UK’s Ministry of Defence keeping seret most of the unsatisfactor report on safety of nuclear bomb sites
REVEALED: Nuclear bomb sites hit by fire safety problems and staff shortages, The National, By Rob Edwards 5 Dec 20, NUCLEAR bomb sites across the UK have fire safety problems as well as shortages of safety regulators and engineers, according to a new report from the Ministry of Defence (MoD).
But most of the MoD’s latest internal assessment of the safety of nuclear weapons has been kept secret for “national security” reasons – prompting fury from politicians and campaigners. They have attacked the nuclear secrecy as “deeply alarming” and “completely unacceptable”. The official attitude to nuclear safety was a “disgrace”, they said.
Previous nuclear safety assessments, revealed by The Ferret, have highlighted “regulatory risks” 86 times. Many involved the Trident warheads and nuclear submarines based on the Clyde.
The new MoD report also disclosed “significant weaknesses” on safety at non-nuclear sites. These included “serious deficiencies” on fire safety and “significant risk” from old fuel facilities – particularly on the Falkland Islands in the South Atlantic.
The MoD accepted that there were “infrastructure issues”, but insisted that they were being addressed. Defence nuclear programmes were “fully accountable” to UK ministers, it said.
The MoD has posted online the 2019-20 report from the Defence Safety Authority, which brings together seven regulators, a safety team and an accident investigation unit operating within the MoD. They are overseen by the authority’s director general, air marshal Sue Gray.
But the report said that the entire section from the Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator (DNSR), which is responsible for ensuring safety of the nuclear weapons programme, has been “marked SECRET” and given only “limited distribution”.
The MoD has previously released 10 annual DNSR reports following a challenge under freedom of information law in 2010. They flagged up risks of accidents, ageing submarine reactors, spending cuts and much else.
But in 2017 the MoD abruptly ceased publishing the reports, insisting that they had to be kept under wraps to protect national security. In 2019 that decision was challenged by campaigners at a UK information tribunal, whose verdict is still awaited.
he latest safety authority report, however, does contain a few details of nuclear risks buried in its 80 pages. It doesn’t specify which bases were affected, but they are likely to include the two major nuclear weapons sites, at Faslane on the Clyde and at Aldermaston in Berkshire.
In a discussion of problems with “fire safety assurance” across all MoD sites, the report said: “Particular issues have been noted at defence nuclear sites, where discussions continue between defence and statutory regulators.”
Between April 2019 and March 2020 as many as 374 fires were reported on all MoD sites. Although there had been some improvements “there is still more to do to reinforce the capability of defence to manage fire safety,” the report said.
A section on the “maturity” of the DNSR as a nuclear safety regulator disclosed that it was facing an 11 per cent shortage of staff in 2020-21. Shortfalls had been mitigated by the secondment of two senior staff from the UK Government’s nuclear power watchdog, the Office for Nuclear Regulation, and from the nuclear weapons company, AWE.
This had been supplemented by “making full use of partial retirees, graduate placements and development posts during 2019-20,” the report said. But these stopgap measures were failing………………
The Scottish National Party expressed concern about “a pattern of failure” on MoD safety. “Worryingly, the findings of this report reflect significant non-compliance with security and safety regulations at sensitive sites, including those where there are nuclear materials,” said the party’s defence spokesperson, Stewart McDonald MP.
“Not only is nuclear power and weaponry not safe, it is expensive, and not being handled properly under this Tory Government’s watch. The UK Government needs to transition away from nuclear entirely.”
MCDONALD described the nuclear safety failures as “alarming” and accused the MoD of “a lack of regard for public safety and transparency”. He pointed out that the UK Government’s civil nuclear watchdog, the Office for Nuclear Regulation, had criticised MoD secrecy.
The Scottish Green MSP for the west of Scotland, Ross Greer, called for nuclear weapons to be completely scrapped. “It is deeply alarming that the MoD continues to shroud so much secrecy over the safety issues with Britain’s weapons of mass destruction,” he said.
“We’ve known for years of significant issues at sites like Faslane and on the submarines themselves, so continued attempts to hold information back from the public are totally out of order.”
Lynn Jamieson, chair of the Scottish Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, said: “The MoD’s tolerance of unsafe regimes is a disgrace for an organisation supposedly overseeing our protection. This adds to the urgency of nuclear disarmament.”
