AUKUS nuclear submarine cooperation seriously jeopardizes peace, stability in Asia-Pacific: embassy
LONDON, April 8 (Xinhua) http://eng.chinamil.com.cn/VOICES/16215442.html
The United States, Britain and Australia have been pressing ahead with nuclear submarine cooperation despite being widely questioned, which creates nuclear proliferation risks and undermines the international non-proliferation system, the Chinese Embassy in Britain has said.
In response to a question concerning the trilateral Australia-UK-U.S. (AUKUS) cooperation on nuclear submarines, the embassy said on Friday that such cooperation will exacerbate the resurgence of the Cold War mentality, trigger a new round of arms race, and further provoke regional security and military confrontation, seriously jeopardizing regional peace, stability and prosperity.
The Asia-Pacific is now the most dynamic and fastest growing region in the world, which hasn’t come easily, the embassy said in a press release. “The AUKUS cooperation is designed to serve the U.S. geopolitical agenda to introduce group politics and Cold War confrontation into the Asia-Pacific with military deterrence. It is aimed at creating a NATO-replica in the Asia-Pacific, which runs counter to peace and stability in the region.”
The AUKUS nuclear submarine cooperation marks the first time for nuclear weapon states to transfer naval nuclear propulsion reactors and weapons-grade highly enriched uranium to a non-nuclear weapon state, it noted.
As the current International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards system is incapable of ensuring effective safeguards, such cooperation poses serious nuclear proliferation risks, seriously compromises the authority of the IAEA, and deals a blow to the agency’s safeguards system, the embassy said.
“If the three countries are set on advancing the cooperation, other countries will likely follow suit, eventually leading to the collapse of the international nuclear non-proliferation regime,” it said.
China urges the three countries to heed the call of the international community and regional countries, discard the outdated zero-sum Cold War mentality and narrow geopolitical mindset, earnestly fulfil their international obligations and do more things that are conducive to regional peace, stability, unity and development, the embassy said.
“This serves the fundamental and long-term interests of regional countries as well as the three countries themselves,” it said. “The UK is not a country in the region and it is unwise to overstretch itself.”
G7 countries are likely to back nuclear power
Climate, energy and environment ministers from the Group of Seven advanced
economies are considering stressing the importance of nuclear power for
energy security in a joint statement to be issued after a meeting later
this month, according to a draft of the statement. The statement, seen
Friday, is likely to note that G7 countries welcome Japan’s plan to release
treated water from the crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant into
the ocean in a transparent way and in close coordination with the
International Atomic Energy Agency, according to the draft. The G7 climate,
energy and environment ministers are scheduled to meet in Sapporo on April
15-16. Parliament is currently deliberating legislation that would extend
the life of nuclear plants beyond 60 years as the government aims to ensure
stable electricity supply and promote decarbonization at the same time.
Japan Times 8th April 2023
Convincing major powers to abide by ASEAN’s nuclear treaty is challenging
A. Muh. Ibnu Aqil (The Jakarta Post) 9 Apr 23,
While China’s expressed intent to sign the protocol for ASEAN’s nuclear weapon free zone treaty should be supported, convincing other nuclear weapon states to follow suit may be a challenge, experts have said.
In 1995, 10 ASEAN member states signed the Southeast Asian Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty (SEANWFZ) or the Bangkok Treaty, designating the region as one free of nuclear weapons.
The treaty also has a protocol open to signature by recognized nuclear weapon states China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States, but none have signed the protocol, objecting to the inclusion of continental shelves and exclusive economic zones in the nuclear weapon free zone. https://www.thejakartapost.com/world/2023/04/09/convincing-major-powers-to-abide-by-aseans-nuclear-treaty-is-challenging.html
India and Pakistan Must Negotiate Nuclear Responsibilities
South Asia Voices, by Ladhu R. Choudhary, April 7, 2023
In 2019, while addressing an election rally, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi stated a fiery public remark, “every other day they [Pakistan] used to say ‘we have nuclear button, we have nuclear button.’ What do we have then? Have we kept it for Diwali (a mega Indian festival celebrated with extensive use of firecrackers)?” His statement is just one example of India and Pakistan’s exaggerated rhetoric around their nuclear rivalry.
…………………………………………… responsible nuclear states should strategize to stigmatize the bomb. Most importantly, these statements undermine the essential ingredients of nuclear responsibilities.
