nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Hamas will not be defeated for another two to three years: Israeli military sources

Hamas is reasserting civilian control of Khan Yunis following the withdrawal of the Israeli army and the return of some residents to the largely destroyed city

The Cradle, News Desk, MAY 5, 2024

Israeli military sources estimate that Hamas will not be decisively defeated in Gaza until 2026 or 2027, even as Hamas reasserts civilian control of the largely destroyed city of Khan Yunis following the army’s withdrawal, Israeli media reported on 4 May. 

Sources speaking with Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth said, “We will not be in Gaza permanently. We’ll return for extensive raids deep into the territory to defeat a terror army built over 15 years.” 

The sources add that “Meanwhile, the achievements of the forces that fought in Gaza are eroding, and there’s no conclusive political solution.”

The comments came amid reports that Hamas is reasserting security control over Khan Yunis following the withdrawal of the Israeli army and the slow return of Palestinians to their homes, or what is left of them, in the southern Gaza City since last month. 

Yedioth Ahronoth reported that for Israel, it is becoming “increasingly difficult to achieve even the more modest goals of the war: reducing Hamas’ civilian, not just military, control, especially after the IDF’s main military operation ended this week, to continue with limited raids.”

The paper added that “The Air Force will not target every municipal worker currently clearing debris from the streets with a tractor, nor will it strike every Gazan head of sanitation or regional education department manager still receiving their salary from Hamas.”

Previous reporting from +972 Magazine indicated that the Air Force was using artificial intelligence to develop target lists to assassinate thousands of low-level Hamas members by bombing their homes at night while they slept with their wives and children. 

Yedioth Ahronoth says the Israeli army now struggles to identify and target the intact internal security mechanisms of Hamas.

It noted a successful case last month in which the air force identified members of Hamas’ internal security services in Shujaiyah’s Kuwait Square last month and immediately launched airstrikes, killing most of them.

The paper also noted the Israeli military assassinated the mayor of the Maghazi refugee camp, Hatem al-Ghamri, for serving as the head of the local emergency committee for Hamas. The committee was responsible for distributing humanitarian aid to the camp’s residents.

“Since the first day of the war, the mayor has been working to provide relief services to tens of thousands of displaced people who sought refuge in the camp,” Mohammad al-Ayedi told the Palestine Chronicle. 

“He directly supervised the central emergency committee of the camp and continued to work diligently until the day of his martyrdom. Indeed, he was killed while fulfilling his mission of providing relief to the displaced,” he added.

However, Yedioth Ahronoth notes, “the challenge of locating and targeting the dispersed workforce of thousands of Hamas operatives is akin to finding a needle in a haystack.”

Instead, video footage and eyewitness reports have emerged of many instances of Israeli drones opening fire and killing unarmed civilians, including children and healthcare workers, as well. 

The paper added that in the markets of Jabaliya in northern Gaza, Hamas operatives are currently maintaining order and preventing price gouging on food amid shortages………………………………………more https://thecradle.co/articles-id/24727—

May 7, 2024 Posted by | Israel, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Is There Life Beyond Nuclear Armageddon?

Bruce Dorminey, Senior Contributor, Forbes, 30 Apr 24

Earth is a very rare jewel of a planet. A completely serendipitous chance encounter with a Mars-sized impactor some 4.5 billion years ago created our anomalously large moon which to this day gives our planet its stable axial tilt. All of which enabled our planet to evolve its current life-rich biosphere.

Yet only in the last 300,000 years or so have we been around long enough to watch Earth’s civilizations come and go. And only within the last hundred years have we created weapons of mass destruction so powerful that if used in anger, they could wipe out billions of years of biological evolution.

Given recent geopolitics, however, in fifty years’ time I wouldn’t bet on there being anybody here to ponder such philosophical musings.

Thus, could life survive a full-scale nuclear war?

