Cuban missile crisis, 60 years on: new papers reveal how close the world came to nuclear disaster
In 1962, a Soviet submarine commander nearly ordered a nuclear launch, newly translated accounts show, with modern parallels over Ukraine all too clear
Guardian, Julian Borger in Washington 27 Oct 2022
The commander of a nuclear-armed Soviet submarine panicked and came close to launching a nuclear torpedo during the Cuban missile crisis 60 years ago, after being blinded and disoriented by aggressive US tactics, according to newly translated documents.
Many nuclear historians agree that 27 October 1962, known as “Black Saturday”, was the closest the world came to nuclear catastrophe, as US forces enforced a blockade of Cuba to stop deliveries of Soviet missiles. On the same day a U-2 spy plane was shot down over the island, and another went missing over Siberia when the pilot lost his way.
Six decades on from the “world’s most dangerous day”, last week’s revelation that a Russian warplane fired a missile near a British Rivet Joint surveillance plane over the Black Sea has once more heightened concerns that miscalculation or accident could trigger uncontrolled escalation.
In October 1962, the US sent its anti-submarine forces to hunt down Soviet submarines trying to slip through the “quarantine” imposed on Cuba. The most perilous moment came when one of those submarines, B-59, was forced to surface late at night in the Sargasso Sea to recharge its batteries and found itself surrounded by US destroyers and anti-submarine planes circling overhead.
In a newly translated account, one of the senior officers on board, Captain Second Class Vasily Arkhipov, described the scene……………………………………………………………
In his account, Arkhipov played down his role and how close the B-59 submarine commander, Savitsky, came to launching the submarine’s one nuclear-tipped torpedo. However, Svetlana Savranskaya, the director of the National Security Archive’s Russian programmes, interviewed another submarine commander from the same brigade, Ryurik Ketov, who said Savitsky was convinced they were under attack and that the war with the US had started.
The commander panicked, calling for an “urgent dive” and for the number one torpedo with the nuclear warhead to be prepared. However, because the signalling officer was in the way, Savitsky could not immediately get down the narrow stairway through the conning tower, and during those few moments of hesitation, Arkhipov realised that the US forces were signalling rather than attacking, and deliberately firing off to the side of the submarine.
“He called to Savitsky and said: ‘calm down, look they are signalling, not attacking, let’s signal back.’ Savitsky turned back, saw the situation, ordered the signalling officer to signal back,” Savranskaya said. She added that two other officers would have had to confirm any order from Savitsky before the nuclear torpedo could have been launched.
Tom Blanton, the director of the National Security Archive, said the aggressive tactics used by the American submarine hunters contributed to the close shave…………………………………………….
Saved ‘primarily because of luck’
The B-59 incident was just one of a cascade of crises that day. A U-2 went missing over Siberia when the pilot lost his bearings, blinded by the aurora borealis and misled by compass malfunction close to the north pole.
Some F-102 interceptor jets were scrambled to protect the U-2, but the joint chiefs of staff who gave the order for their launch were not aware they had been armed with nuclear missiles as a matter of course once the alert level was raised to Defcon 2.
Minutes later, the joint chiefs heard that another U-2 had been shot down over Cuba and assumed it was a deliberate escalation by Moscow. In fact, the order had been given independently by two Soviet generals in Cuba. The joint chiefs were also unaware that there were 80 nuclear warheads on the missiles already in Cuba when they gave their recommendation for the US to carry out airstrikes and then an invasion of Cuba.
The recommendation was overruled by president John Kennedy, as negotiations with Soviet representatives, some of them in a Washington Chinese restaurant, were making progress, leading ultimately to the withdrawal of Soviet missiles from Cuba while US missiles were pulled back from Turkey.
Tom Collina, the director of policy at the Ploughshares Fund, a disarmament advocacy group, said Black Saturday “reminds us that the reason we’ve gotten out of things like that in the past is primarily because of luck”.
“We had some good management, we had some good thinkers,” Collina, co-author of The Button, a book on the nuclear arms race, said. “But basically, we got lucky in the closest situations where we could have gotten involved in nuclear war.”……………………………..
“The lesson we should have learned in 1962 is that humans are fallible, and we should not combine crises with fallible humans with nuclear weapons,” Collina said. “Yet here we are again.” https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/27/cuban-missile-crisis-60-years-on-new-papers-reveal-how-close-the-world-came-to-nuclear-disaster
‘Small but important step’: Australia’s shift on treaty banning nuclear weapons applauded
Australia abstained from voting on the UN treaty banning nuclear weapons for the first time in five years. Previously, the country had opposed the treaty.