Nuclear responsibilities are defined as a set of extraordinary obligations and reasoning of the nuclear weapon states to exercise restraint in nuclear posturing and proliferation activities to avoid nuclear crises and avert a nuclear arms race. A nuclear responsibilities framework demands that states prioritize behaviors that reinforce credible deterrence postures and doctrines, reduce nuclear risks, and create the conditions for disarmament. Given the catastrophic risks of escalation, the political leadership in both India and Pakistan should refrain from acts of nuclear irresponsibility and demonstrate their respect for nuclear safety and security norms.
………………………………………………. Existing South Asian Nuclear Culture Lacks Nuclear Responsibilities
When politicians in India and Pakistan remind one another of the nuclear button and equate nuclear weapons with Diwali firecrackers, they reinforce South Asian atomic culture. This atomic culture has facilitated the acquisition of nuclear technology with chauvinistic pride and a symbol of supreme power for political independence. It has limited space for negotiating potential threats of nuclear exchanges and shared responsibilities of hostile SNW. For instance, New Delhi and Islamabad have not been able to build robust institutional arrangements for Nuclear Confidence Building Measures (NCBMs).
India and Pakistan need a better cooperation record for joint nuclear doctrine formulations and identifying implementation procedures. Furthermore, their ambiguous doctrines, postures, and accidents may escalate nuclear instability. ……………………………… more https://southasianvoices.org/india-and-pakistan-must-negotiate-nuclear-responsibilities/
Germany criticizes Russian role in French nuclear fuel plant
German officials have criticized plans by French firm Framatome to produce
nuclear fuel in a joint venture with Russia’s Rosatom at a facility in
western Germany, and said Thursday that they will consider whether an
application to do so can be rejected.
Officials in the state of Lower
Saxony have received a request for the Framatome-owned ANF facility in
Lingen, near the German-Dutch border, to be allowed to produce hexagonal
fuel rod arrangements used in Soviet-designed water-water energetic
reactors. Such reactors, known by the Russian acronym VVER, are common in
Eastern Europe and the fuel production would take place under license from
state-owned Rosatom.
“Doing business with (Russian President) Putin must
stop, and that also and especially applies to the nuclear sector,” Lower
Saxony’s Energy Minister Christian Meyer said.
Washington Post 30th March 2023
China warns of World War III with ‘nuclear sword hanging over our heads’ over Putin’s plan to send nukes to Belarus
China has called for superpowers to step back from the brink of nuclear war as Russia announces a plan to deploy tactical nukes.
news.com.au Alike Kraterou and Jack Evans 2 Apr 23
China has issued a warning of a possible World War III after Russia’s announcement to deploy tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus.
Geng Shuang, China’s representative in the United Nations, called for all world powers to step back from the brink and maintain “global strategic stability”.
He urged nations to prevent nuclear proliferation and crisis, avoid armed attacks against nuclear power plants and the use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine.
Speaking at a Security Council meeting on international peace, Shuang made clear China’s opposition to Kremlin’s plan to send nuclear weapons to Minsk.
He described nuclear weapons as “the sword of Damocles hanging over our heads” and called on all nuclear weapon states to reduce the risk of a nuclear war and avoid any armed conflict between nuclear weapons states.
“We call for the abolition of the nuclear-sharing arrangements and advocate no deployment of nuclear weapons abroad by all nuclear weapons states, and the withdrawal of nuclear weapons deployed abroad,” Shuang said.
Shuang stressed that “nuclear proliferation must be prevented and nuclear crisis avoided.” He added that “a nuclear war cannot be won and must not be fought,” and that China’s position on nuclear weapons has been “clear and consistent”.
China has firmly committed to a defensive nuclear strategy, not using or threatening to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapon states or nuclear-weapon-free zones, and to no first use of nuclear weapons at any time and under any circumstances.
While not directly mentioning Russia, Geng called for all parties to “stay rational, avoid aggravating tensions, and intensifying frictions, or fanning the flames”.
China has claimed to maintain a neutral stance in the war but has also pointed out its “no-limits friendship with Russia”.
Last month, China released a point peace plan to end the war, calling for a ceasefire and talks between Ukraine and Russia…………………………………………………….
Nuclear Tug of War Intensifies in Brussels
With money and regulations on the table for renewable energy, the EU has become entrenched into two solid blocs with different stances on nuclear power.
