nuclear-news

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

Putin warns European nations on hosting US nuclear weapons – risk to them of counter-strike

Putin says Russia will target nations who host US nuclear weapons https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-putin-missiles-us-arms-treaty-inf-john-bolton-moscow-a8600146.html

‘European countries… must understand that they are putting their own territory at risk of a possible counterstrike,’ says Russian president, Oliver CarrollMoscow @olliecarroll  27 Oct 18Russia would immediately target any European nation that agreed to deploy US missiles on their soil, Vladimir Putin has said, following the announcement from Washington that it would withdraw from a landmark arms control treaty..  

It would be “quick and effective.” Mr Putin said. The Russian president added that if the US “delivers” any new weapons to Europe after they pull out of the deal, Moscow would have no choice but to defend itself.

European countries that agree to host them, if things go that far, must understand that they are putting their own territory at risk of a possible counterstrike,” he said.

The comments, delivered during a news conference following talks with Italian Prime Minster Conte, came a day after meeting US National Security Advisor John Bolton in Moscow. That visit made it clear that the United States intended to issue formal notice on the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty, and brought forward the prospect of nuclear weapons returning to European soil.
The Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces treaty, which was signed in Washington in 1987 by Presidents Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev, committed the two Cold War superpowers to destroy short range and intermediate range missiles (500-5,000km), and not to develop them in the future.

It resulted in a reduction of approximately 85 per cent of all nuclear stockpiles.

Many expect the imminent US withdrawal from this treaty to be followed by the non-renewal of another major arms control deal the strategic arms reduction treaty, the New START, which runs out in 2021.

Mr Putin said that prospect “worried him.” “It is a very dangerous situation, which leaves nothing else but an arms race,” he said.

October 27, 2018 Posted by | EUROPE, politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Nuclear power lobbyists for Saudi Arabia finding it (a bit) tough following Jamal Khashoggi ‘s murder

Saudi’s Lobbyists Feel Heat of Khashoggi Murder, Bloomberg By Kathleen Hunter, October 26, 2018 It’s not just Donald Trump who has cultivated a cozy relationship with Riyadh. Saudi Arabia has been a cash cow for Washington’s influence industry.

Over the past decade, D.C.’s lobbyists have raked in $76.9 million advocating for the Saudis on everything from nuclear power to fending off legislation that would leave the kingdom liable in lawsuits filed by family members of victims in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, Ben BrodyNaomi Nix and Bill Allison report.

That lucrative business is now facing its biggest test in years as the killing of U.S.-based journalist Jamal Khashoggi inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul draws worldwide criticism. ….https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-26/saudi-lobbyists-feel-heat-of-khashoggi-murder-balance-of-power?

October 27, 2018 Posted by | politics international, Saudi Arabia | 1 Comment

USA withdrawal from nuclear weapons treaties -risks creating “another Cuban Missile Crisis”

CIS:E.1512-2004

PRESIDENT Trump risks creating “another Cuban Missile Crisis” if he withdraws the US from key nuclear weapons treaties, leading Russian parliamentarian Alexei Pushkov has warned.

By JAMES BICKERTON, EXPRESS UK, Oct 24, 2018 Mr Pushkov made the troubling comments during an interview with the state-controlled Tass Russian News Agency.

He said: “The danger is that the United States is pushing the world to another Cuban Missile Crisis. “Back then we were lucky to avoid an exchange of nuclear strikes. “Only God knows what all this may end up in now.”

Trump has announced the US will pull out of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), which was established between the US and the Soviet Union in 1987.
The treaty prohibits the development of nuclear missiles with a range of between 500 and 5,000 kilometres.
The US claims Russia is breaching the agreement by continuing to work on mid-range ballistic missiles which could carry nuclear warheads.

There is particular focus on the 9M729 intermediate missile system, which Russia insists does not violate the INF treaty……..

Despite the US’s rhetoric, the Trump administration is yet to start the formal withdrawal process from the INF treaty.

In 2002, President George W Bush withdrew the US from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, thus allowing the country to develop a defensive missile shield.

