France’s UK energy apathy poses nuclear problem for Labour
France’s public spending watchdog is advising the country to cut back on its involvement in UK nuclear projects
Brad Gray, Tortoise 27th March 2025, https://www.tortoisemedia.com/2025/03/26/frances-uk-energy-apathy-poses-nuclear-problem-for-labour
EDF has reduced its stake in the Sizewell C nuclear power plant by a further 7.7 per cent, leaving the UK government with an 83.8 per cent share.
In 2022, a government buy-out to allow the Chinese state to exit the project made the UK the leading investor.
Last week Emmanuel Macron fired the EDF chief following a row over energy prices, and France’s public spending watchdog is advising the country to cut back on its involvement in UK nuclear projects and focus on small modular reactors instead.
As France reduces its investment, taxpayers are likely to foot more of the bill than anticipated – a tough pill to swallow as the chancellor slashes public funding.
When complete, Sizewell C is forecast to provide up to 7 per cent of the country’s electricity needs, with reactors lasting 60 years. Right now it’s a political headache.
Why The US Australia Alliance Needs a Rethink
Australian Independent Media March 29, 2025, By Denis Hay
Description
Why the US Australia alliance needs a rethink. The U.S. is no ally. Discover why Australia must distance itself to avoid war and reclaim its sovereignty.
How Australia Can Safely Distance Itself from U.S. Hegemony
Introduction – The US Australia Alliance: Myth vs Reality
Picture this: You’re sitting in a Brisbane café, sipping a flat white while reading the headlines – Australia has just signed another defence pact with the United States. More American troops, military hardware, and diplomatic praise about our “unbreakable alliance.” Yet, beneath the headlines lies a growing discomfort – are we allies, or are we just a strategic pawn in U.S. global dominance?
Joh Bjelke-Petersen once said that this is just politicians “feeding the chooks.” Empty words. The truth is, the U.S. government doesn’t respect its people, let alone Australia. It sees nations – including its own – as resources to be mined for profit. This article will explore how Australia can break free from this exploitative alliance without putting itself in harm’s way.
The U.S. Government’s Track Record: A Global Power Without Respect
Exploiting Its Own Citizens
Visit Detroit, Michigan – a city once bustling with manufacturing pride. Now, it stands as a ghost town of forgotten promises, where basic water access has become a luxury. Millions of Americans are homeless or working two jobs or more just to survive. U.S. billionaires soared in wealth, while 45 million Americans live impoverished.
Internal reflection: “If they treat their own citizens this way, what hope do allies have?”
Exploiting Other Nations
Let’s take Iraq. The 2003 invasion, sold on lies about weapons of mass destruction, cost hundreds of thousands of lives, all to secure oil. In Libya, a once-stable nation descended into chaos after U.S.-led intervention. This is not defence—it’s corporate imperialism.
When the U.S. backs coups in Latin America or imposes sanctions on countries like Venezuela or Cuba, the motive is always clear: control the global economy for U.S. corporate gain.
The U.S.–Australia Relationship: Not What It Seems
Political Rhetoric vs Reality
Australian and U.S. politicians often repeat phrases like “shared values” and “strong friendship.” But how many Australians were consulted when Pine Gap was set up or when AUKUS was signed?
Dialogue: “This isn’t a partnership. It’s a surrender of our sovereignty,” says a former Australian diplomat.
The Cost of Loyalty
Australia’s blind support for U.S. policy has real consequences:
• Trade tensions with China – our largest trading partner
• Environmental destruction from military exercises on Australian soil
• Loss of independence as U.S. bases expand here without public debate.
Why China Matters More Than Ever
60% of Australia’s exports go to Asia, with China alone accounting for over 25%. Australia’s economy is tightly linked to Chinese demand, from iron ore to wine. Trade disruptions – often driven by political antagonism encouraged by the U.S. – have already cost farmers, winemakers, and miners dearly.
The Danger of Choosing Sides
We risk becoming collateral damage in a U.S.-China conflict. Australia should not repeat its mistakes from Vietnam or Iraq – wars that had nothing to do with our national interest but cost us dearly in blood, treasure, and reputation. This has been the outcome of the US Australia alliance.
Thought: “Must we always fight other nations’ wars? When do we stand up for ourselves?”
Pathways Toward Australian Independence………………………………………..
Phasing Out US Australia Alliance and Military Influence
Start with transparency:
• Conduct a national audit of U.S. bases and agreements.
• Establish parliamentary oversight.
• Hold a public referendum on AUKUS.
Dialogue: “Our security must not come at the cost of our sovereignty,” says Senator David Shoebridge.
………………………………………….more https://theaimn.net/why-the-us-australia-alliance-needs-a-rethink/
Trump warns of ‘bad, bad things’ for Iran if nuclear deal not reached
https://www.iranintl.com/en/202503289286 29 Mar 25
AS president Donald Trump warned Iran on Friday that “bad, bad things” would happen if Tehran did not agree to a nuclear deal, a day after Iran declined to have direct talks under his stepped-up sanctions.
“My big preference … is we work it out with Iran. But if we don’t work it out, bad, bad things are going to happen to Iran,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office.
This is what Trump said he conveyed in his letter to Iran’s supreme leader Ali Khamenei last week.
Tehran confirmed on Wednesday that a response to the letter had been sent via Oman.
“Our policy remains not to engage in direct negotiations under maximum pressure and military threats. However, indirect negotiations as existed in the past can continue,” foreign minister Abbas Araghchi said.
Iran denies seeking a nuclear weapon but the UN’s nuclear watchdog says it has enriched more uranium than any state lacking a bomb. While Washington assesses Tehran is not actively building one, it doubts Iranian intentions.
Trump last month reinstated the “maximum pressure” campaign of sanctions on Iran from his first term, with the stated aim of driving its oil sales to zero.
Trump’s remarks come as Iran’s parliament speaker on Friday accused the US of using nuclear talks to pressure Tehran into relinquishing its defense capabilities.
“The US means disarmament when it says negotiation,” Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said in a speech during Quds Day rallies in Tehran on Friday. “Our people understand that talks under threat are just a show to impose their will. No wise nation would accept that.”
His comments were echoed by other senior Iranian officials speaking at Quds Day events showcasing Tehran’s solidarity with Palestinians, including Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and senior adviser to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Larijani.
I’m Oppenheimer’s grandson. I support Trump’s pursuit of nuclear diplomacy.
President Donald Trump is right to propose direct talks with President Vladimir Putin of Russia and President Xi Jinping of China on nuclear arms control.
USA Today, Charles Oppenheimer, 28 Mar 25
Amid all the chaos in the world, I want to provide a ray of light, a sliver of hope: We may be on the verge of radically reducing the gravest global existential danger ‒ that of nuclear weapons.
Many people and countries have felt threatened by the rapidly changing world order, and many increasingly look to nuclear weapons for supposed protection. But an uncontrolled global nuclear arms race would be the worst outcome, as global nuclear risks have already surged to the highest level since the end of the Cold War. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists recently pushed its famed Doomsday Clock to 89 seconds to midnight, the closest ever to humanity’s destruction.
To his credit, President Donald Trump has proposed confronting the growing global nuclear danger head-on. He is right to be repeatedly calling for bold denuclearization talks among the United States, China and Russia ‒ the world’s three biggest nuclear powers ‒ to de-escalate the new nuclear arms race.
If Trump is serious about pursuing nuclear diplomacy, I’ll strongly support his initiative ‒ and there is much work to be done.
How many countries now have nuclear weapons? 9.
As Trump has pointed out, nothing in the world is more dangerous than the persistent threat that nuclear weapons pose to our very existence. During the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union waged a dangerous, costly and ultimately unwinnable nuclear arms race under the doctrine of mutual assured destruction (MAD). At its peak, the two countries amassed more than 70,000 nuclear weapons and repeatedly brought the world to the brink of nuclear annihilation.
MAD was always a crazy gamble, positing that more nuclear weapons make us safer. But if it had any merit, it was designed for two nuclear peers, not for three nuclear superpowers. Nor did it account for the growing number of countries looking to acquire their own nuclear weapons or irrational leaders with their fingers on the button.
Yet, MAD still dominates countries’ nuclear thinking.
At a time of profound global changes and instability, following the dangerous and outdated Cold War playbook will only lead to another futile nuclear arms race among the world’s now nine nuclear powers and encourage even more countries to build their own nukes.
Instead of increasing security, such a nuclear free-for-all will only hasten our own demise.
We don’t need to go down this path. There is a reason for hope. A new opening for peace. Not to solve all conflicts and all problems ‒ but the world’s most important and dangerous one.
As the president suggested, the best shot at reducing the growing nuclear threat is directly de-escalating the arms race among the United States, China and Russia. China’s rise as a world power has led it to increase its once-small nuclear arsenal.
China now has roughly 600 nuclear weapons and is on a path to match America’s and Russia’s deployed arsenals of about 1,500 each (thousands more are in reserve).
Many U.S. politicians see the growth of China’s power as a reason to escalate tensions. The military-industrial complex still sells the old lie: The more nuclear weapons we have, the more we can “deter” China and Russia, and the safer we will be………………………………………………………………………………………………….
President Trump is right to propose direct talks with President Vladimir Putin of Russia and President Xi Jinping of China on nuclear arms control. Though nuclear negotiations are often held by bureaucrats with no real power and don’t go anywhere, it’s time the leaders themselves step up to lead.
A meaningful commitment from these three leaders to reducing global nuclear threats would be the biggest breakthrough on this most important of issues since the 1986 summit between Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev and President Ronald Reagan ‒ a hawkish leader who ended up embracing nuclear disarmament.
Such an accomplishment would be worthy of a Nobel Peace prize for Trump, Putin and Xi, regardless of what you think of their respective politics.
There are many great ideas out there on how trilateral nuclear negotiations could work. My recommendation is to start with prohibiting artificial intelligence from launching nuclear weapons, something all parties could agree to. Washington and Moscow could then explore reducing their respective arsenals from thousands toward Beijing’s much lower level. They can further negotiate with China on a mutual pledge not to use nuclear weapons first, which China has already committed to………………………………… https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2025/03/28/trump-nuclear-diplomacy-russia-china-oppenheimer/82651474007/
Netanyahu’s nuclear gamble: The risks of escalation with Iran
https://www.dailysabah.com/opinion/op-ed/netanyahus-nuclear-gamble-the-risks-of-escalation-with-iran 27 Mar 25
While Netanyahu convinces the Israeli public and the U.S. administration to wage war on Iran, it cannot be known ‘for whom the bells will toll’ at the end of such an escalation.
n 1992, when he was a 42-year-old Knesset member, Benjamin Netanyahu raised concerns about Iran’s nuclear threat, stating, “Iran is close to producing a nuclear weapon within three to five years, and this threat needs to be uprooted by an international front led by the U.S.” In 1995, in his book, he discussed Iran’s nuclear threat and emphasized that it was a vital issue for Israel. A year later, he came to power for the first time.
The Israeli prime minister’s political career has been marked by security-focused rhetoric. In a country like Israel with high security concerns, this is not unusual, but what makes Netanyahu different is his constant focus on issues like Iran, Hamas and Palestine, and his personalization of the message that “only I can protect Israel.” So much so that rabbis like Nir Ben Artzi and Moshe Ben Tov preach, “Netanyahu must remain prime minister until the Messiah comes.”
Last year, Netanyahu’s posing with Lubavitch movement leader Rebbe Schneerson’s book in the Knesset and claims that Schneerson had prophesied 30 years ago that Netanyahu would “become Israel’s prime minister and transfer the duty to the Messiah” have added apocalyptic meanings to Israel’s war environment.
Factors such as Netanyahu’s brother being Israel’s national hero and his father being one of the important figures of Revisionist Zionism make the situation even more mystical. Revisionist Zionism essentially argues that Jewish rights can only be protected by force; that reconciliation with Arabs is impossible and that the Jewish state encompasses all the historical Eretz Yisrael territories. All these arguments align quite well with Netanyahu’s policies.
Throughout his 40-year political career, Netanyahu’s emphasis on “the last few years” for Iran to become a nuclear threat has led to criticism, especially from his political rivals, that he is exploiting this issue and using it to consolidate power. However, today, Netanyahu appears closer than ever to achieving this goal. Over the past 30 years, Netanyahu has faced three obstacles to his hawkish steps regarding Iran’s nuclear capacity: convincing the bureaucracy and domestic public opinion, convincing the U.S. and convincing the international community.
It is known that in 2010-2011, Netanyahu, together with Defense Minister Ehud Barak, ordered the military to prepare to strike Iran. The order to put the Israeli Air Force on alert for a long-range airstrike was made with a small group of advisors within the security bureaucracy. However, figures such as Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi and Mossad Chief Meir Dagan objected, characterizing such an operation as an “illegal war decision” before the necessary military preparations were completed. Netanyahu was forced to back down. It is also known that the U.S. repeatedly restrained Netanyahu.
Plans of a warmonger
Today, there is a broad consensus in Israel, both from the government and the opposition, that Iran’s possession of nuclear weapons is unacceptable. The rhetoric “we will strike alone if necessary” resonates with society, and the developments in October reinforced this determination. Netanyahu’s threat at the U.N., “If you strike us, we’ll strike you,” has gone beyond rhetoric and has been implemented. This has given Israelis the confidence that “we can defend ourselves, we can act preemptively if necessary.” A significant portion of public opinion polls and media support Israel taking unilateral action if diplomacy fails and Iran reaches the nuclear threshold. Especially after Iran’s direct attack, a psychology of “there’s nothing to fear anymore, if they did it, we can do it too” has emerged. All this indicates that Netanyahu has been highly successful in socializing the issue.
Another obstacle for Netanyahu was bureaucratic issues. As mentioned above, Netanyahu’s desired steps had been stuck in domestic politics and bureaucracy. Netanyahu, who was cornered before the Oct. 7 attacks, has used the attacks as a significant lever and has begun taking radical steps to leave his political legacy as the one who solved the “problems” of Gaza, Hamas, Hezbollah, (if possible) the West Bank and Iran. In this process, he has virtually crushed anyone who stood in his way without regard to domestic politics. His newly appointed Chief of Staff, Eyal Zamir, has declared 2025 a “year of war” and indicated that they will focus especially on Gaza and Iran. Zamir’s 2022 report for the Washington Institute, titled “Countering Iran’s Regional Strategy: A Long-Term, Comprehensive Approach,” is quite noteworthy. Every step Zamir proposed in this report has been taken after Oct. 7.
Lastly, Israel has significantly neutralized Hamas in the south and Hezbollah in the north. Both the Israeli Air Force and the U.S. Air Force are conducting “exercises” for long-distance attacks with their strikes on Yemen. The distance between Tel Aviv and Sanaa is 2,000 kilometers (just over 1,240 miles), while the distance between Tel Aviv and Tehran is 1,500 kilometers.
Strike before being struck
During President Donald Trump’s first term, the U.S. came to Netanyahu’s desired line, and radical steps such as withdrawing from the nuclear agreement, declaring Jerusalem as the capital, and the killings of Qasem Soleimani and Mohsen Fakhrizadeh were taken. The fundamental question is: What has changed from yesterday to today that would make Trump take a different step from his 2018-2020 line? In other words, Netanyahu’s thesis since 1992, “this can’t be done without the U.S.,” seems to be coming true. The U.S. administration is now openly threatening Iran with military intervention. Internal objections and opposition in Israel seem to be of no concern to the Netanyahu government. Therefore, Netanyahu faces the third and final obstacle: convincing the international community.
Netanyahu’s U.N. speeches were also aimed at convincing the international community that Iran would not comply with nuclear negotiations and that diplomacy was “not a path.” The revelation of nuclear documents smuggled from Iran in 2018 by himself and the emphasis that Iran was a “liar” who did not abandon its intentions despite the agreement are diplomatically significant.
From Israel’s perspective, it is necessary to be sure that Russia will not provide support to Iran at this point. Recent developments in Ukraine are likely to keep Russia away from Iran. The U.S. government may also be providing suggestions to Russia on this matter. The Iranian domestic public opinion does not trust the Russians on this issue. Especially the events in Karabakh and Syria have created great disappointment among Iranians.
As for the other actors, European countries do not appear to be able to actively get involved at this stage due to the security crisis they are in. Although China has been providing covert diplomatic and technological support to Iran against Israel for some time, it does not seem possible to expect it to directly enter the field militarily in such an intervention. Therefore, Iran presents an image that has lost its proxy forces in the region, largely lost its effectiveness in the field, and lacks popular support.
The Iranians are aware of the approaching threat. On the one hand, they are conducting tremendously flexible diplomacy. On the other hand, they complain about the threats made against them, saying, “There can be no negotiation with threats.” They express at every opportunity that they do not want war, but on the other hand, they conduct military exercises almost every week. They particularly focus on air defense and naval forces in these exercises. Commanders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) say they will not bow to threats and will give a clear response to any attack.
According to Zamir, Iran’s center of gravity is the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). He thinks that if the center of gravity is targeted, the regime will dissolve on its own. Indeed, the IRGC dominates almost every corner of the country and, although not openly stated, is at odds with civilian politics and institutions in the country. The dominant figure in the IRGC is Mojtaba Khamenei.
Triggering the unplanned
Israel’s first step will be covert activities, similar to Lebanon. At this point, it is very likely that assassinations and sabotage (especially targeting leading IRGC figures) will be seen very soon. Indeed, information in this direction is also reflected in open sources. Likewise, ethnic fault lines in many parts of Iran, such as Urmia, can break very violently. It is a known fact that Iran is concerned about pan-Turkist movements within it. So much so that the election engineering of Masoud Pezeshkian, who was vetoed in the parliamentary elections a week before the late Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi’s death, and frequent emphasis on the “Iranian Turkishness-Anatolian Turkishness” distinction through events such as the Chaldiran commemorations, are results of this concern.
Whatever happens, if popular movements follow the chaos created by the paralysis of the political mechanism (or vice versa), the regime in Iran may be seriously at risk. Because both in the 2009 protests and the Mahsa Amini protests, the influence of Khamenei and those under his command is known. With the elimination of this influence, the ground in Iran may completely change.
In conclusion, all experts agree that the Netanyahu government cannot end Iran’s nuclear capacity by striking nuclear facilities. However, the basic strategy is to completely paralyze Iran by directly targeting the regime and rendering all its activities, from ballistic missiles to nuclear, from proxy forces to drone work, dysfunctional.
However, this situation can open Pandora’s box. If things don’t go as planned and Iran enters a total war by mobilizing all its available means, it may not be able to deliver fatal blows to Israel, but it will cause tens of thousands of Israelis who already find Israel unsafe to leave their country, companies to withdraw their investments from Israel, and in the medium and long term, the establishment of a climate of insecurity. Therefore, Netanyahu is taking a huge gamble and paving the way for a path that could make Israel more insecure. Because the biggest risk is an uncalculated risk, these steps threaten the future of the region from beginning to end. As the famous poet John Donne said: “And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.”
Ukraine and Israel are not US allies.
Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL , 25 Mar 25
They are essentially US Trojan Horses used to project US power dominance in Europe and Middle East respectively.
Both US Trojan Horses have come up lame and are heading for the glue factory.
The US marched their Ukraine Trojan Horse up to Russia’s borders armed with NATO entrance papers and billions in US weapons. When Russia pleaded with the US for years to discuss Russia’s valid security concerns, the US replied ‘Nyet.’ Former President Biden knew Russia would attack but believed any invasion would be a Vietnam style quagmire for Russia. Biden saw the upcoming Russian collapse as the shining achievement of his half century anti-Russian Cold War mantra. That failed spectacularly.
The election of Trump has injected a healthy dose of realpolitik that acknowledges Biden’s folly. Trump is currently in negotiations to put America’s Ukraine Trojan Horse to pastoral retirement. Can’t come soon enough.
America’s Israeli Trojan Horse to dominate the Middle East is a horse of a different color. It’s more like Israel’s Trojan Horse near totally financed by Uncle Sam. America gets to sit back while Israel marches around their neighborhood committing genocide is Gaza, indiscriminately bombing innocents in Syria and Lebanon, and promoting US attacks on Yemen and eventually Iran. All this senseless carnage constitutes Israel serving as the US battering ram to recreate the Middle East according to its dominant worldview.
Like our Ukraine Trojan Horse, our Israeli Trojan Horse is failing to promote America’s true national interests. Most of the world’s 193 countries are aghast America promotes the most grotesque genocide this century. America’s standing may be at an all time low. Like with Ukraine, we’re enabling Israel to self destruct. It’s now a pariah state. Tourism and investment are in decline. Its military is demoralized both from significant casualties and having to commit genocide.
Both allies are flirting with wider war; nuclear in Ukraine, regional war in Israel.
America gets nothing from allies Ukraine and Israel except worldwide condemnation, squandered treasure and diminishing unipolar world dominance.
With allies like Ukraine and Israel, America does not need enemies.
Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant to stay in Russian control, Moscow says
By Reuters, March 26, 2025, https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/zaporizhzhia-nuclear-plant-stay-russian-control-moscow-says-2025-03-25/
MOSCOW, March 25 (Reuters) – Russia’s Foreign Ministry said on Tuesday the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant was a Russian facility and transferring control of it to Ukraine or any other country was impossible.
The ministry also said that jointly operating the plant was not admissible as it would be impossible to properly ensure the physical and nuclear safety of the station.
It said Zaporizhzhia region, partly controlled by Russian forces, was one of four in Ukraine that had been annexed by Russia by virtue of referendums staged seven months after Moscow’s full-scale invasion of its neighbour and a presidential decree had formally made the station Russian property.
Western nations have dismissed the referendums as shams.
“The return of the station to Russia’s nuclear sector has been a fait accompli for quite some time,” the ministry statement said. “Transferring the Zaporizhzhia plant to the control of Ukraine or another country is impossible.”
Russian forces seized the station early in the invasion and each side has since routinely accused the other of staging attacks that endanger safety at the plant, Europe’s largest with six reactors.
Although the plant now produces no electricity, the U.N.’s nuclear watchdog has monitors stationed there, as it does at all Ukrainian nuclear power sites.
Ukraine demands the return of the station to its jurisdiction and rejects the 2022 annexation of its territory as illegal.
U.S. President Donald Trump, during a phone conversation this month with his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelenskiy suggested the United States could help run and possibly own Ukraine’s nuclear power plants.
Zelenskiy said the plants belong to the Ukrainian people. He said he and Trump had discussed potential U.S. investment in the plant. Reporting by Maxim Rodionov and Ron Popeski; Editing by Hugh Lawson and Rod Nickel
Nuclear experts pour cold water on US idea to restore and run Ukrainian power plant.
Nuclear experts have also highlighted that the US does not have any nuclear plants that use the same class of technology as Zaporizhzhia, which is a Soviet-designed “water water energetic reactor” (abbreviated as “VVER” in Russian).
By Lauren Kent, CNN, 20th March 2025, https://edition.cnn.com/2025/03/20/europe/ukraine-us-zaporizhzhia-nuclear-power-plant-explainer/index.html
Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, occupied by Russian forces since the early days of the war, could be restored and protected by US ownership – at least according to the Americans.
But it’s unclear how the operation would work in practice, experts say, especially as the plant is on the front line, in territory controlled by Russia.
As part of ongoing talks to inch toward a partial ceasefire, US President Donald Trump and Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky “discussed Ukraine’s electrical supply and nuclear power plants” during a Wednesday phone call, according to the US readout of the call.
“(Trump) said that the United States could be very helpful in running those plants with its electricity and utility expertise. American ownership of those plants would be the best protection for that infrastructure and support for Ukrainian energy infrastructure,” the readout said.
On Thursday, Zelensky disputed that section, saying: “In terms of ownership, we definitely did not discuss this with President Trump.” Zelensky stressed that “all nuclear power belongs to the (Ukrainian) state, including the temporarily occupied Zaporizhzhia region.”
Zelensky said the day before that Ukraine is ready to consider the possibility of American investment in the restoration and modernization of Zaporizhzhia. During a news conference after his call with Trump, Zelensky said they only discussed the occupied Zaporizhzhia plant, rather than Ukraine’s wider nuclear power network.
“I believe that the station will not work under occupation. I believe that the station can be restored to operation,” Zelensky said, also cautioning that the process will take an estimated two years or more.
Before Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022, the Zaporizhzhia plant supplied roughly 20% of Ukraine’s energy, with six reactors, making it the largest nuclear power station in Europe. Ukrainian staff remain at the plant under Russian occupation, and at one point staff were forced to work at “gunpoint.”
But the plant is now disconnected from the grid and the electricity infrastructure required to operate the plant safely has been damaged by drone strikes and frequent shelling. Russia also destroyed the nearby Kakhovka dam, emptying the reservoir that supplied water to cool the plant.
All six reactors are shut down and there are concerns over the plant’s ongoing maintenance, as explosions continue nearby, according to a UN nuclear watchdog team on the ground.
When asked about how the US could potentially run a Ukrainian nuclear plant, Energy Secretary Chris Wright told Fox News that he didn’t believe it would require American troops on the ground.
“Certainly, we have immense technical expertise in the United States to run those plants. I don’t think that requires boots on the ground,” Wright said. “But I’ll leave the foreign policy to President Trump and Secretary (of State Marco) Rubio. I know they are working tirelessly, ‘How do we bring peace to Ukraine?’
“But, if it was helpful to achieve that end – have the US run nuclear power plants in Ukraine? No problem. We can do that,” Wright added.
But experts question how feasible the idea floated by the Trump administration would be.
Operating the plant safely would require a safe, constant power supply to avoid a reactor meltdown, as well as the restoration of sufficient water supplies for cooling the plant.
“The first word of business would be to establish definitively that there could be no attacks on either the plant directly or on the supporting infrastructure – both power and water resources – and that would have to be iron-clad,” said Edwin Lyman, director of nuclear power safety at the Union of Concerned Scientists. “So far, that kind of agreement has been elusive, as shelling occurs at a daily basis in the vicinity of the reactors.”
“There’s no point in trying to rebuild a plant and operate it if it could be jeopardized at any moment,” Lyman said. “And the notion that US-ownership would somehow be more of a deterrent to Russia attacking the plant than now, when the Russians themselves control the plant, that doesn’t make sense either.”
The idea of US operation “raises a whole lot of logistical and technical and practical questions that are very unclear,” Lyman said, including the question of US liability for any accident at the facility. “With ownership or operator status comes responsibility.”
Nuclear experts have also highlighted that the US does not have any nuclear plants that use the same class of technology as Zaporizhzhia, which is a Soviet-designed “water water energetic reactor” (abbreviated as “VVER” in Russian).
“These are different technologies,” said Elena Sokova, director of the Vienna Center for Disarmament and Non-Proliferation, adding that there are strict licensing requirements for the plant’s operators.
“The US is an advanced country… but to be prepared to immediately take control of something that is of a different design, designed by different country, and where you have no experience of running it – I don’t think it’s a good solution or viable option.”
“Having said that, if we’re talking about a long process, I’m sure certain things could be worked out, particularly if there is an arrangement… to have the majority of the Ukrainian staff and operators running these reactors,” Sokova added.
Ukraine wants role in restoration of plant
Zelensky emphasized on Wednesday night that safe restoration of the plant is in the whole world’s interest, and Ukraine should have a role in that “because it is ours, and this is our land, this is our station.”
The Ukrainian president said any return of the plant would not be possible without control of the area where it is located – the city of Enerhodar – on the Russian-occupied side of the Zaporizhzhia region.
“If you just hand over the station, and a meter away from the station, everything is occupied or there are Russian weapons, no one will work like that,” Zelensky told reporters, raising concerns that the plant could be restored with US and Ukrainian investment, only to have Russia possibly damage or destroy it again later.
As fighting continues along the front line, the dire situation at the Zaporizhzhia plant “remains unchanged,” Andrian Prokip, energy program director at the Ukrainian Institute for the Future, wrote last month.
“It still does not receive adequate maintenance and it continues to serve as a Russian ammunition depot,” said Prokip, also a senior associate at the Wilson Center.
CNN’s Svitlana Vlasova, Christian Edwards and DJ Judd contributed to this report.
US seeks full dismantling of Iran’s nuclear program, Trump’s advisor says
Iran International 23rd March 2025,
https://www.iranintl.com/en/202503231237
The Trump administration is seeking full dismantlement of Iranian nuclear program in a way that the entire world can see, White House National Security Advisor Michael Waltz told CBS News on Sunday.
“It is time for Iran to walk away completely from its desire to have a nuclear weapon. And they will not, and cannot be allowed to have a nuclear weapons program, that’s enrichment, weaponization, and its strategic missile program,” Waltz said.
“The President has all options on the table. But we want to be clear, this isn’t some kind of, you know, kind of tit for tat that we had under the Obama administration, or Biden. This is the full program. Give it up, or there will be consequences,” he added.
His comments came in contrast to the much more conciliatory tone of Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, who spoke of the US president’s intention to resolve Iran’s nuclear dispute diplomatically.
Earlier this month, Trump wrote a letter to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in an attempt to explore a new nuclear agreement and prevent military escalation, Witkoff told Fox News on Sunday.
“We don’t need to solve everything militarily,” Witkoff said.
He emphasized that Iran cannot have a nuclear bomb, saying, “It cannot happen and it will not happen.”
“Our signal to Iran is let’s sit down and see if we can, through dialogue, through diplomacy, get to the right place. If we can, we are prepared to do that. And if we can’t, the alternative is not a great alternative.”
On Friday, Witkoff told the Tucker Carlson show, “We should talk. We should clear up the misconceptions. We should create a verification program so that nobody worries about weaponization of your nuclear material.”
He also said Trump believes the issue “has a real possibility of being solved diplomatically” and “acknowledged that he’s open to an opportunity to clean it all up with Iran.”
His remarks raised questions about the Trump’s administration’s approach toward Iran, as Trump’s Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, and National Security Advisor, Michael Waltz, have taken a much tougher stance, insisting over the past few weeks that Iran’s nuclear program must be dismantled and that Iran will face military action unless it complies with US demands.
Ukraine will have to make territorial concessions – Waltz
https://www.rt.com/news/614323-waltz-ukraine-territorial-concessions/ 24 Mar 25
Trump’s national security adviser has also indicated that the US is ready to ramp up sanctions pressure on Russia if it declines a 30-day ceasefire.
Ukraine should be prepared to give up certain territories as part of any future peace negotiations with Russia, US National Security Adviser Mike Waltz has said.
Kiev claims sovereignty over Crimea, the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, as well as Kherson and Zaporozhye Regions. The territories officially became part of Russia after referendums in 2014 and 2022. Moscow has maintained that their status is non-negotiable.
Speaking to ABC News on Sunday, Waltz said that a potential settlement to the Ukraine conflict “is going to be some type of territory for future security guarantees” for Kiev.
According to the official, an alternative in the form of NATO membership for Ukraine “is incredibly unlikely.” Ukraine has demanded accession to the US-led military bloc whereas Moscow views Kiev’s NATO aspirations as a root cause of the ongoing conflict.
Attempts to “drive every Russian off of every inch of Ukrainian soil, including Crimea” would be unrealistic at this point, Waltz believes. The ongoing diplomatic efforts spearheaded by the US should focus on the “reality of the situation on the ground,” the national security adviser argued.
Also on Sunday, in an interview with Fox News, Waltz said that “we are engaging in diplomacy, and that will involve both carrots and sticks to get both sides to the table.” When asked whether US President Donald Trump was prepared to “punish” Russian President Vladimir Putin with more sanctions if he rejected a ceasefire, Waltz replied that “all options are on the table.”
Earlier this week, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio revealed that representatives from Washington and Kiev had “had conversations” on the issue of territorial concessions during the talks in the Saudi Arabian city of Jeddah on Tuesday. The diplomat argued that “neither side can militarily achieve their maximalist goals.”
He similarly predicted that “obviously, it’ll be very difficult for Ukraine in any reasonable time period to sort of force the Russians back all the way to where they were in 2014.”
Following the negotiations in Jeddah, Ukraine agreed to a 30-day ceasefire.
Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, traveled to Moscow on Thursday to present Putin with the details of the proposal.
The Russian head of state welcomed the ceasefire in principle but insisted on addressing several salient issues first, including the fate of the Ukrainian troops encircled in Russia’s Kursk Region
US wants to negotiate with Iran on nuclear programme: US envoy
Tehran accuses US of bullying tactics as nuclear deal uncertainty deepens under Trump’s renewed pressure campaign.
US President Donald Trump’s outreach to Iran’s Supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, on a possible new nuclear deal is an attempt to avoid direct military action, US special envoy Steve Witkoff has said.
“We don’t need to solve everything militarily,” Witkoff told Fox News on Sunday. “Our signal to Iran is ‘Let’s sit down and see if we can, through dialogue, through diplomacy, get to the right place’. If we can, we are prepared to do that. And if we can’t, the alternative is not a great alternative.”
Witkoff’s comments come after Trump said on March 7 that he sent a letter to the Iranian leadership seeking to engage in talks over Iran’s nuclear activities and warning of potential military action if it refused. The approach was slammed by Khamenei, who said Iran was not going to engage with a “bully”.
Trump has also threatened Tehran over any support for the Iran-aligned Houthis in Yemen, who have resumed their military support for Palestinians by targeting Israel after it blockaded aid and then resumed its war in Gaza.
Amid intense US air strikes on Yemen last week, Trump said the US will hold Tehran responsible for any attacks by Yemen’s Houthis, dismissing Iran’s insistence that the group operates independently.
Talks with the US are impossible unless Washington changes its pressure policy the Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Sunday. On Thursday, he said that the letter was “actually more of a threat”, and that Tehran would respond soon.
There is little trust in Iran in US negotiation commitments after Trump in 2018 pulled the US out of a landmark nuclear deal – the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) – imposing instead additional sanctions on Iran. The JCOPA was signed with world powers in 2015 to curb Iran’s nuclear deal in exchange for sanctions relief.
Since Trump’s unilateral withdrawal from the accord, Iran has accelerated its enrichment of uranium to up to 60 percent purity – a step away from the 90 percent level needed for weapons-grade uranium.
According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which carries out inspections of Iranian nuclear sites, Iran has amassed enough fissile material for multiple bombs, but has made no effort to build one.
While Trump has hinted at the desire to negotiate with Iran since returning to the White House earlier this year, he has reinstated a “maximum pressure” campaign against Tehran.
And on Wednesday, senior White House officials again said Iran must do away with its nuclear programme entirely, leaving all uranium enrichment activity, even at low levels.
That, along with Trump’s threats of military action against Iran, has prompted calls from within Iran to abandon its officially stated policy that it will never pursue nuclear weapons.
Aaron Mate on how NATO provoked Russia in Ukraine and undermined peace
By Aaron Maté / The Grayzone March 23, 2025, https://scheerpost.com/2025/03/23/aaron-mate-on-how-nato-provoked-russia-in-ukraine-and-undermined-peace/
The Grayzone’s Aaron Maté argues that the US and NATO provoked Russia in Ukraine by expanding NATO, dismantling arms control, installing military assets threatening Russia, meddling in Ukraine and blocking multiple opportunities for peace.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8IMtB6UkvM
Katz: Israel To Begin Annexing Gaza
The Defense Minister explained that Israel will begin seizing territory and will not stop until all hostages are released
by Kyle Anzalone March 21, 2025, https://news.antiwar.com/2025/03/21/katz-israel-to-begin-annexing-gaza/
Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said that the IDF will begin annexing parts of the Gaza Strip. President Donald Trump and Israeli officials have discussed expelling the Palestinians from the Strip.
“I have instructed the IDF to seize additional areas in Gaza, while evacuating the population, and to expand the security zones around Gaza for the protection of Israeli communities and IDF soldiers,” he said on Friday. “The more Hamas persists in its refusal to release the hostages, the more territory it will lose, which will be annexed to Israel.”
On Wednesday, Katz directly threatened the civilian population of Gaza with “utter destruction and devastation” if they did not release the hostage and expel Hamas from Gaza. He added if the Palestinians did that, then they would be allowed to leave Gaza for another country.
While Katz is demanding Hamas release the hostages, the renewed assault on the Strip breaks a hostage and ceasefire deal that would have led to the release of the remains of the Israeli captives. Since Israel resumed bombing Gaza, at least 500 have been killed, including 200 children.
Katz explained in his Friday statement that he will deploy “all military and civilian pressure tools including the evacuation of Gaza’s population southward and the implementation of voluntary relocation plans for Gaza residents.” He added that the IDF would establish “permanent Israeli control of the territory.”
On Friday, the Times of Israel reported that Egypt said it was willing to temporarily house half a million Palestinians in the northern Sinai while Gaza is rebuilt.
Still, Tel Aviv and Washington lack a country to send the roughly two million permanently resettle Palestinians. Over the past week, reports said Syria, Somalia, Somaliland, and Sudan received offers from Washington to resettle Palestinians.
Kyle Anzalone is the opinion editor of Antiwar.com and news editor of the Libertarian Institute. He hosts The Kyle Anzalone Show and is co-host of Conflicts of Interest with Connor Freeman.
The fight for control of Ukraine’s nuclear reactors
How serious is Donald Trump about US ownership of Kyiv’s nuclear power plants?
By Chas Newkey-Burden, The Week UK,
https://theweek.com/world-news/the-fight-for-control-of-ukraines-nuclear-reactors
First, Donald Trump made a pitch for Ukraine’s critical minerals; now, the US president seems to want to own the war-torn nation’s nuclear power plants.
But there’s a lot of confusion over what Trump would do if he did take control of the plants – and if he actually even wants to.
How many nuclear power plants in Ukraine?
Ukraine has four nuclear power plants. The most significant one – and the largest in Europe – is Zaporizhzhia, which was seized by Russia in the first weeks of the war. And it’s this plant, in particular, that’s become Trump’s “new craving” in his “transactional approach to bringing peace”, said Politico.
What is Trump demanding?
As a demand, it’s Trump “at his most confusing”, said The Guardian. If the current frontlines in Ukraine were “frozen” in a ceasefire or peace deal, it would be “difficult to see” how Zaporizhzhia could be operated by the US while it’s “surrounded by Russian occupiers”. Besides, Ukraine is “not thought willing” to “renounce” ownership.
It’s “unclear” whether the US is actually looking to own Ukraine’s atomic power, said the Financial Times. A US account of a recent call between Kyiv and Washington suggested so, but Zelenskyy said the discussion only touched on the US helping to “recover” and modernise the Zaporizhzhia plant.
Why would Trump want control?
Trump’s minerals deal with Ukraine is “back on” but “can only go ahead if the materials can be extracted”, said The Telegraph. This “takes a lot of energy – something which the Zaporizhzhia plant could provide”.
Energy analysts have also noted that the US could have another “economic interest” in the plant, said The New York Times. Zaporizhzhia uses fuel and technology supplied by Westinghouse, an American nuclear technology company.
But still, the idea has “a catch” for “the man who coined the art of the deal”, said Reuters: “it would be years” before there is “even a hope of it making a return on investment”. So, the proposal could simply be the US “testing out various ideas to see what works”, as Trump “seeks to hammer out a lasting peace deal”.
What might happen next?
Control over the plant is “likely to remain a legal and logistical challenge”, said The Associated Press. And, of course, control over the land Zaporizhzhia stands on is a “highly divisive issue for both warring sides”.
It’s “unclear” what Trump could “offer to Russia to get it to hand over the plant”, said the NYT. Moscow is likely to demand something meaningful in return, such as “the lifting of Western sanctions that have hurt its economy”.
If Ukraine does regain control of Zaporizhzhia, the “more likely” alternative to US ownership is a “joint venture” – an investment fund for the ageing plant, which “both parties could contribute to and benefit from”, said The Telegraph. This is essentially the same concept that “formed the basis” of the minerals deal.
Trump: best protection for Ukraine’s nuclear power is US takeover.
President Trump has told President Zelensky that an American takeover of
nuclear power in Ukraine would offer the “best protection” for the
country’s infrastructure. The White House said Trump had “moved
beyond” the minerals deal for American companies to extract oil, gas and
rare metals that had been proposed as a way to protect Ukraine from future
Russian aggression. That deal was suspended after Zelensky’s disastrous
meeting last month with Trump and JD Vance, the vice-president, in the Oval
Office. It envisaged US control over natural resources and infrastructure
such as ports, but did not mention nuclear power.
Times 19th March 2025 https://www.thetimes.com/world/russia-ukraine-war/article/trump-best-protection-for-ukraines-nuclear-power-is-us-takeover-9l0xsxqjj
1 This Month
26 September – International Day for the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons
PLEASE OPPOSE HR 8255 AND S.3639 – bills would accelerate satellite deployment, with no environmental review or safeguards – https://ncstd5li.quorum.us/campaign/169331/
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- September 2026 (206)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (375)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 