CIA, with Trump’s blessing, is using Ukrainians to sabotage Russia’s energy infrastructure and oil tankers – NYT
Iona Cleave, The telegraph, Fri, 02 Jan 2026, https://www.sott.net/article/503791-CIA-with-Trumps-blessing-is-using-Ukrainians-to-sabotage-Russias-energy-infrastructure-and-oil-tankers-NYT
Attacks on oil refineries have cost Moscow $75m a day, according to US intelligence
The CIA secretly taught Ukraine how to target crucial components of Russia’s oil refining infrastructure and its sanction-busting shadow fleet, according to officials.
Despite Washington pulling back its support for Kyiv’s war effort under the Trump administration, it has emerged that US intelligence and military officers continued to find new ways to stifle Vladimir Putin’s war machine.
Since June, the CIA, with Donald Trump’s blessing, has been covertly providing specific intelligence to bolster Ukraine’s aerial offensive against oil refineries inside Russia, according to the officials.
The move came amid Mr Trump’s growing frustration with Putin’s unwillingness to negotiate while Russian forces accelerated attacks on Ukrainian cities.
The US has long shared intelligence with Kyiv that helps with attacks on Russian military targets in occupied parts of Ukraine and provides advanced warning of incoming Russian missiles and drones.
Under persuasion by Ukraine sceptics in the White House, led by JD Vance, the vice-president, and his allies, Mr Trump froze military aid in March and intelligence sharing was suspended as a result.
However, The New York Times, citing officials, said the CIA heavily lobbied for the agency to keep sharing intelligence.
Before summer, the impact of the strikes on Russia’s energy infrastructure – which often hit storage depots or structures easily repaired – had been relatively minimal.
Under a new plan, crafted by the CIA and US military, the campaign was concentrated exclusively on oil refineries, targeting a newly found Achilles heel.
A CIA expert had identified a coupler device that is so difficult to replace that it could lead to a facility remaining shut for weeks.
The strikes became so successful that Russian oil refining was reduced by as much as a fifth on certain days, cutting exports and leading to domestic fuel shortages.
It was costing its economy an estimated $75m (£55m) a day, according to US intelligence.
Comment: That’s certainly one way to make your otherwise useless sanctions work: just start blowing up your opponent’s oil business! Uniquely American…
In response, Mr Trump praised the strikes for the leverage and deniability they gave him as Putin continued to stonewall negotiations, according to the sources.
It was first reported in October that Washington was closely involved in the planning of such strikes, but it wasn’t known that the CIA was responsible for the new focus of the campaign and identifying specific weaknesses in its energy infrastructure.
In late November, Ukraine also began a maritime campaign against Moscow’s shadow fleet, a clandestine network of hundreds of vessels carrying sanctioned oil to keep the Russian economy afloat.
Comment: At least we now know how ‘Ukraine’ struck a Russian oil tanker off West Africa.
Kyiv was using its explosive-laden long-range naval drones to blow holes in the ships, opening a new front in the war to cut off Russia’s largest source of funding and strengthen its negotiating position at US-led peace talks.
According to US and Ukrainian officials, the CIA was authorised to assist Kyiv’s military in these efforts, despite the risk of angering Putin’s regime.
It is not clear exactly when such help was approved by the Trump administration.
The New York Times report, citing hundreds of national security officials, military and intelligence officers and US, Ukrainian and European diplomats, charts the unwinding of the US-Ukrainian alliance over the past year.
The officials argued that as Mr Trump attempted to broker peace, factions in the White House and Pentagon pushed the president and his aides to make inconsistent, and at times, erratic decisions that damaged Kyiv’s war effort.
This included how the newly renamed Department of War, led by Pete Hegseth, repeatedly made unannounced decisions to withhold vital munitions from Ukraine that had already been given under the Biden administration, costing lives at the front.
A critical error, according to the officials and diplomats, was Mr Trump overestimating his rapport with Putin and ability to get him to meaningfully engage in negotiations.
Despite repeatedly touting his ability to secure an end to the war in “24 hours”, the Republican was forced to admit on Sunday his lack of a breakthrough after a year of on-off negotiations.
As he hosted Volodymyr Zelensky at Mar-a-Lago, he was forced to admit “it is not a one-day process deal. This is very complicated stuff”.
The officials also revealed that Mr Trump and his Ukrainian counterpart bonded over a love of Ukrainian women.
Following their disastrous meeting in February, Mr Zelensky returned six months later to win back Mr Trump’s support.
Sitting in the Oval Office, Mr Trump said “Ukrainian women are beautiful”, to which Mr Zelensky replied, “I know, I married one.”
In an odd sequence of events, Mr Trump rang up an old friend who had married a former Miss Ukraine who was then put on the phone to speak to Mr Zelensky.
“It humanised Zelensky with Trump,” an official who was there told the New York Times. “You could feel the room change.” The meeting, in which the Ukrainian leader was on the charm offensive, proved crucial for their relationship moving forward.
The officials also revealed that Mr Trump had approved a back channel being opened with Moscow before his inauguration, despite the fact that doing so before his first term prompted claims of conspiracy and became part of a long-running Russian investigation.
The Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, reportedly introduced Mr Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff to Kirill Dmitriev, who would later emerge as the lead negotiator in peace talks with the US.
That move reportedly came after Joe Biden rejected a request for a secret letter granting Mr Trump and his team permission to begin talks during the transition, for fear the incoming president would sell out Ukraine in a deal.
Comment: So, apparently ‘an edge on the oil markets’ is more important to ‘the peacemaker’ than actual peace.
As Israel bans aid orgs in Gaza, notorious mercenary firm seeks “Targeter”
the Israeli government is using the absurdly onerous new registration standards as cover to ban virtually every credible international aid organization from entering Gaza.
Max Blumenthal·December 31, 2025, https://thegrayzone.com/2025/12/31/israel-aid-gaza-mercenary-targeter/
Are Israel and the Trump admin planning to revive the dystopian Gaza Humanitarian Foundation scheme that spawned famine and death under cover of humanitarian aid?
In its bid to continue the genocide in Gaza, Israel has banned 37 international aid organizations from entering the decimated, militarily occupied coastal enclave. This leaves only five humanitarian groups still able to operate inside Gaza.
At the same time, one of the US mercenary firms responsible for securing the notorious Gaza Humanitarian Foundation sites which were present during the worst periods of famine in Gaza, when at least 3000 Palestinian civilians were gunned down while seeking aid, has posted an ad soliciting former special forces soldiers for offensive operations.
UG Solutions, the scandal-stained private mercenary firm, announced this December that it was hiring an “experienced Targeter to support intelligence-driven operations through the identification, development, validation, and maintenance of operational targets.” The targeter will be expected to “Develop, validate, and maintain operational target packages in accordance with approved targeting processes.”
Anthony Aguilar, the retired United States Army Lt. Col and former Green Beret who blew the whistle on UG Solutions’ human rights abuses in Gaza, told me he believes that Israel’s ban on the 37 international aid organizations signals the return of UG Solutions as part of a restructured version of the Israeli-controlled Gaza Humanitarian Foundation scheme.
While it’s unclear where the UG Solutions targeter position will be deployed, if they are being hired for upcoming operations in Gaza, Aguilar says “this shows that the US, though paramilitary contractors, is now going to either directly target, or feed target data to the IDF.”
To set the stage for its blanket ban on international aid organizations, Israel’s intel-tied Ministry of Diaspora Affairs has demanded that all staffers of aid NGOs prove they do not support calls to boycott Israel, that they do not support armed struggle or oppose Israel’s existence as an exclusivist Jewish state, and that they do not “actively advance delegitimization activities against the State of Israel.”
Aid staffers must also demonstrate that they have never questioned the established history of the Holocaust or challenged official Israeli narratives about October 7 – including, presumably, that Palestinians committed “mass rape” or beheaded babies.
Israel has also demanded that Doctors Without Borders provide COGAT occupation administrators with the personal data of its staff and donors, an unprecedented move by a belligerent in a conflict which few, if any, aid groups could ever honor.
It seems obvious that the Israeli government is using the absurdly onerous new registration standards as cover to ban virtually every credible international aid organization from entering Gaza. In doing so, the apartheid entity seemingly seeks to deprive Palestinians living inside the yellow occupation line of sustenance, forcing them to leave Gaza, or to move into one of the high-tech, concentration camp-like “smart cities” mapped out in the dystopian new “Project Sunrise” proposal marketed by Trump cronies Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner.
And it is there that they would be “secured” by a mercenary outfit like UG Solutions – and targeted if they dared to resist.