Bridget Ryder — April 3, 2023 The European Conservative
With both a package of incentives for green technology and revisions to the Renewable Energy Directive on the table, the fight in Brussels over the place of nuclear power in the ‘green,’ ‘sustainable,’ ‘clean’ energy landscape—and its corresponding regulation—has intensified.
The bloc’s energy ministers met last week to prepare their negotiating points with the EU Parliament over changes to the Renewable Energy Directive. Prior to the March 28th Council meeting, energy ministers pow-wowed in competing breakfast gatherings—one for the French-led nuclear alliance and the other for the Austrian-organised Friends of Renewables group, Euractiv reports.
Nuclear alliance
At the end of their meetings, the nuclear alliance sent out a press release to notify the media—and presumably, both the Commission and their rivals on the EU Council—that they had agreed that nuclear energy was indeed “strategic” in achieving the EU Commission’s environmental goals. This is the opposite position to the one the Commission has taken in the recently proposed Net Zero Industry Act (NZIA), a set of incentives meant to counter U.S. green tech subsidies.
Under French leadership, the nuclear alliance (consisting of Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Finland, Hungary, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia) first met in February while the Commission was still preparing the NZIA. Its goal was to promote nuclear power as a low-carbon source of electricity and work on “common industrial projects.”
In mid-March, the Commission presented the NZIA draft, but with nuclear power excluded from the list of “strategic” technologies that would qualify for incentives. The one exception was “cutting-edge nuclear” technology, such as small modular reactors (SMRs) which could qualify for some investment incentives. The alliance then met again in March, just before the meeting of energy ministers on March 28th, and announced that they had “fully recognised that nuclear is a strategic technology for achieving climate neutrality.”
The pro-nuclear breakfasts were attended by Italy and Belgium, though only as observers. The two countries made it clear they had not signed on to any agreed position with the group, though they have reasons for desiring a favourable status for nuclear energy.
Belgium, for its part, has had to retract plans to start shutting down the country’s six nuclear reactors. After announcing the closure of a set of nuclear power plants by 2025, the public outcry forced the energy ministry to instead grant them a ten-year extension. ………………..
Friends of renewables
The Friends of Renewables—Estonia, Spain, Germany, Denmark, Ireland, Luxembourg, Portugal, Latvia, and Lithuania, with Austria as leader—are a clear counterweight to the nuclear alliance.
The compromise
After the breakfast gatherings, the two groups had to come together with the rest of the bloc’s member states for the official EU Council Meeting to settle on a negotiating position for the updates to the Renewable Energy Directive (RED).
The nuclear sticking point was whether hydrogen produced using nuclear power should be included in renewable fuel targets. After hours of back and forth, they agreed to label nuclear-produced hydrogen as “low carbon,” in other words, dirtier than ‘green’ hydrogen but better than the ‘brown’ hydrogen linked to fossil fuels.
Nuclear power enters into the debate about renewables in the question of hydrogen gas. Making the gas ‘green,’ a process of separating the hydrogen from water molecules, requires an energy source. When that source is considered ‘green,’ such as solar or wind power, the hydrogen is considered ‘green.’
Negotiators for the EU Parliament then also made room for nuclear power in the Renewable Energy Directive (RED), admitting that it has a “role” to play in reducing carbon emissions and is in a category of its own in the spectrum of environmental friendliness.
The RED now recognizes “the specific role of nuclear power, which is neither green nor fossil,” French MEP Pascal Canfin, chair of the Parliament’s Environment Committee, who participated in the negotiations, tweeted…….
The political agreement reached by the Council and Parliament calls for doubling renewable energy output by 2030.
“The agreement raises the EU’s binding renewable target for 2030 to a minimum of 42.5%, up from the current 32% target and almost doubling the existing share of renewable energy in the EU. Negotiators also agreed that the EU would aim to reach 45% of renewables by 2030,” the Commission said in a statement about the political agreement on the RED.
‘Renewable’ energy currently makes up just over 20% of the bloc’s energy mix.
Further room was made for nuclear by provisions in the agreement by giving member states two options to calculate achieving certain targets: either emission reductions or renewable energy output. This is an advantage for countries like France that have substantial nuclear capacity, as carbon dioxide is not the major by-product of nuclear power production. https://europeanconservative.com/articles/news/nuclear-tug-of-war-intensifies-in-brussels/
Inside Saudi Arabia’s Global Push for Nuclear Power
Despite qualms in Washington, Saudi officials have pressed the United States to help them develop nuclear power. But they are also exploring other options, including China.