John Bolton, Trump’s national security advisor and an advocate of withdrawing from the INF treaty, was involved in these negotiations. https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1035602/World-war-3-President-Donald-Trump-nuclear-weapon-crisis-Russia-MP-Vladimir-Putin

October 25, 2018 Posted by | politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

USA issues stark warning against UK partnering with China on nuclear power stations

US warns Britain against Chinese alliances on nuclear plants, Security official claims evidence of civilian nuclear technology being put to military use, Ft.com, David Sheppard in London , 25 Oct 18

The US has issued a stark warning to the UK about partnering with China’s largest state-backed nuclear company on a host of new power plants, saying it has evidence that it is engaged in taking civilian nuclear technology and transferring it to military uses. Christopher Ashley Ford, the US assistant secretary for international security and non-proliferation, said that China General Nuclear (CGN), which is a partner on the £18bn Hinkley Point C nuclear project, among others, was at the forefront of Chinese efforts to militarise civilian nuclear technology.

“It’s quite clear now that essentially the entirety of the Chinese nuclear industry is lashed up with military-civil fusion,” Mr Ford said in a briefing with the Financial Times. “There is a growing pattern of information of which we have become aware over time related to technological theft issues.” Mr Ford said the US had shared evidence, both “open source” and from intelligence gathering, with the UK, showing CGN was involved in the transfer of technology that could be used for a range of military applications. That could include powering China’s new breed of nuclear powered submarines, aircraft carriers and “floating nuclear reactors for the ongoing militarisation of the South China Sea”, Mr Ford

“If CGN is engaged in helping the Chinese navy . . . with missiles that could presumably be pointed at western capitals, including London . . . It’s worth thinking about whether that’s a particularly good idea,” Mr Ford said. The bluntly delivered warning comes as UK prime minister Theresa May has tried to increase scrutiny of Chinese investment in key UK infrastructure compared to her predecessor David Cameron, including over involvement in nuclear power plants.

But the US intervention, given their status as the UK’s key military ally, is likely to increase pressure on Downing Street. The Trump administration is locked in a trade war with China, with tensions ramping up over tariffs and the balance of payments between the two countries. But the US this month also updated its own policies on civilian nuclear co-operation with China to say that there would be a “presumption of denial” for any US company seeking to transfer technology to CGN or its subsidiaries. …..

A contract between China and Westinghouse Electric Company, the US nuclear engineering group sold by Toshiba to Canadian asset manager Brookfield last year, is not, however, broadly affected by the US policy shift, although future deals could be. The second Westinghouse plant in China started up on Wednesday, 11 years after the deal to build four AP1000 reactors was first signed. …..

Last month, CGN told the Financial Times that political sensitivities could prompt it to give up the chance to operate a new atomic power plant at Bradwell in Essex, as the group also outlined ambitious plans for an industrial partnership with Britain. …..

CGN has invested more than £2bn in its British nuclear projects in the past two years, and has committed to spend £9.5bn in this area in total. https://www.ft.com/content/84ab26f6-d7a5-11e8-a854-33d6f82e62f

October 25, 2018 Posted by | China, politics international, UK, USA | Leave a comment

Trump threatens to build up U.S. nuclear arsenal against China, Russia

 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-nuclear-trump-arsenal/trump-threatens-to-build-up-us-nuclear-arsenal-against-china-russia-idUSKCN1MW2N4

WASHINGTON (Reuters) OCTOBER 23, 2018, – President Donald Trump warned on Monday that the United States intended to build up its arsenal of nuclear weapons to pressure Russia and China. Speaking to reporters, Trump repeated his contention that Russia was not abiding by the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, which he has threatened to abandon.

October 23, 2018 Posted by | politics international, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Russia threatens to develop intermediate-range nuclear weapons in response to USA’s nuclear move

CIS:E.1512-2004

Russia fires back after Donald Trump threatens to ditch nuclear arms treaty https://www.news.com.au/world/middle-east/russia-fires-back-after-donald-trump-threatens-to-ditch-nuclear-arms-treaty/news-story/57fe67ef8b643c4d828d05bc2d7aaee2

RUSSIA has issued a bellicose threat to the US after Donald Trump made public his plan to increase his country’s nuclear arsenal.  AAP, staff writers, News Corp Australia Network, OCTOBER 23, 2018

A US withdrawal from the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty would require Russia to undertake measures to ensure its security, the Kremlin has warned.

If the US develops intermediate-range nuclear weapons, then Russia would have to follow suit, to “restore the balance”, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said in comments carried by media on Monday.

US President Donald Trump announced over the weekend the US was pulling out of the deal amid accusations Russia had violated it.

The US has said Russia breached the treaty by developing the Novator 9M729 cruise missile, estimated to have a range of 2600 kilometres. The treaty, signed between the United States and the then-Soviet Union in 1987, had sought to restrict nuclear-armed missiles with a range up to 5500km.

