Dr. Strangelove and the Los Alamos Nuclear Fiasco, Farming out the nuclear arsenal turned out to be radioactive. The American Conservative , By KELLEY BEAUCAR VLAHOS • July 13, 2017 WASHINGTON — It’s no secret that federal bureaucracy can be inefficient, wasteful and dysfunctional, but when the cumulative effect of mistakes at a major nuclear weapons laboratory starts resembling a Three Stooges shtick, it’s anything but funny. It’s dangerous.
Despite being a major component (and birthplace) of the U.S. nuclear weapons program, the lab is not (mis)managed solely by the federal government. The longstanding problems at the New Mexico campus, which include enough safety and security lapses to make one’s hair curl, have taken place under the stewardship of a private global construction giant, Bechtel Corporation, which leads the public-private partnership called Los Alamos National Security LLC. This also includes the University of California, which botched its own 62-year management of the lab but was taken on as a partner anyway. Two other private contractors—BWX Technologies and Washington Group International (now AECOM)—form the rest of the enterprise, which beat out other major privateers, such as Lockheed Martin, for the $2.2 billion contract in 2006.
Bechtel, the largest civil engineering and construction contractor in the United States, brought in an annual revenue stream of $32.3 billion as of 2015. It raked in billions of military contracts during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, scooping up a $680 million deal to “rebuild” only a month after the initial invasion of Iraq in 2003. Despite a long record of cost-overruns, mismanagement, environmental violations, and even fraud in its many war and domestic contracts, Bechtel has soared on to bigger and better things, today holding an unprecedented $10 billion contract to build Saudi Arabia’s first underground transportation system in Riyadh, and a planet full of other projects, including those involving the U.S. nuclear arsenal.
The Los Alamos partnership is destined to be just a footnote in the company’s 120-year history, however. In fact, Bechtel’s stewardship was so bad the consortium is losing its contract in 2018 and the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), the semi-autonomous part of the Department of Energy that oversees the development and modernization of the nation’s nuclear warheads, officially started the bid process for the new contract in late June.
The question is if privatizing the industry proved less safe and more expensive than a government run operation, will another private contractor be any better? Furthermore, seeing how the DOE, NNSA—even the U.S. Congress—fell down in its oversight responsibilities, who can be confident that the government can turn this lab, or any other that has been farmed out to industry, around?
“The management problems at Los Alamos National Laboratory are so deep and structural, there’s a lot of blame to go around, and they won’t be fixed by picking one contractor over another. The entire contracting arrangements need to be completely rethought and congressional oversight committees need to do their duty,” says Greg Mello, director of the Los Alamos Study Group, an Albuquerque-based non-profit that since 1989 has been relentless in its pursuit to cast sunlight on the lab’s activities, including its contract and program boondoggles and security breaches.
“There has been little accountability for mistakes for literally hundreds of fiascos and goofball management decisions,” Mello told TAC last week. “We have to start with parsing the elements of the mission and the presumption that a lot of people can get rich while doing very little work at a federal nuclear weapons laboratory. The culture of Los Alamos is deeply arrogant and to bring back a culture of public service and intellectual integrity will require more institutional examination than has ever happened.”……..
But what about cost? The move toward privatization was supposed to save taxpayers money but as the watchdogs point out, it’s done anything but. As the Santa Fe New Mexican reported early this year, the management fee incurred by the government increased from $8 million in 2005 to $80 million by 2010, while the number of upper-level managers making more than $200,000 a year tripled.
Just as bad are the lab’s boondoggles. As TAC reported in 2011, a facility that was supposed to increase pit (the cores of a nuclear weapon) production to 80 pits a year (per congressional mandate) ballooned to $6 billion in projected costs and spent $500 million in the planning phase before it was cancelled amid widespread criticism. That didn’t stop the lab from embarking on a new plan, one that is expected to cost $3 billion despite all of the aforementioned safety problems that already exist and have yet to be fixed.
Lydia Dennett, an investigator with the Project on Government Oversight says she has little confidence a new contractor will do any better after the Bechtel gang leaves town. There are less than two dozen contractors in this field, and they have all worked together in some configuration or another, even on the current contract. The big ones have their lobbyists in Washington to help pull the strings. She points to Lockheed Martin, which got a mere ‘slap on the wrist’ for using federal funds to lobby Washington for no-bid contracts, which is illegal. It still manages the Sandia National Laboratory to the tune of $2.4 billion a year.
