politics international « nuclear-news

Trump may need Congress approval to withdraw from Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty

Can Trump abrogate the INF Treaty without Congress? Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, By Walter C. Clemens, November 28, 2018 President Donald Trump wants to withdraw the United States from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty signed by presidents Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev in 1987. But can he do so without Congressional approval?

At first glance, it may appear that Trump has the authority to do so, considering that the president has already used his executive powers to pull the United States from the Paris climate agreement and the Iran nuclear deal.

But those were technically not treaties, but accords. (While definitions vary and are a bit fuzzy, a treaty is generally considered to be a formal written contract between sovereign states, and recognized by international law. In contrast, an accord is viewed as a lesser animal, and because it is not a treaty it does not need Congressional approval………..

if the commitment is indeed a full-fledged, bona fide treaty such as the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, that leaves the question: Does the White House have the right to flout or void treaties—described by Chief Justice John Marshall in 1823 as the “supreme law of the land”—without approval by one or both houses of Congress? Some members of Congress certainly think that their approval is needed to exit a treaty; when the president warned in July 2018 that he might pull the United States from NATO, founded on a multilateral treaty, several senators said he could expect an extensive fight in Congress.

The question seems to boil down to this: While the Constitution says that the Senate needs to approve a treaty negotiated by the president, it says nothing about pulling out of a treaty. That leaves us with a conundrum: If it takes two branches of government to make a treaty, can the White House alone terminate it?

A problem more difficult than it first looks. The US Constitution provides no clear answers to this question, but the precedents established over more than two centuries suggest that the president may not act alone to abrogate US treaty obligations. …………

The Senate did place explicit restrictions on the president when it approved the INF Treaty in 1988, and the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty in 1991. In each case, the Senate conditioned its consent on an understanding that the original interpretation of each treaty could not be unilaterally altered by the president. …………https://thebulletin.org/2018/11/can-trump-abrogate-the-inf-treaty-without-congress/?utm_source=Bulletin%20Newsletter&utm_medium=iContact%20email&utm_campaign=AbrogateINF

December 1, 2018 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

France halts plan with Japan, for developing advanced nuclear reactors

Nikkei Asian Review 30th Nov 2018 The French government has informed Japan it will halt joint development of
advanced nuclear reactors, Nikkei has learned, dealing a blow to the fuel
cycle policy underpinning much of the East Asian country’s energy plans.
https://asia.nikkei.com/Economy/France-halts-joint-nuclear-project-in-blow-to-Japan-s-fuel-cycle

December 1, 2018 Posted by Christina Macpherson | France, Japan, politics international | Leave a comment

Trump’s international nuclear negotiations will lead to Saudi Arabia getting nuclear weapons

Why Saudi Arabia Will Acquire Nuclear Weapons If the Trump administration continues to turn its nuclear negotiations into a boondoggle, then nothing will prevent Riyadh from building bombs.,National Interest by Paul R. Pillar, 28 Nov 18

The Trump administration’s handling of nuclear negotiations with Saudi Arabia promises to lay bare some realities about security issues and nuclear programs in that part of the world that the administration has refused to acknowledge. A front-page article by David Sanger and William Broad in the New York Timesreviews some of the still-unresolved questions. The Saudi regime insists on producing its own nuclear fuel, which would be different from terms the United States has negotiated with some other states, including the United Arab Emirates, that have sought U.S. assistance in developing their nuclear programs. The Saudis have balked at comprehensive international inspections to detect any work on nuclear weapons. And Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) has explicitly threatened to develop nuclear weapons, ostensibly in response to any similar development by Iran.

A useful model for approaching this situation involves Iran. The model is the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the multilateral accord commonly known as the Iranian nuclear deal, which Donald Trump has castigated and on which his administration has reneged by imposing new economic sanctions despite continued Iranian compliance with the JCPOA. The JCPOA closed all possible pathways to development of an Iranian nuclear weapon through stringent restrictions on enrichment of uranium, the gutting of reactors that otherwise might be used to produce plutonium, and the prohibition of any reprocessing by Iran of nuclear fuel. The agreement also established a thorough inspection system that involves not only routine monitoring of nuclear facilities but also the ability of international inspectors to inspect any other sites they may have reason to suspect are housing nuclear-related activity, with the other parties to the agreement being able to outvote Iran in the event of disagreement about the relevance of a requested inspection. This is the kind of highly intrusive inspection arrangement that the Saudis reportedly are refusing to apply to themselves.