According to the Ministry of Defence, the annual assurance report and recommendations were currently being reviewed. Information that “could compromise national security” would not be published, the MoD said.,,,,,,,,,,,, https://www.thenational.scot/news/18923905.revealed-nuclear-bomb-sites-hit-fire-safety-problems-staff-shortages/
Nuclear corruption – this time it’s Taiwan
 Three detained in probe into nuclear power plant case, https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2020/12/03/2003748020 By Jason Pan / Staff reporter
Police on Friday last week arrested Kuo, 52, who allegedly led the operation, and questioned more than 10 people in connection with the case, including Kuo’s two deputies, both surnamed Lee (李), who were released after posting bail on Tuesday, the office said. The investigation found that Kuo’s operation, based in New Taipei City’s Jinshan District (金山), rigged bids, as well as extorted, coerced and assaulted other contractors, to win about NT$150 million (US$5.21 million at the current exchange rate) in bids related to two nuclear power plants, prosecutors said. Kuo, his two deputies and two colluding contractors were listed as suspects in the case, and could be charged with assault, attempted murder, intimidation and extortion, as well as breaches of the Government Procurement Act (政府採購法). Prosecutors said evidence showed that Kuo from 2016 to last year won seven projects related to the decommissioning of the Jinshan Nuclear Power Plant in New Taipei City’s Shihmen District (石門) and one project in 2017 at the Guosheng Nuclear Power Plant in New Taipei City’s Wanli District (萬里). Taipower Power Co (Taipower), which was responsible for the bidding process, is reported to have planned NT$150 billion in expenditures over 25 years to decommission the Jinshan plant. While most of the work requires advanced engineering skills, NT$30 billion has been budgeted for maintenance, material procurement, warehouse construction and other parts of the project, attracting many businesses and contractors. The investigation found that while Kuo and his friends pooled money to register a construction company, he did not have a business license or permits for the projects, but illegally borrowed a license and other documents from colluding contractors. Kuo initially persuaded legitimate contractors to join his bids by offering them a percentage of the project money, but when they refused to cooperate, he instructed his deputies and subordinates to beat them up and scare them off. In March last year, a contractor surnamed Hsu (許), who had won the bid on a landscaping project that Kuo had wanted, was invited to a dinner meeting, at which Kuo’s deputies allegedly stabbed him, leaving him with serious injuries, prosecutors said. An investigation led to Kuo and his deputies being charged with assault and attempted murder, they said. “Taipower should also be held liable for the gangsters’ bid-rigging and other illegal profiteering in this and related cases worth billions of dollars, as company officials failed in their due diligence and permitted gangsters to intimidate and use violence to secure the bids on these projects,” one Shilin prosecutor said. |
|
Nuclear power is dead. Here’s why it’s pretending that it’s not
|
US Nuclear Site Cleanup Underfunded By Up To $70 Billion, Clean Technica, December 1st, 2020 by Michael Barnard …………………..Nuclear power is going to be the gift that keeps on returning fiscal dividends for a century.
That’s why Brookfield bought the bankrupt Toshiba Westinghouse division, for the long-term, guaranteed decommissioning revenue. SNC Lavalin bought Canada’s CANDU for the same reason, although I’m sure they are at the trough on the Canadian SMR idiocy too. This isn’t exactly a secret. Nuclear projects always go over budget and over schedule, and there is exactly zero reason to believe decommissioning estimates provided by the industry. So why have jurisdictions been building more nuclear plants, whether at the egregious but at least honest costs of Hinkley, or the massively underestimated but increasingly obvious costs of the Virgil C. Summer and Vogtle sites? Three reasons. The first is the magic of net present value. That calculates the value of future dollars today given inflation. Just as a thousand bucks bought a lot more in 1990 than it does today, in 2050 it will buy a lot less than it does today. That means that liabilities that will be incurred decades in the future approach zero cost in today’s cost benefit analysis. Can you say generational inequity? The second is ideology. When really blatantly obvious economic sense gets thrown out the window, you start looking around for irrationality or graft. A lot of conservatives really hate onshore wind because it spoils the views from their manses (UK) or ranches (US) or country estates (Oz). They also think of wind and solar as inadequate hippy shit. They think nuclear is the answer. These are opinions that they formed in the 1970s or perhaps the 1980s, but conservatives have a stronger tendency to not let empirical reality change their mind. So Hinkley, Vogtle, and Summer are a triumph of ideology over reality. The third is graft. When we start talking about $10 billion or more to build a plant, billions in subsidies, and another billion to take the thing apart, a lot of people start rubbing their hands together and figuring out who they have to bribe now to get a big payoff later. The entire regulatory structure in the two states that had nuclear plants in construction until recently when one was finally put out of the state’s fiscal misery were both structured so that no matter how much the utility spent, it was guaranteed a set profit. If they built a $15 billion nuclear plant, they made a lot of profit off of the rate payers. If they built $2 billion worth of wind and solar instead, they made a lot less money off of the rate payers. It’s dumb as a box of hammers, but it’s part of the reason a lot of utilities love nuclear, and coal-generation carbon capture schemes to boot. They are licenses to print money. Outside of China, where they have trained resources who can build nuclear plants who would be mediocre at building wind and solar (which they are building a lot more of) and nuclear plants will displace coal plants, it doesn’t make a lot of sense to build new nuclear. The looming decommissioning debacle is just the icing on the cake. Wind and solar have proven themselves to be vastly cheaper, completely reliable on grids, and easy to integrate in very large amounts. Their decommissioning costs are trivial. That’s yet another reason why nuclear is dead, but pretending it’s not. https://cleantechnica.com/2020/12/01/us-nuclear-site-cleanup-underfunded-by-up-to-70-billion/ |
“……….
|
Assassination of top scientist may push Iran closer to nuclear bomb
|
Assassination of top scientist may push Iran closer to nuclear bomb, The Strategist
1 Dec 2020| Connor Dilleen Media speculation has gone into overdrive since the assassination of Iran’s top nuclear scientist on Friday. Mohsen Fakhrizadeh was an important albeit little-known figure in the Iranian government and was the head of research and innovation in Iran’s defence ministry.