SBS News 29 Oct 22,
Anti-nuclear campaigners welcomed the shift in the Australian government’s position on a UN treaty banning the proliferation of nuclear weapons.
Australia was among 14 nations to abstain from voting. There were 43 nations who voted against the UN resolution co-sponsored by New Zealand, Indonesia, Malaysia and Ireland. A total of 124 nations voted in favour of the motion.
The Australian branch of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) described the move as “a small but important step forward”.
“ICAN looks forward to a formal decision by the Albanese government to sign and ratify the TPNW (the treaty) – in line with its pre-election pledge,” the group said.
The overwhelming majority of Australians support joining this treaty, and progress towards disarmament is more urgent than ever.”
ICAN said it was encouraging to see that the majority of nations stood united on the risks of nuclear war, particularly “in light of the war in Ukraine”.
It ends years of Canberra siding with the United States by actions on the treaty to ban the deadly weapons and comes as Australia looks to nuclear submarines to boost its navy…………………………………
Australia also recently faced criticism from nuclear powers for joining a Pacific push to help deal with the consequences of nuclear testing.
New Zealand, a signatory to the nuclear weapons ban, has previously pushed for Australia to join.
A total of 93 countries have signed the treaty, including 68 nations that have formally ratified it. https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/small-but-important-step-australias-shift-on-treaty-banning-nuclear-weapons-applauded/j3cz2yr7l
Russian delegation at UN calls on USA to join initiative to renounce weapons in space
Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova’s comment on the US initiative in the UN General Assembly First Committee
The other day, the US delegation submitted to the UN General Assembly First Committee an aide-memoire on proposed UN General Assembly resolution on destructive direct-ascent anti-satellite missile testing. We analysed the text to discover that our apprehensions concerning this US initiative were valid.
As before, we regard the moratorium on testing the above type of anti-satellite weapon (ASW) announced by the White House in April as a purely declarative move. The UN General Assembly statements and draft resolutions are clearly not enough to prevent an arms race in space (PARIS), all the more so for a country that has had experience – at least since 2008 – destroying space objects with ASW.
The United States remains bashfully silent about the most important thing: are they willing to permanently rule out the combat use of this type of weapon? The resolution says nothing about it. There are no commitments regarding the development and production of such systems, or the prospect of ever destroying the Pentagon’s existing anti-satellite capabilities.
Moreover, the possibility of deploying ASW means on the US reusable unmanned space shuttle X-37B, which is capable of staying in orbit for a long time, performing manoeuvres and carrying a payload, cannot be ruled out. By the way, our multiple requests to the United States to clarify the X-37B platform’s goals and objectives have so far remained unanswered.
Military dominance and superiority in outer space being set as clear goals in US doctrinal documents, their view of space as an arena of confrontation and their plans for achieving these goals are quite telling if one wants to understand Washington’s genuine motives. It is no coincidence that the US delegation at the Geneva Conference on Disarmament is doing its utmost to hinder the start of talks on a multilateral instrument which contains reliable international legal guarantees against deploying weapons of any kind in outer space and the renunciation of the use of force or the threat of force against space objects. The Americans are using every pretext to avoid working on the Russian-Chinese draft treaty designed to fulfill PARIS goals………………….
Washington can prove it has serious intentions if it revises its destructive stance and the US delegation that is participating in the Conference on Disarmament joins the efforts to start talks as soon as possible on a legally binding instrument with guarantees of non-deployment of weapons in space, non-use of force or threat of force against space objects.
Specifically, the approach promoted by Russia involves the following commitments:
– not to use space objects as a means of destroying any targets on Earth, in the air or outer space;
– not to create, test or deploy weapons in space to perform any tasks, including for anti-missile defence, anti-satellite activity, or use against targets on Earth or in the air, and to eliminate such systems that the states already possess;
– not to create, test, deploy or use space weapons for anti-missile defence, anti-satellite activity, or use against targets on Earth or in the air;
– not to destroy, damage, or disrupt the normal functioning and not to change the flight paths of space objects owned by other states;
– not to assist or encourage other states, groups of states, international, intergovernmental, or any non-governmental organisations, including non-governmental legal entities that were established, registered or located on the territory under their jurisdiction and/or control, to participate in the above activities.
In addition, the accession of the United States and its allies to the international initiative/political commitment not to be the first to place weapons of any kind in outer space would be a really important confidence-building measure. We are once again calling on Washington to follow the example of more than 30 UN member states and join this initiative, as well as to support the UNGA draft resolution on that matter.
