An American Spy Base Hidden in Australia’s Outback, NYT By JACKIE DENT The trials — and the Australian government’s uncompromising prosecution of the protesters — has put a spotlight on a facility that the United States would prefer remain in the shadows.
— Margaret Pestorius arrived at court last week in her wedding dress, a bright orange-and-cream creation painted with doves, peace signs and suns with faces. “It’s the colors of Easter, so I always think of it as being a resurrection dress,” said Ms. Pestorius, a 53-year-old antiwar activist and devout Catholic, who on Friday was convicted of trespassing at a top-secret military base operated by the United States and hidden in the Australian outback.
North Korea is often righteously condemned for being the only nation to have conducted five nuclear tests and a barrage of missile tests in the 21st century. Led by a young chubby dictator with a bad haircut, we have long been told that the paranoid hermit kingdom known for its undeniably bombastic, intensely patriotic and anachronistic rhetoric is evil, unhinged and dangerous.
While not to advocate for family dynastic rule in any way, the way in which North Korea has been mediated for mainstream audiences in advanced industrial democratic countries over decades demonstrates a consistent narrative pattern of Orientalist imagery that play on variants of immaturity, cunning and treachery in a legacy going back to Fu Manchu. Complexities tend to be reduced to a simplistic ‘us or them’ binary and seem to trigger intuitive reactions hard-wired by more than enough movies and sensationalist media journalism. No further discussion or reading required.
In the significant amount of digital space recently awarded to speculation on North Korea’s purported nuclear-capable ICBM tests on 4 and 28 July that could strike parts of continental U.S.A., few mainstream media reports bothered to include that since May 2017 the U.S. military tested 4 ICBMs from Vandenberg Air Force base to Kwajalein Atoll and conducted 11-12 drills over the Korean peninsula involving B-1B, B-2 and B-52 bombers (the latter two are nuclear capable). The current Ulchi Freedom Guardian reiteration on 21-31 August 2017 and the previous Foal Eagle Key Resolve operation involving 67,000 troops in March 2017 are based on years of biannual U.S.-ROK military drills, giving substance to the recent statement by Secretary of Defense James Mattis: “combined allied militaries now possess the most precise, rehearsed and robust defensive and offensive capabilities on Earth.”
Certainly, North Korea staged the longer reach of a new Hwasong-14 missile which demonstrated staged rocketry, better re-entry cladding and guidance systems. Yet we were expected to take at face-value a Washington Postreport of claims by unnamed US Defense Intelligence Agency officials that North Korea had achieved sufficient warhead miniaturisation to fit on ICBMs. This was supposed to support US President Trump’s apparently unprompted threat of ‘fire and fury the likes of which the world has never seen’, holding much of the population of North Korea hostage as he sat down to lunch. Yet days earlier Senator Lindsey Graham had stated that he had discussed a plan with the President to “destroy the North Korean nuclear program and North Korea itself”. Moreover, National Security Adviser McMaster had already declared that United States could launch a ‘preventive war’ to prevent North Korea from attaining nuclear weapons cabability – a paradoxical pursuit if ever there was one.
Mainstream channels continued to interpret this ‘tough line’ corrective to the former Obama administration’s ‘strategic patience’, as necessary to force North Korea to the negotiating table. Incidentally, preventive war was the defence used by lawyers at the Nuremberg Trials in their attempt to justify Nazi Germany’s invasion of Poland.
In response, the North Korean Strategic Force stated that it was calculating an operational plan to create an ‘enveloping fire’ with 4 IRBM (Hwasong-12) missiles in areas 30-40 km off Guam which had to be approved by leader Kim Jong-un. Subsequently Kim suspended the operation for the meantime. Clearly intended to demonstrate credible intention to strike Guam’s huge U.S. naval and airforce installations from where pre-emptive strikes could be launched and which include 8,000 U.S. troops, anti-ballistic missile defence systems, and signals intelligence infrastructure, this was aimed at military targets. Media reports did not emphasise this point, ignoring the North Korean caveat that this launch would be a warning not an attack. It remains unclear whether or not the IRBMs would be nuclear-tipped. The Foreign Minister Ri Yong-ho at the recent ASEAN meeting stated that North Korea was not prepared to negotiate with its nuclear weapons and ballistic rockets unless “the hostile policy and nuclear threat of the U.S. against the DPRK are fundamentally eliminated”. The Korean People’s Army (KPA) listed U.S. hostile actions as: ‘decapitation operations’ and ‘pre-emptive’ attack (as rehearsed in U.S.-ROK drills); ‘preventive war’; and/or ‘secret operations’ for stealthy regime change (CIA coordinated Special Operations).