Fakhrizadeh was also an integral figure in Iran’s pre-2004 nuclear weapons work, and his role in Iran’s Amad program in the early 2000s had long made him a person of interest to those seeking to unravel Iran’s historical weapons program. Fakhrizadeh’s role in Iran’s defence establishment also raised questions about the nature of his ongoing research, including whether there were any elements that related to nuclear weapons……… Israel has, unsurprisingly, emerged as the most likely culprit behind Fakhrizadeh’s killing. As noted by Trita Parsi in Responsible Statecraft, Tel Aviv had the expertise, capacity and motive to conduct the attack, and it has carried out similar assassinations before. Israel has been identified as being likely behind the murder of four other Iranian scientists between 2010 and 2012, and the attempted murder of several others. It’s also likely that the US was complicit in the attack, at a minimum providing Tel Aviv with a green light to conduct the attack. ……… The assassination of Fakhrizadeh was clearly symbolic. It was the first known assassination of a figure associated with Iran’s nuclear program in over eight years. It also occurred at a time when political transition in the US has raised hopes of a renewal of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) on Iran’s nuclear program, given President-elect Joe Biden has committed to resurrecting the deal. It is also likely to be more than coincidental that US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo reportedly met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in Saudi Arabia on 22 November, possibly to advance elements of an anti-Iranian coalition in the dying stages of the Trump presidency. In the absence of any publicly available evidence indicating that Iran has undertaken any substantive research related to nuclear weaponisation since 2003, it appears Fakhrizadeh was targeted because of his historical role, not because of any contemporary work that he was undertaking…… it appears likely that the perpetrators of Fakhrizadeh’s assassination intended to do more than just spoil any chance for a renewal of cooperation with Iran on its nuclear program and the reinstatement of US participation in the JCPOA. It’s likely that they are also seeking to provoke a response from Tehran that would legitimise further punitive action against Iran by Israel or the US. The implications of this could prove catastrophic……. Fortunately, despite the killing of Fakhrizadeh being arguably a de facto declaration of war, Tehran appears set to continue the policy of strategic patience that it adhered to after the assassination of Soleimani. It also followed this approach after the apparent attack on the Natanz nuclear facility and possibly other industrial sites in the middle of the year. ……. The assassination of Fakhrizadeh may not only fail to achieve its core objectives, but may also prove disastrously counterproductive by providing the catalyst to convince policymakers in Tehran that they need the strategic deterrent capability that only a nuclear weapon can provide. https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/assassination-of-top-scientist-may-push-iran-closer-to-nuclear-bomb/ |
|
The Australian government”s intimidation of whistleblowers – the torture of Julian Assange
Torture of Julian Assange by Australian governments sends powerful message to whistleblowers, Michael West Media by Lissa Johnson | Nov 26, 2020
Australia has used a range of torture techniques against Julian Assange, writes Dr Lissa Johnson. Governments have isolated and demonised him; flatly rejected evidence of ill-treatment; refused to respond to specific allegations; and divested themselves of any responsibility. Leaders can’t, or won’t, accept the difference between psychological torture and ‘a legal matter’.
Julian Assange has set a number of firsts for Australia, including:
- The first Walkley award winner whose journalism has attracted a possible 175 years in US prison.
- The first journalist to be prosecuted as a spy by the US government, under its 1917 Espionage Act.
- The first citizen of an ostensibly democratic state (Australia) whom a UN official has found to be the target of a campaign of collective persecution and mobbing by other so-called democratic states.
As the UN Rapporteur on Torture, Nils Melzer, observed:
In 20 years of work with victims of war, violence and political persecution I have never seen a group of democratic states ganging up to deliberately isolate, demonise and abuse a single individual for such a long time and with so little regard for human dignity and the rule of law.
As part of this mobbing and collective persecution, Assange is the first Australian journalist to be tortured for journalism in the UK.
On 9 May 2019, Professor Melzer visited Assange in Belmarsh prison, accompanied by two medical experts specialising in the assessment and documentation of torture. On 31 May, Melzer reported that they had found Assange to be suffering all symptoms typical of prolonged exposure to psychological torture.
On 1 November 2019, Melzer warned that, unless the UK government urgently changed course, it may soon end up costing his life.
What torture?