NY Times, By Edward Wong, Vivian Nereim and Kate Kelly, This article was reported from Washington and Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. April 1, 2023
For years, Saudi Arabia has pressed the United States to help it develop a nuclear energy program, as Saudi leaders look beyond oil to power their country.
But talks about a nuclear partnership have dragged on, largely because the Saudi government refuses to agree to conditions that are intended to prevent it from developing nuclear weapons or helping other nations do so, according to officials with knowledge of the discussions.
Frustrated Saudi officials are now exploring options to work with other countries, including China, Russia or a U.S. ally.
At the same time, they are renewing a push with the United States — their preferred partner — by offering to try to normalize relations with Israel in exchange for U.S. cooperation on building nuclear reactors and other guarantees.
New details of the Saudi efforts provide a window into the recent difficulties and distrust between Washington and Riyadh, and into the foreign policy that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is pursuing: greater independence from the United States as he expands partnerships with other world powers, including China……………
The Saudi nuclear efforts raise a specter of proliferation that makes some American officials nervous: Prince Mohammed, the kingdom’s de facto ruler, has said that Saudi Arabia will develop nuclear weapons if Iran does. Any civilian nuclear program has dual-use elements that could aid a country in producing weapons-grade material.
…………………………………………………………….. Saudi officials have refused to commit to the restrictions, which would undermine their goal of enriching and selling uranium. The United Arab Emirates, a Saudi neighbor, and Taiwan have agreements with the United States that include bans on enrichment and fuel reprocessing.
Even if Saudi officials express willingness to sign a 123 agreement, any deal would face significant political obstacles in Washington. President Biden distrusts Prince Mohammed and denounced Saudi Arabia during a blowup over Riyadh’s oil policy in October. And many Democratic lawmakers and some Republican ones say Saudi Arabia has been a destabilizing force…………………………………………………………………………………………………
Flirting With China
As the Biden administration insists on certain safeguards, Saudi officials have continued looking at non-American companies.
An attractive one is the Korea Electric Power Corporation, or Kepco, based in South Korea. A company spokesperson said Kepco is talking to U.S. officials about the nuclear program and is interested in working with Saudi Arabia but declined to go into details, citing a confidentiality agreement with the Saudis.
But the South Korean government, a U.S. ally, would likely bar the company from the project if Saudi Arabia does not enter into a strict nonproliferation agreement with a government or the International Atomic Energy Agency. The company said it hoped “the conditions for participation in the project will be created.” And a complicating factor is a legal dispute between Kepco and Westinghouse over reactor designs.
…………………………… China has built up Saudi Arabia’s ballistic missile arsenal over decades and sends military officers to work on the program, current and former U.S. officials said. And with Chinese technology, Saudi Arabia is now able to build its own missiles, they said. New satellite imagery showing bulldozer activity at previous missile sites indicates Saudi Arabia could be housing a new type of missile underground, said Jeffrey Lewis, a nuclear nonproliferation expert at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies.
………………………………… Chinese nuclear companies have also offered to help explore and develop the country’s uranium resources. In 2017, the China National Nuclear Corporation and the Saudi Geological Survey signed a memorandum of understanding on surveying uranium deposits. In 2021, the Saudi Geological Survey issued a “certificate of appreciation” to the Beijing Research Institute of Uranium Geology for help in exploring uranium and thorium resources……. more https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/01/us/politics/saudi-arabia-nuclear-biden-administration.html
China’s new warning to Australia over nuclear submarine deal
China has fired off another dire warning to Australia, amid growing tension over the nuclear submarine deal with the US and Britain.
Carla Mascarenhas, 1 Apr 23
Global superpowers unite against US
‘Anytime, anywhere’: Kim’s nuke threat
Dan appears on Chinese TV
China has fired off a frightening warning to Australia over its nuclear submarines deal with the US and the UK, declaring it may trigger an unpredictable global arms race.
The Chinese foreign ministry said on Thursday that once a Pandora’s box is opened, the “regional strategic balance will be disrupted and regional security will be seriously threatened”.
The United States, Australia and UK this month unveiled details of a plan to provide Australia with nuclear-powered attack submarines from the early 2030s to counter China’s ambitions in the Indo-Pacific.
“China firmly opposes the establishment of the so-called ‘trilateral security partnership’ between the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia,” said Tan Kefei, a spokesman at the Chinese defence ministry, during a regular press briefing.