Mr Peskov rejected accusations that Russia could have violated the deal. “Russia has been and remains committed to the provisions of this agreement,” he said, according to state news agency TASS.

Mr Trump’s announcement could herald fresh tensions between the former Cold War rivals.

While the US president has repeatedly praised Mr Putin, his administration has taken a tough line against Russia, repeatedly imposing sanctions on it.

US National Security Advisor John Bolton and his Russian counterpart, Security Council chairman Nikolai Patrushev, discussed arms control agreements, Syria, Iran, North Korea and the fight against terrorism in Monday’s meeting, according to the Security Council, as Russia sought clarification on the issue.

Russia hoped “to hear more details and clarifications on what steps the US side is planning to take,” Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said in comments carried by state media.

The European Union called upon the US and Russia to preserve the agreement, calling it a “cornerstone” of European security.

Thanks to the INF treaty, which contributed to the end of the Cold War, almost 3000 missiles with nuclear and conventional warheads have been destroyed, EU foreign policy spokeswoman Maja Kocijancic told reporters in Brussels. NATO backed up the US claim that Russia could have violated the treaty, saying a “pattern of behaviour over many years has led to widespread doubts about Russian compliance”.

The Russian 9M729 missile system, unveiled earlier this year, raises serious concerns, NATO spokeswoman Oana Lungescu said in a statement. “In the absence of any credible answer from Russia on this new missile, allies believe that the most plausible assessment would be that Russia is in violation of the INF Treaty,” the spokeswoman said.

The US has also said the treaty limited US defence capabilities in response to potential Chinese medium-range missiles.

China’s Foreign Ministry said it was “completely wrong to involve the Chinese side into the withdrawal from the treaty”.

“This treaty has played an important role in easing international relations, advancing the process of nuclear disarmament, and even maintaining a global strategic balance and stability,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said.

Last week, former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev has said he thinks Mr Trump is making a “mistake” by leaving its nuclear weapons treaty with Russia.

Mr Gorbachev was one of the original signatories to the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, signed originally in 1987 with then-US President Ronald Reagan.

“Under no circumstances should we tear up old disarmament agreements. … Do they really not understand in Washington what this could lead to?” Mr Gorbachev said to Interfax news agency.

 

October 23, 2018 Posted by | politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Gorbachev, experts baffled by U.S. withdrawal from nuclear weapons deal

  Euro News, By Alexander Smith with NBC News World News•   22/10/2018

A piece of reckless brinkmanship that could spark an arms race between NATO and Russia in Europe, or a hardball negotiating strategy that might push Moscow into keeping its longstanding promises on nuclear weapons?President Donald Trump was widely criticized this weekend when he announced his intention to scrap a landmark nuclear weapons agreement signed by President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1987. The deal was designed to keep ground-based nuclear missiles out of Europe.Trump said that Russia has for years been violating the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty, or INF.He’s not the first president to make this allegation. President Barack Obama said much the same.Many experts agree that Moscow continues to break the rules and flout the pact, but despite that some say ripping up the agreement is a bad idea.

These skeptics range from Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., to Gorbachev himself, with the Nobel laureate telling Russia’s Interfax news agency Sunday that Trump’s decision was “very strange” and not the work of “a great mind.”The White House’s decision to pull out, so this argument goes, will only allow Moscow to continue its current actions without having to maintain the pretense of compliance. Meanwhile, Russia, which also accuses the U.S. of violating the agreement, can point the finger at the U.S. as the one responsible for the INF’s failure.The 1987 agreement bans ground-based nuclear and conventional missiles that can strike between 300 miles to 3,400 miles.”One concern is that in the medium-term there may be the temptation to return intermediate-range missiles, potentially including nuclear weapons, to Europe,” said Karl Dewey, an analyst at Jane’s by IHS Markit, an open-source defense intelligence provider based in London…….. https://www.euronews.com/2018/10/22/will-trump-s-withdrawal-nuclear-treaty-spark-arms-race-or-n922731

October 23, 2018 Posted by | EUROPE, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

5 things to know about threatened US-Russia nuclear weapons deal

October 22, 2018 Posted by | history, politics international, Russia, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

National security adviser John Bolton urging Trump to withdraw from Russian nuclear arms treaty

John Bolton pushing Trump to withdraw from Russian nuclear arms treaty, Exclusive: national security adviser recommends ending intermediate-range nuclear forces treaty over alleged Russia violations, Guardian,  Julian Borger , 20 Oct 18, John Bolton is pushing for the US to withdraw from a cold war-era arms control treaty with Russia, in the face of resistance from others in the Trump administration and US allies, according to sources briefed on the initiative.Bolton, Donald Trump’s third national security adviser, has issued a recommendation for withdrawal from the 1987 intermediate-range nuclear forces treaty (INF), which the US says Russia has been violating with the development of a new cruise missile.