Julian Assange is being held in ‘Britain’s Guantanamo’, Belmarsh prison, a high-security facility designed for those charged with terrorism, murder and other violent offences. He has been held in solitary confinement for 22 to 23 hours a day.
He knows that US-aligned security contractors have written in emails that he will make a nice bride in prison, and needs his head dunked in a full toilet bowl at Gitmo. He knows he is headed for life in US supermax prisons, where prisoners are held in perpetual solitary and chains.
‘If this man gets extradited to the United States, he will be tortured until the day he dies’, Profesor Melzer has cautioned.
To heighten the torment, Assange has been prevented from preparing his defence against extradition in violation of his human rights as a defendant.
He has been granted negligible access to his lawyers and is prevented from researching his own defence. The only purpose is to render him helpless, intensifying his trauma.
A Message from the Australian Government
Assange’s experience sets an example to anyone thinking of airing the dirty secrets of those in power: the genuinely dirty secrets, such as wantonly slaughtering and torturing innocent people and covering it up.
Like all public torture, it sends a message to onlookers: this could happen to you.
And the message from the Australian government to any Australian journalists looking on? You’re on your own.
The US government is seeking to retrospectively apply its own Espionage Act to non-US citizens in foreign lands, while simultaneously withholding the free speech protections of its Constitution. The upshot would be that non-US citizens, and non-US journalists, would be vulnerable to prosecution wherever they may be, whenever the United States saw fit.
Should a host country oblige, that journalist’s only hope would be the protection of their own government. And the message from the Australian government? Not a chance.
A climate of consent
But can the government do anything to stop the torture of Assange in the UK? Or are its hands tied?
Australia ratified the Convention Against Torture in 1989. It therefore has a positive duty to take ‘effective legislative, administrative, judicial and other measures to prevent acts of torture’ of its citizens. According to the Federal Attorney-General’s website, however, that duty applies to ‘territories within Australia’s jurisdiction’.
So who is responsible for protecting Australian citizens from torture overseas?
Australian officials can raise concerns with their overseas counterparts when they are concerned about gross violations of citizens’ rights as happened in the cases of Melinda Taylor, James Ricketson, David Hicks and Peter Greste.
They could also make a submission to the Committee against Torture that a state is ‘not fulfilling its obligations under this Convention’.
n Assange’s case, however, the government has opted for ‘consent and acquiescence’ under Article 1 of the convention. Consent and acquiescence is listed alongside inflicting and instigating torture as part of the very definition of torture.
‘Standard’ fare
DFAT representatives say repeatedly that Assange’s treatment In the UK is perfectly normal. ‘Standard’. ‘No different’ from the treatment of other UK prisoners. Routine, in other words. Nothing to see here.
When reminded that Assange had been handcuffed 11 times, stripped naked twice and moved between five holding cells after the first day of his extradition hearing, a DFAT representative described this as ‘standard prison to court and court to prison procedure’.
What the official failed to explain is that treatment is only ‘standard’ and normal for prisoners charged with terrorism or other violent offences.
It is not remotely normal for journalists with no criminal history, and no history or risk of violence, to be detained under the most punitive conditions that UK law enforcement has to offer.
As an exercise in “consent and acquiescence” DFAT representatives performed their duties well.
Sanitising, normalising language minimises and trivialises abuse………….
‘Not our responsibility’ has been the Australian government’s refrain. Australian government officials ‘don’t provide running commentaries on legal matters before the courts in other parts of the world’, asserted the Foreign Minister.
Australia is ‘not a party to the legal proceedings in the United Kingdom’, stressed a DFAT official when asked why Australia had not intervened in Assange’s case during Senate Estimates. ‘We have no standing in the legal matter that is currently before the courts.’
Perhaps the Australian government doesn’t understand the seriousness of the abuses taking place in the UK. Perhaps ministers and their advisors are unaware of the difference between psychological torture and a ‘legal matter’. Psychological torture is, after all, not commonly well understood.
It is possible that the Australian government merely fails to grasp the gravity of ignoring Professor Melzer’s warnings. However, when the group Doctors for Assange wrote to the Australian government in December 2019, they detailed the medical and psychological basis of their concerns for Assange’s life and health…………..
New normal in Australia?
Assange is not the first person in Australia to be subjected to torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Australia’s abuse of asylum seekers and refugees has been found to violate the Convention Against Torture. Aboriginal Australians, among the most incarcerated groups on earth, have been dying in custody, buried under acquiescent consent, for decades, and historically for hundreds of years.
The Human Rights Measurement Index 2019 has given Australia a 5.5 out of 10 rating for ‘freedom from torture’, noting, ‘Torture is a serious problem in Australia … a large range of people [are] at particular risk of torture or ill-treatment, with Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders at the top of the list’…….
Through sending a message to journalists worldwide by torturing Assange, the abusive licence deployed against other persecuted groups is being expanded to take in journalism. The targeting of journalists around the world matters because journalists cut across the acquiescence and consent, remove the deadbolt on the torture chamber door, turn down the music, and expose what is going on inside. Every persecuted and abused group or person needs them, to break the cycle of violence by breaking the silence.