The principal U.S. negotiator has been Secretary of Energy Rick Perry, for whom this is a learning-on-the-job experience. Perry was initially unaware of the Department of Energy’s nuclear responsibilities and believed his job would consist of promoting the oil industry. (This contrasts with Perry’s predecessor, Ernest Moniz, a nuclear physicist who played a key role in negotiation of the highly detailed JCPOA.)………

Amid all the talk among opponents of the JCPOA about ballistic missiles, it is worth noting that Saudi Arabia has been ahead of its regional neighbors on that count as well. Two decades ago, Saudi Arabia secretly purchased medium-range missiles from China that, although reportedly configured to carry conventional weapons, were of a type originally designed to deliver a nuclear warhead. The Saudis in more recent years have modernized their missile force, again relying on China as the supplier.

Destabilizing regional activity also implies that Saudi Arabia is more of a worry than most states regarding the implications of possible acquisition of nuclear weapons. Saudi Arabia has bombed Yemen into becoming a humanitarian catastrophe, has kidnapped and attempted to coerce into resignation the prime minister of Lebanon, and has used diplomatic facilities in foreign countries to assassinate nonviolent dissidents. The impetuous young prince behind these policies has been moving toward one-man rule, shedding even the restraints of what had been a collective family autocracy.

The murder of Jamal Khashoggi has drawn some recent and welcome attention to this pattern of behavior, although it has not budged Donald Trump from his stance of sticking with MbS no matter what he does. California Rep. Brad Sherman has appropriately observed, “A country that can’t be trusted with a bone saw shouldn’t be trusted with nuclear weapons.”

The administration’s assault on the JCPOA may provide the trigger for Saudi Arabia to try to obtain such weapons. If the U.S. “maximum pressure” campaign succeeds in negating completely the economic relief Iran was supposed to have received under the JCPOA, then Iranian leaders may yet throw up their hands in disgust and pronounce the agreement null and void. This would release Iran from all its nuclear restrictions under the agreement, which in turn might provide the perfect rationale for Riyadh, especially as long as MbS is in charge, to acquire the bomb.

Paul R. Pillar is a contributing editor at the National Interest and the author of Why America Misunderstands the World . https://nationalinterest.org/blog/paul-pillar/why-saudi-arabia-will-acquire-nuclear-weapons-37197

November 29, 2018 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics international, Saudi Arabia, USA | Leave a comment

Tensions rise as Russia prepares for USA to deploy nuclear weapons to Europe after ban treaty abandoned

Russia says it’s planning for the US to deploy nuclear weapons to Europe after ban treaty abandoned, Business Insider, Andrew Osborn and Tom Balmforth, Reuters, 26 Nov 18

Russia and the United States have both accused each other of violating a Cold-war era arms treaty that prohibits short- and intermediate-range nuclear weapons within Europe.
President Donald Trump has threatened to quit the treaty, pointing to Russian violations, but National Security Advisor John Bolton has said the US is a long way from discussing new nuclear weapons deployments to Europe.
Russia said on Monday that despite US promises, it is still planning for the US to deploy new nuclear missiles.

MOSCOW (Reuters) – Russia said on Monday it was planning for a U.S. deployment of new nuclear missiles in Europe following Washington’s planned withdrawal from a landmark Cold war-era arms control treaty despite the United States denying it has such plans.

Russia is keen to dissuade U.S. President Donald Trump from carrying out a threat for Washington to quit the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty which eliminated both countries’ land-based short- and intermediate-range nuclear missiles from Europe.