“This small circle dominated by Cold War mentality is useless and extremely harmful.”
Mr Tan added such co-operation was an extension of the nuclear deterrence policy of individual countries, a game tool for building an “Asia-Pacific version of NATO” and seriously affected peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region………………………………………………………….
Richard Dunley, a naval and diplomatic historian, said the deal “looks best from Washington – they get major wins in terms of basing, maintenance support and recapitalisation in their yards”.
He noted the Australian perspective was “less clear”.
“The cost is astronomical,” he wrote on Twitter.
Huge but still unknown amounts will be paid to the US in subsidies and then to buy the Virginias. This capability will only realise materialise mid-next decade, and is only a stopgap.”
carla.mascarenhas@news.com.au https://www.news.com.au/world/asia/chinas-new-warning-to-australia-over-nuclear-submarine-deal/news-story/16904f97d0a534af20dd69815f9c1986
Australia Isn’t A Nation, It’s A US Military Base With Kangaroos, and happy to have Julian Assange imprisoned
Caitlin Johnstone 1 Apr 23 https://caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p/australia-isnt-a-nation-its-a-us?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=82124&post_id=111947244&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email
One of the many, many signs that Australia is nothing more than a US military and intelligence asset is the way its government has consistently refused to intervene to protect Australian citizen Julian Assange from political persecution at the hands of the US empire.
In a new article titled “Penny Wong moves to dampen expectation of breakthrough in Julian Assange case,” The Guardian quotes Australia’s foreign minister as saying, “We are doing what we can, between government and government, but there are limits to what that diplomacy can achieve.” Wong said this when asked if Prime Minister Anthony Albanese discussed the world’s most famous press freedom case with the US president and British prime minister when he met with them together two weeks ago.
Wong refused to say whether her government’s leader had raised the issue with his supposed US and UK counterparts, repeating instead the same line she’s been bleating since Labor took over: that the Assange case “has dragged on long enough and should be brought to a close.” Which if you listen carefully isn’t actually a statement in favor of releasing the WikiLeaks founder or blocking extradition — it’s just saying the case should be concluded hastily, one way or another.
These statements came in response to questions from Greens Senator David Shoebridge, who took a jab at the Labor government’s “quiet diplomacy” approach to the Assange case.
“The idea that quiet diplomacy must be so silent that the government can’t tell the public or the parliament if the PM even spoke to the president is bizarre,” Shoebridge said.
Wong told Shoebridge that Australia is powerless to intervene to protect the acclaimed Australian journalist, saying, “We are not able as an Australian government to intervene in another country’s legal or court processes.”
While it is true that Australia can’t force the US to end the political imprisonment and persecution of Assange for exposing US war crimes, it obviously can conduct diplomacy with its supposed ally in order to protect an Australian citizen. Even nations with whom Australia has no form of alliance are vocally confronted by Canberra when they imprison Australian citizens, like the statement Wong released yesterday regarding China’s detention of Chinese-Australian journalist Cheng Lei in which the foreign minister explicitly and unequivocally calls for “Ms Cheng to be reunited with her family.”
Just yesterday alone Wong tweeted to demand justice for Cheng and for American journalist Evan Gershkovich, who has been arrested in Russia on espionage charges.
“It is one year since Australian citizen Cheng Lei faced a closed trial in Beijing on national security charges,” tweeted Wong. “She is yet to learn the outcome. Our thoughts are with Ms Cheng and her loved ones. Australia will continue to advocate for her to be reunited with her children.”
“Australia is deeply concerned by Russia’s detention of Wall Street Journal Moscow correspondent Evan Gershkovich. We call on Russia to ensure access to consular and legal assistance,” Wong tweeted a few hours later.
Now guess how many times Penny Wong has tweeted the word “Assange”?
Answer: zero.
What is the basis for this discrepancy? Why has Australia’s foreign minister been publicly demanding that China release Cheng Lei and return her to her children, without making the same demands of the US for Julian Assange? Assange has children too, and he has been imprisoned for four times longer than Cheng — more than ten times longer if you count the period of his arbitrary detention in the Ecuadorian embassy in London before his arrest. Why are we seeing more action from the Australian government to defend an Australian journalist in China than to defend an Australian journalist fighting extradition to a nation we’re supposedly allied with which upholds itself as the leader of the rules-based international order?
The answer is that Australia is not a real country. It’s an American colony. It’s a giant US military base with kangaroos.