Withdrawal from the treaty, which would mark a sharp break in US arms control policy, has yet to be agreed upon by cabinet and faces opposition from within the state department and the Pentagon. A meeting on Monday at the White House to discuss the withdrawal proposal was postponed.

The INF faces a congressionally imposed deadline early next year. An amendment in the 2019 defence spending bill requires the president to tell the Senate by 15 January whether Russia is in “material breach” of the treaty, and whether the INF remains legally binding on the US.

Bolton, who has spent his career opposing arms control treaties, is seeking to shrug off the traditional role of national security adviser as a policy broker between the agencies, and become a driver of radical change from within the White House.

Former US officials say Bolton is blocking talks on extending the 2010 New Start treaty with Russia limiting deployed strategic nuclear warheads and their delivery systems. The treaty is due to expire in 2021 and Moscow has signaled its interest in an extension, but Bolton is opposing the resumption of a strategic stability dialogue to discuss the future of arms control between the two countries.

The US has briefed its European allies this week about the proposal, sounding out reactions. The briefing alarmed UK officials who see the INF as an important arms control pillar. The treaty marked the end of a dangerous nuclear standoff in 1980s Europe pitting US Pershing and cruise missiles against the Soviet Union’s SS-20 medium-range missiles.

The US alleges Russia is now violating the treaty with the development and deployment of a ground-launched cruise missile, known as the 9M729. Moscow insists the missile does not violate the range restrictions in the INF and alleges in return that a US missile defence system deployed in eastern Europe against a potential Iranian threat can be adapted to fire medium-range offensive missiles at Russia.

The National Security Council (NSC) declined to comment on the fate of the INF………

Bolton’s meeting with his Russian counterpart, Nikolai Patrushev, in Geneva in August, was expected to give the final green light to the dialogue, but Bolton is said to have blocked it. He is due to visit Moscow next week, when the Kremlin said he may meet Vladimir Putin.

(pic DANBY/BDN) The New York Times reported on Friday that Bolton intended to use his Moscow trip to inform Russian leaders of the administration’s plans to exit the INF agreement. Under the terms of the treaty, withdrawal would take six months.

In remarks in Sochi on Thursday, Putin appeared to suggest that Russia would adopt a “no first use” policy on nuclear weapons.

“We have no concept of a pre-emptive strike,” he told a conference. “[W]e expect to be struck by nuclear weapons, but we will not use them first,” he said.

A meeting of Nato defence ministers earlier this month in Brussels issued a joint statement saying the INF “has been crucial to Euro-Atlantic security and we remain fully committed to the preservation of this landmark arms control treaty”………

“The decision has been taken in the NSC [National Security Council] that the US should withdraw, and they are trying to persuade other parts of the administration. There has been no formal Trump decision yet,” said Hans Kristensen, the director of the nuclear information project at the Federation of the American Scientists. “Very little good will come of this, other than another round of nuclear escalation with Russia.”  ………https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/oct/19/john-bolton-russia-nuclear-arms-deal-trump-lobbying

October 20, 2018 Posted by | politics, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Risk of nuclear war between USA and China “not as implausible” no, as it was in the past

October 20, 2018 Posted by | China, politics international, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Trump’s financial benefit from Saudi Arabia – shaping USA’s foreign policy

Saudi Arabia is putting money in Trump’s pocket. Is that shaping U.S. policy? https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2018/10/16/saudi-arabia-is-putting-money-in-trumps-pocket-is-that-shaping-u-s-policy/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.434cc7237930, By Paul Waldman,October 16

As hard as it is to resist writing about the fact that on Tuesday the president of the United States called the adult film actress to whom he paid hush money “Horseface,” I want to focus on a different aspect of this presidency that we’re seeing play out right now.

.As the apparent murder of Saudi journalist and Post contributor Jamal Khashoggi complicates our relations with Saudi Arabia, we have to ask what the implications are of having a fully transactional presidency, one not just built on “deals” but where policy is determined by what is financially beneficial to the president.