Both countries accuse each other of violating the 1987 treaty and President Vladimir Putin and Trump are due to discuss the matter at the G20 in Argentina later this month. …….https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-doesnt-trust-us-nuclear-arms-treaty-2018-11/?r=AU&IR=T

November 27, 2018 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics international, Russia, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Donald Trump in convenient denial over Crown Prince Bin Salman’s role in the murder of Khashoggi

Trump’s Utter Denial About Saudi Arabia and Its Crown Prince, New Yorker, By Robin Wright,November 20, 2018

So much for American justice. In a statement both stunning and coldhearted, President Trump on Tuesday

gave Saudi Arabia a pass on the grisly murder and dismemberment of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in the

name of U.S. national security. He blithely rejected a U.S. intelligence assessment as well as damning

physical evidence provided by Turkey indicating that the kingdom’s de-facto ruler, Crown Prince

Mohammed bin Salman, authorized the Saudi dissident’s execution, in Istanbul, on October 2nd. The President

of the United States sounded more like a defense attorney—or lobbyist—for the oil-rich kingdom than

a protector of American values.

“It could very well be that the Crown Prince had knowledge of this tragic event—maybe he did and maybe

he didn’t!” Trump said in a two-page statement. He condemned the Khashoggi assassination as an

“unacceptable and horrible crime,” but then said Saudi Arabia was too important a purchaser of U.S. weaponry,

an exporter of oil, and an ally in “our very important fight against Iran” to take punitive action. “The United

States intends to remain a steadfast partner of Saudi Arabia to ensure the interests of our country,” Trump said.

“Very simply,” he concluded, “it is called America First!”

The President’s statement was riddled with falsehoods and contradictions. He embraced the “vigorous” denials

from King Salman and his tempestuous young heir, Prince Mohammed—even though several members of the fifteen-man hit squad that killed Khashoggi worked for the crown prince, who is known by his initials, M.B.S. Trump based his justification on what he claimed was the kingdom’s promise to invest or spend four hundred and fifty billion dollars, including a hundred and ten billion dollars in arms purchases, in the United States. Last month, however, Politifact concluded that Trump’s claim earned a “pants

on fire” rating. “Orders on that scale don’t exist” and are only a “mirage,” it said. “There is no data behind the $450

billion, and the $110 billion is a blend of smaller deals in progress, old offers”—from the Obama era—“that have

not come through, and speculative discussions that have yet to move forward.”

Saudi Arabia, in fact, has only followed through so far on fourteen and a half billion dollars in arms and aircraft,

the State Department acknowledged last month. Other deals are merely vague memorandums of understanding

that cover the next decade, not this year. On Tuesday, a new report by the Center for International Policy also

called Trump’s claims “wildly exaggerated”—and noted that many of the jobs created from the arms sales are

in Saudi Arabia, not the United States.

Washington is also far from dependent on Riyadh’s oil wealth. Rather, the Center for International Policy’s new

report detailed the kingdom’s “extreme dependence” on the United States. With the U.S.-Saudi relationship

under scrutiny after Khashoggi’s murder, “it’s important to remember that the United States has substantial

leverage over Saudi behavior,” William Hartung, the director of the center’s Arms and Security Project, wrote.

“The Saudi military depends on U.S. arms, spare parts and maintenance to carry out its brutal war in Yemen

and could not prosecute that war for long without that support.”

The President’s comments, which flouted a C.I.A. assessment that M.B.S. likely ordered Khashoggi’s death,

provoked scorn, dismay, and outrage from human-rights groups, politicians, and foreign-policy experts.

Joseph Cirincione, the president of the Ploughshares Fund, a global-security foundation, told me, “This is,

without a doubt, the most uninformed, toady, poorly written, categorically untrue statement I have ever seen

a President of the United States make. His statement has provoked such a strong, overwhelmingly negative

reaction for good reason: it raises serious questions about the President’s fitness for office.”

Sarah Leah Whitson, the executive director of the Middle East division of Human Rights Watch, told me that

Trump’s statement “isn’t just immoral, it’s reckless and will come back to haunt and hurt U.S. interests.” She

said the crown prince has proved to be “an impulsive, sadistic, unhinged leader” who has destabilized the

region, most notably by launching the deadly war in Yemen, in 2015. “This only signals to tyrants around

the world that it’s open season on journalists and critics, wherever they are, so long as they’re cozy with Trump.”