That’s why the Albanese government’s “quiet diplomacy” to free Assange is so quiet that it can’t actually be said to exist.
Regular readers may recall that the last time we discussed an interaction between Senators Wong and Shoebridge was when the former condescendingly dismissed the latter’s efforts to find out if the Australian government is allowing the US military to bring nuclear weapons into the country. Wong angrily told Shoebridge that the US has a standing “neither confirm nor deny” position with regard to where it keeps its nuclear weapons, and that the Australian government understands and respects that position.
We’re so far under Washington’s thumb that we’re not even allowed to know if there are American nukes in our country, and our own government can’t even advocate in defense of its own citizen when he’s being persecuted for the crime of good journalism.
Add that to the fact that Australia has been pressed into an AUKUS pact which makes us much less safe and a hostile relationship with China which hurts our own economic and security interests, the stationing of a US nuclear intelligence site which makes us a nuclear target, and the US staging literal coups of our government whenever its elected leaders threaten US strategic interests, and it becomes clear that our so-called “country” is functionally just a US aircraft carrier that happens to be the size of a continent.
Which would be bad enough if these bastards weren’t pushing us to play a front-and-center role in World War Three. We’ve got to start fighting against our enslavement to the US empire and against the Pentagon puppets in our own government like our lives depend on it, because they very clearly do.
AUKUS Exists To Manage The Risks Created By Its Existence
Australia would be at risk of being attacked by China because the US wants to use Australia to attack China.
The only way China attacks Australia is if Australia’s role as a US military asset makes us a target when the US attacks China
“NATO exists to manage the risks created by its existence,” Professor Richard Sakwa once wrote in an attempt to articulate the absurdity of the military alliance’s provocative nature on the world stage. At some point Australians must wake up to the fact that this is equally true of AUKUS: we’re told the military alliance exists for our protection, but its very existence makes us less safe.
As former prime minister Paul Keating recently observed in the Australian Financial Review, this government’s justification for the AUKUS alliance and the obscenely expensive nuclear submarine deal that goes with it has been all over the map, first claiming that it’s to protect our own shores from a Chinese attack, then pivoting to claiming it’s to protect sea lanes from being blocked off by China after Keating dismantled the first claim at the National Press Club two weeks ago.
One thing Canberra has struggled to do is to explain exactly why China would launch an unprovoked attack on Australia or its shipping routes; the former couldn’t yield any benefit that would outweigh the immense cost even if it succeeded, and the latter is absurd because open trade routes are what makes China an economic superpower in the first place.
Luckily for us, the Pentagon pets cited in the Australian media’s recent propaganda blitz to promote war with China explained precisely what the argument is on Canberra’s behalf. They say Australia would be at risk of being attacked by China because the US wants to use Australia to attack China.
…………………………………………………… In their haste to make the case for more militarism and brinkmanship, these war propagandists admit what’s long been obvious to anyone paying attention: that the only thing putting Australia in danger from China is its alliances and agreements with the United States. The difference between them and normal human beings is that they see no problem with this.
Other empire lackeys have been making similar admissions. In a recent article by Foreign Policy, Lowy Institute think tanker Sam Roggeveen is quoted as saying the AUKUS nuclear submarine deal will make it “almost impossible” for Australia to avoid getting entangled in a war between the US and China:………………
The only way China attacks Australia is if Australia’s role as a US military asset makes us a target when the US attacks China
…………………………………………………AUKUS has nothing to do with “defence”. You don’t need long-range submarines to defend Australia’s easily-defended shores, you need long-range submarines to attack China. Australia’s “defence posture” is an attack posture.
………………
AUKUS is not a defence partnership because it’s got nothing to do with defence, and it’s also not a defence partnership because it is not a “partnership”. It’s the US empire driving Australia to its doom, to nobody’s benefit but the US empire.
AUKUS exists to manage the risks created by its existence, and the same is true of ANZUS and all the other ways our nation has become knit into the workings of the US war machine. If we’re being told that our entanglements with the US war machine will make it almost impossible for us to avoid entering into a horrific war that will destroy our country, then the obvious conclusion is that we must disentangle ourselves from it immediately.
The problem is not that Australia’s corrupt media are saying our nation will have to follow the US into war with China, the problem is that they’re almost certainly correct.
The Australian media aren’t criminal in telling us the US is going to drag us into a war of unimaginable horror; that’s just telling the truth. No, the Australian media are criminal for telling us that we just need to accept that and get comfortable with the idea.