Below is a list of all the aid orgs banned by Israel from operating in Gaza:
1. Accion contra el Hambre – Action Against Hunger
2. Action Aid
3. Alianza por la Solidaridad
4. Artsen zonder Grenzen (Medecins Sans Frontieres Nederland)
5. Campaign for the Children of Palestine (CCP Japan)
6. CARE
7. DanChurchAid
8. Danish Refugee Council
9. Handicap International – Humanity and Inclusion
10. Japan International Volunteer center
11. Medecins Du Monde (FRANCE)
12. Medecins du Monde Switzerland
13. Medecins Sans Frontières Belgium
14. Medecins Sans Frontieres France
15. Medicos del Mundo (Spain)
16. Mercy Corps
17. MSF Spain – Doctors Without Borders Spain
18. NORWEGIAN REFUGEE COUNCIL
19. Oxfam Novib
20. Premiere Urgence Internationale
21. Terre des hommes Lausanne
22. The International Rescue Committee (IRC)
23. WeWorld-GVC
24. World Vision International
25. Relief International
26. Fondazione AVSI
27. Movement for Peace – MPDL
28. American Friends Service Committee (AFSC)
29. Medico International
30. PSAS – The Palestine Solidarity Association in Sweden
31. Defense for Children International
32. Medical Aid for Palestinians – UK
33. Caritas Internationalis
34. Caritas Jerusalem
35. Near East council churches
36. OXFAM Quebec
37. War Child holland
Venezuelan leader Maduro lands in New York after capture by US troops – live
Donald Trump says the US will ‘run’ Venezuela and put Maduro on trial after audacious military operation in Caracas
- Full report: Trump says US will ‘run’ Venezuela
- Explained: Is there legal justification for the US attack on Venezuela?
- Reaction: Global outcry after US strikes Venezuela
4 Jan 26, https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2026/jan/03/caracas-explosions-venezuela-maduro-latest-news-updates-live?page=with:block-69599f418f085ed25e9e3394
Nicolás Maduro ‘has arrived in New York’
A plane believed to be carrying Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, has landed near Stewart Air National Guard Base in New York.
Maduro is expected to be taken by helicopter to the city where he will be processed and transported to the Metropolitan Detention Center prison, officials told NBC News.
They added the Venezuela president is set to appear in court by Monday evening.
The New York Times has reported that at least 40 people, including civilians and soldiers, were killed in Saturday’s US attack on Venezuela. The estimate comes from a senior Venezuelan official who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
The victims reportedly include a woman called Rosa González, who was killed when her three-story apartment complex was hit by a strike. Another resident was reportedly severely injured.
US oil giants have so far remained silent on Donald Trump’s claim that they are primed to spend “billions and billions of dollars” rebuilding the Venezuelan oil industry following the ouster of Nicolás Maduro.
Chevron, the only US oil company still operating in Venezuela, committed only to following “relevant laws and regulations” after the US president suggested American energy multinationals would be central to his plans for the country.
Venezuela’s vast oil reserves – reputedly the world’s largest – will be modernized and exploited, Trump claimed in interviews and a press conference at his Mar-a-Lago estate. US oil firms will invest heavily to reconstruct “rotted” infrastructure, ramp up production and sell “large amounts … to other countries”, he told reporters, adding: “We’re in the oil business.”
“We’re going to have our very large United States oil companies – the biggest anywhere in the world – go in, spend billions of dollars, fix the badly broken infrastructure and start making money for the country,” the president said. The firms would be “reimbursed”, he added, without providing more detail.
ExxonMobil, the biggest US oil company, and ConocoPhillips, another major player, did not respond to requests for comment.
A spokesperson for Chevron said: “Chevron remains focused on the safety and wellbeing of our employees, as well as the integrity of our assets. We continue to operate in full compliance with all relevant laws and regulations.”
In response to today’s events, Canada’s PM, Mark Carney, wrote on X: “One of the first actions taken by Canada’s new government in March 2025 was to impose additional sanctions on Nicolás Maduro’s brutally oppressive and criminal regime – unequivocally condemning his grave breaches of international peace and security, gross and systematic human rights violations, and corruption. Canada has not recognised the illegitimate regime of Maduro since it stole the 2018 election. The Canadian government therefore welcomes the opportunity for freedom, democracy, peace, and prosperity for the Venezuelan people.
“Canada has long supported a peaceful, negotiated, and Venezuelan-led transition process that respects the democratic will of the Venezuelan people. In keeping with our long-standing commitment to upholding the rule of law, sovereignty, and human rights, Canada calls on all parties to respect international law. We stand by the Venezuelan people’s sovereign right to decide and build their own future in a peaceful and democratic society.
“Canada attaches great importance to resolution of crises through multilateral engagement and is in close contact with international partners about ongoing developments. We are first and foremost ready to assist Canadians through our consular officials and our embassy in Bogotá, Colombia, and will continue to support Venezuelan refugees.”
The UK’s prime minister, Keir Starmer, has backed a transition of power in Venezuela.
He said his Labour administration would “shed no tears” over the end of Nicolás Maduro’s regime and said Britain would discuss the “evolving situation” with American counterparts over the coming days.
Starmer said in a statement: “The UK has long supported a transition of power in Venezuela.
“We regarded Maduro as an illegitimate president and we shed no tears about the end of his regime.
“I reiterated my support for international law this morning.
“The UK government will discuss the evolving situation with US counterparts in the days ahead as we seek a safe and peaceful transition to a legitimate government that reflects the will of the Venezuelan people.”
Starmer earlier refused to be drawn on whether the US military action broke international law, saying he wanted to talk to president Donald Trump, with whom he had not spoken on Saturday morning, and allies to “establish the facts”.
About 500 UK nationals are in Venezuela and work is continuing to “safeguard” them, the prime minister said, while the UK’s Foreign Office advised against all travel to the country.
“As you know, I always say and believe we should all uphold international law, but I think at this stage, fast-moving situation, let’s establish the facts and take it from there,” Starmer told broadcasters.
Share
Updated at 08.49 AEDT
08.21 AEDT
Summary: the day so far
It’s been an incredibly dramatic day so far but a confusing one, in the US and Venezuela, as the world watches the aftermath of a lightning military strike overnight that resulted in Nicolás Maduro being captured by US forces and taken to an American aircraft carrier in handcuffs. The toppled Venezuelan president was en route to New York early on Saturday, where the Trump administration has promised to bring him up in court, indicted on drug trafficking and other federal criminal offenses. He could arrive later the same day, even. Donald Trump claims the US is now running Venezuela, with the remaining regime’s cooperation – a claim sharply contrast
The United Nations security council is due to hold an emergency meeting on Monday as a result of the United States attacking Venezuela early on Saturday and snatching up its president, Nicolás Maduro, holding him en route to New York where it will confront him with federal criminal charges related to drug trafficking and weapons.
Nicolás Maduro’s vice-president in Venezuela, Delcy Rodríguez, a loyalist, has appeared on television and radio there, from the capital Caracas, contradicting Donald Trump’s description of her now being president and cooperating with the US. She said Maduro was Venezuela’s “only” president and that Venezuela would not be colonized.
Rodríguez appears to be in Caracas. This followed hours of rumors that she might have been in Russia or parts unknown, but not in Venezuela.
Donald Trump called Cuba a failing nation, and US secretary of state Marco Rubio called the communist-run island, from which his parents fled to the US in the 1950s, a “disaster”. Both hinted that they could reprise their action in Venezuela in Cuba, but made no direct threats.
Trump was asked about his current thoughts on Russian president Vladimir Putin and the ongoing war perpetrated by that country in Ukraine. Trump said he was “not thrilled” with Putin and called the war a bloodbath.
Donald Trump said he and his administration have not talked to Venezuela’s exiled opposition leader María Corina Machado since the capture of Maduro. He took on a dismissive tone and said she would not run Venezuela as she did not have the necessary support or respect in the country. It was unclear whether he was talking about the Venezuelan regime or the general population. Machado won the latest Nobel Peace prize.
United Nations secretary general António Guterres said the Trump administration was setting a “dangerous precedent” with its unilateral action inside Venezuela. He later said he thought the US had probably breached the founding charter of the UN.
At a press conference in Florida, Trump said that US oil companies will take control of Venezuela’s state oil operation. There has been no confirmation of anything like this from US oil companies, nor how such an arrangement would work.
Donald Trump claimed at his press conference earlier that the United States is “going to run” Venezuela for the time being. He gave no specific details about how that might happen, later implying the remains of the Maduro regime were cooperating with US leadership – something soon after contradicted by Venezuela’s vice president, Delcy Rodríguez.
Trump posted a picture on his Truth Social platform that he states is “Nicolas Maduro on board the USS Iwo Jima”, which appeared to show the captured Venezuelan president in handcuffs, black goggles and headphones, clutching a water bottle, expressionless.
The US Department of Justice unsealed a fresh version of a federal criminal indictment of Nicolás Maduro. He was indicted by the US in 2020. The superseding indictment now includes his wife and son.
Trump confirmed that the Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, were heading to New York. Trump told Fox News on Saturday that Maduro and his wife were taken to a ship after their capture by US forces and were headed to the US city.
US attorney general Pam Bondi said the deposed Venezuelan leader and his wife would face criminal charges after an indictment in New York. Bondi vowed in a social media post that the couple will “soon face the full wrath of American justice on American soil in American courts”.
The United States is going to be “very strongly involved” in Venezuela’s oil industry after the operation to capture Maduro, Trump told Fox News on Saturday. He said: “We have the greatest oil companies in the world, the biggest, the greatest, and we’re going to be very much involved in it.”