The former U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power, who won the Pulitzer Prize for her book on efforts to halt

genocide and other war crimes, tweeted that the President’s remarks were “an abomination that will define

the ignorance, corruption, cruelty and recklessness of this presidency for generations to come.” The former

nato Ambassador Nicholas Burns, a career diplomat who is now at Harvard’s Belfer Center, called Trump’s

seven-paragraph statement “beyond embarrassing. It is shameful. He cites uncritically the MBS smear that

Khashoggi was a traitor. He argues the U.S. can’t afford to alienate Riyadh due to oil+Iran. He is silent on

our most important interest—Justice.”…….

Trump, apparently, believes that his policies could be endangered if he spurns Prince Mohammed, who has

amassed authoritarian powers. The Prince is now gaming his own rehabilitation, which Trump’s statement

will help. The Saudi press recently reported that M.B.S. will represent the kingdom at the annual G20

summit of the world’s twenty most important economies, which is next week in Buenos Aires. Trump is

expected to meet with the crown prince there…….https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/trumps-utter-denial-about-saudi-arabia-and-its-crown-prince?mbid=nl_Daily%20112118&CNDID=46508601&utm_source=nl&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daily%20112118&utm_content=&utm_brand=tny&utm_mailing=Daily%20112118&hasha=c25c4ad8a3e4cbc8faed20a1376eed39&hashb=637cacb29baeeb67e63d66fee2c449133fb8087a&spMailingID=14662796&spUserID=MTcxNTIwODYzMTU2S0&spJobID=1521660067&spReportId=MTUyMTY2MDA2NwS2

November 24, 2018 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Saudi Arabia’s crown prince Mohammed bin Salman – wanting a nuclear bomb?

Saudis Want a U.S. Nuclear Deal. Can They Be Trusted Not to Build a Bomb? NYT, By David E. Sanger and William J. Broad, Nov. 22, 2018, WASHINGTON — Before Saudi Arabia’s crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, was implicated by the C.I.A. in the killing of Jamal Khashoggi, American intelligence agencies were trying to solve a separate mystery: Was the prince laying the groundwork for building an atomic bomb?The 33-year-old heir to the Saudi throne had been overseeing a negotiation with the Energy Department and the State Department to get the United States to sell designs for nuclear power plants to the kingdom. The deal was worth upward of $80 billion, depending on how many plants Saudi Arabia decided to build.

But there is a hitch: Saudi Arabia insists on producing its own nuclear fuel, even though it could buy it more cheaply abroad, according to American and Saudi officials familiar with the negotiations. That raised concerns in Washington that the Saudis could divert their fuel into a covert weapons project — exactly what the United States and its allies feared Iran was doing

before it reached the 2015 nuclear accord, which President Trump has since abandoned.

Prince Mohammed set off alarms when he declared earlier this year, in the midst of the negotiation, that if Iran, Saudi Arabia’s fiercest rival, “developed a nuclear bomb, we will follow suit as soon as possible.” His negotiators stirred more worries by telling the Trump administration that Saudi Arabia would refuse to sign an agreement that would allow United Nations inspectors to look anywhere in the country for signs that the Saudis might be working on a bomb, American officials said.

Asked in Congress last March about his secret negotiations with the Saudis, Energy Secretary Rick Perry dodged a question about whether the Trump administration would insist that the kingdom be banned from producing nuclear fuel.

Eight months later, the administration will not say where the negotiations stand. Now lurking behind the transaction is the question of whether a Saudi government that assassinated Mr. Khashoggi and repeatedly changed its story about the murder can be trusted with nuclear fuel and technology. Such fuel can be used for benign or military purposes: If uranium is enriched to 4 percent purity, it can fuel a power plant; at 90 percent it can be used for a bomb.

Privately, administration officials argue that if the United States does not sell the nuclear equipment to Saudi Arabia someone else will — maybe Russia, China or South Korea.

They stress that assuring that the Saudis use a reactor designed by Westinghouse, the only American competitor for the deal, fits with Mr. Trump’s insistence that jobs, oil and the strategic relationship between Riyadh and Washington are all far more important than the death of a Saudi dissident who was living, and writing newspaper columns, in the United States.

Under the rules that govern nuclear accords of this kind, Congress would have the opportunity to reject any agreement with Saudi Arabia, though the House and Senate would each need a veto-proof majority to stop Mr. Trump’s plans.