We are ready to substantively and professionally discuss the US initiative in this context of multilateral efforts to arrive at a comprehensive solution to PARIS issues. https://mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/1835061/
US, Japan, S Korea vow response if N Korea tests nuclear bomb
US says full military capabilities will be used, including nuclear, to protect its allies South Korea and Japan.
An “unparalleled” scale of response would be warranted if North Korea conducts a seventh test of a nuclear weapon, the United States, Japan and South Korea have warned.
The warning was issued on Wednesday amid concerns by the US and its regional allies that North Korea could be poised to resume nuclear bomb testing for the first time since 2017.
“We agreed that an unparalleled scale of response would be necessary if North Korea pushes ahead with a seventh nuclear test,” South Korean first vice foreign minister Cho Hyun-dong told a news conference in Tokyo.
Cho made his comments alongside Japan’s vice foreign minister Takeo Mori and US Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman.
North Korea has been carrying out weapons tests at an unprecedented pace this year, firing more than two dozen short and medium-range ballistic missiles in recent weeks, including a missile that over-flew Japan.
We urge (North Korea) to refrain from further provocations,” Sherman said, calling the North’s actions “reckless” and deeply destabilising for the region.
Sherman also said that the US will use its full military capabilities, “including nuclear, conventional and missile defence”, to protect its allies Japan and South Korea.
North Korea needs to understand that the US commitment to the security of South Korea and Japan is “iron clad”, she said.
“And we will use the full range of US defence capabilities to defend our allies, including nuclear, conventional and missile defence capabilities,” she said.
US State Department spokesman Ned Price said in a statement that Sherman also reiterated that the US was continuing to “seek serious and sustained dialogue with the DPRK” (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) – the official name for North Korea.
Cho, during his talks with Sherman, raised concern that a new North Korean nuclear weapons policy adopted in September increases the possibility of its arbitrary use of nuclear weapons.
“This is creating serious tension on the Korean peninsula,” Cho said.
In September, the USS Ronald Reagan and accompanying ships conducted joint military exercises with South Korean forces in response to a North Korean ballistic missile test in what was their first joint military training involving a US aircraft carrier since 2017.
Angered by South Korea’s military activities, Pyongyang last week fired hundreds of artillery shells off its coasts in what it called a grave warning to its neighbour to the south.
Sherman met earlier on Tuesday with Japan’s Mori and reaffirmed the further strengthening of the Japan-US alliance and other shared goals, including the complete denuclearisation of North Korea and their joint response to China’s increasingly assertive actions in the region.
Japanese defence minister Yasukazu Hamada recently said that North Korea is believed to have achieved a miniaturisation of nuclear warheads while significantly advancing its missile capabilities by diversifying its launch technologies, making interceptions more difficult.
Japan has joined South Korea in also warning of a possible nuclear test by North Korea in the near future.
Russia is funding its war on Ukraine by selling $billions of uranium to Europe’s nuclear industry- no sanctions on that!
The Russian nuclear industry has once again managed to avoid inclusion in the latest round of EU sanctions – the eighth in a row to skirt this vital issue in an apparent acknowledgment that Europe’s dependence on Russian nuclear fuel cannot easily be reversed.
Since the start of the war in February, the media has been so focused on Russian fossil fuels, particularly natural gas, that it has avoided any discussion of Europe’s nuclear dependence on Russia completely. However, the topic can no longer be safely ignored. The Kremlin has already earned several hundred billion dollars so far this year by selling fossil fuels to Europe, a financial cushion that has allowed Moscow to fund its horrific war in Ukraine.
While Europe is less reliant on Russia supplying its atomic energy sector than it is its fossil fuel sector, the dependence of the European atomic energy industry on Russian nuclear fuel is as surprising as it is alarming. Much work has gone into weaning Europe off Russian fossil fuels, with time being of the essence as Brussels seeks to curtail Moscow’s lucrative revenue streams as quickly and as comprehensively as possible. However, its nuclear industry has not yet been the focus of any such efforts.
Moscow Times 22nd Oct 2022
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/10/22/europe-should-sanction-russias-nuclear-industry-now-a79089
Cities should increase role in effort to abolish nuclear weapons
Mayors for Peace comprises 8,213 cities from 166 countries and regions, including the United States, Russia and other nuclear weapon states.
https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/14750556, October 24, 2022
Foreign representatives to the general conference of Mayors for Peace pose for a photograph in Hiroshima on Oct. 20. (The Asahi Shimbun)
While disarmament by nuclear weapon states progresses only at a snail’s pace, Russia has invaded Ukraine and has repeatedly threatened to use nuclear weapons.