While indicating its preference for de-escalation and negotations toward de-nuclearisation of the Korean peninsula, China declared it would defend North Korea if it was pre-emptively attacked by the United States and it would not do so if North Korea struck first. Determining who exactly fired first may be difficult, however, if it was a matter of minutes between detection of a pre-emptive attack (such as B-1B bombers firing missiles at distance) and North Korea launching conventional attacks on U.S. bases in South Korea and IRBM missiles to Guam (nuclear or non-nuclear).
From a North Korean strategic perspective informed by decades of various forms of hostility from the U.S. and some of its allies including the refusal to negotiate and preparations for regime change, such missile capability would seem to provide a desperately needed means of self-defence. In fact, with regard to these latest U.S. nuclear threats listed above (which are not new), North Korea could invoke Article 51 of the UN Charter which maintains the right to self-defence when a sovereign state is under direct attack by a foreign power. It could also invoke the Caroline standard of pre-emptive self-defence in the case of likely attack being ‘instant, overwhelming and without other means, and no moment for deliberation’.
As it would be suicidal for North Korea to provoke U.S.-led retaliation with a pre-emptive strike and considering its historical context, it is reasonable to see the North Korean nuclear program as intended to achieve a second-strike retaliatory capability. Although the U.S. would be unlikely to strike if China (and possibly Russia) was to intervene, North Korea would still seek such a deterrent as a means to negotiate its security terms with the United States and others and to protect its fundamental sovereignty which it regards under threat.
It has been official U.S. policy to refuse to countenance a North Korean nuclear weapons state and to negotiate with it on these terms which it now frames as threatening the lives of millions of ordinary Americans in continental U.S.A.. Yet U.S. leadership does not hesitate from threatening millions of lives in North Korea and on the Korean peninsula. This is not very strategic, as it undermines South Korean sovereign agency and perceptions of and trust in the U.S.-ROK alliance as a deterrent and to the contrary that it might drag the South Korean population into a destructive conflict.
In short, with China’s ‘dual suspension’ suggestion as the most sensible and statesman-like so far, North Korea conceivably would suspend its nuclear program in return for a freeze in U.S. military hostile actions to create the mechanism for direct negotiations to begin. North Korea would then seek an end to the Armistice Agreement of 1953, the terms of which the U.S. never honoured in full, and the establishment of a formal Peace Treaty. North Korea would also seek independent negotiations with South Korea for increased trade, exchange and communications.
Compared to the spike in stocks in Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and Boeing and as some U.S. allies push for increased military spending, including anti-ballistic missile systems and ‘pre-emptive strike’ capabilities, the potential losses of millions of lives in a conventional and/or nuclear confrontation on the Korean peninsula and to the global economy in trade would not seem to be worth it. Diplomacy and dialogue between North Korea and the United States and/or other concerned parties toward demilitarisation and de-nuclearisation would seem the safest and cheapest form of defence to be investing in. Perhaps a normalised Korean peninsula which would benefit China’s economic plans, are what the U.S. and its allies fear most, and so they are starting fires to revivify a military containment policy.
Dr Adam Broinowski is a visiting research fellow and recent ARC DECRA fellow at the College of Asia and the Pacific, Australian National University. His research and teaching are in contemporary history, politics and society in Japan and Northeast Asia. He is the author of Cultural Responses to Occupation in Japan: The Performing Body during and after the Cold War (London and Sydney: Bloomsbury Academic, 2016).
Ambassador to U.K. Liu Xiaoming speaks in interview with ITV
China has “done everything” it can to resolve crisis
China’s Ambassador to the U.K. Liu Xiaoming says he’s “cautiously optimistic” that a diplomatic solution can be found to stop North Korea from developing further nuclear weaponry.
Liu, who was China’s ambassador to North Korea for more than three years, said that his government “had done everything” it could to persuade the country to halt its nuclear program. He spoke in a television interview with ITV.
“I am still cautiously optimistic,” Liu said in the interview that was broadcast on Sunday. “I still believe that if all parties engage with each other and we encourage North Korea to return to the negotiating table, we can still find a diplomatic solution to this problem.”