“I don’t see any of these concerns changing just because there is a changing of the guard,” she tells TAC. “What needs to happen is the DOE needs to get more engaged in its management and oversight role.” She said the lack of accountability has been appalling, taking nearly a decade before Bechtel was penalized. “They got a lot of leeway and a lot of chances before the government stepped in and said, ‘enough.’ How much are taxpayers paying for before the government says, ‘enough’’’?
Mello points out that without stronger government oversight, a change in the lazy, pass-the-buck culture, and a true ‘free market’ approach that breaks up the small number of contractors’ grip on the industry and makes them truly accountable, the status quo will remain.
“In the absence of such a profound self-examination the only conclusion we can make is that Los Alamos cannot be reformed, it’s just going to be a mess,” he said. “And it will be just a matter of time before there’s more accidents, more project management failures, hundreds if not billions wasted.”
Brexit clash looms over European court, nuclear power, British government says it wants ‘smooth and orderly’ end to jurisdiction of European Court of Justice in the UK.Politico, By ANNABELLE DICKSON AND SARA STEFANINI, 7/13/17, LONDON — Britain will go into next week’s Brexit negotiations staking out positions on the role of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and on liability for nuclear materials in the U.K. that are squarely at odds with Brussels…….
On nuclear material (the fuel and waste associated with civil nuclear plants), the U.K. wants to make sure ownership remains with whoever has the right to use it regardless of where it currently is. With ownership comes legal liability for the material and the U.K. is trying to avoid taking on responsibility which it does not see as its own — for example when Switzerland, Germany or the Netherlands sends materials to the U.K. to be turned into higher quality nuclear waste, and the U.K. sends it back.
The position would essentially lock in law what already happens under commercial contracts but it differs from the one the European Commission presented in June, potentially setting the scene for a tussle over who takes responsibility for special fissile material in the U.K. after it leaves the European Atomic Energy Community, or Euratom.
Euratom owns all of the EU’s special fissile materials such as uranium, which are used to generate nuclear power.
The U.K. said the ownership should be transferred to “the persons or undertakings with the right of use and consumption of the material,” and that it should apply “whether these are established in the U.K., EU or non-EU states.”
The Commission’s paper, in contrast, said “it seems appropriate” that ownership of special fissile materials and Euratom property used for safeguard inspections in the U.K. be transferred to Britain — making it more costly for the country.
Existing rights to use and consume special fissile material shouldn’t be affected by the U.K.’s withdrawal, and the Commission should be able to require that this material be deposited with the Euratom Supply Agency or another store that the Commission can supervise, it added.
The U.K.’s position paper said it would make sure all necessary equipment is in place to maintain safeguard inspections after it leaves Euratom.
As for ownership, it was a little less cut-and-dried than Brussels.
“Further consideration will be given to the possibility of the U.K. taking ownership of existing Euratom-owned equipment. This will need to be rooted in a common understanding of the fair value and liabilities of the equipment concerned, and interactions with the EU budget.”
Tipping point for nuclear war’ – North Korea lashes out after US practice bombing run, Telegraph UK, Our Foreign Staff9 JULY 2017 North Korea on Sunday lashed out at a live-fire drill the US and South Korea staged in a show of force against Pyongyang, accusing Washington of pushing the peninsula to the “tipping point” of nuclear war.
The allies held the rare live-fire drill as tensions grew over the peninsula following the North’s first intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) test held last week. The test sparked global alarm as it suggested North Korea now possessed an ICBM capable of reaching Alaska, a major milestone for the reclusive, nuclear-armed state.Saturday’s drill, designed to “sternly respond” to potential missile launches by the North, saw two US bombers destroy “enemy” missile batteries and South Korean jets mount precision strikes against underground command posts.
The North’s state-run Rodong newspaper accused Washington and Seoul of ratcheting up tensions with the drill, in an editorial titled “Don’t play with fire on a powder keg.”
“The US, with its dangerous military provocation, is pushing the risk of a nuclear war on the peninsula to a tipping point,” it said, describing the peninsula as the “world’s biggest tinderbox.”During Saturday’s drill, long-range B-1B Lancer bombers reportedly flew close to the heavily-fortified border between two Koreas and dropped 2,000-pound (900 kilogram) bombs.
Pyongyang described the joint drill as a “dangerous military gambit of warmongers who are trying to ignite the fuse of a nuclear war on the peninsula.”