The developments have brought home a reality where nuclear arms could be used again in the manner of what was done to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
In light of the situation, we are left to ask what role could be played by local governments, which are closer to citizens than central governments, in striving for the goal of abolishing nuclear weapons.
Mayors for Peace held its 10th General Conference in Hiroshima on Oct. 19-20.
The international nongovernmental organization was founded 40 years ago in the midst of the Cold War in response to a proposal made by Hiroshima’s mayor at a U.N. meeting.
The Hiroshima Appeal, adopted at the meeting last week, expressed alarm at the risk of nuclear war, which it said has been raised to “the highest level,” and emphasized that “the only absolute viable measure for humanity to take against repeated threats of nuclear weapons is their total elimination.”
The document called on nuclear weapon states to fulfill their disarmament obligations spelled out in the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) and to ratify the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), which took effect at the initiative of countries with no nuclear arsenals, in lockstep.
Mayors for Peace comprises 8,213 cities from 166 countries and regions, including the United States, Russia and other nuclear weapon states.
While nuclear weapon states and their allies continue to adhere to the nuclear deterrence theory, the organization has called on local governments to unite across national borders and return to the basic principle that nuclear arms should be abolished. It has played a significant role.
A number of cities, particularly in Europe, have moved to join Mayors for Peace since Russia invaded Ukraine.
In a resolution last year, the U.S. Conference of Mayors called on the U.S. government to welcome the TPNW and take immediate action toward nuclear abolition. Cities that are members of Mayors for Peace played a major part in that process.
Mayors for Peace should expand its activities by capitalizing on the current trend of the growing presence of local governments.
The essential thing is to work hand in hand with civil society in sending out messages.
Mayors for Peace has been supported by pleas from survivors of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki that the error should never be repeated.
During the meeting in Hiroshima, cases of efforts being made in Japan and abroad were presented. They include how a group of 26 cities in western Tokyo have been working together to archive people’s accounts of their war experiences and to provide peace education.
We hope more local governments will draw on their networks to share and expand their diverse attempts.
Japan, as the only nation that has suffered atomic bombings in war, has a major role to play.
Of all municipalities in the nation and Tokyo’s wards, more than 99 percent, or 1,737, are members of Mayors for Peace.
At a general meeting of Japanese member cities held on the sidelines of the 10th general conference, a written request was approved calling on the government to participate as an observer in the second meeting of the state parties to the TPNW, which is scheduled for next year, and sign and ratify the treaty.
Hiroshima is expected to host the first meeting of a new international group of eminent persons to discuss nuclear disarmament by year-end and a Group of Seven summit next spring.
Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, who will be presiding over both meetings, should take the appeal of Mayors for Peace seriously and discard his stance of continuing to turn his back on the TPNW as soon as possible.
Allegations fly about plans to use “dirty bomb” and nuclear weapons in Ukraine war
The warning from the United States comes as Russia alleges Ukraine is in the “final stage” of plans to deploy a “dirty bomb”, with Western nations accusing Moscow of using the claim as a pretext to escalate the war.
Russia warned nuclear weapons use would bring ‘severe consequences’ amid allegations of war escalation plot SBS News 25 Oct 22,
The United States has warned there would be severe consequences if Russia used a nuclear weapon in Ukraine, as Western countries accused Moscow of plotting to escalate the war on the pretext that Ukraine was planning to deploy a so-called “dirty bomb” laced with nuclear material.
With Ukrainian forces advancing into Russian-occupied Kherson province, top Russian officials phoned Western counterparts on Sunday and Monday to tell them of Moscow’s suspicions. Russia plans to raise the issue at the United Nations Security Council on Tuesday, diplomats said
The foreign ministers of France, Britain and the United States rejected the allegations and reaffirmed their support for Ukraine.
“Our countries made clear that we all reject Russia’s transparently false allegations that Ukraine is preparing to use a dirty bomb on its own territory,” they said in a joint statement. “The world would see through any attempt to use this allegation as a pretext for escalation.”
……………………………… Russian military Chief of General Staff Valery Gerasimov spoke to the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mark Milley, on Monday, Russia’s RIA news agency reported. The call was the first between the top generals since May, a US military official said, and came eight months to the day since Russia invaded Ukraine.
US officials said there was no indication Moscow had made the decision to use nuclear weapons.