We should begin by reminding ourselves that as awful as Khashoggi’s apparent murder is, it’s only the latest in a long list of Saudi abuses that administrations both Democratic and Republican have chosen to overlook for decades. The country is a cruel dictatorship that embodies none of the values we as a nation hold dear, such as democracy, freedom of expression, freedom of the press and freedom of religion. But we decided long ago that since the Saudis have a great deal of oil and they provide us with a strategic ally in the Middle East, we’ll overlook all that.

There is something unsettling about the fact that Saudi intervention in Yemen’s civil war, in which they have reportedly killed thousands of civilians, has received steady U.S. support, while the murder of a single journalist threatens to upend the relationship between the two countries.

Or so you might think. But here’s the reality: This will blow over, not only because of the complex relationship between the two countries, but also because everything in foreign policy is personal with President Trump, and he likes the Saudis.

And why does he like them so much? Because they pay him.

This is not something Trump has been shy about saying. “Saudi Arabia, I get along with all of them. They buy apartments from me. They spend $40 million, $50 million,” he said at a rally in Alabama in 2015. “Am I supposed to dislike them? I like them very much.”

Trump says so many shocking things that it’s sometimes easy to slide right past the most appalling ones, but read that again. Here you have a candidate for president of the United States saying that he is favorably disposed toward a foreign country because they have given him millions of dollars, and all but promising to shape American foreign policy in their favor for that very reason.

Am I supposed to dislike them?” he asks. How could I possibly dislike them when they pay me?

We should note that it’s more than just apartments. Trump has sold many properties to Saudis, and Saudis have invested in Trump projects. And as David Fahrenthold and Jonathan O’Connell report:

Business from Saudi-connected customers continued to be important after Trump won the presidency. Saudi lobbyists spent $270,000 last year to reserve rooms at Trump’s hotel in Washington. Just this year, Trump’s hotels in New York and Chicago reported significant upticks in bookings from Saudi visitors.

This is precisely the reason the framers of the Constitution added a provision saying that neither the president nor other officials could “accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.” If a foreign country is putting money in the president’s pocket on an ongoing basis, how in the world can we trust that the decisions he makes will be based on the best interests of the United States and not on his bank account?

This is of more concern with Trump than with any other president in American history. His entire life has been devoted to the accumulation of wealth, as though there were no other goal anyone should consider seeking (“My whole life I’ve been greedy, greedy, greedy. I’ve grabbed all the money I could get. I’m so greedy,” he has said). He made sure that upon assuming office his businesses would continue to operate and continue to provide avenues for those wishing to further enrich him to do so. And he refuses to release his tax returns, so we have no idea exactly how much money he’s getting and from whom.

But Tuesday, Trump tweeted this:

For the record, I have no financial interests in Saudi Arabia (or Russia, for that matter). Any suggestion that I have is just more FAKE NEWS (of which there is plenty)!

This is the same claim Trump has made with regard to Russia, and it’s the same dodge. The point isn’t whether Trump has interests in Saudi Arabia, it’s whether Saudi Arabia has interests in him. And just as is the case with Russia, they do.

If you’re the Saudis, the nice thing about Trump is that he lacks any subtlety whatsoever, so you don’t have to wonder how to approach him. He has said explicitly that the way to win his favor is to give him money. He has established means for you to do so — buying Trump properties and staying in Trump hotels. And with his combination of narcissism and insecurity, if you invite him to your country and give him a gold medal, he’ll forever be your friend.

Every president has to balance the desire to honor U.S. values with more crass interests such as whether a country will buy weapons from us, which Trump also cited as a reason we shouldn’t punish Saudi Arabia for Jamal Khashoggi’s murder (even though they aren’t actually buying what Trump claims). But only Trump apparently gets direct and significant payoffs from other countries, and only Trump is so clear that if you pay him he’ll do what you want. That may not have changed the American stance toward Saudi Arabia too much yet, but we have no idea what’s to come.

October 18, 2018 Posted by | politics international, Saudi Arabia, USA | 1 Comment

Trump and Kushner – naive, ill-informed and craven as they obsess over Saudi money

Trump and Kushner Put Saudi’s Money First https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-10-17/trump-and-kushner-put-saudi-arabia-s-money-ahead-of-khashoggi

Jamal Khashoggi’s death has exposed the White House and two of its most powerful figures as naive, ill-informed and craven. What comes next?,  By October 17, 2018, The Trump team is standing by Saudi Arabia and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman as the investigation and controversy surrounding the disappearance of journalist Jamal Khashoggi deepens.