When it Comes to Climate Change, It’s G19 vs the United States, Slate, By Daniel Politi 8 Jul 17 The annual Group of 20 meeting is supposed to be one of those boring gatherings where world economic powers get together to slap each other on the back and utter platitudes about things they all agree on. This year though, the conflicts were clear and the divisions were stark. No split was more evident than climate change, where President Donald Trump was left isolated as as every other world leader signed up to the final compromise agreement that declared the Paris accord “irreversible.” They also vowed that the deal would be implemented “swiftly” and without exceptions.
Global leaders didn’t hide their anger at Trump’s intractable position. British Prime Minister Theresa May, for example, said she was “dismayed at the U.S decision to pull out” of the Paris accord and had personally urged Trump to reconsider. German Chancellor Angela Merkel also was careful to highlight the points of disagreement with the United States. “Wherever there is no consensus that can be achieved, disagreement has to be made clear,” Merkel said at the end of the summit. “Unfortunately—and I deplore this—the United States of America left the climate agreement.”
Rare footage show the nightmare aftermath of Hiroshima after atomic bomb killed 140,000 people
Setsuko Thurlow, who survived the Hiroshima blast, was a 13-year-old schoolgirl when she was near to the hypocentre of the explosion on August 6, 1945.
“I have been waiting for this day for seven decades and I am overjoyed that it has finally arrived,” she told the Japan Times. “This is the beginning of the end of nuclear weapons.”
Recounting what happened in the aftermath to survivors, she said: “Their hair was standing on end — I don’t know why — and their eyes were swollen shut from the burns. Some peoples’ eyeballs were hanging out of the sockets. Some were holding their own eyes in their hands. Nobody was running. Nobody was yelling. It was totally silent, totally still. All you could hear were the whispers for ‘water, water.’
“How do you describe a hell on Earth?”
Toshiki Fujimori, assistant secretary-general of the Japan Confederation of A- and H-Bomb Sufferers Organisations also hailed the adoption of the treaty.
“I never would imagine this treaty was going to be concluded,” he said. “I think it is the collective effort of the humanity of all the people that came together here at the United Nations.”
The United Nation’s first-ever adoption of the nuclear weapons ban was agreed by a total of 122 countries, with only the Netherlands opposed and Singapore abstaining.
Dutch foreign affairs minister Bert Koenders said the Netherlands supported the ban on nuclear weapons but was concerned over issues with the resolution itself. Particularly, how checks and controls would be adhered to.
Costa Rican Ambassador Elayne Whyte Gomez, president of the UN conference on prohibiting nuclear weapons was jubilant. “We all feel very emotional today. We feel that we are responding to the hopes and to the dreams of present and future generations — that we undertake our responsibility as a generation to do whatever is in our hands to achieve and to move the world toward the dream of a world free of nuclear weapons.”
The treaty will enter into force three months after the document is ratified by 50 countries. It is legally binding for an unlimited period. The text of the charter also bans threats to use nuclear weapons.
In direct reference to A-bomb survivors, victims of the atrocity, which killed more than 140,000 people, will be provided with medical care and rehabilitation.
However, none of the countries known or believed to have nuclear weapons – the US, Britain, Russia, North Korea , France, India, Pakistan, and Israel — is backing the pact.
Nikki Hayley, the US Ambassador, agreed in principle on the ban but suggested “we have to be realistic”, according to Timemagazine.
She added that North Korea would be “cheering” such a ban on nuclear weapons, leaving US residents at risk.
A Treaty Is Reached to Ban Nuclear Arms. Now Comes the Hard Part, NYT, By RICK GLADSTONE JULY 7, 2017 For the first time in the seven-decade effort to avert a nuclear war, a global treaty has been negotiated that proponents say would, if successful, lead to the destruction of all nuclear weapons and forever prohibit their use.
A Summit Without Fireworks Over North Korea, 38 North, BY: LEON V. SIGAL 6 JULY 17 Observers who expected fireworks at the first Trump-Moon summit meeting had to wait for the Fourth of July when North Korea test-launched what it said was an ICBM. Smiles rather than tweets marked the mood of the summit with both leaders determined to put on a public show of alliance solidarity and personal rapport. That display will now be put to the test in the aftermath of the North’s missile test.
The sharp differences at the summit came over trade, not North Korea, as US President Donald Trump made clear his intent to revise the Korea-US Free Trade Agreement, focusing on automobiles and steel.[1] That demand could face resistance in South Korea…….