The US vice-president JD Vance hailed what he called a “truly impressive operation” in Venezuela that culminated in the capture of Maduro. Posting on social media as he reshared Trump’s post about the action, Vance wrote: “The president offered multiple off-ramps, but was very clear throughout this process: the drug trafficking must stop, and the stolen oil must be returned to the United States.”
The US secretary of state Marco Rubio said in a post on X that Maduro is “under indictment for pushing drugs in the United States”. The Republican US senator Mike Lee said on Saturday that Rubio had told him that he “anticipates no further action in Venezuela now that Maduro is in US custody”.
Venezuela’s government urged citizens to rise up against the US assault and said Washington risked plunging Latin America into chaos with “an extremely serious” act of “military aggression”. “The entire country must mobilise to defeat this imperialist aggression,” it added. It accused the US of launching a series of attacks against civilian and military targets in the South American country, after explosions rocked its capital, Caracas, before dawn on Saturday.
Explosions and low-flying aircraft were heard in Caracas in the early hours of Saturday. In its statement, Venezuela’s government confirmed that the city had come under attack, as had three other states: Miranda, La Guaira and Aragua.
Venezuela has accused the US of trying to “seize control” of the country’s resources, in particular its oil and minerals. The country has called on the international community to denounce what it called a flagrant violation of international law that put millions of lives at risk.
The president of neighbouring Colombia, Gustavo Petro, called for an immediate emergency session of the UN security council, saying on social media that Venezuela had come under attack.
UK prime minister Keir Starmer has reacted to Donald Trump’s military action in Venezuela saying: “The UK was not involved in any way in this operation.” He added that “we should all uphold international law”. France said the US military operation that resulted in the capture of Maduro went against the principles of international law.
Russia has demanded “immediate” clarification about the circumstances of the capture of Maduro during an attack ordered by Trump. Earlier, Venezuela’s vice-president, Delcy Rodríguez, said the US needed to provide “proof of life” for Maduro.
Venezuelan allies Russia, Cuba and Iran were quick to condemn the strikes as a violation of sovereignty. Tehran urged the UN security council to stop the “unlawful aggression”. Among major Latin American nations, Argentina’s president Javier Milei lauded Venezuela’s new “freedom” while Mexico condemned the intervention and Brazil’s president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva said it crossed “an unacceptable line”.
Share
World
Europe
US news
Americas
Asia
Australia
Middle East
Africa
Inequality
Global development
News
Opinion
Sport
Culture
Lifestyle
Original reporting and incisive analysis, direct from the Guardian every morning
Sign up for our email
About us
Information
Help
Complaints & corrections
Contact us
Tip us off
SecureDrop
Privacy policy
Cookie policy
Tax strategy
Terms & conditions
All topics
All writers
Newsletters
Digital newspaper archive
Bluesky
Facebook
Instagram
LinkedIn
Threads
TikTok
YouTube
Advertise with us
Guardian Labs
Work for us
Accessibility settings
Guardian Australia acknowledges the traditional owners and custodians of Country throughout Australia and their connections to land, waters and community. We pay respect by giving voice to social justice, acknowledging our shared history and valuing the cultures of First Nations.
Back to top
© 2026 Guardian News & Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. (dcr)
New Imperial War: The U.S. Assault on Venezuela Exposes a Desperate Empire
January 3, 2026, By Joshua Scheer, https://scheerpost.com/2026/01/03/new-imperial-war-the-u-s-assault-on-venezuela-exposes-a-desperate-empire/
Multiple blasts were reported in Venezuela’s capital early Saturday after President Trump authorized U.S. airstrikes targeting military installations and other sites.
Residents of Caracas saw plumes of smoke and reported hearing aircraft flying at low altitude around 2 a.m. local time, according to the Associated Press and Reuters. Power outages were reported in the southern part of the city near a military base.
Videos shared on social media appeared to show several explosions across the capital. CBS News cited U.S. officials as confirming that the strikes were ordered by Trump.
The United States carried out a series of military strikes on Venezuela early Saturday, targeting key military installations in and around Caracas, as President Donald Trump claimed that Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro had been captured and flown out of the country.
Explosions were reported around 2 a.m. local time in the Venezuelan capital and neighboring states, with smoke visible over parts of Caracas and power outages reported near major military facilities. Among the targets cited in multiple reports were La Carlota Air Base, Fuerte Tiuna, and other strategic sites. Social media videos showed aircraft overhead and active air defenses, while witnesses described low-flying helicopters across the city.
In a statement posted to social media, Trump said the United States had “successfully carried out a large scale strike against Venezuela” and that Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores had been taken into U.S. custody. The White House said the operation was conducted in coordination with U.S. law enforcement and confirmed that no American casualties had been reported. Trump later described the mission as “brilliant,” asserting it was carried out under his Article II constitutional powers.
Following U.S. strikes in Venezuela and the reported seizure of President Nicolás Maduro and first lady Cilia Flores, several senior members of the government appeared to remain active. Vice President Delcy Rodríguez, next in the line of succession, issued statements after the attacks, though her location was unclear amid reports she may have been in Russia. Other key allies, including Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino López and Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello, also appeared to have survived. Their continued presence suggests that despite the removal of Maduro, the Venezuelan government was still functioning, albeit under significant strain, in the immediate aftermath.
According to Venezuelanalysis and other outlets, Venezuelan Vice President Delcy Rodríguez said the government had not been provided proof of life for Maduro and demanded clarification from Washington. Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino López confirmed that U.S. bombings had occurred in Caracas and surrounding areas, stating that authorities were assessing damage and casualties. Venezuelan officials reported civilian and military deaths but did not provide specific figures.
The Venezuelan government declared a nationwide state of emergency, referred to as a state of “External Commotion,” activated national defense plans, and ordered the deployment of armed forces across the country. In an official communiqué, Caracas accused the United States of a “flagrant violation” of the United Nations Charter and described the strikes as an act of aggression threatening regional peace. The government said it would file formal complaints with the United Nations, CELAC, and the Non-Aligned Movement, while reserving the right to self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter.
International reaction was swift. Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva condemned the strikes and the reported capture of Maduro, calling the action “an unacceptable affront to Venezuela’s sovereignty” and warning it set a dangerous precedent for the international community. Tweeting this: -[on original]
Colombian President Gustavo Petro described the operation as an act of aggression against Latin America and announced that Colombian forces were being deployed to the Venezuelan border amid concerns over potential refugee flows. He underscored the stakes of the crisis, saying, “Without sovereignty, there is no nation. Peace is the way, and dialogue between peoples is fundamental for national unity. Dialogue and more dialogue is our proposal.”
This should also be the standard for how foreign policy is conducted more broadly. War should not be the default response — especially in cases like this, where there appears to be a clear disregard for factual accuracy.
Petro, also tweeting about his role on the UN security council, stated “Colombia since yesterday is a member of the United Nations Security Council and [it] must be convened immediately. Establish the international legality of the aggression against Venezuela.”
We might not hold our breath, however, since two of the five permanent members of the Security Council are currently involved in questionable wars. Yet we can only hope that Petro and more world leaders take up the mantle of ending wars and allowing diplomacy and sovereignty to be the norm. If the royal “we” could stay out of other countries’ internal affairs, certainly we would not have wars in Ukraine or, now, in Venezuela — just to name a few. But empire is going to empire, and like a cockroach, the neocon agenda seems never to die.
This 1984-level war justification comes as the Trump administration has repeatedly accused Nicolás Maduro of narco-terrorism and questioned his legitimacy as Venezuela’s leader. In a post on X from July 2025, Marco Rubio reiterated the administration’s position on Maduro’s authority, stating that “his regime is NOT the legitimate government.” adding that “Maduro is the head of the Cartel de Los Soles, a narco-terror organization which has taken possession of a country. And he is under indictment for pushing drugs into the United States,” Rubio wrote.
Today Rubio continues to repeat this rhetoric, his first post was a re-tweet of the July post.
The neocon war on drugs justification rings hollow as Trump’s often contradictory framing or barefaced lying. Much of the available reporting points out that major drug-trafficking flows have long been linked to countries such as Honduras, including the case of its former president, Juan Orlando Hernández, sentenced in 2024 to 45 years in prison for conspiring to distribute more than 400 tons of cocaine and related firearms offenses; he was pardoned by Trump on Dec. 1. Against that backdrop, it becomes increasingly difficult to sustain the pretense that this action is about narcotics enforcement rather than a colonial-style power grab.
With responses from other leaders across the Americas came swiftly. Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel wrote: “This is state terrorism against the brave Venezuelan people and against Our America,” and is rightfully demanding urgent action from the international community in response to the “criminal attack.”
Bolivia’s former leftist president, Evo Morales, also condemned the U.S. action, saying he “strongly and unequivocally” repudiated the attack on Venezuela. “It is brutal imperialist aggression that violates its sovereignty,” Morales said, expressing “full solidarity with the Venezuelan people in resistance.”
Across the region, governments warned that the escalation risked destabilizing Latin America and undermining long-standing efforts to preserve the region as a zone of peace.