No. Absolutely not. This war cannot happen. Must not happen. We cannot go to war with a nuclear-armed country that also happens to be propping up our economy as our number one trading partner. We need to shred whatever alliances need to be shredded, enrage whatever powers we need to enrage, kick the US troops out of this country, get ourselves out of the Commonwealth while we’re at it, bring Assange home where he belongs, and become a real nation. https://caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p/aukus-exists-to-manage-the-risks?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=82124&post_id=111711350&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email
EU agrees to a compromise on nuclear energy amid French pressure
Get local insights from Lisbon to Moscow with an unrivalled network of journalists across Europe, expert analysis, our dedicated ‘Brussels Briefing’ newsletter. Customise your myFT page to track the countries of your choice.
The EU has reached a compromise on new targets for renewable energy after
agreeing to make an exception for nuclear power in certain sectors amid
pressure from France. Negotiators from member states and the European
parliament agreed to increase the overall binding target of renewable
energy consumed in the EU to 42.5 per cent by 2030, up from 32 per cent,
according to a statement. They also set an “indicative” target of
reaching 45 per cent by the end of the decade.
France had pushed for nuclear energy to be included in countries’ efforts to reach those targets. But at the end of a long night of negotiations, the countries
agreed on a more limited concession counting nuclear power towards the
target for industry. Nuclear-sceptic countries including Germany and
Austria had argued against the inclusion of atomic power, saying that such
a move would undermine efforts to expand solar, wind and other renewable
sources of energy.
FT 30th March 2023
https://www.ft.com/content/02adde01-3b27-4743-8c17-2e39ab682660
Top UN official urgently calls for de-escalating nuclear tensions over Belarus
, UN News,
Urgent efforts must be made to de-escalate the situation following Russia’s announcement last weekend that it plans to station tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus, the UN disarmament chief warned the Security Council on Friday.
“The risk of a nuclear weapon being used is currently higher than at any time since the depths of the cold war,” said Izumi Nakamitsu, UN High Representative for Disarmament Affairs. “The war in Ukraine represents the most acute example of that risk.”
The Security Council met on the heels of President Vladimir Putin’s announcement last Sunday that it had reached an agreement with its neighbour, which has been any ally in Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine, to station non-strategic nuclear weapons inside Belarusian territory, which would be in place for aerial use, by July.
Dangerous rhetoric
Ms. Nakamitsu said the absence of dialogue and the erosion of the disarmament and arms control architecture, combined with dangerous rhetoric and veiled threats, are key drivers of this potentially existential risk posed by nuclear escalation.
“When it comes to issues related to nuclear weapons, all States must avoid taking any actions that could lead to escalation, mistake or miscalculation,” she said, recalling that all States parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, or the NPT – nuclear-armed States and non-nuclear weapon States alike – must strictly adhere to its commitments and obligations.
“They should return to dialogue to de-escalate tensions urgently and find ways to develop and implement transparency and confidence-building measures,” she said, appealing to States parties to the treaty to fully adhere to their obligations and to immediately engage in serious efforts to reduce nuclear risk……………………………………
https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/03/1135222
Nuclear dispute hangs over EU renewable energy talks
The renewable energy law reflects a broader dispute among countries over whether EU policies should actively encourage nuclear energy with subsidies and incentives – or restrict those privileges to other green technologies like wind and solar.
By Kate Abnett, https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/nuclear-row-looms-over-eu-renewable-energy-talks-2023-03-29/
BRUSSELS, March 29 (Reuters) – The European Union enters the final stage of tense talks over how to treat hydrogen produced using nuclear power on Wednesday, in an effort to end a dispute that threatens to thwart a deal on more ambitious renewable energy goals.
Reporting by Kate Abnett; Editing by Jan Strupczewski, Sharon Singleton and Alexander Smith
Negotiators from EU countries and the European Parliament are meeting to reach a deal on how fast to expand renewable energy sources this decade – a central pillar of the 27-member bloc’s efforts to fight climate change.
One of the key goals in the renewable energy policy is for every EU country to use a certain amount of renewable fuels, such as hydrogen, as a energy source in industry by 2030.
Because low-carbon hydrogen requires electricity to be made in the first place, the EU battle now is over what energy sources should be allowed for its production, if it is to be counted towards the renewable energy targets.