“It is one thing to sell them planes, but another to sell them nukes, or the capacity to build them,’’ said Representative Brad Sherman, Democrat of California and a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Following Mr. Khashoggi’s death, Mr. Sherman has led the charge to change the law and make it harder for the Trump administration to reach a nuclear agreement with Saudi Arabia. He described it as one of the most effective ways to punish Prince Mohammed.

“A country that can’t be trusted with a bone saw shouldn’t be trusted with nuclear weapons,” Mr. Sherman said, referring to Mr. Khashoggi’s brutal killingin the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul last month.

Nuclear experts said Prince Mohammed should have been disqualified from receiving nuclear help as soon as he raised the prospect of acquiring atomic weapons to counter Iran.

“We have never before contemplated, let alone concluded, a nuclear cooperation agreement with a country that was threatening to leave the nonproliferation treaty, even provisionally,” said William Tobey, a senior official in the Energy Department during the Bush administration who has testified about the risks of the agreement with Saudi Arabia.

He was referring to the crown prince’s threat to match any Iranian nuclear weapon — a step that would require the Saudis to either publicly abandon their commitments under the nonproliferation treaty or secretly race for the bomb.

The Trump administration declined to provide an update on the negotiations, which were intense enough that Mr. Perry went to Riyadh in late 2017. Within the last several months, a senior State Department official engaged in further discussions over the deal in Europe.

……..The core challenge for the Trump administration is that it has declared that Iran can never be trusted with any weapons-making technology. Now, it must decide whether to draw the same line for the Saudis.

The United States’ own actions may be helping to drive the Saudis’ nuclear thinking. Now that the Iran agreement, brokered with world powers, is on the edge of collapse after Mr. Trump withdrew the United States, analysts are worried that the Saudis may be positioning themselves to create their own nuclear program in response.

The kingdom has extensive uranium deposits and five nuclear research centers. Analysts said Saudi Arabia’s atomic work force was steadily growing in size and sophistication — even without producing nuclear fuel.

Saudi leaders saw a political opening when Mr. Trump was elected.

In its early days, the administration spent considerable time discussing ways that Saudi Arabia and other Arab states could acquire nuclear reactors. Michael T. Flynn, who briefly served as Mr. Trump’s national security adviser, backed a plan that would have let Moscow and Washington cooperate on a deal to supply Riyadh with reactors — but not the ability to make its own atomic fuel.

As a precondition, American economic sanctions against Russia would have been dropped to allow Moscow to join the effort. Mr. Flynn was fired in early 2017 as questions swirled around his conversations with Russia’s ambassador to the United States, including about ending the trade restrictions.

At his Senate confirmation hearing in November 2017, Christopher A. Ford, the assistant secretary of state for international security and nonproliferation, called the safeguards a “desired outcome.” But he equivocated on whether the United States would insist on them.

Senator Edward J. Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat who sits on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, described the administration’s approach as “a recipe for disaster.”…….The crown prince made headlines in March by shifting the public discussion over Riyadh’s intentions from reactors to atomic bombs. In a CBS News interview, he said that if Iran acquired nuclear arms, Saudi Arabia would quickly follow suit. …….Mr. Falih, the energy minister, raised concerns about the outcome of negotiations with Washington by insisting publicly that Riyadh would make its own atomic fuel. ………https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/22/world/middleeast/saudi-arabia-nuclear.html

November 24, 2018 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics international, Saudi Arabia, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Russia to give up its policy of ‘no first use’ of nuclear weapons

Russia rewrites nuclear rule book to fire first, The Times, 23 Nov 18 President Putin would have the power to launch nuclear first strikes under plans approved by the Russian parliament.

