and 36 of the nuclear deal, saying, “Paragraph 36 of JCPOA is a clear example that we negotiated this deal with the full understanding that we could not trust the commitment of the West.

As part of the first phase of scaling down its commitments, Iran exceeded the 300-kilogram limit set by the JCPOA on its low-enriched uranium stockpiles……….

The JCPOA obliges the European partners to prove their commitment to the nuclear deal in action, Zarif said, adding that the Islamic Republic would commit to the agreement in exactly the same way as those countries would.https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2019/07/05/600190/Iran-Zarif-JCPOA-nuclear-deal-commitments

July 15, 2019 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Iran, politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

U.S., Russia to discuss nuclear arms limits in Geneva on Wednesday –officials

U.S., Russia to discuss nuclear arms limits in Geneva on Wednesday –officials https://news.yahoo.com/u-russia-discuss-nuclear-arms-185425751.html

WASHINGTON, July 15 (Reuters) – Representatives from the United States and Russia are set to meet in Geneva on Wednesday to explore the idea of a new accord limiting nuclear arms that could eventually include China, U.S. senior administration officials said on Monday.

U.S. President Donald Trump has said that he would like to see a new type of arms control deal with Russia and China to cover all types of nuclear weapons, a topic that he has discussed individually with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping.

China is not currently a party to nuclear arms pacts between the United States and Russia.

The U.S. delegation will be led by U.S. Deputy Secretary of State John Sullivan and will include Tim Morrison, a top aide at the White House National Security Council, as well as representatives from the Pentagon, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the National Security Agency, said the U.S. officials, who spoke to reporters on condition on anonymity.

Russia’s deputy foreign minister, Sergei Ryabkov, will lead the Russian delegation, the U.S. officials said.

“We actually feel that – touch wood – we’ve actually got to a point where we can try to start this again,” one of the officials said, listing off a long series of incidents that have soured relations between the United States and Russia during the past year.

“I say touch wood because we’re always just one incident away from unfortunately things getting derailed,” the official said. (Reporting by Roberta Rampton Editing by Marguerita Choy)

July 15, 2019 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics international, Russia, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

How the Iran nuclear deal actually works

“I think in Iran, we are pretty confident that there is no undeclared plant”

How the Iran nuclear deal works, explained in 3 minutes

Iran is enriching uranium and breaking the limit set by the nuclear deal. Here’s what that means.

Uranium enrichment is a critical step in making nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. VOX, By Umair Irfan Jul 8, 2019, Iran has exceeded the uranium enrichment level of 3.67 percent set in the 2015 nuclear deal it made with world powers, a spokesman for Iran’s nuclear agency said, according to reports Monday.

The deal put tight restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for the loosening of some international sanctions on the country. The 3.67 percent limitation on uranium enrichment purity was one of many limits in the deal meant to keep Iran from gathering enough material to build an atom bomb in a year if it chose to (Iran has never officially said it wants a nuclear weapon).

On Sunday, Iran’s deputy foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, said Iran would begin enriching uranium to 4.5 percent for its Bushehr power plant.

“This is to protect the nuclear deal, not to nullify it. … This is an opportunity for talks. And if our partners fail to use this opportunity, they should not doubt our determination to leave the deal,” Araghchi said.

The 4.5 percent enrichment is still well below the 90 percent considered weapons-grade. But the violation of the deal is a move meant “to pressure Europe to reset the terms of the nuclear agreement following a US withdrawal from the pact last year,” according to the Washington Post.

Given the extraordinary destructive power of a nuclear weapon, keeping a close eye on enrichment around the world is critical to global security. But in the decades since the Manhattan Project, the enrichment process has gone from a massive, power-hungry, brute-force operation to a sophisticated and potentially clandestine affair.

Since it’s immensely important in international diplomacy right now, it’s worthwhile to understand what goes into enriching nuclear material, how the nuclear process works, and the strategies for keeping it in check………

Under the NPT, countries that don’t currently possess nuclear weapons are prevented from developing or spreading nuclear weapons technologies, but they can pursue nuclear activities for peaceful purposes like research or energy.

In 2003, Iran was found to have violated nuclear activity reporting requirements in the NPT, which spurred the international effort to get Iran to suspend its enrichment work. The US has argued that Iran does not have the right to enrich uranium since it was caught violating some of the safeguards imposed by the NPT, though Iran has not violated the treaty itself.

The goal of the six countries that signed the JCPOA with Iran in 2015 was to limit what is called “breakout time.” That is, how long it would take Iran to enrich enough material for a nuclear weapon if the country suddenly decided to ditch all international agreements and aggressively ramp up enrichment.

Prior to the agreement, Iran’s breakout time was estimated at four to six weeks. The provisions of the deal (Vox’s Zack Beauchamp put together an excellent explainer on this) aimed to extend this to more than a year, which would give international observers time to detect such a shift and enact countermeasures.

In short, the agreement made Iran limit uranium enrichment to 3.67 percent and decommission about 14,000 of its centrifuges, allowing just roughly 5,000 of Iran’s first-generation units to keep spinning. These IR-1 centrifuges produce between 0.75 and 1 SWU per device, whereas the IR-8 centrifuges Iran was developing at the time of the deal could theoretically manage 24 SWU, making them much more efficient.

Iran also gave up much of its low-enriched uranium stockpile, going from 25,000 pounds to 660 pounds. Iranian officials also agreed to pour concrete into their Arak reactor, a potential source of plutonium for nuclear weapons.

In addition, the JCPOA requires round-the-clock monitoring of Iran’s enrichment facilities in Fordow and Natanz, with only the Natanz facility allowed to operate. These are likely the only places where Iran can enrich uranium for a weapon.

“I think in Iran, we are pretty confident that there is no undeclared plant,” said Alex Glaser, director of the Nuclear Futures Laboratory at Princeton University.

International observers are also monitoring Iran’s uranium mining operations.

As it stands, the agreement effectively eliminates Iran’s prospects for enriching enough uranium for a civilian nuclear program and makes it much more tedious to gather the material required for a weapon. What little enrichment Iran is allowed under the deal is effectively a face-saving measure.

But, critics argue, pausing Iran’s entire nuclear enrichment apparatus only extends the breakout time by a few months since the country could just rebuild or reinstall its centrifuges if it decided to leave the agreement. And it looks like that day may be getting closer: a spokesman for Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization said Monday that the agency may increase the enrichment level to 20 percent or reinstall centrifuges.https://www.vox.com/2018/6/11/17369454/iran-uranium-enrichment

July 9, 2019 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Iran, politics international | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries Next Entries »