A nuclear Armageddon might be broadly similar to the K/Pg impact (the “dinosaur killer”) some 66 million years ago, Ariel Anbar, a geochemist and President’s Professor at Arizona State University in Tempe, told me via email. But in terms of the energy released the impact was thousands of times larger than even an all-out nuclear war would release, he says. Nuclear war also brings with it radiation that can drive mutations, which is a special kind of “nasty” but both scenarios are more than enough to bring down human civilization, says Anbar.

Most if not all of humanity would simply disappear.

My suspicion is that something like 99.9% of all humans would die, and our civilization would never rebound, Bruce Lieberman, a paleontologist and evolutionary biologist at the University of Kansas in Lawrence, told me via email. Either we wouldn’t survive, or it would be so bad for those few that lived that they would be better off if they didn’t survive, says Lieberman.

But Would Our Biosphere Survive?

Earth’s biosphere would survive even though it would take a big hit, says Anbar. Leaving aside the consequences of radioactive fallout, a nuclear war would be less severe than the K/Pg impact some 66 million years ago, he says. The consequences of nuclear fallout from a global exchange are hard to gauge since there’s a lot we do not know, says Anbar. But plenty of animals would likely survive so evolution is not likely to be “reset” back to microbes, he says.

How would nuclear Armageddon compare to natural planet killers that have befallen planet Earth, such as giant asteroids, comets as well as nearby gamma ray bursts or supernova explosions?

Life eventually rebounded after each of these mass extinctions, though it took at least 10-20 million years for diversity to reach former levels and for ecosystems to return to their pre-extinction levels of complexity, says Lieberman.

Even so, Lieberman says a global nuclear holocaust would cause a tremendous initial loss in biodiversity, perhaps on the order of 70% to 95% of all animal and plant species on land and 25% to 50% in the oceans.

The lesson here is that our planet’s fate can turn on a dime…………………………………………………………………………. more https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucedorminey/2024/04/30/is-there-life-beyond-nuclear-armageddon/?sh=30cdf0a04eb0

May 6, 2024 Posted by | weapons and war | 2 Comments

Nukes in space: Why a very very stupid idea just became more likely

Fears of a Cold War nightmare are resurfacing.

Tom Howarth, May 4, 2024,  https://www.sciencefocus.com/space/nukes-in-space

Could a nuke be used in space? Last month, Russia seemingly took a step toward making the idea a reality. In defiance of a US and Japan-sponsored UN resolution, the country vetoed plans to prevent the development and deployment of off-world nuclear weapons.

Fortunately, the country didn’t actually threaten to launch such a device into space, an act that would violate the 1967 Outer Space Treaty. However, the UN representative for Russia did call the new resolution a “cynical ploy” and claimed “we are being tricked”.

But what would actually happen if Russia – or any other country – detonated a nuke above Earth? The worrying answer: such an explosion could be as devastating as one on ground level.

What happens if you detonate a nuclear warhead in space?

There are some pretty stark differences between setting off a nuke at ground level and up in orbit. 

“When nuclear weapons go off on the ground, a lot of energy is initially released as X-rays,” Dr Michael Mulvihill, vice chancellor research fellow at Teesside University, tells BBC Science Focus.

“Those X-rays superheat the atmosphere, causing it to explode into a fireball – that’s what produces the shockwave and characteristic mushroom cloud that sucks up dirt and produces fallout.”

But in space there is no atmosphere. So no mushroom clouds or shockwaves are formed when you set off a nuke in space. That doesn’t mean the effects are any less terrifying, however. 

“In space, a nuclear explosion releases a huge amount of energy as X-rays, gamma rays, intense flows of neutrons and subatomic charged particles. It also produces what’s known as an electromagnetic pulse, or EMP,” Mulvihill says.

An EMP is effectively a burst of electromagnetic energy; when one interacts with the upper atmosphere, it strips electrons from it, blinding radar systems, knocking out communications and wiping out power systems.

After the initial explosion, a belt of radiation wraps around the Earth that persists for months, possibly even years – no one knows for sure. The radiation can damage satellites and, as Mulvihill points out, would pose a serious risk to anyone in space at the time – such as astronauts on the ISS.