“We continue to see nothing in the way of preparations by the Russian side for the use of nuclear weapons,” White House national security spokesman John Kirby told reporters. “And nothing with respect to the potential use for a dirty bomb at this point.”
Russia’s defence ministry said the aim of a “dirty bomb” attack by Ukraine would be to blame Russia for the resulting radioactive contamination. The ministry has begun preparing for such a scenario, it said, readying forces and resources “to perform tasks in conditions of radioactive contamination.”
In a statement on Monday, Russian Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov said: “According to the information we have, two organisations in Ukraine have specific instructions to create a so-called ‘dirty bomb’. This work is in its final stage.”
Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov insisted the threat was real and that Russia had a “keen interest in preventing such a terrible provocation.”
But Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy had said the Russian accusation was a sign Moscow was planning such an attack itself and would blame Ukraine.
“If Russia calls and says that Ukraine is allegedly preparing something, it means one thing: Russia has already prepared all this,” Mr Zelenskyy said in an overnight address.
The UN’s nuclear watchdog said on Monday it was preparing to send inspectors in the coming days to two Ukrainian sites at Kyiv’s request, in an apparent reaction to the Russian “dirty bomb” claims.
What is a dirty bomb?
At its most basic, a “dirty bomb” is a conventional bomb laced with radioactive, biological or chemical materials which get disseminated in an explosion.
Using radioactive materials would make it a type of radiological dispersal device, a term often used interchangeably with “dirty bomb”.
Nobody has ever exploded a “dirty bomb”, but there is suspicion that extremists may have tried to build one……………………. https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/russia-warned-nuclear-weapons-use-would-bring-severe-consequences-amid-allegations-of-war-escalation-plot/q19cw4ou2
Kremlin diplomat assures that Russia has no intention of using nuclear weapons in Ukraine
https://euroweeklynews.com/2022/10/25/kremlin-diplomat-assures-that-russia-has-no-intention-of-using-nuclear-weapons-in-ukraine/ By Chris King • 25 October 2022,
Russia has no intention of using nuclear weapons in Ukraine claimed Kremlin diplomat Vasily Nebenzya in a letter to the UN Secretary-General.
As reported by TASS on Monday, October 24, in a letter from Vasily Nebenzya from the Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to the UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, he stated that Russia never intended to, and never will, use nuclear weapons in Ukraine.
Konstantin Vorontsov, the Deputy Director of the Department for Non-Proliferation and Arms Control of the Russian Foreign Ministry, noted earlier that Russia has not threatened and is not threatening Ukraine with nuclear weapons.
This was reiterated by Dmitry Peskov, the press secretary of the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, who stressed that the Russian Federation does not participate in Western rhetoric about the use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine. These arguments are only on the conscience of American and European leaders he added.
Prior to this, Mikhail Podolyak, the adviser to the head of the office of the President of Ukraine stated that the likelihood of a nuclear conflict with the Russian Federation at the moment is minimal. He recalled that Russia signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. That is, it is forbidden to use nuclear weapons against a state that does not have them.
In turn, the head of European diplomacy, Josep Borrell, said that an attack against Ukraine with nuclear weapons would provoke a powerful military response from NATO, the European Union, and the United States, as reported by gazeta.ru.
Zelenskyy blasts Israel, suggests Russia-Iran nuclear collusion
Ukraine’s leader rails against Israel’s refusal to provide its Iron Dome missile defence system, saying the attack on his country has brought Moscow and Tehran closer together.
Aljazeera, 24 Oct 2022, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has criticised Israel’s neutrality in the Ukraine war, saying the decision by its leaders not to support Kyiv with weaponry has encouraged Russia’s military partnership with Iran.
Addressing a conference on Monday organised by Israel’s Haaretz newspaper, Zelenskyy repeated his request for Israel’s Iron Dome anti-missile technology to thwart Russian strikes………..
On Monday, Israeli Defence Minister Benny Gantz told his Ukrainian counterpart, Oleksiy Reznikov, that “Israel will not provide weapon systems to Ukraine.”
Since the Russian invasion in February, Israel has offered humanitarian assistance to Ukraine but has held back from providing military equipment for fear of harming relations with Russia……………………………………
Iran has denied providing Russia with weapons for the war.