We do torture here. It is our problem. In Julian Assange’s case, the biggest problem appears to be that torturing journalists is becoming the new normal in Australia.
This edited extract is reproduced from A Secret Australia: Revealed by the WikiLeaks Exposés, edited by Felicity Ruby and Peter Cronau, Monash University Publishing, December 2020. https://www.michaelwest.com.au/torture-of-julian-assange-by-australian-governments-sends-powerful-message-to-whistleblowers/
Japanese local governments depend on “nuclear money”
|
Japanese town’s approval of nuclear reactor restart reflects subsidy dependence , https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20201129/p2a/00m/0na/001000c 29 Nov 20, TOKYO — Japanese local governments’ dependence on “nuclear plant money” distributed by the national government was starkly highlighted recently when one town granted their approval for a reactor restart at one power plant badly damaged in the March 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and tsunami.
TOKYO — Japanese local governments’ dependence on “nuclear plant money” distributed by the national government was starkly highlighted recently when one town granted their approval for a reactor restart at one power plant badly damaged in the March 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and tsunami.
However, the Japanese government has taken measures such as changing both the subsidies’ name and their governing mechanisms after the 2011 disaster, so that local governments can still get the money even when the power plant in their jurisdiction has been off-line for long periods. At least some 115 billion yen (around $1.11 billion) has been distributed as subsides and aid from the national government to local hosts of nuclear power plants this fiscal year alone. According to the town of Onagawa, it received about 530 million yen (approximately $5.1 million) in subsidies based on the Three Power Source Development Laws in fiscal 2010, the year before the Great East Japan Earthquake. That has increased following the disaster, with subsidies reaching over 1.4 billion yen (roughly $13.5 million) in fiscal 2017 and 2018. This included payments totaling 1.08 billion yen (roughly $10.4 million) connected to two reactors at the plant in service for more than 30 years.
Onagawa’s total fiscal 2019 spending stood at 34 billion yen (roughly $327.4 million). If the fixed property taxes paid for the nuclear power plant (about 2.7 billion yen, or roughly $26 million) are added to the subsidies stemming from the Three Power Source Development Laws, money derived from the nuclear plant accounts for over 10% of the town’s annual revenue. “We are being greatly helped in terms of finance,” a municipal government official commented. Of the monies based on the Three Power Source Development Laws, Onagawa reaped about 350 million yen (about $3.37 million) more than previously in one subsidy for enhancing the area around the plants — a category designed to gain cooperation from communities hosting the plants. In fiscal 2019, the subsidies were put toward the salaries of seven local social welfare council employees (about 28 million yen, or roughly $270,000), updating a hospital’s electronic medical record system (about 77 million yen, or some $742,000), and renovating a gymnasium, tennis court and baseball field (about 240 million yen, or roughly $2.31 million), among other purposes. Such subsidies can be used for various purposes under the name of enhancing public services. According to municipal project guidelines, although there were many cases where local tax revenue accounted for around 10-20% of expenses, renovation costs for the athletic facilities were covered entirely by the subsidies. Onagawa’s situation is hardly unique. Local governments hosting nuclear power plants generally rely heavily on the large subsidies. National government policies contribute greatly to the increasing subsidies handed out even as nuclear power stations remain shuttered. The Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry reviewed regulations following the nuclear disaster such that the plants would be deemed as “in operation” to a certain extent even while their reactors were off-line. Takeo Kikkawa, professor at International University of Japan, suggested that the national government “may have been distributing generous subsidies even when the plants were suspended to make it easier for local governments to approve reactor restarts.” According to the Onagawa government, reforms that allowed local bodies to receive more funding based on the years a power station has been in service was also one of the factors behind the town’s increased subsidy take. Central government figures have raised concerns over this particular change to the subsidy system, including that the economy minsitry is doing it “for its own convenience.” Furthermore, public relations and research-related subsidies received by Onagawa to cover nuclear power plant tours, information circulars and other costs, among other purposes, recovered to the same level as before the 2011 disaster (around 10 million yen annually, or roughly $96,300) since fiscal 2015. A senior official at a major electric power company commented, “Thorough PR activities are indispensable for getting reactors restarted.” It was revealed in the town’s project assessment report that a large majority of the contracts to enhance public services and conduct PR-related activities were negotiated without any competition. Once the No. 2 unit at the Onagawa nuclear station is back on-line, the town is also set to receive subsidies from the nuclear fuel tax, collected from the power company based on the nuclear plant’s performance. The community also reaps further benefits when employees of power companies, including subcontractors, frequent local eateries and other businesses during regular inspections. Hideaki Tanaka, a tax law professor at Meiji University, commented, “This nuclear plant money is an extreme example of the government’s subsidy and aid regime.” And so the town of Onagawa’s approval of the restart at their local nuclear plant could be considered inevitable, so dependent on nuclear money have host municipalities become. (Japanese original by Yuki Takahashi, Business News Department)
|
|
It is likely that Trump gove the nod for assassination of Iran nuclear scientist
Observer 29th Nov 2020, As the president lashes out wilfully during his last days in office, it seems likely that he at least gave the nod to this killing. Iran’s leaders, mindful of previous, unexplained killings of its nuclear experts, have been quick to blame Israel for Fakhrizadeh’s death. But American and regional analysts suggest that if Israel was involved, it would only have acted after getting the nod from Trump.