“The EMP would knock out power systems on the ISS, effectively destroying the life support systems and everything that circulates the atmosphere within the space station. And I imagine the astronauts would be exposed to high levels of radiation too,” Mulvihill explains.

“It would be highly hostile to life in orbit.”

Space is becoming more and more crowded with satellites – approximately 10,000 satellites are in low earth orbit right now, and tens of thousands more are planned for launch in the coming years. This significantly raises the stakes of unleashing nuclear energy in space, as we become more reliant on the systems we put into orbit.

From ground level, however, other than blowing power grids and disrupting communications, the effects could also be somewhat beautiful.

As charged particles from the explosion interact with the Earth’s magnetic field and the atmosphere, they would cause brilliant auroras, stretching across huge distances that could last for days. So there’s that, at least. 

Have nuclear explosions reached space before?

Unsurprisingly, during the Cold War, global superpowers (namely, the US and Russia) tested nukes in just about every scenario imaginable. On land, underwater, in a mountain – you name it, they tried blowing it up. 

It comes as no surprise then, that detonating nuclear weapons in space has been done before. In total, the US conducted five space nuclear tests in space; the most famous of which, according to Mulvihill, occurred on 9 July 1962 near(ish) to the Pacific island paradise of Hawaii. 

Starfish Prime was launched 400km (250 miles) above Johnston Island and had an explosive power of 1.4 megatons – about 100 times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb.

The EMP was much larger than expected, compromising the classified nature of the test as streetlights and phone lines were knocked out in Hawaii 1,450 km (900 miles) away from the detonation point.

The ensuing red auroras stretched across the Pacific Ocean and lasted for hours.

“At the time there were around 22 satellites in space, of which around a third were knocked out,”  Mulvihill says. The casualties included the world’s first TV communication satellite, Telstar 1, which had been a beacon of US technological development until Starfish Prime caused it to prematurely fail after just seven months in orbit.

In the following years, everyone came to their senses a bit and decided that testing nuclear warheads in space constituted a bad idea. Thus, the Outer Space Treaty (OST) was born. 

Signed in 1967 by the US, UK and Soviet Union, the OST now has over 100 signatories and designates space as free for all to use for peaceful purposes only. The world breathed a sigh of relief and got on with using space for nice things like astronomy, space stations and WiFi for the next 60 years. So, what’s changed? 

How worried should we be?

Rumours of a change in the orbital security situation began swirling when earlier this year the US House Intelligence Committee chairman Mike Turner issued a vague warning about a “serious national security threat” posed by Russia. 

Following this, news outlets began reporting that the threat pertained to a possible “nuclear weapon in space”.

“It’s certainly concerning, but don’t lose sleep over it,” Mulvihill says. “Russia is still a signatory of the OST, so any sort of weapon in space would be absolutely illegal.” 

He also points out that as Starfish Prime demonstrated, nuclear weapons in space are indiscriminate, meaning any detonation would do just as much damage to Russia and its allies as anyone else. 

“It wouldn’t just knock out Starlink [the SpaceX system of satellites that provides internet to 75 countries]. It would knock out Chinese satellites and everyone else’s too.” 

Another possibility, Mulvihill thinks, is that countries could develop nuclear-powered ‘jammers’. In other words, not a bomb (phew), but something that uses nuclear power to generate a signal that could disrupt, rather than destroy, other satellites. 

Ultimately, though, this could all be little more than geopolitical posturing. “Deterrence is all about messaging and trying to persuade somebody that you would do it without ever actually getting there. I think that’s probably the psychology that’s going on with this,” Mulvihill concludes.