“The Islamic Republic of Iran has by no means supplied any side with arms to be used in the war in Ukraine, and its policy is to oppose arming either side with the aim of ending the war,” said Hossein Amirabdollahian, Iran’s foreign minister. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/10/24/zelenskyy-blasts-israel-suggests-russia-iran-nuclear-collusion
The West Has Failed: North Korea Is a Nuclear State
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/the-west-has-failed-north-korea-is-a-nuclear-state/2022/10/23/e1511926-531e-11ed-ac8b-08bbfab1c5a5_story.html Analysis by Gearoid Reidy | Bloomberg, October 24, 2022,
The world might not want to hear it, but Kim Jong Un might be right.
“There will never be such a thing as our abandonment of the nuclear weapons or denuclearization,” Kim declared last month. “The position of our state as a nuclear nation has become irreversible.”
Decades of pursuing the “denuclearization” of the Korean peninsula has failed. After North Korea last month declared itself a nuclear weapons state, it’s time for the US and its allies to accept this reality — and learn to live with it. That’s the first step to reducing the risk of accidental confrontation that could lead to all-out nuclear war.
The idea is reaching the mainstream. Jeffrey Lewis, a leading nuclear weapons expert, has called on Washington to “contemplate the unthinkable” and accept North Korea’s nuclear statehood, citing the increasing risks of a flashpoint as South Korea and Japan talk up first-strike capability.
Washington should think “about the return we’re seeing on our stubborn continued insistence on denuclearization as the desired near-term end-state,” agrees Ankit Panda, a senior fellow in the nuclear policy program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “We have a far more acute interest on the Korean peninsula, which is averting the use of nuclear weapons by North Korea.”
A rethink is needed. For one thing, the US administration has already shown an admirable willingness to abandon the failed policies of previous administrations. From ending the war in Afghanistan, casting off decades of naive Democratic party China policy or de-escalating the War on Drugs with a reform of cannabis policy, President Joe Biden has discarded ideas he previously promoted.
And to describe the goal of denuclearization of the Korean peninsula as a bust would be generous. Beyond condemning millions to poverty after 30 years, the US has little to show for its punishing economic sanctions. Pyongyang has built itself a formidable arsenal: enough fissile material for dozens of nuclear bombs, and a demonstrated capacity for its missiles to hit US bases in Guam or the American mainland itself. More nuclear tests are feared soon, which would be the first in five years. Kim said last month he won’t budge even after 100 years of sanctions.
Absent a very dangerous policy of regime change, Kim is going to remain in charge, and in any event doesn’t have a way to climb down from nuclear weapons. The window for military action against North Korea closed during the Clinton administration, when the US considered a preemptive strike. It chose negotiation instead, which Pyongyang used as cover to speed development of its nuclear and missile programs.
North Korea’s new nuclear doctrine, unveiled in September, has further upped the ante, pledging automatic nuclear strikes on its enemies if its command-and-control leadership is threatened. Such a doctrine is a “logical reaction” to South Korea talking up its ability to deal a fatal blow to the North’s leadership, Panda says.
Indeed, far from the stereotype of the crazy North Korean leader, Kim is being perfectly logical in seeking to keep his regime in one piece. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has put that in stark relief. Ukraine famously agreed to give up the nuclear weapons on its territory (though they were not under its control) after the fall of the Soviet Union, in exchange for security guarantees from the US, UK and Russia. Time has shown how valuable those assurances were. Iraq’s Saddam Hussein and Libya’s Moammar Al Qaddafi are other examples of leaders who abandoned their nuclear pursuits, only to meet gruesome ends.
Kim could not be sure of any guarantee that Washington might give in return for denuclearization — especially when it’s US policy that has been most inconsistent. Flipping between dovish Democratic and hawkish Republican positions on Pyongyang (or in the case of Donald Trump’s administration, between “fire and fury” and love letters in the space of a few years) has resulted in head-snappingly inconsistent carrot-and-stick approaches.
Meanwhile, through a cycle of bait-and-switch negotiations and threats, Kim has managed to keep the US and South Korea distracted enough to complete his nuclear state. He’s on his fourth South Korean leader and third American president. He’s less than half Biden’s age; time is on his side, assuming he can avoid the heart problems that felled his father and grandfather.
Of course, there are significant risks. Pyongyang has proven not to be a trustworthy negotiating partner. Being seen to reward its obstinacy might embolden rogue regimes elsewhere. Even a tacit acceptance of North Korea’s position could also lead to another bout of proliferation. The South Korean public is already roundly in favor of also possessing nuclear weapons. Japan is understandably far more opposed but how might it react surrounded by four nuclear-armed states?