In the United States, antiwar organizations quickly mobilized. The ANSWER Coalition issued a call for nationwide protests on Saturday, Jan. 3, arguing that the operation was driven by geopolitical and economic interests rather than security concerns. Within hours, demonstrations were announced in multiple cities, including a protest outside the White House. The listing is available at https://answercoalition.org/venezuela
As of Saturday morning, the situation in Venezuela remained fluid, with conflicting accounts over Maduro’s status and mounting international pressure for clarification. The United Nations had not yet issued a formal response, though several world leaders called for an emergency international review of the U.S. action.
This is a developing story. More will come.
We have become the worst version of a desperate empire: taking over countries, attacking them under false pretenses, lying about our reasons, and stealing natural resources we claim are “ours.” This is an affront to any reasonable person — an act of cowardice and moral failure that reveals clear colonial intent.
Our so-called leadership, through threats directed at remaining Venezuelan politicians, reminds us of classic warmonger tactics. Trump suggested on Fox News that his administration would continue targeting Venezuelan government officials if they sided with Maduro. “If they stay loyal, the future is really bad — really bad for them,” he said. “I’d say most of them have converted.”
Trump’s first term was marked by the implied repudiation of “forever wars,” and now, with the influence of figures like Marco Rubio and Stephen Miller, the United States has bombed more than nine countries and is engaging in yet another unprovoked conflict. There is no easy way to say this, but it makes more sense now why the president has avoided seriously confronting Putin — he is following the same playbook. Of course, it is also the same approach we have used since the beginning of this dying empire, with figures such as JFK, LBJ, and GW Bush — just to name a few.
Here is the full response of the Venezuelan government, in an English translation by Ben Norton.
Read more: New Imperial War: The U.S. Assault on Venezuela Exposes a Desperate EmpireCOMMUNIQUÉ BOLIVARIAN REPUBLIC OF VENEZUELA The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela rejects, repudiates, and denounces before the international community the extremely grave military aggression perpetrated by the current Government of the United States of America against Venezuela’s territory and population in civilian and military sites of the city of Caracas, capital of the Republic, and the states of Miranda, Aragua, and La Guaira. This act constitutes a flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter, especially its articles 1 and 2, which enshrine respect for sovereignty, the juridical equality of States and the prohibition of the use of force. Such aggression threatens international peace and stability, specifically in Latin America and the Caribbean, and places the lives of millions of people at grave risk. The objective of this attack is none other than to take control of Venezuela’s strategic resources, particularly its oil and minerals, attempting to forcibly break the Nation’s political independence. They will not succeed. After more than 200 years of independence, the people and their legitimate Government stand firm in defense of sovereignty and the inalienable right to decide their destiny. The attempt to impose a colonial war to destroy the republican form of government and force a “regime change”, in alliance with the fascist oligarchy, will fail like all previous attempts. Since 1811, Venezuela has confronted and defeated empires. When in 1902 foreign powers bombarded our coasts, President Cipriano Castro proclaimed: “The insolent foot of the foreigner has profaned the sacred soil of the Homeland”. Today, with the moral authority of Bolívar, Miranda, and our liberators, the Venezuelan people rise once again to defend their independence against imperial aggression. People to the streets The Bolivarian Government calls on all social and political forces of the country to activate mobilization plans and repudiate this imperialist attack. The people of Venezuela and their National Bolivarian Armed Forces, in perfect popular-military-police fusion, are deployed to guarantee sovereignty and peace. Simultaneously, Bolivarian Peace Diplomacy will file corresponding complaints before the UN Security Council, the Secretary General of said organization, CELAC, and the Non-Aligned Movement, demanding condemnation of and accountability for the US Government. President Nicolás Maduro has ordered all national defense plans to be implemented at the appropriate time and circumstances, in strict adherence to the provisions of the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, the Organic Law on States of Exception, and the Organic Law of National Security. In this regard, President Nicolás Maduro has signed and ordered the implementation of the Decree declaring a state of External Commotion throughout the national territory, to protect the rights of the population, the full functioning of republican institutions, and to immediately transition to armed struggle. The entire country must be activated to defeat this imperialist aggression. Likewise, he has ordered the immediate deployment of the Command for the Integral Defense of the Nation and the Directional Bodies for Integral Defense in all states and municipalities of the country. In strict adherence to article 51 of the United Nations Charter, Venezuela reserves the right to exercise legitimate defense to protect its people, its territory, and its independence. We call on the peoples and governments of Latin America, the Caribbean, and the world to mobilize in active solidarity against this imperial aggression. As Supreme Commander Hugo Chávez Frías stated, “In the face of any circumstance of new difficulties, whatever their magnitude, the response of all patriots… is unity, struggle, battle, and victory”. Caracas, 3 January 2025
WAS RUSSIA’S SPECIAL MILITARY OPERATION “UNPROVOKED”?
AI is a tool that many use to research the historical facts behind contentious issues. What does it say about Russia’s claims it was endlessly provoked into its conflict with the Ukrainian regime?
Aearnur, Jan 03, 2026, https://aearnur.substack.com/p/was-russias-special-military-operation?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=312403&post_id=183250361&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=ln98x&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
AI Overview.
Archival material declassified by the US National Security Archive and other Western institutions has established that multiple Western leaders gave Mikhail Gorbachev a “cascade of assurances” in 1990 and 1991 that NATO would not expand eastward beyond a reunified Germany.
The declassified records, which include contemporaneous memoranda of conversation (memcons) and telegrams (telcons), show that these discussions were not limited to East Germany but addressed Central and Eastern European security as a whole.
Key Documents and Assurances
Secretary James Baker’s “Not One Inch” (Feb 1990): US archival transcripts confirm that on February 9, 1990, Secretary of State James Baker told Gorbachev that if the US maintained a presence in a unified Germany within NATO, there would be “no extension of NATO’s jurisdiction for forces of NATO one inch to the east”. Baker repeated this formula three times during the meeting.
The Bush-Gorbachev Malta Summit (Dec 1989): Records show President George H.W. Bush assured Gorbachev that the US would not seek “unilateral advantage” from the rapid changes in Eastern Europe.
Chancellor Helmut Kohl (Feb 1990): Declassified West German records show Chancellor Kohl told Gorbachev on February 10, 1990, that “NATO should not enlarge the sphere of its activity”.
British and French Leaders: Declassified documents show British Prime Minister John Major told Soviet Defense Minister Yazov in March 1991 that he did not foresee circumstances where Eastern European countries would join NATO. French President François Mitterrand also expressed support for dismantling military blocs and ensuring Soviet security.
AI Overview.
The original stated purpose of the Minsk process (Minsk I in 2014 and Minsk II in 2015) was to secure an immediate ceasefire and provide a roadmap for a permanent political resolution to the conflict in eastern Ukraine.
According to the official 12-point and 13-point “packages of measures,” the primary goals included:
Military De-escalation: An unconditional ceasefire, withdrawal of heavy weaponry to create a security zone, and the pullout of all foreign armed formations and mercenaries.
Political Reintegration: Decentralization of power in Ukraine through constitutional reform, granting a “special status” to the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, and holding local elections under Ukrainian law.
Sovereignty Restoration: The return of full control over the state border to the Ukrainian government, contingent upon the completion of the political settlement.
The Russian Understanding of the Process
For Russia, the Minsk process was understood as a vehicle to achieve several strategic objectives that differed from Ukraine’s interpretation of sovereignty:
Institutional Influence (the “Trojan Horse”): Russia understood “special status” as granting the Donbas regions comprehensive autonomy, including their own legal systems and the right to cross-border cooperation with Russia. This was intended to give these regions a de facto veto over Ukraine’s national foreign policy, specifically to prevent Ukraine fromjoining NATO or the EU.
Legitimacy for Proxies: Russia insisted on the inclusion of the self-proclaimed “People’s Republics” (DPR/LPR) in the negotiations. Moscow viewed this as a step toward their formal recognition and a way to frame the conflict as a “civil war” rather than a Russo-Ukrainian war.
Sequencing of Control: A fundamental part of Russia’s understanding was that political concessions (elections and autonomy) must occur before Ukraine regained control of its border with Russia, effectively securing the separatist enclaves while they were still under Russian influence.
“Freezing” the Conflict: Western analysts noted that for Russia, the accords served to consolidate control over captured territories and “freeze” the conflict at a level that favored Moscow’s interests while avoiding further international sanctions.
Following the 2022 invasion, Russian officials asserted that the true purpose of the West was to use the accords as a “ruse” to buy time for Ukraine to rearm, while they maintain their original stated goal was a genuine political settlement for the Donbas.
AI Overview.
In a series of interviews following the 2022 invasion of Ukraine, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel clarified that the primary purpose of the
Minsk Accords (2014–2015) was to buy time for Ukraine to strengthen itself against future Russian aggression.
In a December 2022 interview with The Kyiv Independent, former French President François Hollande stated that the Minsk Accords were successful in providing Ukraine with the “precious time” needed to strengthen its military.
His comments corroborated earlier revelations by former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, confirming that the agreements served as a temporary respite to prevent further Russian territorial gains while the Ukrainian army underwent a total transformation.