Hours before the final negotiations between EU governments and the European Parliament begin, EU countries are still at odds over whether to recognise hydrogen produced from nuclear power under the targets.
EU officials said they expect a long night, with some doubtful a deal will be reached.
France, backed by at least eight other EU countries, including Poland and Hungary, is leading a push for “low-carbon hydrogen”, made using nuclear power, to count towards the renewable goals.
Nuclear energy does not produce planet-heating CO2 emissions and those countries say the EU should better support its contribution to meeting climate goals.
But at least nine other EU countries, including Germany, Spain and Austria, disagree. They say the EU targets should solely focus on renewable sources like wind and solar to drive the massive expansion of these energy sources needed for Europe to end its reliance on Russian gas and cut CO2.
The renewable energy law reflects a broader dispute among countries over whether EU policies should actively encourage nuclear energy with subsidies and incentives – or restrict those privileges to other green technologies like wind and solar.
EU countries’ ambassadors failed to agree on Wednesday to a compromise drafted by Sweden, which holds the EU’s rotating presidency – leaving Sweden to represent EU countries in the final talks without a clear negotiating position on the issue.
The proposal, seen by Reuters, offered countries a reduced target to use renewable hydrogen in 2030, if 30% or less of their total hydrogen use is fossil fuel-based hydrogen.
That could benefit countries where large shares of nuclear-based hydrogen have helped push fossil-based hydrogen out of the mix. EU officials said some countries opposed any reopening of the targets to nuclear-based fuels while others wanted a deeper reduction than the proposed 30%.
The EU renewable energy policy contains a raft of other rules to help countries shift away from fossil fuels.
Negotiators will try to agree binding targets for how much of the EU’s total energy must come from renewable sources by 2030 – with 40% and 45% among the options being considered.
Other parts of the deal may tighten the EU’s rules on whether wood-burning “biomass” energy can be classed as renewable and count towards green goals.
US stops sharing nuclear arms data with Russia under START Treaty
Aljazeera, 29 Mar 23,
Under terms of the New START treaty, both countries should share data on deployed nuclear warheads on a biannual basis.
The United States has told Russia it will cease exchanging detailed data on its nuclear weapons stockpiles, the White House said, calling the move a response to Russia’s suspension of participation in the New START nuclear arms treaty.
While Russian President Vladimir Putin has not formally withdrawn from the treaty, his suspension from participating in it announced in February has endangered the last pillar of US-Russian nuclear arms control.
The US and Russia hold nearly 90 percent of the world’s nuclear warheads – enough to destroy the planet several times over. The New START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) limits the number of strategic nuclear warheads countries deploy.
“Russia has not been in full compliance and refused to share data which we … agreed in New START to share biannually,” John Kirby, the US National Security Council spokesperson, told reporters in a conference call on Tuesday.
“Since they have refused to be in compliance … we have decided to likewise not share that data,” he said……………………………………….
Under the terms of the New START, signed in 2010 and due to expire in 2026, Moscow and Washington may deploy no more than 1,550 strategic nuclear warheads and 700 land- and submarine-based missiles and bombers to deliver them………………………. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/3/29/us-stops-sharing-nuclear-arms-data-with-russia-under-start-treaty
1 This Month
22 June – Virtual Event –Climate Change: New Data, New Debate
Monday, June 22, 2026 2:30 p.m. – 3:15 p.m. CT
YouTube. Register here
Protect Sazan Island from the Trump family! https://secure.avaaz.org/campaign/en/protect_sazan_island_from_the_trump_family_loc/?bqFCVab&v=174511&cl=22707147157&_checksum=5e9dde668860e8231c33699735e16a1fbf22ab2cb01da50c999fe8732b9775ef&utm_source=email&utm_medium=blast_email&utm_campaign=174511
25 June- THE PUKE ON NUKES
Thursday, June 25, 2026
7pm Central Time (8pm ET, 6pm MT, 5pm PT) UTC – 5
From NRC & DOE Deregulation to Techno-Fascist Billionaires Going Nuclear, Plus a Few Songs from Atomic Cabaret REGISTER
26 June – Radiation Trainwreck at the NRC / Join the Protect Better Campaign – https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/4ZlZ5_qLSHGiLSCg8FF6Bg#/registration
Cuba Is Not a Failed State – It Is a Besieged State
PETITION: “Global Appeal to Endorse Palestinian Right of Return of Refugees”
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- June 2026 (193)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
-
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 