But doggedly pursuing a failed policy that has only become more unrealistic over the years isn’t getting the US and its allies anywhere — and the risk of accidental confrontation is only running higher
USA’s planned small nuclear reactors must have special uranium fuel – from Russia!
Putin holds the key to Biden’s nuclear dreams as Russian fuel needed for
new US plants. The West has been scrambling to wean itself off Russian
energy amid the war in Ukraine, but a Kremlin-controlled firm has a tight
grip on a crucial part of the nuclear industry.
The US is vying to roll out its new small nuclear power plants amid the global energy crisis as it weans
itself off fossil fuels, but Russia is the only country which has the fuel
needed to power the next-generation reactors. Now, the US is scrambling to
use some of its stockpile of weapons-grade uranium, (uranium is the fuel
widely used in nuclear plants) as an alternative as it hopes to kickstart
the nuclear revolution.
Express 20th Oct 2022
Biden’s diplomatic nuclear faux pas regarding Pakistan
US President brought up Pakistan’s nuclear programme with shockingly undiplomatic language
Express Tribune Ozer Khalid October 21, 2022
At a Congressional Campaign Committee reception in Los Angeles on October 14, US President Joe Biden brought up Pakistan’s nuclear programme with shockingly undiplomatic language. He mentioned Pakistan twice at the public form first vis-à-vis China, then stating that Pakistan is “one of the most dangerous nations in the world” which has “nuclear weapons without any cohesion”.
Tragically, these were not off-the-cuff remarks and ramblings, as an official White House transcript indicated President Biden meant what he said, leading to strong rebuttals from PM Shehbaz Sharif and FM Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari and a demarche by the Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Biden’s remarks lacked explanation, context and coherence. Ely Ratner, US Assistant Secretary of Defense, last month reminded that “US interests associated with defense partnership with Pakistan were primarily focused on counterterrorism and nuclear security”.
Given Washington’s mounting rivalry vis-à-vis Russia and China, it could be that Biden’s comment was a veiled threat at isolating Pakistan if it continued to pursue rapprochement with Moscow and Beijing. If so, it would be déjà vu of the ‘either you are with us or against us’ ultimatum issued by George W Bush post-9/11. Whatever his intentions, it was irresponsible of Biden to leverage regional-bloc politics to make unsubstantiated remarks about Pakistan’s secure nukes…………………..
Pakistan ill-deserves such unwarranted remarks given its impeccable nuclear stewardship with the Strategic Plans Division and diligent adherence to international IAEA best practices.
The Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI) report ranked Pakistan as the most “improved country” on Safety and Security of Nuclear Assets, ahead of India. Pakistan demonstrated exemplary restraint and sangfroid in response to India’s “accidental” firing of a BrahMos cruise missile that landed across the border in March, 2022. The BrahMos incident was a clear violation of global nuclear safeguards for which India faced no accountability.
In March 2022, an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) mission confirmed that Pakistan’s updated nuclear safety regulations by the Pakistan Nuclear Regulatory Authority strengthened its nuclear and radiation safety. This includes the modernisation of Pakistan’s National Radiation Emergency Coordination Centre (NRECC) which strengthens Pakistan’s ability to respond to a nuclear or radiological emergency.
At the request of the Government of Pakistan, the IAEA’s Integrated Regulatory Review Service confirmed the country’s strengthening arrangements for regulatory inspections, authorisations, emergency preparedness and response, occupational radiation protection and environmental radiation monitoring.
The IAEA confirmed safety of Pakistan’s five civilian operating nuclear power reactors and that the country successfully implemented all 13 recommendations adequately addressing 29 out of 31 suggestions.
For President Biden to single out a responsible nuclear steward like Pakistan, with resilient nuclear safeguards, commands and controls in place with no reported incidents, while remaining conspicuously silent on serious incidents from India raises consternation……………………………………………………………… more https://tribune.com.pk/story/2382629/bidens-diplomatic-nuclear-faux-pas
Russia says U.S. blocked its participation in nuclear conference
MOSCOW, Oct 21 (Reuters) – The Russian state nuclear corporation Rosatom said on Friday that the United States had effectively blocked Russia’s participation in a nuclear energy conference in Washington by failing to issue entry visas.
Relations between the United States and Russia have sunk to their lowest level since the depths of the Cold War after Moscow sent its armed forces troops into Ukraine in February.