As the summit communique stated: “Noting that sanctions are a tool of diplomacy, the two leaders emphasized that the door to dialogue with North Korea remains open under the right circumstances.” The communique endorsed Seoul’s re-engagement with Pyongyang, as well, explaining: “President Trump supported President Moon’s aspiration to restart inter-Korean dialogue on issues including humanitarian affairs.”[3]
As the summit communique stated: “Noting that sanctions are a tool of diplomacy, the two leaders emphasized that the door to dialogue with North Korea remains open under the right circumstances.” The communique endorsed Seoul’s re-engagement with Pyongyang, as well, explaining: “President Trump supported President Moon’s aspiration to restart inter-Korean dialogue on issues including humanitarian affairs.”[3]
En route to Washington, President Moon spoke with reporters about a two-phased nuclear negotiating process, starting with a freeze on its nuclear programs. ……..
Furthermore, Moon did not back away from the need for a peace process in Korea. “With the nuclear dismantlement, a peace system will be established on the peninsula,” he stated.[7]And he made clear that economic engagement with the North would resume at the Kaesong Industrial Complex and Mount Kumgang with the onset of a nuclear freeze.
Sustaining Washington’s secret talks with Pyongyang will be critical to relations with both Koreas. ……..
the latest test-launch underscores how tougher sanctions by Washington and Seoul provoke Pyongyang to step up arming unless nuclear diplomacy is resumed and the North’s security concerns are addressed.
Hinkley Point C: UK censured for failing to consult German public British government failed to abide by Aarhus convention that says major projects must consult citizens on environmental impacts, Guardian, Adam Vaughan, 7 July 17, The UK has been censured by an international committee for its failure to notify the German public of the potential environmental impacts of Hinkley Point C, the new nuclear power station being built in Somerset, south-west England.
In a political embarrassment for the government, the verdict found that the UK had not complied with the Aarhus convention, an international agreement on involving citizens in environmental matters.
The Aarhus committee’s finding followed a complaint by a German Green party politician, who said the UK should now halt work on the project to properly consult with the public in neighbouring countries.
Sylvia Kotting-Uhl told the Guardian: “If the government does not want to ridicule the trans-boundary participation procedure that is now due, construction works should be suspended until the procedure is completed.”
While the ruling is very unlikely to affect the project, which began construction last year, the breach comes on top of a fortnight of bad news for the two atomic reactors.
Kotting-Uhl originally complained to Aarhus’s compliance committee in the summer of 2013, before the UK had agreed commercial terms with EDF.
She said the UK government had discriminated against Germans by not giving them opportunities to take part in the environmental impact assessment procedure for Hinkley, as the Aarhus convention requires. The committee agreed.
In conclusions published recently, the committee said: “By not ensuring that the public concerned in Germany had a reasonable chance to learn about the proposed activity and the opportunities for the public to participate in the respective decision-making, the party concerned failed to comply with article 6, paragraph 2, of the convention.”
Named after the Danish city of Århus, the convention covers the involvement of the public on environmental matters relating to developments such as power stations or new roads – including access to information, the public’s participation in decision-making, and access to justice. The UK ratified the agreement in 2005.
As US and North Korea Escalate Tensions, Saner Voices Call for ‘Engagement and Dialogue’
‘The U.S. military drills are a reminder that both sides are acting to escalate this crisis,” says Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, by Common Dreams by Andrea Germanos, staff writer, July 05, 2017As tensions continue to rise following Pyongyang’s testing of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) and subsequent military exercises carried out by the U.S. and South Korea, anti-war voices are calling de-escalation and restraint, with one advocacy group charging Wednesday that “both sides are acting to escalate the crisis” and that only way forward is through diplomacy.
Rising tensions were evident on Wednesday as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley addressed the U.N. Security Council. “Time is short. Action is required,” Haley said as she also threatened possible use of “considerable military forces” to address the situation.
“We condemn the missile test and we urge the DPRK government to put an end to further missile tests. The U.S. military drills are a reminder that both sides are acting to escalate this crisis.”
—Kate Hudson, Campaign for Nuclear DisarmamentThe London-based Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND), however, pointed to the Iran nuclear deal reached in 2015 as evidence that diplomacy can deliver meaningful results.
“We condemn the missile test and we urge the DPRK government to put an end to further missile tests. The U.S. military drills are a reminder that both sides are acting to escalate this crisis,” said CND general secretary Kate Hudson.