Chinese President Xi Jinping recently sent Song Tao, head of the Communist Party’s International Liaison Department, to North Korea a week after hosting U.S. President Donald Trump, stoking speculation that Song may carry a message from the Xi-Trump talks. South Korea’s Yonhap News Agency reported there was a good chance that the Chinese envoy would meet leader Kim Jong Un on Sunday, citing unidentified diplomats in Beijing.
Liu said Sunday that North Korea had “legitimate concerns” about trust and security and blamed South Korea’s close relationship with the U.S. as the “root cause” of the problem. While China “strictly abides” by United Nations sanctions against North Korea, resolutions must also be about negotiations, he told ITV.
CHINA has demanded the US military stops carrying out exercises on the Korean peninsula in a bid to cool off tensions between North Korea state and the Trump administration.By VINCENT WOODOfficials from Xi Jinping’s government have told their US and South Korean counterparts to stop carrying out joint drills in the region – exercises that are often used as a show of force in response to military tests carried out by Kim Jong-un’s nuclear cronies.
In return they believe they can negotiate a stop to the tyrant’s nuclear and missile provocations amid fears tensions could trigger the start of World War 3 on the Korean peninsula.
Geng Shuang, China’s foreign ministry spokesman, claims freezing military drills in exchange for a freeze on North Korean missile testing was the best means of achieving peace in the region.
He said: “China sees the freeze-for-freeze scheme is the most reasonable way.”
The official’s comments follow a 12-day tour of Asia by President Trump, in which the Republican firebrand met with China’s newly emboldened leader Xi Jinping to discuss bringing an end to the North Korean threat.
However, on Wednesday the US President claimed he “would not accept” freeze for freeze plans “like those that have consistently failed in the past”.
Mr Geng added: ”The freeze-for-freeze move is just for a breakthrough and the first step.
“The final objective is to peacefully resolve the North’s nuclear problem and realise long-term stability on the Korean Peninsula.”
It comes as the United States deploys 14,000 troops on aircraft carriers and destroyers off the coast of North Korea for a series of war games with Japan in drills likely to infuriate Kim Jong-un.
More than 14,000 servicemen will take part in the ten-day exercise, which will see US and Japanese troops performing war games in the waters off Okinawa.
The US Navy said the drills, which began on Thursday, are “designed to increase the defensive readiness and interoperability of Japanese and American forces through training in air and sea operations”.
And they also include aircraft carrier the USS Ronald Reagan, and the guided-missile destroyers USS Stethem, USS Chafee and USS Mustin, among others – the first such deployment of three US carriers since 2007.
A US Navy spokesman: “The exercise follows more than a week of scenario-based training ashore.”
The display of military force is meant to pressure North Korea and make it clear to Pyongyang the US can rapidly mobilise a potent military force.
China will send a high-level diplomatic envoy to North Korea, Business Insider, Michael Martina and Ben Blanchard, Reuters, Nov. 15, 2017 BEIJING— A senior Chinese diplomat will visit North Korea on Friday as a special envoy of Chinese President Xi Jinping, Beijing said, though it did not say the envoy was planning to discuss North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs.
China has repeatedly pushed for a diplomatic solution to the crisis but in recent months has had only limited high-level exchanges with North Korea. The last time China’s special envoy for North Korea visited the country was in February 2016.
In a brief dispatch, China’s Xinhua news agency said Song Tao, who heads the ruling Communist Party’s external-affairs department, would leave for North Korea on Friday.
Iran undertook to curb its uranium enrichment program in return for relief from international sanctions that crippled its economy, and U.N. nuclear inspectors have repeatedly verified Tehran’s adherence to the key aspects of the accord.
Trump has called the agreement between Iran, the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia, China and the European Union “the worst deal ever” and he disavowed Iran’s compliance last month. His decision did not constitute a U.S. exit from the accord but raised concern about its staying power.
Trump’s move, at odds with the commitment of the other parties to the deal, meant the U.S. Congress must decide by mid-December whether to reimpose economic sanctions lifted under the accord, reached under his predecessor Barack Obama.
If Congress reimposes the sanctions, the United States would in effect be in violation of the deal and it would likely fall apart. If lawmakers do nothing, the deal remains in place.