Key Revelations by Hollande
Buying Time for Rearmament: Hollande agreed with Merkel’s assessment that the primary merit of the Minsk agreements was giving the Ukrainian army the opportunity to become “completely different” from what it was in 2014. He noted that by 2022, the army was better trained and equipped, which he directly attributed to the diplomatic respite provided by the accords.
In 2022 and 2023, former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko made several public statements revealing that the primary purpose of the Minsk Accords from his perspective was to buy time for Ukraine to rebuild its military and avoid a total collapse of the state.
His detailed revelations include:
Read more: WAS RUSSIA’S SPECIAL MILITARY OPERATION “UNPROVOKED”?Buying Time for Rearmament: Poroshenko stated that when he signed the agreements in 2014 and 2015, Ukraine effectively “did not have armed forces at all”. He revealed that the truce provided a “precious” window of several years to invite NATO instructors, purchase weapons, and transform the Ukrainian military into a modern fighting force capable of resisting a large-scale invasion.
Strategic Deception: Poroshenko described the agreements as a “forced position” but a “success for diplomats”. He admitted that the goal was to “buy time” and “slow down Russia’s advance” while stalling on the most unacceptable political obligations of the deal, such as granting constitutional autonomy to the Donbas republics.
Preventing Immediate Defeat: He recalled that the 2015 Minsk II agreement was signed under extreme duress, specifically when thousands of Ukrainian soldiers were surrounded by regular Russian forces at the battle of Debaltseve. The primary goal at that moment was to stop the Russian offensive and prevent the “annihilation” of his forces.
International Legitimacy: Poroshenko revealed that another goal of the accords was to demonstrate to the world that Russia was the aggressor. By signing a peace plan, Ukraine gained the international solidarity needed to implement and maintain Western sanctions against Russia for its non-compliance with the deal.
These admissions, similar to those made by Angela Merkel and François Hollande, have been used by the Russian government to argue that the West and Ukraine negotiated the peace process in bad faith to prepare for eventual war.
AI Overview.
As of January 2, 2026, Russia continues to frame its invasion of Ukraine as a defensive and corrective measure necessitated by Western aggression and humanitarian crises. These justifications have evolved throughout the conflict, combining long-standing grievances with recent allegations of “state terrorism” by the Ukrainian government.
1. Security Architecture and NATO Expansion
Russia’s primary long-term justification is the perceived threat from NATO’s eastward expansion.
“Red Lines” and Broken Promises: Russian officials cite declassified 1990 archival records as proof that Western leaders promised NATO would not move “one inch eastward.” Russia argues that by 2021, Ukraine’s “de facto” integration into NATO through military training and infrastructure had reached an existential threat level.
The 2021 Security Proposals: In December 2021, Russia requested formal treaties with NATO and the US to halt expansion and return to 1997 troop positions. The Kremlin justifies the 2022 invasion as a result of the West’s dismissal of these proposals.
Buffer Zones (2026 Update): In early 2026, the Kremlin emphasized the need for an expanded “buffer zone” in the Sumy and Kharkiv regions to protect Russian territory from cross-border shelling and drone strikes.
2. Humanitarian Protection and “Genocide”
Russia claims its intervention was a legal necessity to protect ethnic Russians and Russian speakers.
Protecting the Donbas: Putin asserted that the 2022 “Special Military Operation” was launched to end eight years of “humiliation and genocide” by the “Kyiv regime” against people in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions.
Independence Recognition: Russia argues that because it recognized the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics as independent states just before the invasion, its military action was a lawful request for assistance under Article 51 of the UN Charter.
3. “Denazification” and “Demilitarization”
The Kremlin uses these terms to frame the Ukrainian government as illegitimate and a threat to European peace.
Regime Change: Russia claims the 2014 Euromaidan revolution was a Western-backed “unconstitutional coup” that installed a “neo-Nazi” leadership.
Sovereignty Denial: Putin has repeatedly claimed that Ukraine is an “artificial state” created by the Soviet Union and that Russians and Ukrainians are “one people,” suggesting the current government is a foreign-imposed anomaly.
4. Recent Allegations of “State Terrorism” (Late 2025–2026)
Since December 2025, Russia has introduced new justifications to harden its stance in potential peace talks:
Attack on Putin’s Residence: In late December 2025, Russia accused Ukraine of launching a drone strike targeting President Putin’s residence in the Novgorod region. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov characterized this as “state terrorism,” using it to justify retaliatory strikes and a “more rigorous” negotiating position.
For official updates and historical documents, the National Security Archive provides records of 1990 assurances, while current statements are often published by the Russian Foreign Ministry.
AI Overview.
In January and February 2022, the Donbas region in south-eastern Ukraine experienced a massive and rapid escalation in shelling and ceasefire violations. Reports from the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission (SMM) indicated that after a period of relatively low activity in early January, violations surged by over 340% in the week leading up to the full-scale Russian invasion on February 24.
Trump Praises Putin, Promises Peace—Kyiv Still Under Fire
As Russian missiles continued to strike Ukrainian cities, the contrast between diplomatic rhetoric and battlefield reality remained stark. While Trump projected confidence that peace may be within reach, Kyiv once again faced burning apartments, shattered infrastructure, and a winter night without heat—underscoring how far any deal may still be from the ground truth of the war.
December 29, 2025, By Joshua Scheer, https://scheerpost.com/2025/12/29/trump-praises-putin-promises-peace-kyiv-still-under-fire/
Trump’s Peace Optimism Collides With Russia’s Intensifying Assault on Kyiv
Another morning has arrived with no peace between Ukraine and Russia, despite President Trump repeatedly suggesting that an agreement is either incredibly close—or may never happen at all.
It is a familiar refrain, delivered as Russian forces continue to bombard Kyiv and while President Vladimir Putin remains absent from the negotiations. Yet Trump has positioned himself as vouching for Putin, a stance that produced an awkward moment during his meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
According to The Daily Beast, Trump told reporters, “Russia wants to see Ukraine succeed,” prompting Zelenskyy to visibly raise an eyebrow. Trump then added, “It sounds a little strange,” as Zelenskyy grinned, nodded, and replied dryly, “Yeah.”
The exchange followed comments Trump made Sunday, when he said he had told Zelenskyy that “President Putin was very generous in his feeling toward Ukraine succeeding.”
Yet as of yesterday at least two people were killed in Kyiv during a 10-hour Russian aerial assault that unfolded as diplomatic optimism surrounding a potential U.S.-brokered peace deal briefly surged. Forty-four others—including two children—were injured, according to Ukrainian officials, while hundreds of thousands of residents were left without heat or electricity amid near-freezing temperatures.
With Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy saying Russia launched nearly 500 drones overnight—many of them Iranian-designed Shahed drones—along with around 40 missiles, including hypersonic Kinzhals. The primary targets were Kyiv’s energy facilities and civilian infrastructure.
“Regrettably, there have been hits, and ordinary residential buildings have been damaged,” Zelenskyy said in a statement posted on X. Rescuers were still searching for at least one person believed to be trapped under rubble. In several districts of the capital and surrounding region, electricity and heating remained unavailable as emergency crews worked under ongoing air-raid alerts.
Zelenskyy framed the assault as Russia’s answer to recent international peace overtures.
“There have been many questions over the past few days—so where is Russia’s response to the proposals to end the war offered by the United States and the world?” he said. “Russian representatives engage in lengthy talks, but in reality, Kinzhals and ‘Shaheds’ speak for them.”
The Ukrainian president accused Russian President Vladimir Putin and his inner circle of having no genuine interest in ending the war, arguing that Moscow is instead using diplomacy as cover while escalating attacks designed to inflict maximum suffering.
“If Russia turns even the Christmas and New Year period into a time of destroyed homes and ruined power plants, then this sick activity can only be responded to with truly strong steps,” Zelenskyy said, calling on the United States, Europe, and allies to intensify pressure and accelerate air-defense support.
Yet just hours later, Zelenskyy struck a noticeably different tone following meetings with U.S. President Donald Trump, thanking him and his team for what he described as constructive negotiations.
“I thank President Trump and his team for the negotiations,” Zelenskyy wrote. “Together, we must—and can—implement our vision for the sequencing of steps toward peace.”
Also saying “Thank you to President Trump for the wonderful meeting. We had a meaningful discussion on all issues and highly appreciate the progress achieved by the Ukrainian and American teams over the past weeks. Special thanks to Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner for their engagement and full commitment to the cause, as well as to our team, primarily Rustem Umerov and Andriy Hnatov.”
Trump, speaking after meetings at Mar-a-Lago, offered an upbeat assessment of the talks, saying a deal was “maybe very close.” He said he had spoken with Putin for more than two hours prior to meeting Zelenskyy and claimed the Russian leader expressed a strong desire to reach an agreement.
“He told me very strongly,” Trump said of Putin. “I believe him.”
However, the optimism appeared premature. Reports indicated that a joint U.S.-Ukraine framework remained incomplete, with Russia rejecting several core proposals. Trump himself acknowledged lingering obstacles, echoing familiar language he has used throughout the conflict.
“There are one or two very thorny issues,” Trump said. “Very tough issues. But I think we’re doing very well.”