“We call on the international community to strengthen efforts to seek an end to the growing tensions in the region,” she said. Referring to now-collapsed six-party negotiations aimed at Pyongyang’s nuclear disarmament—which involved the U.S., North Korea, South Korea, Japan, Russia, and China—Hudson said those talks “need to be resumed as a matter of urgency. The Iran nuclear deal shows what can be achieved through engagement and dialogue.”
“Russia and China are promoting a joint freeze on North Korean missile tests and further U.S. and South Korean military drills. The British government should support this initiative, which acknowledges the security fears on both side of the conflict,” Hudson added.
As Martin Hart-Landsberg, former economics professor and member of the Board of directors of the Korea Policy Institute, wrote last month, “it is important to realize that what is happening is not new.” He wrote:
The U.S. began conducting war games with South Korean forces in 1976 and it was not long before those included simulated nuclear attacks against the North, and that was before North Korea had nuclear weapons. In 1994, President Bill Clinton was close to launching a military attack on North Korea with the aim of destroying its nuclear facilities. In 2002, President Bush talked about seizing North Korean ships as part of a blockade of the country, which is an act of war. In 2013, the U.S. conducted war games which involved planning for preemptive attacks on North Korean military targets and “decapitation” of the North Korean leadership and even a first strike nuclear attack.
Given that background Christine Ahn, founder and international coordinator of peace group Women Cross DMZ, toldDemocracy Now! Wednesday that Pyongyang likely conducted the missile test “as a way to advance their capability to defend in the case of any kind of preemptive strike from the United States.” According to Ahn, the North Koreans “want to put the pressure on the United States, on the Trump administration, to say, ‘We need to negotiate some kind of peace settlement,’ because they feel threatened.”
Poised to outlaw nuclear weapons for the first time http://thebulletin.org/poised-outlaw-nuclear-weapons-first-time, Tim Wright, 5 July 17This Friday at the United Nations, an overwhelming majority of the world’s nations will decide—by acclamation or vote—whether to adopt a treaty to prohibit nuclear weapons. Since June 15, they have been intensively negotiating its various provisions. Their aim: a robust, effective instrument that will lead us toward the total elimination of these abhorrent weapons.
Civil society organizations—groups outside of government and business working in the interests of citizens—were pivotal in bringing about this historic treaty-making process, and have helped shape governments’ negotiating positions throughout.
Hundreds of campaigners have met with diplomats in New York and officials in capitals around the world in an effort to strengthen the draft text of what promises to be a landmark international agreement.
Many thousands of ordinary citizens—gravely concerned about the looming specter of nuclear war—have taken to the streets to voice their support for the ban, mostly in nations that have refused to join the negotiations. And more than three million people have signed a petition (link in Japanese), initiated by Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors, urging states to adopt a strong treaty.
The negotiations are part of a broader “humanitarian disarmament” agenda that places human beings at its center and challenges abstract notions such as deterrence and geostrategic stability—which have long dominated discussions on nuclear weapons and entrenched the dangerous status quo. Morality and ethics have, at last, entered the diplomatic discourse on this subject.
Humanitarian concerns feature prominently in the draft preamble of the treaty, which acknowledges “the unacceptable suffering of and harm caused to the victims of the use of nuclear weapons.” The operative part includes obligations to provide victim assistance and remediate environments contaminated by the use and testing of nuclear weapons.
In presenting a near-final draft of the treaty on Monday, Elayne Whyte Gomez, the Costa Rican ambassador presiding over the negotiations, said: “We have more points of convergence than differences. The text establishes a bridge that reflects the will that the states have expressed at this conference. We need to work hard to have some good news for the world on Friday.”
If consensus cannot be reached, states will have the option to adopt the treaty by vote. It will then open for signature on September 20th in New York, after which states will pursue ratification. Once 50 states have completed this process, the treaty will become binding international law—permanently. Our task then will be to promote its full implementation and universalization.
The original treaty [Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) ]is quite clear. Article VI reads as follows (emphasis mine):
“Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.”
The “nuclear club” countries, however, have lately reneged on their end of the “let’s move toward disarmament” plan. The most recent news in the U.S., of course, is that both of our major political partieshave supported a massive, trillion-dollar “modernization” program that would significantly enhance rather than reduce existing stockpiles……..
North Korea Isn’t the Only Rogue Nuclear State Nuclear weapons are about to be made illegal worldwide, but good luck hearing about it at home, Rolling Stone, By Matt Taibbi, 6 July 17, As if the last few years weren’t bad enough, we now have a real nuclear crisis.