This explanation makes sense for several reasons. Like last January’s assassination of the Revolutionary Guard general Qassem Suleimani, Friday’s outrage is an extraordinarily provocative act. It risks goading Iran into armed retaliation against its most prominent enemies – Israel, Saudi Arabia and US forces based in the region. The assassination, in this sense, is tantamount to a declaration of war.
What’s behind the assaisnation of Iran’s top nuclear scientist?
The operation behind the assassination of the Iranian nuclear program founder, The Hybrid War Institute,
Eyal Pinko, 29 Nov 20,
On Friday morning, November 27, Muhsin Fakhrizadeh, considered the founder of Iran’s nuclear program, was assassinated…….. It is not the first-time assassination attempts were made to kill Fakhrizadeh, who survived a similar assassination attempt five years ago. Sixty years old Fakhrizadeh, who holds a doctorate in physics by his profession, was a key figure in the Iranian nuclear program and is considered one of its ancestors. Besides, Fakhrizadeh has been involved in other Iranian strategic plans, such as developing Iran’s air defense system and developing the missile upgrade program, known as Iran and Hezbollah’s missile precision project………
Once a clear and high-quality intelligence picture has been produced, which will allow an understanding of the target’s life routine and planned events, a relevant operational plan to thwart him will create, including the timing of the attack, ways, and means of access and withdrawal from the attack. …….. The recent assassination of Fakhrizadeh comes just a few weeks before the regime change in the United States, and the understanding that President-elect Joe Biden is expected to ease the nuclear sanctions imposed by Trump on the Iranian regime as part of his “maximum pressure” progra ……….
Senior Iranians, who were quick to accuse Israel of assassination, promised that Iran would not remain silent, and a painful Iranian response was expected. Fakhrizadeh’s senior status and key role in Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile development raises the likelihood of an Iranian response. As Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s military adviser, Hossein Dehghani, said, “In the last days of a provocative ally, Israel is striving to increase pressure on Iran to go to war. We will pursue the shahid’s killers and make them regret their actions.” Dehghani is one of the prominent candidates for Iran’s presidency in the elections that are expected to take place in the country next year.
Simultaneously, the change of the administration in the United States and the Iranian hope for the expected changes with the entry of Biden into office is a brake and a deterrent to the Iranian response. An Iranian response at this time may be against Israeli elements only and at low intensity. As a recall, Iran has previously stated that it will respond sharply to the United States for the assassination of Qasem Soleimani and has not yet implemented its threat in practice. It will now be a shaky deadline for it to react, at least until the Biden administration stabilizes.
For Israel, if it is the one behind the assassination operation, it is likely that the assassination operation will not significantly delay or halt Iran’s ballistic missile and nuclear developments. But it could create a deterrent to Israel taking all measures to prevent Iran from reaching nuclear capability, even when it is expected that the US political support for these efforts will decrease significantly during Biden’s administration.. https://www.hwi.institute/post/the-operation-behind-the-assassination-of-the-iranian-nuclear-program-founder
Architect of its nuclear programme assassinated – Iran vows retaliation
Mohsen Fakhrizadeh was ambushed with explosives and machine gun fire in the town of Absard, 70km (44 miles) east of Tehran. Efforts to resuscitate him in hospital failed. His bodyguard and family members were also wounded.
There was no immediate claim of responsibility, but the Iranian foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, said Israel was probably to blame, and an adviser to Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, vowed retaliation. “We will strike as thunder at the killers of this oppressed martyr and will make them regret their action,” tweeted Hossein Dehghan.
The killing was seen inside Iran as being as grave as the assassination by US forces of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander Qassem Soleimani in January.
Israel will face accusations that it is using the final weeks of the Trump administration to try to provoke Iran in the hope of closing off any chance of reconciliation between Tehran and the incoming US administration led by Joe Biden.
Amos Yadlin, a former head of Israeli Defence Force intelligence, said: “With the window of time left for Trump, such a move could lead Iran to a violent response, which would provide a pretext for a US-led attack on Iranian nuclear facilities.”…….. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/nov/27/mohsen-fakhrizadeh-iranian-nuclear-scientist-reportedly-shot-dead-near-tehran
Corruption investigation into AREVA’s sale of Nigerian uranium
Former CEO of failed V.C. Summer nuclear project pleads guilty to fraud charges
Former SCANA CEO pleads guilty to fraud charges for failed nuclear power project, https://abcnews4.com/news/local/former-scana-ceo-pleads-guilty-to-fraud-charges-for-failed-nuclear-power-project by Tony Fortier-Bensen, Wednesday, November 25th 2020 COLUMBIA, SC (WCIV)
The former chief executive officer of SCANA pleaded guilty on Tuesday to fraud charges for the failed V.C. Summer project in Fairfield County.