He added that clarity would emerge soon—another timeline critics say has repeatedly failed to materialize.
“In a few weeks, we’ll know one way or another,” Trump said. “It’s possible it doesn’t happen.”
One of the most contentious unresolved issues remains the territory. Asked directly what stood in the way of an agreement, Trump pointed to land occupied by Russian forces. With CNBC reporting,
“Some of that land has been taken,” he said. “Some of that land is maybe up for grabs, but it may be taken over the next period of a number of months, and you are better off making a deal now.”
That issue is one Zelenskyy has consistently refused to bend on, often stating that he has no authority to do so under Ukraine’s constitution. The Ukrainian president has repeatedly ruled out surrendering territory, saying he has “no right” to give up land under either Ukrainian or international law. Kyiv has instead said it is prepared to propose alternative arrangements.
Zelenskyy’s stance comes as Ukraine continues to grapple with internal challenges, including ongoing corruption concerns, even as the war drags on with no clear end in sight. While territorial concessions remain a red line, Zelenskyy has previously floated ideas aimed at reducing hostilities without formally ceding land.
As part of his current peace plan,Zelenskyy has suggested the creation of a demilitarized free economic zone in contested areas. Speaking to reporters earlier this week, he said such a zone could require the withdrawal of heavy forces by an agreed distance.
“If we establish a free economic zone here, and it envisages a virtually demilitarized zone—meaning heavy forces are removed from this area—and the distance, for example, is 40 kilometers, it could be five, 10, or 40 kilometers,” Zelenskyy said. “Then if these two cities, Kramatorsk and Sloviansk, are our free economic zone, the Russians would have to pull back their troops accordingly.”
Zelenskyy, meanwhile, said he requested security guarantees lasting up to 50 years, describing discussions on that front as “100% agreed.” Trump offered a more cautious assessment, suggesting the guarantees were still under negotiation.
As Russian missiles continued to strike Ukrainian cities, the contrast between diplomatic rhetoric and battlefield reality remained stark. While Trump projected confidence that peace may be within reach, Kyiv once again faced burning apartments, shattered infrastructure, and a winter night without heat—underscoring how far any deal may still be from the ground truth of the war.
So much for a president who boasted about ending wars—specifically claiming he would end the Ukraine conflict within 24 hours, before taking office, or on “day one.” When President Donald Trump was reminded of those promises in an April interview with Time magazine, he said the remark was never meant to be taken literally. And CNN found 53 other times that president stated this as a fact.
“Well, I said that figuratively, and I said that as an exaggeration, because to make a point,” Trump said, according to Time’s transcript. He added that the comment was “said in jest,” while maintaining that the war would still ultimately be ended. Heres hoping that the war will end soon, but with the three leaders seemingly entrenched in their positions, that hope may prove fleeting.
Here is the wrap-up from the two leaders, with Donald Trump praising those in the audience possible war criminal Pete Hegseth and Marco Rubio, who is leading the neocon push back into “forever wars” and supporting Trump’s aggressive foreign policy. The same man Rubio once called a “peacemaker” is now actively bombing nine countries. I wrote about this the other day. Here is their press conference—believe what you want—but with this president, the approach can change day to day. At least, for now, the war has not gone nuclear.
Why talk of a Japanese nuclear option is resurfacing – and why it alarms critics
Conservatives are calling for a rethink of nuclear taboos, while critics warn of risks to the global non-proliferation regime
Julian Ryall, SCMP,3 Jan 2026
An editorial in the Sankei Shimbun has reopened a long-taboo debate in Japan over whether the country should even discuss acquiring nuclear weapons, after off-the-record remarks by a senior security official arguing the country should have them sparked domestic and regional backlash.
The conservative daily argued that growing threats from Japan’s neighbours mean no option for protecting the public should be beyond discussion, a stance that has drawn praise from some on the right and alarm from critics who warn that even signalling such intent could destabilise the global non-proliferation system.
The editorial, published on Monday, was accompanied by a graphic comparing regional nuclear forces, stating that Russia has an estimated 5,580 nuclear warheads, North Korea around 50 and China about 500, with the latter figure projected to rise to more than 1,000 by 2030.
It appeared 10 days after the senior national security official in the Prime Minister’s Office said – in an off-the-record remark reported by Japanese media during a background briefing – that he personally believed Japan should possess nuclear weapons.
The remarks prompted a fierce reaction at home and abroad, including from Beijing, where Guo Jiakun, a spokesperson for China’s foreign ministry, told reporters the situation was a “serious issue that exposes the dangerous attempts by some in Japan to breach international law and possess nuclear weapons”.
“China and the rest of the international community must stay on high alert and express grave concern,” he added.
Japan has for decades adhered to its three non-nuclear principles – not possessing, producing or permitting the introduction of nuclear weapons – while relying on the United States for extended deterrence and is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which commits non-nuclear states to forgo developing or acquiring nuclear arms.
The Sankei editorial urged Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi not to “give in” to calls for the aide to be dismissed, arguing that doing so would “stifle free debate on how best to protect the Japanese people”.
It dismissed objections from China and North Korea as “ludicrous” and “hypocritical”, noting that both possessed nuclear weapons and were strengthening their arsenals.
“For Japan, the point of the debate is how to safeguard the public, not merely whether or not to actually possess nuclear weapons,” it added. “From that standpoint, making it taboo to merely mention the nuclear weapons option is the worst possible stance to adopt.”………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/politics/article/3338570/why-talk-japanese-nuclear-option-resurfacing-and-why-it-alarms-critics
Israel Bans Dozens of Aid Groups from Operating in Gaza, Including Doctors Without Borders.
Other groups that are being banned include the Norwegian Refugee Council, the Catholic charity Caritas, and Oxfam
by Dave DeCamp | December 30, 2025 , https://news.antiwar.com/2025/12/30/israel-bans-dozens-of-aid-groups-from-operating-in-gaza-including-doctors-without-borders/
Starting on January 1, Israel will ban 37 international aid groups and charities from operating in Gaza in its latest effort to add to the misery for the Palestinian civilians living in flimsy tents and bombed-out buildings in the Strip.
The groups being banned include several prominent international aid organizations: Doctors Without Borders (Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), the Catholic charity Caritas, the Norwegian Refugee Council, and Oxfam. The NGOs will also be barred from working in the Israeli-occupied West Bank.
Israel will stop the groups from operating in Gaza for failing to comply with its stringent new requirements, which include handing over information about their Palestinian employees. The new Israeli rules also include vague ideological requirements that can disqualify any NGO that “promotes delegitimization campaigns” against Israel, or if it, or any officeholder, has called for a boycott of Israel.
An Israeli official claimed, without providing evidence, that an investigation revealed “employees of certain organizations were involved in terrorist activity… in particular, Doctors Without Borders.” The action against MSF is seen in part as an Israeli reaction to the organization’s criticism of Israel’s genocidal campaign in the Strip.
In a statement warning of the consequences of banning it from Gaza, MSF said that it has served hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza this year.
“If Israeli authorities revoke MSF’s access to Gaza in 2026, a large portion of people in Gaza will lose access to critical medical care, water, and lifesaving support,” the group said. “MSF’s activities serve nearly half a million people in Gaza through our vital support to the destroyed health system. MSF continues to seek constructive engagement with Israeli authorities to continue its activities.”
Israel’s move to ban the NGOs comes as Israel continues to violate the US-backed ceasefire deal by continuing to launch attacks on Palestinians and maintaining restrictions on aid and shelter materials entering the Strip.
Ukraine Takes Part in NATO War Games, Further Integrating Into Collective Defense Architecture
by Kyle Anzalone | Dec 28, 2025, https://libertarianinstitute.org/news/ukraine-takes-part-in-nato-war-games-further-integrating-into-collective-defense-architecture/
Ukrainian representatives participated in NATO war games simulating the alliance’s response to an attack.
According to a NATO press release, 1,500 soldiers and civilians from multiple European countries participated in the Loyal Dolos 2025 drills that were conducted at the beginning of the month.
On Sunday, the General Staff of the Armed Forces posted on Facebook that Ukrainian officials participated in Loyal Dolos. “Ukraine is becoming part of the collective defense architecture of NATO. Ukrainian JATEC experts have, for the first time, joined the work of the mechanisms of Article 5 of the NATO Treaty on the training LOYAL DOLOS 2025,” the post explained.
Senior National Representative of Ukraine in JATEC, director of Implementation of the programs of the Joint Center NATO-Ukraine Colonel Valery Vyshnivsky said, “The participation of Ukrainian JATEC experts in the LOYAL DOLOS 2025, which is one of the key elements of NATO’s preparation according to Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, has strategic significance for us, as for the first time Ukrainian representatives have been involved in the work of the Alliance’s collective security mechanisms.”
Kiev’s military ties to NATO countries are one of the primary reasons Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The Kremlin has demanded that Kiev agree to neutrality as a condition for ending the war.
President Zelensky recently announced that Ukraine would agree to stop seeking formal membership in the North Atlantic Alliance if members of the bloc agreed to bilateral agreements with Kiev that are similar to NATO’s Article 5. Article 5 is considered the mutual defense pact in the NATO charter.