North Korea’s loony regime of Kim Jong-un conducted a successful missile launch test – landing about 60 miles south of the Russian city of Vladivostok, according to some reports – marking a frightening nuclear escalation that has heightened tensions across the planet.
That this first serious confrontation in ages is happening now is ironic, given that a little-reported showdown about the use of nuclear power will soon take place in the U.N.
A draft of a U.N. treaty to ban all nuclear weapons is about to be voted on. It has the support of 132 nations and is very likely to pass, at which point the United States will soon once again be in technical violation of a major international agreement, as it long has been with regard to the International Treaty banning land mines.
While practically the ban may not accomplish much, it matters a little when we violate treaties, at least intellectually speaking. North Korea’s violation of similar international agreements is at the crux of the international consensus against allowing the country to have a nuclear program in the first place.
This is what Steve Snyder, the senior fellow on U.S.-North Korea relations for the Council of Foreign Relations, wrote last year about why North Korea must never be allowed to have nukes:
“The United States cannot accept North Korea as a nuclear weapons state for normative reasons; North Korea had signed onto the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) as a non-nuclear state and then abandoned the treaty in order to pursue nuclear capabilities. Tolerating North Korea’s nuclear status would be equivalent to setting a precedent for other NPT signatories to violate the treaty.”
The problem with this argument is that from the point of view of many non-nuclear countries, the United States itself, along with other nuclear club countries (particularly Russia), has been in continuing violation of the original nuclear non-proliferation treaty, as drafted in 1968.
The treaty has been mostly very successful. Since 1970, when it went into effect, only four more countries – Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea – are known to have developed nuclear weapons, and only one, North Korea, was at any time a signatory.
Israel, India and Pakistan were three of just four U.N. member states to originally refuse to sign the treaty. North Korea, meanwhile, pulled out of the treaty in 2003, almost exactly a year after it was put in the crosshairs by George W. Bush in the infamous “Axis of Evil” speech. It had long been suspected of pursuing a secret development program.
One of the reasons the NPT was long seen as successful is that over the decades, it did inspire the main actors – particularly the United States and Russia – to move toward disarmament. Through a variety of programs, nuclear stockpiles have been drastically diminished, down to about 14,900 warheads worldwide, or two-thirds less than their high point in the mid-Eighties.
Russia and the United States didn’t just reduce their stockpiles out of goodwill. They did so in part because moving toward global disarmament was a major component of the original bargain of the non-proliferation treaty.
The original treaty is quite clear. Article VI reads as follows (emphasis mine):
“Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.”
The “nuclear club” countries, however, have lately reneged on their end of the “let’s move toward disarmament” plan. The most recent news in the U.S., of course, is that both of our major political partieshave supported a massive, trillion-dollar “modernization” program that would significantly enhance rather than reduce existing stockpiles……..
A lack of dialogue on the nuclear front between Russia and America is an extremely negative development, given that our two countries have nearly blown up the planet by accident multiple times, in underreported incidents.
The most serious of these was probably 1983, when a Soviet satellite mistakenly detected the launch of five American minuteman missiles headed toward Russia. Only the high-stress judgment of a 44-year-old Soviet lieutenant colonel named Stanislav Petrov prevented a massive counter-launch and the probable deaths of millions.
“I had a funny feeling in my gut,” Petrov said years later, explaining his determination that the signal was faulty. “When people go to war, they don’t do it with five missiles.”…….
For Trump, Threats but Few Options in Confronting North Korea, NYT, By DAVID E. SANGER, JULY 4, 2017 When then-President-elect Trump said on Twitter in early January that a North Korean test of an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of reaching the United States “won’t happen!” there were two things that he still did not fully appreciate: how close Kim Jong-un, the North’s leader, was to reaching that goal, and how limited any president’s options were to stop him.
China has called for calm and restraint after North Korea claimed to have test-launched its first intercontinental ballistic missile that is capable of hitting anywhere in the world.
Foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang also defended China’s “relentless efforts” to resolve the North Korean nuclear standoff after US President Donald Trump called on Beijing to “end this nonsense once and for all”.
The United States on Tuesday requested an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council after North Korea declared that it had successfully tested its first intercontinental ballistic missile, the US mission said. The meeting is expected to take place on Wednesday.
US Ambassador Nikki Haley on Tuesday spoke by phone with China’s Ambassador Liu Jieyi, who holds the council presidency this month, to convey the US request for an urgent meeting.