On Tuesday, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo visited Riyadh for a photo op with the prince. In a press release, he praised the Saudi leadership for “supporting a thorough, transparent and timely” investigation into the Khashoggi affair, a full two weeks after the dissident first went missing.

Pompeo also said that Saudi leaders denied any involvement in Khashoggi’s disappearance, something his boss, President Donald Trump, let the world know on Twitter as well.

By Tuesday evening, that line became more complex to defend after the New York Times reported that at least four suspects in Khashoggi’s disappearance had ties to the crown prince. A fifth was “of such stature that he could be directed only by a high-ranking Saudi authority,” the newspaper said.

Complexity has never deterred the president, however. In an interview with the Associated Press on Tuesday, he blamed critics of Saudi Arabia for holding it “guilty until proven innocent.” Lest anyone doubt his motives, Trump took to Twitter to talk about his finances:

“For the record, I have no financial interests in Saudi Arabia (or Russia, for that matter). Any suggestion that I have is just more FAKE NEWS (of which there is plenty)!”

That statement would be easier to digest if Trump hadn’t bragged publicly in the past about how much Saudis have spent buying his condominiums – and if he wasn’t the steward of the most financially conflicted presidency of the post World War II era.

Trump is playing word games, of course. He says he has no investments in Saudi Arabia or Russia. But that doesn’t mean money from those countries hasn’t flowed into his coffers. In Saudi Arabia’s case, that has meant very different things over the years.

In the early 1990s, Saudi billionaire Prince Alwaleed bin Talal bought Trump’s prized yacht on the cheap from the property developer’s creditors when he was on the cusp of personal bankruptcy. A few years later, one of Trump’s lenders forced him to sell the Plaza Hotel, a New York City landmark also mired in debt, to Alwaleed. As David Fahrenthold and Jonathan O’Connell noted in the Washington Post recently, this was a period when Trump was trying to dig himself out of $3.4 billion of debt, about $900 million of which he had guaranteed personally. But Alwaleed was a bargain-hunter at the time, not someone trying to ensnare a failed developer on the unlikely chance that he might someday become president.

Still, Alwaleed, who once described Trump on Twitter as a “disgrace not only to the GOP but to all America,” kept those early deals in mind. When Trump made fun of him on Twitter two years ago, Alwaleed responded by tweeting, “I bailed you out twice; a 3rd time, maybe?”

As Trump climbed out of his debt hole in the late 1990s and early 2000s, he courted Saudi condo buyers. The Saudi Arabian government bought the entire 45th floor of the Trump World Tower in 2001, and, before running for president, Trump was apparently contemplating doing business in Saudi Arabia – he incorporated eight limited-liability companies with names suggesting he planned to do business there (they were later dissolved).

After becoming president, Trump flouted tradition by declining to authentically separate himself from the Trump Organization and its hotel and golf properties. The Trump International Hotel in Washington has been a favorite venue for Saudi diplomats who have spent lavishly there, as well as at other Trump hotels.

The president and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, also decided to make Saudi Arabia a linchpin of their policy in the Middle East. Kushner, lacking full security clearance and any diplomatic experience, lobbied the crown prince directly in early 2017 to secure what was fancifully and inaccurately touted as a $110 billion arms sale – most of which had been agreed a year earlier, and the bulk of which still hasn’t been completed.

Shortly after that transaction was arranged, Trump visited Saudi Arabia. And soon after that, the Saudis announced they would invest $20 billion in an infrastructure fund managed by Blackstone Group LP. The New York-based firm had financed several of the Kushner family’s deals and its chairman, Stephen Schwarzman, sat on the president’s business-advisory council. The private equity firm told Bloomberg News that the Saudi investment had been contemplated long before Trump was even the Republican nominee.

Kushner’s forays alarmed members of the intelligence and national security communities, as Bob Woodward outlined in his book, “Fear.” At the very moment Kushner was throwing himself into these diplomatic adventures, he was coming under scrutiny for his own financial conflicts – in particular, his efforts to secure funding for 666 Fifth Avenue, a troubled Manhattan skyscraper his family owned.