Rosatom and Russia’s industrial safety watchdog, Rostekhnadzor, planned to attend the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) ministerial conference in Washington on Oct. 26-28 but have yet to receive visas, Rosatom said in a statement………………………………. more https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/russia-says-us-blocked-its-participation-nuclear-conference-2022-10-21/
A US billionaire proposes peace plan for Ukraine and Russia
https://www.rt.com/news/564960-bill-ackman-ukraine-peace/ 17 Oct 22,
Hedge fund manager Bill Ackman says Kiev should make concessions to Moscow.
Ukraine should recognize Crimea as part of Russia and renounce its bid to join NATO for the sake of peace, US billionaire hedge fund manager Bill Ackman has said. As with SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk before him, Ackman was immediately criticized online for suggesting that Kiev should be ready to make concessions in order to end the hostilities.
“Crimea was part of Russia until 1954 and is largely comprised of ethnic Russians, which was apparently why the world did little when Russia annexed it back in 2014,” Ackman, the CEO of Pershing Square Capital Management, tweeted on Monday.
He added that the borders should return to where they were prior to February 24, when Russia launched its military operation in the neighboring country and before four former Ukrainian regions voted to join Russia. He added that the West should then help Kiev with its recovery, while the country should stay outside NATO.
“Thousands of lives will be saved and resources can be invested to rebuild [Ukraine] rather than in a war that will only lead to more destruction and death,” the billionaire wrote. “If there is a viable path to peace, we should pursue it. Each day the conflict continues, the risk to the world rises.”
After receiving criticism online, Ackman clarified his stance on Tuesday. “Yesterday, I suggested that a reasonable peace settlement might be a return to the borders as of [February 24], a Marshall Plan to rebuild [Ukraine], and [Ukraine’s] decision to not join NATO. Then the knives came out. I was accused of being an appeaser and worse,” he wrote.
I ask: is [Ukraine] better off in a continued prolonged war that leads to 1,000s more [Ukrainian] deaths and the leveling of the country or does some kind of negotiated settlement make sense? … I am by no means an expert. It just saddens me to see death and destruction with no apparent end date or opportunity for resolution.
I”n a negotiated settlement, both parties must concede something or there is no opportunity for resolution. What is the least that both parties can concede that is acceptable for both? What am I missing in my analysis? What better ideas do you have?” Ackman argued.
Ackman’s comments came as more public figures in the West have been making suggestions for a possible peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. Venture capitalist and tech entrepreneur David Sacks tweeted on Sunday that the US should propose a ceasefire based on the February 23 lines and guarantee that Ukraine will not join NATO.
Musk offered his own vision of a peace settlement this month, which includes Ukraine recognizing Crimea as Russian territory. Kiev and Western officials quickly blasted Musk for what they considered to be a plan that heavily favors Moscow.
Elon Musk supports Russia keeping Crimea—because he’s worried about nuclear escalation and World War III
Fortune, BY TRISTAN BOVE, October 18, 2022
The world’s richest man wants the West to more seriously consider the risk of nuclear conflict and World War III breaking out over Ukraine, as Russia’s hold over Crimea—illegally annexed by Russia in 2014—is thrown into question.
“If Russia is faced with the choice of losing Crimea or using battlefield nukes, they will choose the latter,” Elon Musk wrote in a tweet on Monday.
He continued: “We’ve already sanctioned/cutoff Russia in every possible way, so what more do they have left to lose? If we nuke Russia back, they will nuke us and then we have WW3.”…………………………….
Musk and Ukraine
Earlier this month, Musk, CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, made waves when he suggested that the two sides reach a compromise before the use of nuclear weapons escalates the conflict into World War III.
He did so by sharing his view on what a peaceful resolution in Ukraine would look like, including Ukraine remaining neutral and permanently ceding control of Crimea to Russia.
In his proposal, Musk wrote that this outcome was “highly likely,” and the only question was “how many die before then.” He noted at the time that a nuclear escalation was a “possible, albeit unlikely” outcome……………
In his tweet on Monday predicting World War III, Musk emphasized the strategic and symbolic importance of Crimea to Russia, equating its potential loss to the “USA losing Hawaii and Pearl Harbor.”
Global war threats
If Putin was holding back on nuclear threats in the first few months of the war, he certainly isn’t now. At the end of September, Putin announced he would employ “all means available to us” to defend the four eastern Ukrainian regions Russia had recently annexed, a threat many took to be nuclear in nature. …………………………………………………. more https://fortune.com/2022/10/17/elon-musk-world-war-3-could-happen-russia-nuclear-response-crimea-putin/
1 This Month
of the week– Nuclear Reactor Information Task Force
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- May 2026 (126)
- 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)
- June 2025 (348)
-
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 