In response, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has said Tehran will stick to the nuclear accord as long as the other signatories respected it, but would “shred” the deal if Washington pulled out.
If the deal unravels, it would strengthen hardline opponents of Hassan Rouhani, Iran’s pragmatist president who opened up diplomatic channels to Western powers to enable nuclear diplomacy after years of worsening confrontation.
Iran’s stock of low-enriched uranium as of Nov. 5 was 96.7 kg (213.2 pounds), well below a 202.8-kg limit set by the deal, and the level of enrichment did not exceed a maximum 3.67 percent cap, said the confidential International Atomic Energy Agency report sent to IAEA member states and seen by Reuters.
Iran’s stock of so-called heavy water, a moderator used in a type of reactor that can produce plutonium, a potential nuclear bomb fuel, stood at 114.4 metric tonnes, below a 130-tonne limit agreed by the parties to the deal.
The 3.67 percent enrichment and 202-kg stockpile limit on uranium, and the 130-tonne cap on heavy water, aim to ensure that Iran does not amass enough material of sufficient fissile purity to produce a nuclear bomb. Such a device requires uranium to be refined to around 90 percent purity.
IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano told Reuters in September he would welcome clarification from the powers on how the agency should monitor Iran’s implementation of the so-called Section T of the nuclear pact that deals with certain technologies that could be used to develop an atom bomb.
Russia had been critical of the agency’s monitoring of Section T provisions, but Monday’s report said the IAEA had verified Iran’s commitment to the section.
Reporting by Shadia Nasralla; editing by Mark Heinrich
North Korea nuclear arsenal too developed to destroy quickly, says Moon, Christine Kim, 14 Nov 17, SEOUL (Reuters) – South Korean President Moon Jae-in said on Tuesday it would not be easy for reclusive North Korea to destroy its nuclear arsenal quickly, even if wanted to, given its weapons programs were so developed. North Korea is under heavy international pressure to end its weapons programs, pursued in defiance of U.N. Security Council resolutions. But it has vowed never to give up its nuclear arsenal.
Speaking to reporters in the Philippines, Moon said that if North Korea agreed to hold talks, negotiations could be held with all options open.
“If talks begin to resolve the North Korea nuclear issue, I feel it will be realistically difficult for North Korea to completely destroy its nuclear capabilities when their nuclear and missile arsenal are at a developed stage,” Moon said in a briefing.
“If so, North Korea’s nuclear program should be suspended, and negotiations could go on to pursue complete denuclearization.”…….
The North defends the programs as a necessary defense against U.S. plans to invade. The United States, which has 28,500 troops in South Korea, a legacy of the 1950-53 Korean war, denies any such intention.
U.S. President Donald Trump has traded insults and threats with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un as North Korea races toward its goal of developing a nuclear-tipped missile capable of reaching the United States.
Trump threatened in his maiden U.N. address to “totally destroy” North Korea if the United States was threatened and has said the time for talking, the policy of previous U.S. administrations, is over.
Moon reiterated his stance that now was the time to increase pressure on North Korea so that it would come to talks……..
He said differences in understanding between South Korea and China, North Korea’s lone major ally, regarding the deployment of the U.S. Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system on South Koran soil had not been resolved.
Iran slams rich nations over climate talks http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2017/11/12/iran-slams-rich-nations-over-climate-talks Iran and its fellow developing countries have accused the world’s richest nations of eroding trust and trying to undermine talks about the Paris agreement. Iran has delivered a blistering assessment of the world’s richest countries’ performance during UN climate negotiations, accusing them of eroding trust and censoring developing nations.
In an unusually strong statement, Iran’s representative told talks in Bonn on Saturday the group of more than 20 like-minded developing countries it spoke for believed others were trying to rewrite the Paris agreement.
The agreement, like the UN climate convention, only worked when all parties had trust in each other and worked together in good faith, he said.
“So soon after the Paris agreement entered into force we are already seeing that trust and good faith being eroded by constant attempts to move away from prior agreements, solemn pledges and treaty obligations,” he said.
“This does not lay a good foundation for long-lasting, equitable and durable action on climate change.”
And in negotiations over finance, technology and building the capacity of nations to cut emissions, suggestions put forward by developing country blocs were “immediately rejected outright by developed countries”.
“What we are seeing now is a concerted effort by developed countries to drop G77 and LMDC proposals from the table in order to focus further negotiations only on developed countries’ positions,” Iran’s representative said.