That Ukraine is continuing its integration into NATO suggests that Kiev is still seeking to become an informal member of the bloc.
The Trillion Dollar War Machine (w/ William D. Hartung) The Chris Hedges Report
December 31, 2025 , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mxti7sPPD0
Once warned against as a looming danger to democracy, the military-industrial complex has evolved into a vast and entrenched system of power that shapes U.S. policy, budgets, and global conflict. Now far beyond what even its earliest critics imagined, the question is no longer whether it exists, but how far it will go — and whether anything can meaningfully restrain it. In this analysis, Chris Hedges interviews arms-industry critic William D. Hartung in a wide-ranging conversation on how runaway military spending and the power of the military-industrial complex drive U.S. foreign policy and perpetual war.
Russia claims to have moved nuclear-capable missile system into Belarus
Guardian, 30 Dec 25
Assertion comes after the Kremlin accused Ukraine of attacking Vladimir Putin’s palace in Novgorod
Russia said its latest nuclear-capable missile system has been deployed in Belarus, a day after Moscow claimed that Ukraine had carried out a large-scale drone attack on Vladimir Putin’s residence.
Footage released by Russia’s ministry of defence showed the new Oreshnik missile trundling through a snowy forest. Soldiers were seen disguising combat vehicles with green netting and raising a flag at an airbase in eastern Belarus, close to the Russian border.
The video appeared part of a choreographed attempt to intimidate Europe and to prepare Russians for a further escalation in the already brutal war against Ukraine. The deployment, if true, would symbolically reduce the time it would take for a Russian missile to hit an EU capital.
Belarus’s president, Alexander Lukashenko, said 10 Oreshnik systems would be stationed in his country. Putin announced they were entering active service at a meeting on Monday with his generals, where he reaffirmed his intention to capture more Ukrainian territory, including the southern city of Zaporizhzhia.
Earlier Russia’s foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, warned that “reprisals” would be carried out against Kyiv and that targets were already prepared. They followed what he said was an attack on Sunday night involving 91 Ukrainian drones on the Russia’s president’s palace in the Novgorod region.
The Kremlin has not produced evidence to back up its allegations. Dmitry Peskov, Vladimir Putin’s spokesperson, said on Tuesday that no proof would be offered since all the missiles had been shot down. He said he could not comment on the lack of debris. Guardian 30th Dec 2025 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/dec/30/russia-claims-moved-nuclear-capable-missile-system-belarus
Pentagon In Panic: China Just Delivered The Final Blow
Br decode, 29 Dec 2025 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEa9E9vhQ0U
“Amateurs talk strategy. Professionals talk logistics.” The US Military just learned this lesson the hard way.
In this video, we analyze the “Supply Chain War” that has erupted between Washington and Beijing. While the US focuses on financial sanctions, China has just sanctioned 9 major US defense firms and is restricting the export of **Antimony**—a critical mineral essential for armor-piercing bullets, missiles, and night-vision goggles.
We expose the “Industrial Suicide” of the Pentagon: How the US shut down its own mines to save money, leaving its entire military industrial base 100% dependent on China for critical resources. We look at the “Sanction Boomerang,” the failure of the US National Defense Stockpile, and why the “Arsenal of Democracy” is running on empty.
The US has the money. China has the minerals. And in a real war, you can’t build missiles out of paper.
When the USSR and China saved humanity: How they won the World Anti-Fascist War.
December 28, 2025 , By Ben Norton, https://geopoliticaleconomy.com/2025/12/26/ussr-china-world-anti-fascist-war/
It was the Soviet Union and China that defeated fascism in WWII. Their heroic contribution was later erased by the West. In the First Cold War, the US recruited former Nazis.
2025 marked the 80th anniversary of the defeat of fascism in World War Two. Unfortunately, the history of this extremely important conflict is not very well understood today.
It was not the United States and its Western allies that defeated fascism in WWII. That is a myth that is promoted by Hollywood movies.
In reality, it was the Soviet Union and China that defeated fascism in WWII. However, their heroic contribution was later erased by the West, when the US waged the First Cold War against the global socialist movement.
The vast majority of Nazi casualties, approximately 80%, were on the Eastern Front, in the Third Reich’s savage, scorched-earth battles against the Soviet Red Army.
More than 26 million Soviets died in the Nazi empire’s genocidal war. Compare that to the just over 400,000 US Americans who died, and the roughly 450,000 Brits who lost their lives.
This means that 62 Soviets were killed for every US American who died in WWII. Yet, tragically, their sacrifice has been forgotten in the West – or, better said, erased from public consciousness for political reasons.
The fact that the USSR defeated Nazi Germany was even admitted by the inveterate anti-communist Winston Churchill, an explicit racist, colonialist, and erstwhile admirer of Hitler who oversaw the British empire’s extreme crimes, including a famine in Bengal in 1943.
In a speech in August 1944, Churchill acknowledged:
“I have left the obvious, essential fact to this point, namely, that it is the Russian Armies who have done the main work in tearing the guts out of the German army. In the air and on the oceans we could maintain our place, but there was no force in the world which could have been called into being, except after several more years, that would have been able to maul and break the German army unless it had been subjected to the terrible slaughter and manhandling that has fallen to it through the strength of the Russian Soviet Armies”.
Then, in October 1944, Churchill said, “I have always believed and I still believe that it is the Red Army that has torn the guts out of the filthy Nazis”.
Read more: When the USSR and China saved humanity: How they won the World Anti-Fascist War.In fact, the USSR wanted to crush fascism even earlier by proposing a surprise attack on Nazi Germany in 1939, weeks before Hitler invaded Poland. Soviet military officers made an official request to British and French officials to form an alliance against Nazi Germany in August 1939, but London and Paris were not interested. The USSR had a million troops ready to fight, but the Western European powers were not prepared.
What the capitalist countries in Western Europe and North America had hoped for was that Nazi Germany would attack the Soviet Union, which they considered their main enemy. This is why the Western imperial powers had long appeased Hitler, signing shameful deals like the 1938 Munich Agreement, which allowed the Nazi empire to expand in Europe.
What the Western capitalist “liberal democracies” and the fascist regimes shared in common was mutual hatred of communism. The rich oligarchs who controlled Western governments feared that they would lose their privileges if workers in their countries were inspired by the Bolshevik Revolution.
In the 1930s, the US State Department spoke positively of fascism as an alternative to communism, and the US chargé d’affaires in Germany praised the supposedly “more moderate section of the [Nazi] party, headed by Hitler himself … which appeal[s] to all civilized and reasonable people”.
It must be emphasized that, when the Japanese empire officially allied with Nazi Germany in 1936, the name of the deal they signed was the Agreement Against the Communist International, or the Anti-Comintern Pact. Benito Mussolini’s fascist regime in Italy subsequently signed the agreement in 1937, and the fascist regimes in Spain, Hungary, and other European countries joined in the following years. It was extreme, violent anti-communism that united all of these fascist powers.
While there is widespread ignorance about the Soviet Union’s leading role in crushing Nazi Germany in WWII, the heroic contribution that the people of China made to the defeat of the Japanese empire is even less well known.
For Europe, WWII began in 1939, when Nazi Germany invaded Poland. For the people of China, the war started much earlier, in 1931, when the Japanese empire invaded the Manchuria region of northern China.
For 14 years, the people of China resisted Japan’s aggression, as the imperial regime sought to colonize more and more Chinese territory.
By the end of the war in 1945, roughly 20 million Chinese had lost their lives. This means that approximately 48 Chinese were killed for every US American who died in WWII.
In China, WWII is known as the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression, and it was part of a larger conflict called the World Anti-Fascist War.
China held an important event on 3 September 2025 commemorating the 80th anniversary of the defeat of fascism. It featured key leaders of countries that are today, once again, fighting against imperialism and fascism, including China’s President Xi Jinping, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin, the DPRK’s leader Kim Jong-un, Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian, and officials from other countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, including Cuba’s President Miguel Díaz-Canel and Nicaragua’s representative Laureano Ortega Murillo.
The United States has long taken credit for the defeat of the fascist Japanese empire, but this erases the enormous, heroic, 14-year contribution made by the Chinese people.
Although it is true that the United States was briefly allied with the USSR and China during WWII, and it did provide significant military assistance through its 1941 Lend-Lease Act, Washington immediately terminated that partnership in 1945.
In fact, even before WWII officially ended, the United States had already started to recruit fascists to help them wage the First Cold War. US intelligence agencies saved many Nazi war criminals in the infamous Operation Paperclip. Instead of facing justice, these genocidaires assisted Washington in its subsequent attacks on the Soviet Union and its communist allies in Eastern Europe.
Later, the CIA and NATO created Operation Gladio, in which they used fascist war criminals as foot soldiers of their new global imperialist war on socialism. The former top Nazi military officer Adolf Heusinger was appointed the chair of NATO’s military committee, and the ex Nazi Hans Speidel became commander of NATO’s land forces in Central Europe.
The United States even rehabilitated Nazi war criminal Reinhard Gehlen, who had directed Hitler’s military intelligence on the Eastern Front in WWII, and who later led the CIA-backed Gehlen Organization to help Washington wage its cold war against communists.