Senators in the Federation Council, the upper house, have recommended tearing up the military doctrine that forbids initial use of weapons of mass destruction. It comes after Mr Putin said that Moscow would retaliate if the United States withdrew from a landmark Cold War missile treaty.
Russia
The revision would allow the president to order nuclear strikes in response to enemy use of conventional weapons, a significant departure from the military doctrine that prohibits first use unless Russia is threatened by weapons of mass destruction or if its “very existence is in jeopardy” ……. (subscribers only) https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/russia-rewrites-nuclear-rule-book-to-fire-first-r9gg2mpqm

November 24, 2018 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics international, Russia, weapons and war | Leave a comment

IAEA Director General Amano says Iran is abiding by nuclear deal, says North Korea should re-admit inspectors

IAEA calls on North Korea to re-admit nuclear inspectors, Money control , 23 Nov 18
IAEA inspectors were expelled from North Korea in 2009 but Director General Yukiya Amano said the agency continues to prepare for their possible re-admittance. The head of the UN’s atomic watchdog has called on North Korea to allow inspectors back into the country to monitor its nuclear program………

On the other hand, Amano told board members that Iran continues to abide by the deal reached in 2015 with major world powers that aimed at preventing Tehran from building atomic weapons in exchange for economic incentives.

He reiterated the agency’s findings in a report distributed to member states earlier this month that “Iran is implementing its nuclear-related commitments under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.”

The issue has grown more complicated since the US withdrew unilaterally in May from the deal and then re-imposed sanctions. Iran’s economy has been struggling ever since and its currency has plummeted in value.

The other signatories to the deal — Germany, Britain, France, Russia and China — are continuing to try to make it work. Amano stressed that “it is essential that Iran continues to fully implement” its commitments.

In its full report, the IAEA said its inspectors continue to have access to all sites in Iran that it needs to visit and that inspectors confirmed Iran has kept within limits of heavy water and low-enriched uranium stockpiles.

“The agency continues to verify the non-diversion of nuclear material declared by Iran under its safeguards agreement,” Amano said. “Evaluations regarding the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran continue.https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/world/iaea-calls-on-north-korea-to-re-admit-nuclear-inspectors-2-3213921.html

November 24, 2018 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Iran, politics international | Leave a comment

U.S. Secretary of State Pompeo orders South Korea to slow down on being friendly with North Korea

Pompeo to Seoul: Nuclear progress must not lag better Korea ties, REUTERS, November 21, 2018 WASHINGTON--The United States has told its ally South Korea it should not improve ties with North Korea faster than Pyongyang takes steps to give up its nuclear weapons, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Tuesday.

Speaking as a working group with South Korea to coordinate North Korean policy held an inaugural meeting in Washington, Pompeo indicated that Washington had been concerned that Seoul had moved too quickly with Pyongyang.

“We have made clear to the Republic of Korea that we do want to make sure that peace on the peninsula and the denuclearization of North Korea aren’t lagging behind the increase in the amount of inter-relationship between the two Koreas,” he told a news briefing………

Last month, in a rare sign of discord between Seoul and Washington, South Korean Foreign Minister Kang Kyung-wha said Pompeo had expressed “discontent” at an inter-Korean military pact reached during a summit in September.

The Koreas also agreed in October to begin reconnecting rail and road links despite U.S. concerns that the rapid North-South thaw could undermine efforts to press Pyongyang to give up its nuclear weapons.

At an unprecedented summit in June, U.S. President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un agreed to work toward denuclearization and peace on the Korean Peninsula and establish new relations.

But negotiations have since made little headway, with Pyongyang upset by Washington’s insistence that international sanctions must remain until it gives up its nuclear weapons.

Last week, South Korean Unification Minister Cho Myoung-gyon said in Washington it was important to provide North Korea with motivation to denuclearize but that sanctions would stay in place “until we see actual progress on denuclearization.” http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ201811210041.html

November 22, 2018 Posted by Christina Macpherson | North Korea, politics international, South Korea, USA | 1 Comment

Vladimir Putin considers his response to US exit from nuclear pact

Putin mulls Russian response to US exit from nuclear pact http://www.wmcactionnews5.com/2018/11/19/putin-mulls-russian-response-us-exit-nuclear-pact/ November 19 MOSCOW (AP) — Russian President Vladimir Putin has gathered his top military officials to discuss a response to the planned U.S. withdrawal from a key nuclear arms pact.

U.S. President Donald Trump declared last month that he intends to opt out of the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, or INF, over alleged Russian violations. Russia has denied breaching the pact.

Putin told the top military brass Monday that the U.S. withdrawal from the treaty “wouldn’t be left without an answer from our side.” He noted that Russia has responded to the U.S. missile defense program by developing new weapons that he said are capable of piercing any prospective missile shield.