“Censoring other parties’ views from being included into negotiating text as the basis of negotiations is clearly not in good faith.”
The Saturday evening session was designed as a mid-COP23 update on the various negotiation bodies that have been working on different aspects of implementing the Paris agreement.
While the chairs of each of the bodies generally gave the impression good progress was being made, almost all the country groups said they were disappointed or concerned about the slow pace.
Ecuador said its G77+China group – representing 134 developing countries – was especially worried about the lack of progress on all financial matters.
This concern was echoed by Mali on behalf of African countries.
Finance is important to developing countries, who cannot afford on their own to cut emissions or adapt to climate change.
“One component is still missing – not from (Fiji) but from our developed country parties – and that is the political will that is needed to engage constructively towards the highest priority of ensuring a balanced progress on all agenda items,” Ecuador official Walter Schuldt said.
And the Maldives, speaking for small island states, accused some countries of taking a “seemingly hard stance” by wanting to limit access to finance.
Australian environment ambassador Patrick Suckling said its Umbrella Group of non-EU developed countries – including the US, Canada and New Zealand – was generally heartened that everyone at the negotiations wanted to see progress.
But Australia’s bloc was disappointed by persistent efforts from some countries to work outside the mandates of the Paris agreement.
Tension has arisen over adding extra items to the official agenda, including a formal discussion about increasing pledges for action before the Paris deal starts in 2020.
“(This) is hampering the very progress we are seeking,” Mr Suckling said.
The European Union said it did not recognise any lack of political will during negotiations and there was no disagreement about the urgency of pre-2020 action – only what form discussions should take.
Morocco, which has been working with countries on a solution to this dispute, also reported there was a clearly unanimous view on the importance of early action on climate change.
It said there was no consensus yet but was convinced once could be reached.
Greenpeace’s Jens Mattias Clausen said giving space to constructive discussions about pre-2020 ambitions was a way developed countries could show good faith to their partners.
“These discussions need to take place now, not only on climate action but also on issues such as the adaptation fund, to build trust and ensure that vulnerable countries will get the help they need,” he told AAP.
The government cannot guarantee Britain will have enough nuclear inspectors when it leaves the EU. The Office of Nuclear Regulation has recruited four new safeguards inspectors but says it needs more time to fill the specialised roles. Nuclear minister Richard Harrington said there was “plenty of time” to recruit the staff needed. But he stopped short of offering a firm guarantee. The government has stressed that nuclear safeguards – the processes by which the UK shows its civil nuclear material is not diverted into weapons programmes – are different from nuclear safety – the prevention of nuclear accidents. Mr Harrington said the UK was committed to leaving Euratom in March 2019. (1)
Industry figures have warned about significant disruption to energy production in the UK if there is not a new inspection regime ready to go to, to replace the one currently overseen by Euratom.
Dr Mina Golshan gave evidence on behalf of the Office for Nuclear Regulation to the Safeguards Bill Committee on 31st October 2017. (2) Dr Golshan completely ducked addressing the most important aspect of the bill, according to nuclear security expert Dr David Lowry. It is- not the operational technicalities which concern Lowry, but the diplomatic acceptability of a nation state asserting that it will replace an independent international safeguards verification regime with a self verified regime, albeit one that intends to be populated by the appropriate expertise from a current recruitment drive.
Dr Golshan also overlooked the fact the current trilateral safeguards agreement (UK-EURATOMIAEA) has an opt out of safeguards application to fissile material, under its article 14, if the Government so decides; and this has actually been done over 600 times since September 1978, when the trilateral safeguards agreement came into force. Foreign states regard this as UK ‘doit-yourself’ nuclear proliferation on an industrial scale, as comments at successive NPT review conferences attest, but ministers routinely ignore.
Trump vows to ‘figure out’ North Korea nuclear crisis with Moon SBS News, 7 Nov 17, US President Donald Trump arrived in Seoul on Tuesday vowing to ‘figure it all out’ with his South Korean counterpart Moon Jae-In, despite the two allies’ differences on how to deal with the nuclear-armed North.
As tensions over Pyongyang’s weapons programme have soared, the US president has traded personal insults and threats of war with North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un, but the South’s capital and its 10 million inhabitants would be on the front line of any conflict.