The United States did not defeat fascism; it rehabilitated and absorbed fascism into the capitalist empire that Washington built after WWII, centered in Wall Street and based on the dollar.
The contemporary German government published the results of a study in 2016, called the Rosenberg project, which sifted through classified documents from 1950 to 1973. It found that, at the height of the Cold War, the government of capitalist West Germany, which was a member of NATO, was full of former Nazis.
In fact, 77% of senior officials in West Germany’s Justice Ministry had been Nazis. Ironically, there had been a lower percentage of Nazi Party members in the Justice Ministry in Berlin when the genocidal dictator Adolf Hitler himself was in charge of the Third Reich.
Similarly, in Japan after WWII, US occupation forces released Japanese war criminals from prison and used them to construct an imperial client regime. The CIA helped to create and fund the powerful Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), which has essentially governed Japan as a one-party state, with few exceptions, since 1955.
Notorious war criminal Nobusuke Kishi had overseen genocidal crimes against humanity against the Chinese people as an administrator of the Japanese empire’s puppet regime of Manchukuo, in Manchuria, during WWII. After the war ended, the United States strongly supported Kishi, who led the LDP, established the de facto one-party state, and became prime minister of the country.
Still today, the Kishi dynasty is one of the most powerful families in Japan. Kishi’s grandson Shinzo Abe also led the LDP and served as prime minister from 2012 and 2020, closely allying Japan with the United States, while antagonizing China and rewriting the history of WWII.
In short, after the Soviet Union and China led the fight to defeat fascism in WWII, the US empire recruited fascists to fight its global war against socialism.
Today, it is extremely important to learn these facts and correct the historical record, because 2025 is the 80th anniversary of the end of WWII, and it is clear that the proper lessons have not been learned in the West.
The planet is still plagued by extreme imperial violence, and closer than ever to another world war.
The United States and Israel have been carrying out a genocide against the Palestinian people in Gaza, committing atrocities that are reminiscent of the fascists’ crimes against humanity in WWII.
Fascism has its roots in European colonialism. The genocidal tactics that the European empires used in Asia, Africa, and Latin America were later used by the fascists inside Europe.
Nazi leader Adolf Hitler was inspired by the genocidal crimes that the German empire had committed in southern Africa, and also by the genocide that the US colonialists had carried out against indigenous peoples in North America. The Nazis were likewise influenced by the US government’s racist laws against Black Americans, in its apartheid system known as Jim Crow.
Given the close links between fascism and Western imperialism, it is not surprising to see that, today, the US regime has become increasingly fascist. Politicians in Washington scapegoat immigrants and foreigners for the many domestic problems in their country, including the significant growth in inequality, poverty, and homelessness. They have no solutions other than more violence, racism, and war.
The increasing political desperation and instability in Washington is combining in a toxic mixture with the greed of US corporations in the military-industrial complex, which profit from war, and are thus incentivized to push for more conflict, not for peace.
The United States, as the leader of NATO, has already been waging a proxy war against Russia in Ukrainian territory, using the people of Ukraine as cannon fodder in an imperial war, tragically destroying an entire generation of Ukrainians in a vain attempt to maintain US global hegemony.
The US empire has also used its Israeli attack dog to wage war on the people of Iran, in an attempt to overthrow the revolutionary government in Tehran and impose a puppet regime, like the former king, the shah, who was propped up by Washington.
The number one target of the US empire today, however, is the People’s Republic of China. US imperialists fear that China is the only country powerful enough to not only challenge but to defeat Washington’s global hegemony.
The US empire is waging a Second Cold War against China, and it has weaponized everything in this hybrid war, imposing sanctions and tariffs to wage economic war, using its control over the dollar system in a financial war, and exploiting the media to spread disinformation and fake news as part of an information war.
Part of the US empire’s strategy in this information war is to erase the Chinese people’s major contribution to the defeat of fascism and imperialism in WWII.
This is why it is so crucial to defend the facts, and to teach the true history of WWII to people today. If we don’t correct the historical record, the fascists and imperialists of the 21st century will weaponize ignorance in order to carry out the same crimes that their ideological brethren committed in the 20th century.
Trump’s Peace? More Like Bombs, Blockades, and Bullying
December 27, 2025, By Joshua Scheer, https://scheerpost.com/2025/12/27/trumps-peace-more-like-bombs-blockades-and-bullying/
President Donald Trump’s aggressive foreign policy has now extended to Nigeria, marking the ninth country he has bombed during his tenure. Once trying to portray himself as a peace president, Trump is proving to be just another in a long line of imperialist war criminals.
A year ago he proudly called himself a peacemaker:
On Christmas, the United States launched a “powerful and deadly strike” against ISIS militants in northwestern Nigeria. Trump himself described the attack as a “Christmas present” for terrorists, rattling local communities and reigniting debates about the administration’s militaristic stance abroad.
On his social media platform Truth Social, Trump framed the attack almost as a holy war:
“The United States launched a powerful and deadly strike against ISIS Terrorist Scum in Northwest Nigeria, who have been targeting and viciously killing, primarily, innocent Christians at levels not seen for many years, and even centuries!”
He bragged that the strike was delayed on his order:
“They were going to do it earlier,” Trump told reporters. “And I said, ‘nope, let’s give a Christmas present.’ They didn’t think that was coming, but we hit them hard. Every camp got decimated.”
Residents in the affected Nigerian villages described terrifying scenes. “Our rooms began to shake, and then fire broke out,” one villager told the Associated Press. “The Nigerian government should take appropriate measures to protect us as citizens. We have never experienced anything like this before.” Another resident, Kagara, said, “We couldn’t sleep last night. We’ve never seen anything like this before.”
Villagers also emphasized their religious unity: “In Jabo, we see Christians as our brothers. We don’t have religious conflicts, so we weren’t expecting this,” one said.
This is a man who thought he deserved the Nobel Peace Prize? The neo-crusade he is launching worldwide is unhinged. Yet, like many bullies, if he doesn’t get his way, he throws a tantrum—except in this case, he has the world’s largest arsenal of weapons in which to do it.
About the Nobel Prize this from October from the Guardian newspaper: “Everybody has been talking about: ‘Will he get the Nobel peace prize?’” said Brian Mast, a Republican congressman of Florida, on Fox News Thursday morning. “Those … academics and elites sitting in Norway, that board of people that decide it, they need to give President Trump the Nobel peace prize.”
That was partly due to the ceasefire in Gaza, which now appears to effectively allow Israel to act with impunity. Since that fateful day in October, the genocide has continued—with more than 300 killed and 1,000 wounded—as Israeli forces expand and seize more territory. Dalia Abu Ramadan, writing for Truthout, describes the so-called “ceasefire” in Gaza as little more than a fiction.
This military aggression starkly contrasts with Trump’s August claims during an Oval Office meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, where he boasted, “I’ve done six wars, I’ve ended six wars.” He later added, “If you look at the six deals I settled this year, they were all at war. I didn’t do any ceasefires.”
The Nigerian airstrike comes amid ongoing tensions in Trump’s handling of international relations, especially concerning Ukraine and Russia. With drone strikes accumulating and Ukraine recently proposing a 20-point peace plan, Trump remains controlling, stating about Zelenskyy’s plan:
“He doesn’t have anything until I approve it. So we’ll see what he’s got.” Regarding his relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Trump expressed optimism:
“I think it’s going to go good with him. I think it’s going to go good with [Vladimir] Putin,” adding that he expects to speak with the Russian leader “soon, as much as I want.”
The recent airstrikes coincide with Trump’s confirmation that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will visit the U.S. this weekend. “I have Zelenskyy and I have Bibi coming. They’re all coming. They all come,” Trump said. “They respect our country again.” Netanyahu’s visit is widely seen as an effort to convince Trump to re-engage in a potential war with Iran.
Trump’s hawkish rhetoric and military actions dangerously escalate global conflicts, undermining diplomatic solutions and raising the risk of catastrophic outcomes—especially in a world already threatened by nuclear weapons. Rather than enhancing security, his approach fuels instability and reckless power plays under the guise of combating terrorism.
As the world watches the fallout from the Christmas airstrikes, questions remain about the broader consequences of Trump’s foreign policy—especially as tensions with Russia persist and conflicts in the Middle East and Africa continue to simmer. As the empire known as the United States continues to decline, hopefully, future generations will witness its peaceful end. The president who once called himself the peacemaker and promised to end forever wars continues to reveal his true colors. He is a bully whose mantra isn’t about ending conflicts but about using bombs and blockades to batter and belittle those who refuse to bow to his twisted worldview.
Just so you don’t think we’ve lost our minds, this praise came from “Little Marco” and his State Department, calling the president the “Peacemaker-in-Chief” back in August—quite a shift from today.
1 This Month
5 January -Webinar-What is Trump’s Golden Dome?
REGISTER AT Massachusetts Peace Action Education
New book – https://www.amazon.com/dp/1923372157?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Now until to February 10, 2026 Radioactive waste storage in France: the debate is finally open! How to participate?
-
Archives
- January 2026 (41)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
-
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 