May 6, 2024 Posted by | space travel, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Inside story: Will Iran’s supreme leader revise his ‘nuclear fatwa’?

 https://amwaj.media/article/inside-story-will-iran-s-supreme-leader-revise-his-nuclear-fatwa 5 May 24

The direct confrontation between Iran and Israel has sparked speculation about a potential shift in the Islamic Republic’s nuclear policies under the leadership of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Following Iran’s Apr. 14 military action against Israel in response to the Apr. 1 bombing of the Iranian consulate in Damascus, a senior commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) explicitly suggested the possibility of a revision to Tehran’s objection to atomic weapons. The suggestion may only be a part of the war of words between Iran and Israel. However, the fact that such discourse is rapidly becoming mainstream in Iran raises questions of what may lie ahead—including whether a shift may take place under Khamenei, who has long opposed atomic weapons on a religious basis.

Rapidly changing discourse

Amid media speculations of a major Israeli attack in response to Iran’s Apr. 14 drone and missile strike on sites inside Israel, Gen. Ahmad Haqtalab—the commander of the Protection and Security Corps of Nuclear Centers—on Apr. 18 stated, “If the Zionist regime wants to use the threat of attacking our country’s nuclear centers as a tool to pressure Iran, it is possible to review the nuclear doctrine and policies of the Islamic Republic of Iran and deviate from the previous considerations.”

The warning was rare, and even as tensions eased between Tehran and Tel Aviv, Iranian officials continued to underscore the significance of the matter. Four days after Haqtalab’s intervention, former IRGC commander and current MP Javad Karimi Qoddousi tweeted, “If permission is issued, there will be [only a] week before the first [nuclear] test.” Qoddousi separately posited that the same amount of time was needed to test missiles with an increased range of 12,000 km (7,456 miles).

However, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Nasser Kanani promptly interjected, dismissing the notion of any alteration to the country’s nuclear doctrine. Meanwhile, government-run Iran daily slammed Qoddousi, characterizing his statements as “untrue” and possibly being exploited by “enemies” to pursue further sanctions and fear mongering against Iran. Several other outlets, including conservative-run media, notably echoed such criticisms.

Yet, despite the blowback, Qoddousi went ahead and posted a video on Apr. 25 in which he said that Iran needs only half a day to produce the 90%-enriched uranium necessary to build nuclear bombs.

Khamenei and the ‘nuclear fatwa’

In Shiite Islam, a fatwa is a religious edict issued by a high-ranking Islamic jurist on the basis of interpretation of Islamic law. To followers of the jurist in question, fatwas are binding and the primary point of reference for everything from major life decisions to day-to-day matters. Fatwas can also be a part of state policies.

Ayatollah Khamenei has on multiple occasions over the past two decades reiterated his objection to the development, stockpiling, and usage of nuclear weapons as haram or religiously impermissible. Among believers, violating what is deemed haram would have serious consequences both in this life and the hereafter. In 2010, the supreme leader reiterated his objection to weapons of mass destruction in a message to an international conference on nuclear disarmament, stating they “pose a serious threat to humanity” and that “everyone must make efforts to secure humanity against this great calamity.”

Critics of what became known as the nuclear fatwa have over the years raised a variety of objections, from the modality of Khamenei’s religious edict to the manner in which it has been presented. Some even question whether the ruling really exists. What is indisputable, however, is that the religious edict has previously averted conflict by aiding diplomacy.

For instance, in connection with the 2013-15 nuclear negotiations that led to the signing of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) between Iran and world powers—which saw Tehran agree to restrictions on its atomic program in exchange for sanctions relief—there were suggestions that the Islamic Republic should codify the fatwa.

Amid the nuclear negotiations with Iran, then-US secretary of state John Kerry in 2014 stated, “We take [Khamenei’s fatwa] very seriously….a fatwa issued by a cleric is an extremely powerful statement about intent. Our need is to codify it.” In another interview the same year, Kerry asserted that “the requirement here is to translate the fatwa into a legally binding, globally recognized, international understanding…that goes beyond an article of faith within a religious belief.”