Kevin Marsh pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy and one count of obtaining false property by false pretenses, according to a plea agreement.
The agreement also said that Marsh would serve 18 to 36 months and has agreed to pay $5 million in restitution.
In June, retired SCANA chief operating officer Steve Byrne entered a guilty plea for his actions in relation to the failed nuclear power plant.
The U.S Attorney’s office alleges Byrne and Marsh conspired with other SCANA executives to deceive state and federal government overseers, stock holders and power customers in order to keep funding coming in to build two nuclear reactors at the V.C. Summer Nuclear Station.
The expansion project cost Santee-Cooper and the defunct South Carolina Electric & Gas over $9 billion before the two entities abandoned the project in July 2017.
In addition, Marsh agreed to waive indictment and arraignment and work with authorities to provide further information on the failed project.
Under the plea agreement, Marsh could be sentenced to serve 18 to 36 months in prison. Marsh has also agreed to pay $5 million in restitution.
Cybersecurity breach at Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant (KKNPP) undetected for over 6 months
Breach at Kudankulam nuclear plant may have gone undetected for over six months: By Nirmal John, , ET Nov 25, 2020
The cybersecurity breach at the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant (KKNPP) may have remained undetected for more than six months, reveals a report from Singapore-based cybersecurity firm Group-IB.
Experts from Group-IB, who discovered and analysed an archive containing dtrack, a remote-administration tool attributed to North Korean group Lazarus, says that analysis “revealed that the logs contained data from a compromised machine running Windows that belonged to an employee of the Nuclear P ..
Orano, formerly Areva, targeted by judicial investigation for corruption.
Orano, formerly Areva, targeted by judicial investigation for corruption. 25 Nov 20, A new case shakes the French nuclear group Orano, formerly known as Areva. An
investigation was opened by the Paris prosecutor’s office for facts “of
corruption of a foreign public official”, implicating in particular one of
the providers of Orano, the company Eurotradia International. “We had not
noticed anything abnormal and we are now at the disposal of justice,” said
the spokesperson for Orano, who claims to have terminated his contracts
with Eurotradia.
Julian Assange ‘targeted as a political opponent of Trump administration and threatened with the death penalty’
Julian Assange ‘targeted as a political opponent of Trump administration and threatened with the death penalty’ Evening Standard. By Tristan Kirk. @kirkkorner
Professor Paul Rogers, a lecturer in peace studies at Bradford University and specialist on the ‘War on Terror’, said Assange’s opinions put him “in the crosshairs” of Trump’s top team.
Giving evidence to Assange’s extradition hearing this morning, he said he believes the prosecution case is part of a drive in the United States to target “dissenters”.
“In my opinion Mr Assange’s expressed views, opinions and activities demonstrate very clearly ‘political opinions’”, he told the court.
Professor Rogers, in his witness statement, said Assange’s work involved exposing secrets that the US government wanted to keep hidden, he had been in conflict with the Obama administration, but there was “no question” that Assange had been targeted as a political opponent by Trump’s officials.
“The opinions and views of Mr Assange, demonstrated in his words and actions with the organisation WikiLeaks over many years, can be seen as very clearly placing him in the crosshairs of dispute with the philosophy of the Trump administration”, he said.
Assange’s legal team argue that a decision was taken under President Obama not to prosecute the Wikileaks activist, but that move was overturned under Trump. https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/julian-assange-donald-trump-administration-old-bailey-hearing-a4543656.html?fbclid=IwAR3Rj4n0Lzlt5GmE1lXZXoMVDsOS5BdT9sEKgj82SCmMnpNLFQ6ZfEzVUOI
UK’s ‘small nuclear reactors’ – the real agenda is the funding of nuclear weapons
A secret military agenda. UK defence policy is driving energy policy – with the public kept in the dark, Beyond Nuclear
By David Thorpe, 8 Nov 20,The UK government has for 15 years persistently backed the need for new nuclear power. Given its many problems, most informed observers can’t understand why. The answer lies in its commitment to being a nuclear military force. Here’s how, and why, anyone opposing nuclear power also needs to oppose its military use.
“All of Britain’s household energy needs supplied by offshore wind by 2030,” proclaimed Prime Minister Boris Johnson at a recent online Conservative Party conference. This means 40 per cent of total UK electricity. Johnson did not say how, but it is likely, if it happens, to be by capacity auctions, as it has been in the recent past.
But this may have been a deliberate distraction: there were two further announcements on energy – both about nuclear power.