North Korea’s announcement Tuesday came after the launch of a ballistic missile in the morning. It flew about 39 minutes and reached an altitude of 2,802 kilometres, before landing in waters within Japan’s exclusive economic zone, according to the announcement.
North Korea’s claims the missile reached that altitude could not be verified. However Japan’s Defence Ministry said it reached an altitude that “greatly exceeded” 2,500 kilometres.
A test-launch of an intercontinental ballistic missile, if confirmed, would be considered a game-changer by countries looking to check North Korea’s push for a nuclear-armed missile that can reach anywhere in the United States.
The test still may be the North’s most successful yet; a weapon analyst says missile could be powerful enough to reach Alaska. The “landmark” test of a Hwasong-14 missile was overseen by leader Kim Jong-un, an emotional female announcer said. It flew 933 kilometres, she added. The North was “a strong nuclear power state” and had “a very powerful ICBM that can strike any place in the world” she said.
There are still doubts whether the North can miniaturise a nuclear weapon sufficiently to fit it onto a missile nose cone, or whether it has mastered the technology needed for it to survive the difficult re-entry into the Earth’s atmosphere.
In his New Year’s address, Kim said his country had reached the final stage of preparing to test-launch the long-range missile.
Officials from South Korea, Japan and the United States said the missile landed in Japan’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) after being launched near an airfield in Panghyon, about 100 km northwest of the North’s capital, Pyongyang.
Japan said on Monday the United States, South Korea and Japan will have a trilateral summit on North Korea at the G20. China’s leader Xi Jinping will also be at the July 7-8 meeting in Hamburg, Germany.
Trump, responding to the latest launch, wrote on Twitter: “North Korea has just launched another missile. Does this guy have anything better to do with his life?” an apparent reference to North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. “Hard to believe South Korea and Japan will put up with this much longer. Perhaps China will put a heavy move on North Korea and end this nonsense once and for all!”, Trump said in a series of tweets.
North Korea has conducted nuclear and missile tests to show defiance in the face of international pressure and to raise the stakes when Pyongyang sees regional powers getting ready for talks or sanctions, analysts say.
White House officials said Trump was briefed on the latest launch, which took place hours before Independence Day celebrations in the United States. North Korea has previously fired missiles around this holiday.
Pyongyang has conducted missile-related activities at an unprecedented pace since the start of last year, but analysts had thought it was years away from having a nuclear-tipped ICBM. capable of hitting the United States.
North Korea is also trying to develop intermediate-range missiles capable of hitting US bases in the Pacific. The last North Korean launches before Tuesday were of land-to-sea cruise missiles on June 8.
David Wright, co-director of the Global Security Programme at the US-based Union of Concerned Scientists, said the assessments of the flight time and distance suggest the missile might have been launched on a “very highly lofted” trajectory of more than 2,800 km.
The same missile could reach a maximum range of roughly 6,700 km on a standard trajectory, Wright said in a blog post.“That range would not be enough to reach the lower 48 states or the large islands of Hawaii, but would allow it to reach all of Alaska,” he said.
South Korea’s President Moon said on Monday in a meeting with former US president Barack Obama that North Korea now faces its “last opportunity” to engage in talks with the outside world.
North Korea has conducted four missile tests since Moon took office in May, vowing to use dialogue as well as pressure to bring Pyongyang’s nuclear and missile programmes under control.
Earlier this week, North Korea was a key topic in phone calls between Trump and the leaders of China and Japan. Leaders of both Asian countries reaffirmed their commitment to a denuclearised Korean Peninsula. Trump has recently suggested he was running out of patience with China’s modest steps to pressure North Korea.
Russia, China offer plan to ease N.Korea tension, abc news, 4 July 17Russia and China have proposed that North Korea declare a moratorium on nuclear and missile tests while the United States and South Korea refrain from large-scale military exercises.
The call was issued in a joint statement by the Russian and Chinese foreign ministries on Tuesday following talks between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping.
The statement came after North Korea tested a missile that flew higher and longer than previous ones, sparking concerns around the world.
Moscow and Beijing suggested that if North Korea halts nuclear and missile tests while the U.S. and South Korea freeze military maneuvers, the parties could sit down for talks that should lead to obligations not to use force and to refrain from aggression………..
North Korea says its latest missile test reached a height of 2,802 kilometers (1,740 miles) and flew 933 kilometers (580 miles) for 39 minutes before falling into the sea.