On Twitter Trump described Moon as “a fine gentleman”, adding: “We will figure it all out!”
The tone was in marked contrast to a previous Trump tweet in which he accused Moon — who has backed engagement with the North to bring it to the negotiating table — of “appeasement”.
Trump arrived from Japan, where he secured Tokyo’s full support for Washington’s stance that “all options are on the table” regarding Pyongyang, and declaring its nuclear ambitions “a threat to the civilised world and international peace and stability”……..
“I got clear indications that the intention is to keep the United States compliant with the agreement,” EU Foreign Policy chief Federica Mogherini told reporters at a news conference in Washington.
Trump on Oct. 13 dealt a blow to the pact by refusing to certify that Tehran was complying with the accord even though international inspectors say it was.
Under the deal, Iran agreed to curb its nuclear program in return for relief from economic sanctions.
Trump’s decision has thrown into doubt the future of the pact negotiated by Iran, the EU and six major powers – Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States. Congress has until mid-December to decide whether to reimpose sanctions lifted under the deal, something few diplomats expect.
Mogherini, one of the negotiators of the agreement, sought to avoid publicly becoming embroiled in the debate among U.S. lawmakers about what kind of legislation, if any, to pass regarding the nuclear deal even as she stressed the EU’s desire to see the United States stick with it.
“I made clear any outcome of any process – that is an internal process and as such has to be respected – has to be, at the end of the day, compliant with the deal,” she said. She added that she had voiced her willingness to help U.S. lawmakers “find solutions that are compatible” with U.S. compliance under the agreement.
CORE 5th Nov 2017,NuGen’s updates on progress with its Moorside new-build project are an
extremely rare commodity these days in the UK. The last update, made six
months ago, reported CEO Tom Samson as saying that ‘a universe of
options’ remained available to NuGen – even with the bankrupt
Westinghouse and its AP1000 reactors apparently kicked into the long grass.
This starry-eyed view of available options must, in reality, be limited to
the current interest expressed in NuGen’s project by Chinese and South
Korean investors, both of whom are likely to insist on the deployment of
their own ‘in house’ reactors.
With little information on progress by the traditionally inscrutable Chinese Government and its state-backed China
General Nuclear (CGN) seeing the light of day recently, South Korea has
been busy number-crunching behind the scenes to work out how the $18Bn
(around £14Bn at today’s exchange rate) might be raised to buy out
Toshiba’s stake in the moribund West Cumbrian project.
A little reported article by Business Korea on 17th October states that a Nuclear Power Plant
Export Strategy meeting in Seoul on 10th October had devised a plan to
raise the $18Bn (around £14Bn at today’s exchange rate) required to take
control of Moorside. Under the plan – and through a ‘project financing
structure’ overseen by the South Korean Government – $7Bn in primary
financial arrangement would be provided by three export financial
institutions – the Export-Import Bank of Korea, the Korea Development
Bank and the Korea Trade Insurance Corporation. An additional $2.2Bn would
come from KEPCO itself and a further $5.6Bn raised jointly from the UK
Government (Infrastructure and Project Authority), the Japan Bank for
International Cooperation and the US Export/Import Bank.
The balance of $3.2Bn would be raised by ‘project operators’. Whether or not these
plans are turned into reality, they provide at least some clue as to what
is happening behind the scenes.
This is more than can be said for NuGen for, despite CEO Tom Samson’s astrological ‘110% certainty’
(curiously upgraded later to 120%) that Moorside would go ahead, its last
public pronouncement on 16th May 2017 advised that it had been forced to
hit the pause button on the project because of investor uncertainty, and
that a strategic review had been initiated on Moorside’s future.
Since then, having virtually disappeared as an entity from the Cumbrian radar
screen and consigned its local stakeholders and consultees to the darkest
black hole, NuGen’s sole website contributions have been confined to the
opening of a memorial beach garden north of Whitehaven and a cycle ride
around Moorside by students from NuGen’s ‘Bright Sparks’ educational
programme. http://corecumbria.co.uk/briefings/south-korea-number-crunching-its-way-to-moorside/
Financing for Eskom to develop nuclear program was discussed
Talks also included options to assist South African Airways
South Africa’s Finance Minister Malusi Gigaba met with representatives of the World Bank last week to discuss financing for development of a nuclear power program in the country, according to two people familiar with the meeting.