16 so-called “small nuclear reactors”
Downing Street told the Financial Times, which it faithfully reported, that it was “considering” £2 billion of taxpayers’ money to support “small nuclear reactors” – up to 16 of them “to help UK meet carbon emissions targets”.
It claimed the first SMR is expected to cost £2.2 billion and be online by 2029.
The government could also commission the first mini power station, giving confidence to suppliers and investors. Any final decision will be subject to the Treasury’s multiyear spending review, due later this year.
The consortium that would build it includes Rolls Royce and the National Nuclear Laboratory.
Support for this SMR technology is expected to form part of Boris Johnson’s “10-point plan for a green industrial revolution” and new Energy White Paper, which are scheduled for release later in the autumn.
Johnson will probably also frame it as his response to the English citizens assembly recommendations– a version of the one demanded by Extinction Rebellion in 2019 – which reported its conclusions last month.
While the new energy plan will also include carbon capture and storage, and using hydrogen as vehicle fuel, it’s the small modular reactors that are eye-popping.
They would be manufactured on production lines in central plants and transported to sites for assembly. Each would operate for up to 60 years, “providing 440MW of electricity per year — enough to power a city the size of Leeds”, Downing Street said, and the Financial Times copied.
The SMR design is alleged to be ready by April next year. The business and energy department has already pledged £18 million (US $23.48 million) towards the consortium’s early-stage plans.
They are not small
The first thing to know about these beasts is that they are not small. 440MW? The plant at Wylfa (Anglesey, north Wales) was 460MW (it’s closed now). 440MW is bigger than all the Magnox type reactors except Wylfa and comparable to an Advanced Gas-cooled Reactor.
Where will they be built? In the town of Derby – the home of Rolls Royce – where, as nuclear consultant Dr. David Lowry points out, the government is already using the budget of the Housing and Communities Department to finance the construction of a new advanced manufacturing centre site.
When asked why this site was not being financed by the business and energy department (BEIS), as you’d expect, a spokesperson responded that it was part of “levelling up regeneration money”.
Or perhaps BEIS did not want its budget used in such a way. Throwing money at such a “risky prospect” betrays “an irrationally cavalier attitude” according to Andrew Stirling, Professor of Science & Technology Policy at the University of Sussex Business School, because an “implausibly short time” is being allowed to produce an untested reactor design.
Only if military needs are driving this decision is it explicable, Stirling says. “Even in a worst case scenario, where this massive Rolls Royce production line and supply chain investment is badly delayed (or even a complete failure) with respect to civil reactor production, what will nonetheless have been gained is a tooled-up facility and a national skills infrastructure for producing perhaps two further generations of submarine propulsion reactors, right into the second half of the century.
“And the costs of this will have been borne not by the defence budget, but by consumers and citizens.”
Yes, military needs
UK defence policy is fully committed to military nuclear. The roots of civil nuclear power lay in the Cold War push to develop nuclear weapons. Thus has it ever been since the British public was told nuclear electricity would be “too cheap to meter”.
The legacy of empire and thrust for continued perceived world status are at the core of a post-Brexit mentality. It’s inconceivable to the English political elite that this status could exist without Great Britain being in the nuclear nations club, brandishing the totem of a nuclear deterrent.
“The civil-military link is undisputable and should be openly discussed,” agrees Dr Paul Dorfman at the Energy Institute, University College London.
Andrew Stirling talks of the “tragic relative popularity of (increasingly obsolescent) nuclear weapons”. The coincidental fact that civil nuclear installations are also crumbling provides a serendipitous opportunity for some.
The stores of plutonium in the UK are already overflowing and the military has its own dedicated uranium enrichment logistics.
Any nation’s defence budget in this day and age cannot afford a new generation of nuclear weapons. So it needs to pass the costs onto the energy sector.
“Clearly, the military need to maintain both reactor construction and operation skills and access to fissile materials will remain. I can well see the temptation for Defence Ministers to try to transfer this cost to civilian budgets,” observes Tom Burke, Chairman of think tank E3G.
The threat of nuclear proliferation
The threat of nuclear proliferation is therefore linked to the spread of civil nuclear power worldwide, says Dr David Toke, Reader in Energy Politics, Department of Politics and International Relations at the University of Aberdeen. David Lowry agrees: “India, Pakistan and above all Israel are obvious examples, each of which certainly has built nuclear weapons.”
It’s impossible to separate the tasks of challenging civil nuclear power without also challenging military nuclear interests, Stirling strongly believes. “The massive expense of increasingly ineffective military nuclear systems extend beyond the declared huge budgets. They are also propped up by large hidden subsidies from consumer and taxpayer payments for costly nuclear power.
“Huge hidden military interests will likely continue to keep the civil nuclear monster growing new arms. Until critics reach out and engage the entire thing, we’ll never prevail in either struggle.”
How new plants would be paid for still remains a question. Nuclear power is prohibitively expensive………..https://wordpress.com/read/feeds/72759838/posts/3011373103
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 