The country’s Academy of Defense Science said Tuesday in a statement that it was a successful test of an intercontinental ballistic missiles called Hwasong-14.
The statement was distributed by North Korea’s KCNA news service.
The reported trajectory was similar to that announced earlier by U.S., South Korean and Japanese officials, though the U.S. judged it to be an intermediate-range missile.
Either way, it would be a longer and higher flight than similar tests previously reported.
The U.S military says it tracked a North Korean missile for 37 minutes before it landed in the Sea of Japan.
The Hawaii-based U.S. Pacific Command said in a statement Tuesday that an intermediate-range ballistic missile was launched from near an airfield in North Korea.
NORAD, or the North American Aerospace Defense Command, said the missile did not pose a threat to North America.
Amid decreasing world demand for nuclear energy, Russia’s state nuclear corporation last week warned it would likely be receiving fewer requests to build nuclear power plants abroad. July 3, 2017 by Charles Digges, The announcement marks a sharp departure for the corporation, which until recently has posed its contracts with other countries as the bread and butter of its bottom line – as well as a potent tool for broadening Moscow’s sphere of political influence.
But there’s a silver lining to the nuclear monolith’s recent disillusionment with its traditional lifeblood: A possible, albeit modest, shift in the direction of renewable energy and battery technologies.
Speaking at last month’s Tekhnoprom-2017 conference, a technical conference in the Siberian city of Novosibirsk, Rosatom’s deputy director Vyacheslav Pershukov called the market for nuclear power stations abroad “exhausted.” “We see that the market is contracting, and for the sustainable growth of the corporation…we must make our money on something other than nuclear technology,” he said, according to the RBK news agency.
His remarks dovetail with a worldwide nuclear sag.
In the United States, renewable energy output eclipsed nuclear for the first time during March and April. Meanwhile, huge nuclear corporations are trying to stave off going broke. Exelon, the country’s biggest nuclear operator, has seen its share prices plummet by 60 percent since 2008.
Westinghouse, meanwhile filed for bankruptcy in March, and Toshiba, its parent company, is trying to sell of its computer divisions to cover the debt. France’s Areva was saved from financial peril by a huge taxpayer infusion into its owner EDF, but that bailout will only stop the bleed the company is experiencing thanks to huge cost overruns on an ambitious but delayed reactor build in Finland.
Pershukov told the Tekhnoprom conference that Rosatom would shift some of its efforts to providing nuclear power plant services abroad, primarily to those it’s in the process of building.
For the past several years, Rosatom has touted its VVER-1200 reactor packages to international capitols and has worked vigorously to sign up customers even – if not especially – those who can barely afford it. On paper, the company has $130 billion in outstanding “memoranda of understanding” and other handshake type deals with foreign countries.
But many of the counties Rosatom counts among its potential contracts – like Jordan, Algeria, Nigeria and Bolivia, and most recently Uganda and Ethiopia – won’t have infrastructure to support nuclear power for decades.
In other cases, like Hungary, the Rosatom-built Paks-2 plant has been approved, but will leave Budapest’s right wing-government heavily indebted to Moscow for the $10 billion plant.
Another similar deal would have indentured South Africa to Rosatom for $76 billion, but that country’s high court torpedoed the deal before it got off the ground.
Other countries where Rosatom builds are already underway – like India’s Kudankulam, Iran’s Bushehr, China’s Tianwan and Belarus’s Ostrovets – are already familiar with Rosatom’s typical cost overruns and delays.
The company can pay for these huge loans because of the generous state subsidies it receives, but taxpayer injections are slated to dry up by 2020.
Oskar Njaa, a nuclear adviser with Bellona said curtailing Rosatom’s international nuclear ambitions represents a humbling moment for the company, and a dampening of its political influence abroad. “This is an economic blow,” he said. “For Russia, reducing an ability to make other countries dependent on Moscow’s nuclear fuel and expertise for energy needs is a blow to its geopolitical interests as well.”
As such, Rosatom is casting a wide net for other avenues of influence and revenue. In May, the company appeared in Chile’s Lithium Call Roadshow, and is reportedly pursuing inroads with Santiago to become a player in cell phone and electric car batteries. Other reports say the company is making a foray into fiber-optics.
More optimistically, Njaa noted, the company also seems to have discovered a bent for the renewable energy sector. He noted Rosatom’s recent interest in small hydroelectric plants and wind energy.
China has called for calm and restraint after North Korea claimed to have test-launched its first intercontinental ballistic missile that is capable of hitting anywhere in the world.