Although the family has since sold off the property, Kushner had tried unsuccessfully to secure funding for it from a Chinese investor. His intersection with a prominent banker and diplomats from Moscow during the Trump campaign’s transition into the White House raised questions about whether he was courting Russian investors (which he denied). Inevitably, the Kushner family also courted a prominent Saudi investor to bail them out of 666 Fifth, as detailed by my Bloomberg News colleagues David Kocieniewski and Caleb Melby.

Late last year, Kushner made another secretive trip alone to Riyadh. He later described the visit as an effort to “brainstorm” Middle East strategies with Mohammed bin Salman. Not long afterward, the crown prince placed dozens of prominent businessmen and political rivals under house arrest in what was described as an anti-corruption drive. Among them was Alwaleed, the man who once snatched the Plaza Hotel and yacht from Kushner’s father-in-law.

Earlier this year, leaked intelligence reports revealed that diplomats in Mexico, Israel, China and the United Arab Emirates had decided to target Kushner because they believed he could be easily manipulated due to “his complex business arrangements, financial difficulties and lack of foreign policy experience.”

For his part, Kushner just plowed ahead, continuing to rest the White House’s plans for the Middle East on the shoulders of an equally young and untested man, Saudi Arabia’s crown prince. The disappearance of a single journalist, a one-time ally of the royal family turned critic, may ultimately cause Kushner’s plans to unravel – and expose his machinations in Saudi Arabia to more revealing and unwanted scrutiny.

If it doesn’t, it may well be because the president – putting the lie to his dissembling about his family’s financial ties to Saudi Arabia – will openly and stubbornly put money ahead of the moral and diplomatic issues at play in Khashoggi’s disappearance.

As he told Fox News in an interview on Tuesday night: “I don’t want to give up a $100 billion order or whatever it is.”

October 18, 2018 Posted by | politics, politics international, Saudi Arabia, USA | 1 Comment

U.S. Military Leaders silent on Saudin Arabia political situation

US Military Leaders Keep Quiet on Saudi Arabia Amid Khashoggi Outrage, Defense One 16 Oct 18  Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Joseph Dunford this week have declined to say much on Saudi Arabia. Both leaders, in previously scheduled meetings with reporters, were asked about the kingdom and what effect the killing of Khashoggi may have on U.S.-Saudi relations. Both men deferred to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and said they were waiting for him to return to the U.S. with more “facts.” And they both implied that any related changes to Trump administration foreign policy would be given to them, not made by them. …….

Speaking to reporters traveling with him in Brussels, Pompeo said: “I do think it’s important that everyone keep in their mind that we have lots of important relationships – financial relationships between U.S. and Saudi companies, governmental relationships, things we work on together all across the world – efforts to reduce the risk to the United States of America from the world’s largest state sponsor of terror, Iran. The Saudis have been great partners in working alongside us on those issues. I could go on about places where the Saudis and the Americans are working together. Those are important elements of the U.S. national policy that are for – are in Americans’ best interests. We just need to make sure that we are mindful of that as we approach decisions that the United States Government will take when we learn all of the facts associated with whatever may have taken place.”

President Trump, meanwhile, has been giving the Saudis as much cover as humanly possible, Over the weekend, he floated the idea that “rogue killers” dispatched Khashoggi, and on Tuesday, he told the Associated Press, “Here we go again with, you know, you’re guilty until proven innocent. I don’t like that. We just went through that with Justice Kavanaugh and he was innocent all the way as far as I’m concerned.”………

Is the Saudi partnership still a matter of necessity? Should it be? That’s not likely the question Mattis and Dunford are asking for the near term. For them, the answer is yes. But for the long term, it’s a question for them, Pompeo,and Trump. It’s a question of whether “Saudi interests” under bin Salman still align with American interests, or just with American military and intelligence interests.

This week, national security press has been inundated with commentaries asking if the U.S.-Saudi relationship has been worth the cost. At the Pentagon, no matter the outcome of the Pompeo fact-finding trip or the Khashoggi investigation, the answer is most likely going to be a resounding yes.  https://www.defenseone.com/politics/2018/10/us-military-leaders-keep-quiet-saudi-arabia-amid-khashoggi-outrage/152082/?oref=site-defenseone-flyin-sailthru

October 18, 2018 Posted by | politics international, Saudi Arabia, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Trump’s ever riskier bet on Saudi Arabia

October 18, 2018 Posted by | politics international, Saudi Arabia, USA | Leave a comment

A plan to get Nuclear-Weapons Treaties happening again

October 18, 2018 Posted by | politics international, Russia, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment