Western, Russian nuclear industries still intertwined, report says

By Reuters, September 19, 2024, https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/western-russian-nuclear-industries-still-intertwined-report-says-2024-09-19/
VIENNA, – The Russian and Western nuclear industries remain dependent on each other, a situation that has shielded Russia from European sanctions, an industry report said on Thursday.
Cutting the West’s dependence would likely drive up costs, the annual World Nuclear Industry Status Report said.
Since Russia’s 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine, some of the five European Union countries with Russia-designed VVER reactors, which use Russian fuel, have sought alternative fuel sources, particularly U.S. company Westinghouse Electric.
Several of those countries, however, stockpiled Russian fuel last year, driving up imports.
Some Western companies rely heavily on Russian state company Rosatom’s construction of new reactors abroad to sell their parts, the report said.
“Interdependence between Russia and its Western partners remains significant,” the report said.
“With Rosatom implementing all 13 nuclear-power reactor construction sites started outside China over the past five years, providers of parts, e.g. France’s Arabelle turbines, do not have any other foreign customer besides Rosatom,” it said, referring to a unit of French state power utility EDF.
With US $billions and diplomatic support, Ukraine and Israel are destroying themselves.
Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL 22 Sept 24
Joe Biden began his presidency doing a great thing for peace. Three years ago he ended America’s illegal, immoral, criminal war in Afghanistan.
But Biden is no friend of peace. He’s spent the last three years instigating and funding proxy war in Ukraine to weaken Russia, and funding and enabling Israel’s genocidal ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in Gaza.
Neither of these murderous wars could continue without America’s endless billions and fervent moral support in word and deed.
But both Ukraine and Israel have fallen for US support to head down the path to failed state status.
Ukraine is already there. A fifth of their land gone. Economy shattered. Military largely destroyed. Millions displaced internally or fled to o other countries. Dependent upon on massive, unrepayable loans from the US and NATO countries simply to function. Cancelled elections spell the end of Ukrainian democracy. It could hardly be worse.
This all could have been avoided had the US not demanded Ukraine join NATO to isolate Russia from the European political economy, and supported a coup toppling the Ukrainian president who sought economic relations with Russia. Nor would it have happened had Ukraine President Zelensky rebuffed Biden’s NATO membership overtures and provided regional autonomy to Donbas as promised under the 2015 Minsk II Accords.
While not the basket case Ukraine is, Israel appears hell bent to join it as a failed state. By exploiting the October 7 Hamas attack to initiate all out genocidal ethnic cleansing of Gaza, Israel is destroying itself as well. Outside of the Biden administration, it has lost worldwide support as a moral nation. It has greatly weakened Israel’s economy, overtaxed it military, irrevocably divided its populace, forced over 60,000 citizens to flee northern Israel, and embarked on a self destructive war it cannot win.
Make that 2 wars. Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s genocidal campaign in Gaza has provoked blowback in northern Israel from both Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen. Like Hamas in Gaza, neither of these two additional opponents can be defeated by Israel alone. Just like with Ukraine, endless billions from Biden will not turn the tide.
Both Zelensky in Ukraine and Netanyahu in Israel have one Hail Mary toss to fling….bring the US directly into the battle on their side. Zelensky has been promoting this explicitly since his losing war with Russia began 31 month ago. Netanyahu, is more discreet, simply taking provocative actions like bombing Hezbollah leaders in Lebanon and Syria, engaging in terrorism using explosive cellphones and pagers, all designed to ignite regional war involving Iran that the US would feel compelled to join.
So far President Biden has resisted direct US involvement in both senseless wars. But either could blow up in his face at any moment, triggering direct US involvement. Should that occur, we’ll see much worse than Ukraine and Israel self destructing. America and the rest of the world’s 193 countries might well join them.
Global status report highlights parlous state of nuclear power sector

“the industry is essentially running to stand still.”
Jim Green, 20 Sept 2024, https://reneweconomy.com.au/global-status-report-highlights-parlous-state-of-nuclear-power-sector/
Two new reports have undermined the Dutton Coalition’s claims about nuclear power.
A report by the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) undermines claims that nuclear power would reduce power bills, and the latest edition of the World Nuclear Industry Status Report undermines claims that nuclear power is on a growth trajectory and Australia risks being left behind.
The IEEFA report’s key findings are as follows:
– Under the Coalition’s nuclear plans, electricity bills could rise by $665 per year on average across jurisdictions and scenarios, for households using a median amount of electricity.
– The bill impact would be more acute for larger households, given their higher electricity consumption. For example, for 4-person households the average annual bill increase across regions and nuclear scenarios would be $972 and for 5+ person households it would be $1,182.
– The cost of electricity generated from nuclear plants would likely be 1.5 to 3.8 times the current cost of electricity generation in eastern Australia.
– Overnight capital costs (excluding financing costs) of recent nuclear power station builds analysed by IEEFA have blown out by a factor of between 1.7 and 3.4, creating significant financial difficulties for the companies involved.
World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2024
The World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2024 (WNISR-2024) was released yesterday. Since 1992, these reports have provided a wealth of factual information about the status and trajectory of nuclear power worldwide.
WNISR-2024 notes that as of 1 July 2024, a total of 408 nuclear power reactors were operating in 32 countries, 30 below the 2002 peak of 438 reactors.
At the end of 2023, nuclear capacity stood at 365 gigawatts (GW). As of mid-2024, operating capacity reached 367.3 GW, 0.2 GW more than the previous 2006 end-of-year record of 367.1 GW.
That’s something for the nuclear boosters to cheer about: record nuclear capacity. But some context is needed. Nuclear power has been stagnant for the past 30 years and a fleet of mostly young reactors is now a fleet of old reactors.
In 1990, the mean age of the global power reactor fleet was just 11.3 years. WNISR-2024 notes that the average age of the world’s operating reactor fleet has been increasing since 1984 and stands at 32 years as of mid-2024, up from 31.4 years in mid-2023.

As the rate of closure of ageing reactors increases, it will become increasingly difficult for the industry to maintain its 30-year pattern of stagnation by matching closures with start-ups, let alone achieving any growth.
Former World Nuclear Association executive Steve Kidd spoke to this problem in 2016, noting that “the industry is essentially running to stand still.”
In 2023, WNISR-2024 notes, there were five reactor start-ups (5 GW) and five permanent closures (6 GW) with a net decline of 1 GW in capacity. (This year has also been underwhelming: a net gain of 2 GW of nuclear capacity compared to several hundred GW of new renewable capacity.)
Nuclear’s share of global electricity generation declined from 9.2 percent to 9.1 percent in 2023, little more than half of its peak of 17.5 percent in 1996.
In the 20 years from 2004 to 2023, there were 102 startups and 104 reactor closures worldwide. Of these, 49 startups were in China with no closures. Outside China, there has been a net decline of 51 reactors over the same period, and net capacity declined by 26.4 GW.
As of mid-2024, 59 reactors were under construction worldwide, 10 fewer than in 2013. China had the most reactors under construction (27) but none abroad. Russia dominates the international market with 26 units under construction as of mid-2024, six of them in Russia and 20 in seven other countries.
WNISR-2024 states: “It remains uncertain to what extent these projects have been or will be impacted by sanctions imposed on Russia and other consequential geopolitical developments following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.”
Construction started on six reactors in 2023 — down from 10 in 2022 — including five in China.
Chinese and Russian government-controlled companies launched all 35 reactor constructions in the world from December 2019 to mid-2024. Besides Russia’s Rosatom, only France’s EDF is currently building nuclear power plants abroad (two reactors in the UK) as lead-contractor.
Potential nuclear ‘newcomer’ countries

Peter Dutton claims that “50 countries are exploring or investing in next-generation nuclear technology for the first time.” That’s nonsense. WNISR-2024 notes that the number of countries building reactors fell by three from mid-2023 to mid-2024.
Reactors are under construction in 13 countries, down from 16 countries the previous year as the UAE and the US completed their last construction projects and Brazil suspended its only reactor construction project. Only three countries — China, India, and Russia — are building reactors at more than one site.
Just three potential nuclear newcomer countries had reactors under construction as of mid-2024: Egypt, Bangladesh and Turkiye.
WNISR-2024 notes that of 18 African countries analysed, only four would have grid systems large enough to meet minimum capacity criteria to host a large nuclear reactor (based on the rule of thumb that the largest unit in a grid system should not exceed 10 percent of total system capacity).
Small modular reactors might find a niche — but they don’t exist.

Small modular reactors
WNISR-2024 states: “The gap between hype about Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) and industrial reality continues to grow. The nuclear industry and multiple governments are doubling down on their investments into SMRs, both in monetary and political terms. So far, reality on the ground does not reflect those efforts.
“SMR projects continue to be delayed or canceled. Costs for nuclear projects in general and SMRs in particular are surging. The few available cost estimates for SMRs, especially when weighted by their electrical power generation capacities, show how expensive these are.”


Two developments over the past year have punctured the hype around SMRs. The first was NuScale’s decision to abandon its flagship project in Idaho after cost estimates rose to an absurd A$30,000 per kilowatt (A$14 billion for a 462 megawatt plant).
Then, French utility EDF announced that it had suspended the development of its Nuward SMR and reoriented the project “to a design based on proven technological building blocks.”
The two operating SMRs — a twin-reactor plant in China and a twin-reactor floating plant in Russia — weren’t built using serial factory construction methods so can’t be called SMRs. Nor are there plans to mass-produce these reactors types using serial factory construction methods, so the so-called SMRs in China and Russia can’t even be called prototype SMRs.
Dutton wants taxpayers to fund the construction of large reactors in the eastern states and SMRs in SA and WA. SA aims to reach 100 percent net renewable electricity generation as soon as 2027. Presumably Dutton wants to replace some of that renewable power generation with SMRs, for some unfathomable reason.
Nuclear vs renewables

Total investment in non-hydro renewable electricity capacity in 2023 was estimated by Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) at $US623 billion, up 8 per cent compared to the previous year. According to a WNISR estimate, this represents 27 times the reported global investment decisions for the construction of nuclear power plants of about $US23 billion for 6.7GW.
BNEF estimated investments in stationary storage capacity at around US$36 billion in 2023, which, for the first time, exceeded investments into new nuclear. Globally, utility-scale storage additions jumped from just over 10 GW added in 2022 to more than 25 GW in 2023.
In 2023, annual additions of solar and wind power grew by 73 per cent and 51 per cent, respectively, resulting in nearly 460 GW of combined new capacity, according to the International Renewable Energy Agency.
The solar PV market saw China alone adding around 217 GW — a 150-percent increase over 2022-additions — and the rest of the world 129 GW for a total of 346 GW or about 1 GW per day.
The Global Wind Energy Council reported a record of 117 GW of new wind installations, a 50 per cent year-on-year increase, with China accounting for 65 percent of total added onshore capacity and 58 per cent of total added offshore capacity. These numbers compare with a net addition of 1 GW nuclear capacity in China and a global decline of 1 GW in 2023.
WNISR 2024 states: “In 2021, the combined output of solar and wind plants surpassed nuclear power generation for the first time. In 2023, wind and solar facilities generated 50 percent more electricity than nuclear plants.
“Wind power alone generated 2,300 terawatt-hours (TWh) and is getting close to nuclear’s 2,600 TWh. Since 2013, non-hydro renewables added 3,500 TWh to the world’s power generation, 14 times more than nuclear’s roughly 250 TWh, and generated 80 percent more power than nuclear in 2023.”
In 2023, the European Union achieved its largest renewable capacity additions ever and the renewable share in total electricity generation reached a record 44 percent. Solar and wind plants together produced 721 TWh compared to nuclear’s 588 TWh.
For the first time ever, non-hydro renewables generated more power than all fossil fuels combined in 2023. Fossil fuel power generation dropped by a record 19 percent, reaching its lowest level ever and accounting for less than one-third of the EU’s electricity generation.
In China, solar PV produced a total of 578 TWh of electricity in 2023, 40 percent more than nuclear’s 413 TWh. Wind power generation first exceeded nuclear in 2012: in 2023, wind produced 877 TWh, more than doubling nuclear generation. Adding other non-hydro renewables like biomass to solar and wind, the net total generation of 1,643 TWh in 2023 was four times the nuclear output.
Keep in mind that China is the only country in the world with a significant nuclear power expansion program. It might be a stretch for WNISR-2024 to state that “nuclear power remains irrelevant in the international market for electricity generating technologies”, but it is heading in that direction.
Dr Jim Green is the national nuclear campaigner with Friends of the Earth Australia and a member of the Nuclear Consulting Group.
The World Would Be Better off Without NATO, Revisited

CounterPunch, by Eve Ottenberg, September 20, 2024
The hyper-capitalist terror state that plots to rule the world keeps its fist in a mailed glove called NATO. But NATO is in trouble. As its massive, disastrous Ukraine adventure fails, a key member, Turkey, applied to, uh, essentially join the other side, namely BRICS. When Ankara does so, how will that work? One foot in the Washington-dominated axis and the other in the Moscow and Beijing camp? That could require some political acrobatics, but Turkey has performed thus before. We got a smaller show of that with the spring 2022 Istanbul negotiations to settle the Ukraine War, until Boris “To the Last Ukrainian” Johnson, doubtless at Joe “Proxy War” Biden’s behest, scuttled them.
Things got stupendously worse September 12, with Anthony “World War III” Blinken’s trip to Kiev, along with his British sidekick, foreign secretary David Lammy, to promise long-range, possibly precision missiles to Volodymyr Zelensky, to strike deep into Russia.
At once Russian president Vladimir Putin took to the airwaves to announce that this would put NATO at war with Russia and that Moscow would adjust its plans accordingly. Never a good sign; one, in fact, that conjures images of bombed, radioactive American, Russian and European cities. But this was a reminder of Russia’s long-standing military policy: if existentially threatened, anything can happen. In short, one of the adults in the room had spoken. And Biden, with unexpected sanity, responded like an adult: no strikes deep into Russia. Let’s all hope to God, the west, Washington in particular, stops playing with fire – as one Kremlin bigwig accurately put it.
As for the Ukraine War itself, well, it’s a catastrophe for Kiev and for NATO. The stinging realization that Washington, the CIA in particular, bit off more than it can chew has commenced wounding the swelled heads of the more intelligent decision-makers in the imperial capital. Now, of course, Moscow is only interested in peace on the harshest terms for Ukraine, a change in posture, and not for the good for the west, thanks to the insane Ukrainian incursion into Russia.
It is unlikely that Recep Erdogan and Naftali Bennett can ride to the rescue, as they attempted two and a half years ago. In those elapsed years, hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers have perished, tens of thousands of Russian ones have too, Europe has swung into an economic and political tailspin, Germany’s broke (Deutschland boasted 10,702 corporate insolvencies in the first quarter of 2024 alone, a scalding indictment of its Russophobic foreign policy), NATO’s cupboards are bare of weapons, and Washington is losing interest. Quite the time for Ankara to approach BRICS – perhaps the first rat leaving the waterlogged Titanic. Can Hungary and Slovakia be far behind?
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Obviously, the western decision to bring Ukraine into NATO was a catastrophic, colossal blunder. As Kiev loses, out-manned and out-gunned by Moscow, this can only focus the very legitimate criticism on NATO that it has essentially done nothing besides make very bloody trouble since the end of the cold war (vide NATO crimes in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Libya). Numerous American diplomatic and security state luminaries vociferously cautioned against NATO expansion after 1991. They were ignored. American presidents, in their supreme arrogance, starting with Bill “Bomb Belgrade” Clinton, broke Washington’s promise to Mikhail Gorbachev and expanded NATO right up to Russia’s doorstep. Evidently, they thought they could do so with impunity. They were wrong. Their gamble not only risks WWIII, it destroyed a country, Ukraine. Time to mothball NATO, so it can never cause such a catastrophe and endanger the entire world again.
Eve Ottenberg is a novelist and journalist. Her latest book is Busybody. She can be reached at her website. https://www.counterpunch.org/2024/09/20/the-world-would-be-better-off-without-nato-revisited/
The 2024 World Nuclear Industry Status Report now released.

The World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2024 (WNISR2024) assesses on 513
pages the status and trends of the international nuclear industry. It
provides a comprehensive overview of nuclear power plant data, including
information on operation, production, fleet age, and construction.
The WNISR discusses the status of newbuild programs in existing as well as in
potential newcomer nuclear countries; notably in the Türkiye Focus which
provides critical context to the ongoing construction of the country’s
first nuclear power plant. A section is dedicated to ambitions and
prospects for nuclear deployment in Potential Newcomer Countries in Africa,
while Taiwan Focus covers the current situation and implementation of the
nuclear phaseout policy.
WNISR 19th Sept 2024
https://www.worldnuclearreport.org/World-Nuclear-Industry-Status-Report-2024-1046
The World’s Chance To Confront US-Israeli Genocide
Popular Resistance, By Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J. S. Davies, Consortium News., September 18, 2024
As nations come together in the U.N. General Assembly on Wednesday, they face both a serious challenge and an unprecedented opportunity.
On Wednesday, the General Assembly is scheduled to debate and vote on a resolution calling on Israel to end “its unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory” within six months.
Given that the General Assembly, unlike the exclusive 15-member Security Council, allows all members to vote and there is no veto in the General Assembly, this is an opportunity for the world community to clearly express its opposition to Israel’s brutal occupation of Palestine.
If Israel predictably fails to heed a General Assembly resolution calling on it to withdraw its occupation forces and settlers from Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and the United States then vetoes or threatens to veto a Security Council resolution to enforce the ICJ ruling, then the General Assembly could go a step further.
It could convene an emergency session to take up what is called a Uniting For Peace resolution, which could call for an arms embargo, an economic boycott or other sanctions against Israel — or even call for actions against the United States.
Uniting for Peace resolutions have only been passed by the General Assembly five times since the procedure was first adopted in 1950.
The Sept. 18 resolution comes in response to an historic ruling by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on July 19, which found that “Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and the regime associated with them, have been established and are being maintained in violation of international law.”
The court ruled that Israel’s obligations under international law include “the evacuation of all settlers from existing settlements” and the payment of restitution to all who have been harmed by its illegal occupation.
The passage of the General Assembly resolution by a large majority of members would demonstrate that countries all over the world support the ICJ ruling, and would be a small but important first step toward ensuring that Israel must live up to those obligations.
Israel’s President Benjamin Netanyahu cavalierly dismissed the court ruling with a claim that, “The Jewish nation cannot be an occupier in its own land.”
This is exactly the position that the court had rejected, ruling that Israel’s 1967 military invasion and occupation of the Occupied Palestinian Territories did not give it the right to settle its own people there, annex those territories, or make them part of Israel.
Settler Violence
While Israel used its hotly disputed account of the Oct. 7 events as a pretext to declare open season for the mass murder of Palestinians in Gaza, Israeli forces in the West Bank and East Jerusalem used it as a pretext to distribute assault rifles and other military-grade weapons to illegal Israeli settlers and unleash a new wave of violence there, too.
Armed settlers immediately started seizing more Palestinian land and shooting Palestinians. Israeli occupation forces either stood by and watched or joined in the violence, but did not intervene to defend Palestinians or hold their Israeli attackers accountable.
Since last October, occupation forces and armed settlers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem have now killed at least 700 people, including 159 children.
The escalation of violence and land seizures has been so flagrant that even the U.S. and European governments have felt obligated to impose sanctions on a small number of violent settlers and their organizations.
In Gaza, the Israeli military has been murdering Palestinians day after day for the past 11 months. The Palestinian Health Ministry has counted over 41,000 Palestinians killed in Gaza, but with the destruction of the hospitals that it relies on to identify and count the dead, this is now only a partial death toll.
Medical researchers estimate that the total number of deaths in Gaza from the direct and indirect results of Israeli actions will be in the hundreds of thousands, even if the massacre were to end soon.
Israel and the United States are undoubtedly more and more isolated as a result of their roles in this genocide. Whether the United States can still coerce or browbeat a few of its traditional allies into rejecting or abstaining from the General Assembly resolution on Sept. 18 will be a test of its residual “soft power.”……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. more https://popularresistance.org/the-worlds-chance-to-confront-us-israeli-genocide/
Miliband urged by US nuclear giant to abandon large reactors in favour of mini-nukes

GE-Hitachi Nuclear boss says investors have ‘scars’ from large projects’ cost overruns
Matt Oliver, Industry Editor
An American nuclear power giant has urged
Ed Miliband to focus on building a new generation of mini reactors instead
of vast megaprojects such as Hinkley Point C. Andrew Champ, the UK country
director for GE-Hitachi Nuclear, said small modular reactors (SMRs) offered
“the best route” to expanding Britain’s nuclear capacity as the
Energy Secretary draws up plans to overhaul the power grid.
By comparison, many investors have “scars” from budget overruns and delays with bigger
nuclear projects and view them as too risky, he claimed. Mr Champ pointed
to the large cost of Hinkley Point C in Somerset as an example. The
project’s budget has ballooned from £20bn to as much as £46bn when
inflation is included.
His comments come as the Government is reconsidering
proposals to build a large-scale nuclear power station in Wylfa, a
taxpayer-owned site on the Welsh island of Anglesey.
GE-Hitachi, which also builds larger-scale reactors, is among those currently trying to
commercialise SMR technology and is vying to secure funding from the UK
under the Government’s current mini-nuke development competition. SMRs
have been hailed as a potential breakthrough for nuclear power because they
would be built in chunks by factories and then assembled rapidly on site,
potentially meaning they can benefit from economies of scale.
So far the technology remains unproven on a commercial basis and no such reactors are
in operation. He also said the UK’s current target to build out 24
gigawatts of nuclear capacity was likely to prove too conservative, partly
due to the huge growth in power demand from data centres being used to
develop artificial intelligence software.
Telegraph 16th Sept 2024
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/09/15/miliband-urged-ge-hitachi-prioritise-mini-nukes/
Biden, Harris sacrificing endless thousands of Ukrainians to retain presidency November 5.

Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coaliton, Glen Ellyn IL, 16 Sept 24

President Biden sent Secretary of State Antony Blinken to Kyiv last week to reassure Ukrainian President Zelensky that Ukraine can prevail against Russia with endless US billions in weapons. He also stated that Ukraine will eventually achieve NATO membership.
Blinken was lying to Zelensky. He, along with President Biden and Democratic nominee Kamala Harris, know full well the US proxy war against Russia in Ukraine is lost. Indeed, it was certain to be lost the day it started over two and a half years ago. It could not be won without direct US/NATO involvement, regardless of how many hundreds of billions we squander supplying Ukraine with weapons. Direct involvement was ruled out because it likely means WWIII. US weapons are worthless because Ukraine is running out of soldiers to use them.
The US essentially green-lighted the invasion believing US weaponry would allow Ukraine to weaken, even defeat Russia, a long sought US foreign policy goal to keep them out of the European political economy.
The result has been a catastrophe for Ukraine, now a shattered country. It spells the end of continued US domination of Europe that offered no seat at the table for Russia.
The Biden/Harris administration must now take the sensible, moral action of forcing Ukraine to sue for peace. Allowing Ukraine to bleed out with further destruction to its economy, infrastructure, demographics and hundreds thousands more casualties is a grotesque policy to pursue.
But Biden and Harris are committed to their declaration this is a holy way of autocracy v. freedom. They are loathe to allow any settlement which allows Russia to achieve their war aims of no NATO membership for Ukraine and independence for Donbas, with security for Ukraine going forward.
It’s even more improbable for them to do that with the election just 7 weeks away. Admitting defeat after squandering over $150 billion simply destroying Ukraine to allow a Russian victory will bring an avalanche of criticism from national security state warhawks. It would rip away the false notion that this was a just war to protect US national security interests. It could cost Harris the election.
So Biden and Harris continue to prevent and cover up Ukraine’s impending collapse till after Election Day. They continue to fling tens of billions in weaponry into Ukraine which will either be destroyed by overwhelming Russian firepower or sit idle unused.
Biden and Harris have made a pact with the Devil over Ukraine. Tens of thousands of Ukrainians must die to keep the Democrats from losing a war shortly before an election. A war that never should have been fought and that signals the impending demise of US unilateral control of the world.
During his first year, President Biden lost the 20 year long Afghan war. Losing 2 senseless wars in one term is a lost war too far to remain in power. Biden and Harris’ message to Ukraine? ‘Keep dying Ukrainians. We’ll figure something out after November 5’.
Ukraine will join NATO – Blinken

https://www.rt.com/news/603873-blinken-ukraine-kiev-nato/— 11 Sept 24
The top US diplomat has repeated Washington’s talking points while visiting Kiev
Washington wants to see Kiev win the conflict against Moscow and join NATO, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has said.
Blinken is visiting Kiev with his British counterpart, David Lammy, to reiterate Anglo-American support for Vladimir Zelensky’s government.
“At the July summit, we declared that Ukraine’s path to NATO membership is irreversible,” Blinken said on Wednesday, reminding his hosts that the US-led bloc has “established a command dedicated to support Ukraine’s membership.”
Blinken has made the case for Kiev’s membership in NATO before. However, the bloc has officially declared, both in Washington this summer and last year in Lithuania, that this could only happen “when allies agree and conditions are met.”
Hungary and Slovakia have already said they will not agree under any circumstances, as bringing Ukraine into NATO would mean war with Russia.
During the same speech in Kiev, Blinken painted a rosy picture of Ukraine’s military industry, claiming it had expanded six-fold over the last year.
“In the coming years, that’s going to give Ukraine one of the most advanced defense industries in the world, and it will be able to take that to the global market and take global market share away from other countries like Russia, and also supply NATO allies,” he added.
Kiev is presently entirely dependent on the West for weapons, equipment, ammunition and even cash infusions to keep its government going. Ukraine is also facing widespread electricity shortages, as Russian missile strikes have degraded power production capacity. Blinken himself announced on Wednesday that the US will send $325 million to help repair the Ukrainian power grid and provide emergency backup generators for critical infrastructure.
Another $290 million has been earmarked for “food, water, shelter, health care and education programs for Ukrainians” both in the country and abroad, with the remaining $102 million designated for landmine removal.
“The bottom line is this: We want Ukraine to win,” Blinken declared at another point during his visit, according to AP.
This, too, was stated by Western officials before, as a prerequisite for Kiev’s membership in NATO. This effectively means that Ukraine will never join the bloc, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov said in June.
NATO’s 2008 announcement about Ukraine’s possible membership “became the trigger for much of the entire crisis that we are observing today,” Ryabkov said at the time. “If NATO members are ready to fall into the same trap again and history teaches them nothing, then they will get hit again and their bruises will get worse,” he added.
‘Blinken, Get Lost!,’ Says Polish MEP Grzegorz Braun
Grzegorz Braun’s fiery remarks highlight growing divisions within Poland over its involvement in the Ukraine conflict. As tensions escalate, Poland finds itself caught between supporting Western allies and safeguarding its security against potential Russian retaliation. Watch an exclusive on India Today Global.
Grzegorz Braun, a Polish member of the European Parliament, recently made a strong statement opposing Poland’s alignment with the United States in the ongoing war in Ukraine. He expressed his dissatisfaction with the U.S. Secretary of State’s involvement, stating,
“Blinken, go home as soon as possible. Get lost! We don’t want you here. We don’t want Polish people paying and dying for your wars.”
Rich countries silencing climate protest while preaching about rights elsewhere, says study

Report says governments in global north increasingly using draconian measures while criticising similar tactics in global south
Matthew Taylor, Tue 10 Sep 2024 https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/sep/10/climate-rights-report-draconian-measures-protest
Wealthy, democratic countries in the global north are using harsh, vague and punitive measures to crack down on climate protests at the same time as criticising similar draconian tactics by authorities in the global south, according to a report.
A Climate Rights International report exposes the increasingly heavy-handed treatment of climate activists in Australia, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Sweden, the UK and the US.
It found the crackdown in these countries – including lengthy prison sentences, preventive detention and harassment – was a violation of governments’ legal responsibility to protect basic rights to freedom of expression, assembly, and association.
It also highlights how these same governments frequently criticise regimes in developing countries for not respecting the right to protest peacefully.
“Governments too often take such a strong and principled view about the right to peaceful protest in other countries – but when they don’t like certain kinds of protests at home they pass laws and deploy the police to stop them,” said Brad Adams, director at Climate Rights International.
Across Europe, the US and the UK, authorities have responded to non-violent climate protests with mass arrests and draconian new laws that have resulted in long prison sentences. In some instances those who have taken part have been labelled as hooligans, saboteurs or ecoterrorists by politicians and the media.
Senior human rights advocates and environmental campaigners have raised concerns about the crackdown and called on governments to protect the right to non-violent protest.
“These defenders are basically trying to save the planet, and in doing so save humanity,” Mary Lawlor, the UN special rapporteur on human rights defenders, told the Guardian last year. “These are people we should be protecting, but are seen by governments and corporations as a threat to be neutralised. In the end it’s about power and economics.”
The escalating climate crisis has resulted in record-breaking temperatures around the world in 2024, driving food shortages, mass movements of people and economic hardship – as well as deadly fires and floods.
But the report found that rather than taking urgent measures to rapidly reduce the use of fossil fuels and halt ecological collapse, many relatively wealthy countries have instead focused on those trying to stop those raising the alarm by taking part in protests and civil disobedience.
“You don’t have to agree with the tactics of climate activists to understand the importance of defending their rights to protest and to free speech,” said Adams. “Instead of jailing climate protesters and undermining civil liberties, governments should heed their call to take urgent action to address the climate crisis.”
The report’s authors highlighted several examples of developed countries lauding the importance of the right to protest on the international stage at the same time as undertaking harsh and punitive crackdowns at home.
Welcoming a UN report in July this year, the UK government said: “These rights [to peaceful assembly and protest] are essential to the functioning of society, providing a platform for citizens to advocate for positive change. Nonetheless, civic space is increasingly contested as authoritarian governments and actors, who feel vulnerable to scrutiny and accountability, seek to silence dissent.”
Tuesday’s report also found:
- Record prison sentences for non violent protest in several countries including the UK, Germany and the US.
- Preemptive arrests and detention for those suspected of planning peaceful protests.
- Draconian new laws passed to make the vast majority of peaceful protest illegal.
- Measures to stop juries hearing about people’s motivation for taking part in protests during court cases, which critics say fundamentally undermines the right to a fair trial.
Climate Rights International called on democratic governments around the world to halt the authoritarian crackdown and protect people’s rights to protest.
“Governments should see climate protesters and activists as allies in the fight against climate change, not criminals,” said Adams. “The crackdown on peaceful protests is not only a violation of their basic rights, it can also be used by repressive governments as a green light to go after climate, environmental, and human rights defenders in their countries.”
Japan PM hopeful Kono calls for US assurances to deter nuclear ambitions
By Tim Kelly and Yukiko Toyoda, September 9, 2024
TOKYO, Sept 9 (Reuters) – Tokyo should seek stronger assurances from Washington about its commitment to Japan’s nuclear defence, in order to deflect concerns that could fuel domestic calls for an independent nuclear arsenal, Taro Kono, a prime ministerial contender, said.
Kono, who oversees Japan’s digital transformation and has been both foreign and defence minister, made the comment amid uncertainty over November’s U.S. presidential election fought by Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump.
“If the U.S. government becomes unstable, some people in Japan might suggest that Japan develop an independent nuclear deterrent,” Kono told Reuters in an interview on Friday.
“However, if Japan were to declare its intention to abandon nuclear disarmament, South Korea and others might follow suit.”
The only nation to have suffered atomic bomb attacks, Japan has long renounced nuclear weapons, relying instead on the United States to deter potential nuclear-armed rivals such as China, North Korea and Russia.
In the past, however, Trump has stoked concern about that U.S. commitment by suggesting that Japan pay the United States to defend it, including with nuclear weapons.
Japan’s large plutonium stockpile and access to advanced technology, such as rockets developed for its space program, means it has many of the components to build nuclear missiles.
Doing so would hurt rather than strengthen Japan’s national security, said Kono, because apart from proliferation risks, it would probably cut off access to the nuclear fuel Japan needs for its power plants at a time of tight energy supplies………………………………… https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/japan-pm-hopeful-kono-calls-us-assurances-deter-nuclear-ambitions-2024-09-09/
Netanyahu to Biden…’We can’t complete the genocidal ethnic cleaning of Gaza without you’

Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL 6 Sept 24
President Biden, with Democratic nominee Kamala Harris in total agreement, proclaims US support of Israeli defense is “ironclad.” What is truly ironclad is US enabling Israel’s genocidal ethnic cleansing that would collapse if Biden simply stopped the weapons gravy train.
That gravy train has sent Israel over 50,000 tons of weapons since the October 7th Hamas attack provoked Israel’s all out genocidal ethnic cleansing of Gaza. Biden recently signed a $17 billion gift of genocide weapons on top of the $3.8 billion Israel receives every year under a 10 year giveaway President Obama authorized 8 years ago this month.
An Israeli Air Force official just admitted Israel cannot keep up their genocidal offensive for more than a couple of months without US weapons. This is especially critical to Israel’s Air Force which gets all its planes and much of its bombs, missiles and intelligence equipment from Uncle Sam.
Based on that, Biden could have ended the genocide by last January if he’d only cut off all weapons once it was clear Netanyahu was using the October 7 Hamas attack to remove all Palestinians from Gaza. Such action by Biden might have returned over 100 Israeli hostages to their loved ones by early January, if not in time for a New Year’s Eve celebration.
Biden and Harris might as well campaign as the Genocide Twins instead of their disgusting posturing that they’re working for a ceasefire. They know Netanyahu must keep the genocide going to remain in office instead of prison, and complete the removal of 2,300,000 Palestinians from Gaza. Releasing Israeli hostages on only third on his to-do list.
Kamala is cursed by siding with her boss’s pact with the Genocide Devil in Gaza. Her feet are set in cement from 11 months of refusing to break with Biden on genocide support. Foreign policy will never pass her lips unless pressed by an increasingly dubious press. All she can mutter is ‘Our defense of Israel is ironclad and we will not change course.’
Kamala Harris would rather be president than end the worst genocide in this century. Nothing but her moral cowardice is preventing her from breaking with Biden and demanding an immediate halt to every US weapon racing to engulf Gaza in endless death and destruction. If she ever has trouble sleeping, she should count dead Palestinian moms and kids instead of sheep. She will never run out.
The US empire is hidden in plain sight

The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) was ‘created… to do in the open what the Central Intelligence Agency has done surreptitiously for decades,’
The UK appears to have very little control over what happens on the USAF-operated bases or the missions that are flown from them.
these agreements ‘ultimately reserve jurisdiction of US personnel to the US’. Most of the American bases are called RAF stations and leased by the US.
1 September 2024
So-called RAF bases filled with US military personnel are a tell-tale sign of Britain’s key role in US imperialism, writes Matt Kennard.
Four years after my book The Racket was first published, I started my own media outlet with historian and journalist Mark Curtis. It was a departure from what I had focused on before – the consequences of US imperialism around the world – because this new publication, Declassified UK, would cover British foreign policy.
Britain handed the mantle of world domination to the US after World War Two and the received history is that it then retired from any kind of imperial role. I found out pretty quickly at Declassified that this was a misunderstanding. The truth is the empire never died. Britain merely became a ‘junior partner’ to the US hegemon. London’s adjunct status did not mean it was insignificant, however. The City of London’s role as the world’s financial capital which spreads neoliberalism around the world, Britain’s vast network of military bases, alongside its corporate giants like BP and BAE Systems, showed the country still served a critical imperial role for its senior partner.
But a more interesting realization for me came when I started to look at the institutions that make up the US empire and their role in Britain. I had spent years looking at what institutions like the CIA, the National Endowment for Democracy, or the US military were doing in the Global South, where their power was exercised against often weak states. But I saw quickly that the infrastructure of the US empire which had colonized so much of the world had also colonized my home country, the country where I had lived nearly all my life. Britain, in fact, appeared to be more completely under the control of its American ally than any country I’d looked into around the world in The Racket.
The similarities did not stop there. Like the mainstream media could never mention the term ‘US empire’ or explain its real role in world affairs, those same establishment journalists did not touch US influence in Britain. This was, again, an invisible empire, hiding in plain sight. The work I began doing would have never made it into the pages of my old employer, the Financial Times, like so many truths in The Racket never could.
Into the state
The colonization by the US empire of Britain became particularly clear when the Labour party elected Jeremy Corbyn leader in September 2015. A veteran anti-war and anti-imperialist politician and activist, Corbyn was a complete outlier within the British political system. He was dangerous to the rule of the British establishment, but also the ability of the US to retain Britain as a vassal state.
The different pressure points that stay hidden in normal times, when the system is running like it should, quickly became exposed. This was made explicit in June 2019, when US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo visited Britain and was recorded saying privately: ‘It could be that Mr Corbyn manages to run the gauntlet and get elected. It’s possible. You should know, we won’t wait for him to do those things to begin to push back. We will do our level best. It’s too risky and too important and too hard once it’s already happened.’
……………….. Britain’s traditional subservience to the US ‘could have gone a different way at various points in modern history, recently if Jeremy Corbyn hadn’t been destroyed by a vicious media campaign,’ Noam Chomsky has written. But it was not a coincidence. The US was integral to building a British political system that made a ‘different way’ next to impossible. m that made a ‘different way’ next to impossible. I began looking at how the US state had been interfering in British politics to stop the rise of anti-imperialist leaders. Britain has never had a prime minister that was not signed up to the US imperial project. I started to realize this was not a mistake, but the result of concerted efforts from Washington.
…………………………………………………………Declassified files from the CIA show how concerned the intelligence agency then was by the left turn in Labour. The BBC noted ‘the deep level of concern inside the CIA about the strength of the Left within Labour in the early 1980s, a political force which the agency regarded as anti-American’. The CIA was particularly concerned about Foot winning the 1983 general election, with an internal report stating that ‘a Labour majority government would represent the greatest threat to US interests’. Foot’s 1983 election manifesto questioned ‘the programme for establishing American-controlled cruise missiles on our soil’ and noted that a new European security pact should end with the ‘phasing out’ of NATO. The BAP’s own official history notes that ‘the traditional British leftwing remained deeply suspicious of the United States, particularly on foreign policy and security issues’ in the period, adding ‘this was the era of Michael Foot’s leadership of a Labour Party committed to unilateral nuclear disarmament’.
………………………………. Michael Foot was a founder and strong supporter of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND), while Corbyn has been a member of the peace group since he was 15 and was, at the time of his election to the Labour leadership, its vice-chair.
The US neutralization campaign, which was leaked to the Washington Post, ‘would take three forms’, Dorrill continued: mobilizing public opinion, working within the churches, and a ‘dirty tricks’ operation against the peace groups.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) was ‘created… to do in the open what the Central Intelligence Agency has done surreptitiously for decades,’ the New York Times reported in 1997…………………………………….. Since the end of the Cold War, the NED had grown and been involved in trying to undermine or remove governments independent of Washington,………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………….. John Kiriakou, a CIA officer from 1990 to 2004, told me that recent changes in the law have widened the potential targets of US information operations. ‘In 2011, the US Congress changed the law that forbade the Executive Branch from propagandizing the American people or nationals of the other ‘Five Eyes’ countries – the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand,’ he said.
……………….. The CIA’s propaganda efforts throughout history have been shameless. But now that they’re not legally relegated to just Russia and China, the whole world is a target.’ One particularly interesting case was Index on Censorship, the UK’s foremost free expression group which monitors threats to free speech and publishes censored writers. It received £603,257 from the NED in 2016–21, according to its Charity Commission accounts.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. This is how it works. Not just in the developing world, but, I was learning, in the developed world, too. In fact, the control was even deeper. I soon understood that the US was not just interfering in the British political process, media and civil society. The hidden fist of the US empire which I’d seen deployed all over the developing world – the massive American military – was also occupying Britain.
I found the US Air Force (USAF) had 9,730 personnel permanently deployed throughout Britain, a number which was increasing rapidly.
……………………………………………… US military personnel in Britain are all in England, with access to 11 Royal Air Force (RAF) bases, stretching from Cambridgeshire to Yorkshire. They are known officially as United States Visiting Forces (USVF).
……………………….Jewel in the crown
The largest US military presence is at RAF Lakenheath, a 727 hectare site in Suffolk. Despite being called an RAF base, it is leased to the USAF, and its population is overwhelmingly American. There were 5,404 US Department of Defense personnel based there in 2022.
……………………………………………… The US is spending billions of pounds upgrading air bases in Britain to enable Washington to intercept international communications and launch military strikes more quickly. Some of the locations are hubs for offensive bombing missions. RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire is the USAF’s only bomber Forward Operating Location, or military base, in Europe. The aircraft deployed there ‘enable US and NATO warfighters to conduct a full spectrum of flying operations’.
………………………………………………..But the UK appears to have very little control over what happens on the USAF-operated bases or the missions that are flown from them. The overarching framework for the stationing of US forces in the UK comes from two pieces of legislation. In 1951, NATO agreed a ‘status of forces’ agreement to govern hosting arrangements between its member states. The following year, The Visiting Forces Act incorporated the NATO agreement into UK law.
But Hudson said that these agreements ‘ultimately reserve jurisdiction of US personnel to the US’. Most of the American bases are called RAF stations and leased by the US. ‘Because of this, while the physical buildings comprising the bases are usually the property of the UK Ministry of Defence, very little of what happens in them is controlled by the British government,’ Hudson said. The empire never sleeps and, despite the mainstream media working to keep it invisible, it’s everywhere.
This is an edited version of the new preface to The Racket: A Rogue Reporter vs The American Empire by Matt Kennard. The second edition is out now, published by Bloomsbury and available at bloomsbury.com and via all good bookshops.
Starmer permanently ties UK nuclear arsenal to Washington

: Britain’s nuclear weapons are now forever reliant on US military scientists after a transatlantic treaty was quietly rewritten.
RICHARD NORTON-TAYLOR, 3 September 2024,
https://www.declassifieduk.org/starmer-permanently-ties-uk-nuclear-arsenal-to-washington/
Labour has reinforced the “special relationship” with Washington by agreeing to make Britain’s nuclear arsenal permanently dependent on the US.
In one of its first, but little-noticed foreign policy moves, Labour has amended the Eisenhower-era 1958 Mutual Defence Agreement (MDA) that is crucial to Britain’s Trident nuclear missile system.
Officials deleted a long-standing sunset clause that required it be renewed every ten years.
All references to an “expiry date” have been removed “to make the entirety of the MDA enduring, securing continuing cooperation with the US”, according to a memorandum signed by defence secretary John Healey.
Kate Hudson from the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) told Declassified: “This spells farewell to even the smallest notion of parliamentary responsibility for Britain’s foreign and defence policies.”
She added that at least nominally parliament has had the opportunity, once a decade, to debate and reconsider America’s role in Britain’s nuclear programme.
“This amendment, introduced in the most undemocratic fashion by the government – at a time when it will be lost in the recess and party conference season – will eradicate those opportunities. This must not go unchallenged.”
The change was agreed by senior British and US officials on 25 July, three weeks after Keir Starmer became UK prime minister.
It comes as Starmer described Britain’s nuclear weapons as the “bedrock” of the country’s defence and amid concern about possible threats to the future of the MDA if Donald Trump wins back the White House.
During a visit to Washington shortly before the general election, David Lammy, now foreign secretary, told a centre-right think tank that Labour: “will always work with the United States, whatever the weather…”
The MDA enables the US to provide Britain with nuclear weapons materials and know-how without which Trident would not be able to function.
It gives the lie to persistent claims by the Ministry of Defence that Britain’s submarine-launched nuclear arsenal is “operationally independent”.
American client
Trident missiles themselves are obtained from America and a cross-party report concluded that the life expectancy of Britain’s nuclear capability without US support could be measured in months.
US presidents have also alluded to this dependency, with George W. Bush saying in 2005 that the US helped Britain maintain a “credible nuclear force”.
Barack Obama declared it was in America’s interest to continue to help Britain “in maintaining a credible nuclear deterrent” when the MDA was renewed ten years ago.
As Declassified recently reported, British military aircraft regularly cross the Atlantic with highly radioactive ingredients supplied by the US. These ingredients are absolutely vital to the Trident missile system.
The memorandum signed by Healey states: “The MDA provides the necessary requirements for the control and transmission of submarine nuclear propulsion technology, atomic information and material between the UK and US, and the transfer of non-nuclear components to the UK.”
It continues: “The MDA underpins the defence nuclear relationship between the UK and US.”
Above democracy
The memo further states that the amendment does not require any change in the law. Although the MDA is incorporated in US law, it has no statutory basis in the UK.
Astonishingly, despite its huge significance, it has never been the subject of a substantial debate in Parliament.
The government describes the MDA as covering the exchange of information on “sensitive nuclear technology” for developing “defence plans” and “military applications of atomic energy”.
Other aspects involve evaluating “the capabilities of potential enemies in the employment of atomic weapons”.
It also concerns the sale of “naval nuclear propulsion plants” and the transfer of materials like U-235 enriched uranium.
However, governments have long refused to provide information about how much nuclear material for British warheads the US has provided to the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston and the nearby Burghfield warhead factor, and at what cost.
The quantity is likely to be significant. Nearly 1,000 non-nuclear components for atomic weapons systems were exchanged between the US and UK in 2020-23 under the MDA, according to new research by the Nuclear Information Service.
A Ministry of Defence spokesperson said the removal of the 10-year renewal provision was decided “given the longstanding nature of this agreement”. She added that making the entirety of the MDA “enduring” was “the case with other international agreements.”
Peter Burt of Nukewatch UK which monitors the UK’s nuclear weapons programme commented: “Every UK Prime Minister since the Second World War has been petrified about losing influence with the US, and in a large part this hinges around access to nuclear weapons technology and military intelligence.
“This is the main reason the UK government always aligns itself with US foreign policy and allows itself to be drawn into US military adventurism, even when it is clearly not in the interests of this country to follow America.”
-
Archives
- October 2026 (279)
- September 2026 (339)
- 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)
-
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