Gigaba met with the bank on Friday to discuss funding options available to state-owned power utility Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd. for the program, said the people, who asked not to be identified because the information is not public. South African Airways, the national airline that is struggling to meet debt obligations, was also discussed at the meeting, said one of the people.
Eskom last year began a process to add 9,600 megawatts of nuclear power capacity beyond its single existing plant by issuing a request for information from vendors. There were 38 responses to the notice, Kelvin Kemm, chairman of the South African Nuclear Energy Corp., told lawmakers in Cape Town on Tuesday.
South Africa’s nuclear investment plans have become a focal point for critics of President Jacob Zuma’s policies. The affordability of the program was a key point of dispute between Zuma and former Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan and the procurement process stalled in April after a provincial court ruled that the government didn’t follow the correct procedure in pursuing the nuclear program.
Gigaba declined to comment on Tuesday when asked about the meeting. The World Bank didn’t immediately respond to questions sent by email but confirmed receipt.
Gigaba said Oct. 26 that South Africa can’t afford to build new reactors for at least five years and that it doesn’t need more baseload, or continuous, power capacity. Nuclear still remains a part of the energy plan and the government will look at it as an option when needed and when it can afford it, he said.
South Africa Energy Minister David Mahlobo, who was appointed last month, said on Oct. 23 that a legal procurement process would be followed for a nuclear program, noting the Western Cape High Court decision.
The World Bank has previously supported energy projects through Eskom. However, an inspection panel from the organization in 2012 found instances of non-compliance in its award of a $3.75 billion loan to the utility for construction of the Medupi coal-fired power plant. The impacts and risks for other local water users weren’t properly considered and the project would place strain on water resources in an area already suffering from scarcity, it said at the time.
The discussions between Gigaba and the World Bank also included options to assist South African Airways, according to one of the people.
Pentagon: only ground invasion can destroy North Korean nuclear program Feinstein says she is ‘very pleased’ Tillerson is with Trump in Asia President says he is prepared to meet Kim Jong-un, Guardian, Martin Pengelly, 6 Nov 17, After a top Pentagon official said the only way to destroy North Korea’s nuclear weapons program would be through a ground invasion, a senior Senate Democrat urged the secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, to “stay the course” and achieve a diplomatic solution to the crisis, in spite of President Donald Trump’s unpredictable behaviour and threats of military action.
Trump himself threw a characteristic wildcard into the mix, saying he would “certainly be open” to meeting the North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un.
Rear Adm Michael J Dumont of the joint staff offered his blunt assessment of US options in response to a letter from two congressional Democrats who asked about casualty assessments in any conflict with North Korea.
The US is evaluating Pyongyang’s ability to target heavily populated areas of South Korea with artillery, rockets and ballistic missiles, Dumont said, adding that Seoul, the South’s capital with a population of 25 million, is just 35 miles from the demilitarized zone (DMZ).
Casualties would differ depending on advance warning and the ability of US and South Korea forces to counter such attacks, Dumont said, also mentioning the possibility that chemical and biological weapons might be used by the North.
“It is the most bleak assessment,” Feinstein, a member of the Senate intelligence committee, told CNN’s State of the Union. “I’ve spent a lot of time reading the intelligence. I’ve had an opportunity to discuss the situation with [Defense] Secretary [James] Mattis. I believe that an outbreak of war would kill hundreds of thousands of people.”……https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/nov/05/pentagon-ground-invasion-north-korean-nuclear-program
Vladimir Putin and Emmanuel Macron team up to prevent NUCLEAR FALL-OUT
FEARS of a nuclear fall-out between Iran and the US has led to Vladimir Putin forming an unlikely alliance with France’s Emmanuel Macron. By DAN FALVEY Mr Putin teamed up with the French President to try and ease escalating tensions surrounding Iran’s nuclear capabilities. It comes as Donald Trump accused Iran of not upholding the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, also known as the Iran nuclear agreement, with the UK, US, Russia, France, China, and Germany in 2015 which aims to limit the country’s nuclear arsenal.
However, fears that the deal could collapse have increased in recent months after the US President threatened not to sign off on the agreement claiming that Iran had broken parts of the pact. Mr Putin and his French counterpart spoke on the phone yesterday to reaffirm their support for the implementation of the deal.
A press statement released by the Kremlin said the Russian leader and Mr Macron agreed on the importance that the deal went ahead.