While warning of a possible Russian retaliation, Putin voiced hope that Moscow and Washington could engage in arms control talks to reduce tensions.

November 19, 2018 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics international, Russia | Leave a comment

Iran hopeful that Europe can salvage nuclear deal – foreign ministry

Channel News Asia, 19 Nov 18 Iran is still hopeful that its 2015 nuclear deal with major powers can be saved despite the withdrawal of the United States, a foreign ministry spokesman said on Monday. DUBAI: Iran is still hopeful that its 2015 nuclear deal with major powers can be saved despite the withdrawal of the United States, a foreign ministry spokesman said on Monday.

“There are some ambiguities on implementation of the EU’s mechanism to protect trade with Iran from America’s sanctions … But we remain hopeful that the Europeans can save the deal,” Bahram Qasemi told a news conference broadcast live on state TV.

Other signatories trying to salvage the deal since May, when U.S. President Donald Trump abandoned it. Washington restored sanctions targeting Iran’s oil, banking and transportation sectors this month.

The European Union has been trying to establish a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) for non-dollar trade with Iran to save the deal, under which most sanctions were lifted in 2016 in exchange for Tehran curbing its nuclear programme……… (Writing by Parisa Hafezi; editing by Darren Schuettler and John Stonestreet)

November 19, 2018 Posted by Christina Macpherson | EUROPE, Iran, politics international | Leave a comment

Mike Pence: North Korea sanctions to remain until denuclearization

Nov. 13 (UPI) — U.S. Vice President Mike Pence vowed to work toward the complete denuclearization of North Korea and fully enforce sanctions during a joint press conference with Japan’s prime minister on Tuesday.

Pence, who is expected to attend the APEC meeting in Papua New Guinea on Saturday instead of President Donald Trump, said the United States stands firmly against countries that threatened freedom and openness in the region, including North Korea, NHK reported……

Pence told reporters economic sanctions against North Korea will be fully enforced until complete denuclearization, and that there is still a lot of work that needs to be done before embargoes are lifted. ….https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2018/11/13/Mike-Pence-North-Korea-sanctions-to-remain-until-denuclearization/8321542114175/

November 17, 2018 Posted by Christina Macpherson | North Korea, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Nuclear material stored in UK, but owned by EU – poses a Brexit problem

What’s In the 585-Page Brexit Divorce Deal Document?, By Ian Wishart, November 15, 2018,

“………Nuclear Material

What to do about the fissile material owned centrally by the EU but stored in the U.K. posed a tricky problem for negotiators. The draft agreement will see the U.K. take over ownership after the transition period. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-11-14/the-brexit-divorce-deal-champagne-banks-data-and-t

November 17, 2018 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics international, UK | Leave a comment

Wylfa nuclear power project may require an embarrassing state-aid plea to the EU Commission.

Dave Toke’s Blog 14th Nov 2018 , Clark’s plan to underwrite losses on Wylfa nuclear project will likely lead
to an embarrassing state-aid plea to the EU Commission.

Now that it seems, short of an extended ‘no-deal’ Brexit scenario, the UK will remain within
EU state-aid rules for a long time to come, Greg Clark will have to oversee
an embarrassing state aid case in support of his proposals to underwrite
the (almost certain) losses from building the Hitachi-led Wylfa nuclear
power plant.

I have already discussed how the taxpayer (and/or electricity
consumer) is exposed to almost certain multi-billion losses as a result of
the plan that Clark is touting here and in Japan. The last time that the UK
applied for what amounted to an exemption from EU state aid rules for
nuclear power was in late 2013 when Ed Davey led the plea for the Hinkley C
deal. The state aid was granted in October 2014 after the Commission ruled
that the Hinkley C deal was a reasonable way to avoid ‘market failure’.

Any application for state aid for Wylfa would be a tougher challenge. Indeed
the very proposal whereby the state will take at least a half equity share
in the project and take responsibility for cost overruns is an action that
in itself creates market failure if curbing carbon emissions is the
objective!

The Government’s cover story in 2013 was that support for
Hinkley C was on the same level available for renewable energy since
renewable energy schemes were also being offered CfDs (as well as very
extensive loan guarantees that most renewable energy schemes could not get
from the Government of course). The European Commission seemed to buy into
this line stating ‘The aid would not have a negative impact on other
low-carbon sources, given that they are also supported by the UK, and there
is no discrimination against renewable technologies’
https://realfeed-intariffs.blogspot.com/2018/11/clarks-plan-to-underwrite-losses-on.html

November 17, 2018 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics international, UK | Leave a comment

Iran is keeping to the conditions of nuclear deal: latest U.N. report

The Latest: Nuclear watchdog: Iran stays within deal limits https://www.kansas.com/news/business/article221528430.html, The Associated Press, November 12, 2018 VIENNA The Latest on U.N. nuclear watchdog’s new report on Iran :

The U.N. atomic watchdog says Iran continues to stay within the limitations set by the nuclear deal reached in 2015 with major powers, aimed at keeping Tehran from building nuclear weapons in exchange for incentives.

In a confidential quarterly report distributed to member states Monday and seen by The Associated Press, the International Atomic Energy Agency said Iran has stayed with key limitations set in the so-called Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA.

The issue has grown more complicated since the U.S. withdrew unilaterally in May from the deal and then re-imposed sanctions. Iran’s economy has been struggling ever since and its currency has plummeted in value.

The other signatories to the deal — Germany, Britain, France, Russia and China — are continuing to try and make it work.

The IAEA says the agency had access to all sites in Iran that it needed to visit and that inspectors confirmed Iran has kept within limits of heavy water and low-enriched uranium stockpiles.

November 13, 2018 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Iran, politics international | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries Next Entries »

1 This Month

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

To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com

Archives
- May 2026 (49)
- April 2026 (356)
- 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)
Categories
- 1
  - Arclight's Vision
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
  - business and costs
    - employment
    - marketing
  - climate change
  - culture and arts
  - ENERGY
    - renewable
      - decentralised
      - energy storage
  - environment
    - oceans
    - water
  - health
    - children
    - psychology – mental health
    - radiation
    - social effects
    - women
  - history
  - indigenous issues
  - Legal
    - deaths by radiation
    - legal
  - marketing of nuclear
  - media
    - investigative journalism
    - Wikileaks
  - opposition to nuclear
  - PERSONAL STORIES
  - politics
    - psychology and culture
      - Trump – personality
    - public opinion
    - USA election 2024
    - USA elections 2016
  - politics international
  - Religion and ethics
  - safety
    - incidents
  - secrets,lies and civil liberties
    - civil liberties
  - spinbuster
    - Education
  - technology
    - reprocessing
    - Small Modular Nuclear Reactors
    - space travel
  - Uranium
  - wastes
    - – plutonium
    - decommission reactor
  - weapons and war
    - Atrocities
    - depleted uranium
  - Women
- 2 WORLD
  - ANTARCTICA
  - ARCTIC
  - ASIA
    - Burma
    - China
    - India
    - Indonesia
    - Japan
    - Malaysia
    - Mongolia
    - North Korea
    - Pakistan
    - South Korea
    - Taiwan
    - Turkey
    - Vietnam
  - EUROPE
    - Belarus
    - Bulgaria
    - Denmark
    - Finland
    - France
    - Germany
    - Greece
    - Ireland
    - Italy
    - Kazakhstan
    - Kyrgyzstan
    - Russia
    - Spain
    - Sweden
    - Switzerland
    - UK
    - Ukraine
  - MIDDLE EAST
    - Afghanistan
    - Egypt
    - Gaza
    - Iran
    - Iraq
    - Israel
    - Jordan
    - Libya
    - Saudi Arabia
    - Syria
    - Turkey
    - United Arab Emirates
  - NORTH AMERICA
    - Canada
    - USA
      - election USA 2020
  - OCEANIA
    - New Zealand
    - Philippines
  - SOUTH AMERICA
    - Brazil
- ACTION
- AFRICA
  - Kenya
  - Malawi
  - Mali
  - Namibia
  - Niger
  - Nigeria
  - Somalia
  - South 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
  - thorium
- Reference
  - Reference archives
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS

nuclear-news

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