Only days after the signing of the JCPOA in 2015, Khamenei said, “The Americans say they stopped Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. They know it is not true. We had a fatwa, declaring nuclear weapons to be religiously forbidden under Islamic law. It had nothing to do with the nuclear talks.”

Will Khamenei change his fatwa?

Khamenei is not the first Iranian Islamic jurist to issue a fateful religious edict on a highly politicized matter. Back in 1891, Mirza Mohammad Shirazi (1815-95), a leading Shiite religious authority at the time, issued a hokm or verdict against the usage of tobacco in what became known as the Tobacco Protest. The move came in protest against a concession granted by the Qajar monarch Naser Al-Din (1848-98) to the British Empire, granting control over the growth, sale, and export of tobacco to an Englishman. The hokm issued by Shirazi ultimately led to the repeal of the concession.

Neither a fatwa nor a hokm is set in stone and can be revised. The main distinction between the two types of rulings is that a hokm tends to have more conditions and requirements attached to it. Moreover, while a fatwa must be followed by the followers of the Islamic jurist who issued it, a hokm must be followed by all believers—including Shiites who are not followers of the jurist in question.

Explaining the intricacies of a hokm, a cleric and professor of Islamic law (fiqh) at the Qom Seminary told Amwaj.media, “There are primary hokm and secondary hokm. The former is like the necessity of the daily prayer that is mentioned in the Quran and the hadiths [traditions], or the prohibition on consuming alcohol. The secondary hokm is based on expediency and necessity that leads to the first ruling being changed. For example, if alcohol helps someone stay alive, then it is not haram [religiously impermissible] for him or her [to make use of it].” He added, “A fatwa can be changed too.”

May 6, 2024 Posted by | Iran, politics, weapons and war | Leave a comment

NATO using war games to ‘prepare for conflict’ – Moscow

 https://www.rt.com/russia/596996-nato-conflict-prepares-russia/ 5 May 24

The US-led bloc is holding its largest exercises in decades near the Russian border, the Foreign Ministry has pointed out

NATO’s largest exercise since the Cold War are being held near Russia’s border, indicating that the US-led bloc is “seriously preparing” for a potential conflict with Moscow, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said.

The Steadfast Defender drills, featuring some 90,000 troops from all 32 NATO member states and 1,100 combat vehicles, started in late January and will end in May.

According to the wargame scenario, “the coalition’s actions against Russia are being practiced using all the instruments, including hybrid and conventional weapons,” Zakharova said in a statement on Saturday.

”We have to admit that NATO is seriously preparing for a ‘potential conflict’ with us,” Zakharova said.

The diplomat was commenting on accusations made by NATO earlier this week that Russia was allegedly carrying out “hybrid activities” on the member countries’ soil, which they insist constitute a threat to their security. These actions include “sabotage, acts of violence, cyber and electronic interference, disinformation campaigns, and other hybrid operations,” the bloc claimed in a statement on Thursday.

Zakharova dismissed the allegations as “disinformation” and an attempt to shift public attention from NATO’s own activities.

The bloc and the leadership of individual member states are “increasing the degree of anti-Russian hysteria in order to justify the unprecedented scale of militarization in Europe,” the official stated.

According to the diplomat, it was NATO that launched “a hybrid war against Russia in all operational environments and in all geographic directions.” In addition, the bloc members are actively involved in the Ukraine conflict. They are providing Kiev not only with financial support, but also with weapons and intelligence data – which are then used “to strike civilians and civilian infrastructure in Russia,” Zakharova added

Back in March, Russian Security Council Secretary Nikolay Patrushev said that NATO’s Steadfast Defender 2024 exercises were “increasing tensions and destabilizing the situation in the world” by simulating a military confrontation with Moscow. The official described the bloc as an “important tool” employed by the US to exert pressure and influence on other nations. NATO has come directly to Russia’s western border and is preparing for future conflicts, he stressed.

In recent months, multiple senior officials from NATO member states claimed that Moscow was planning to launch an attack against the military bloc in the coming years.

Russia has repeatedly denied those claims, with President Vladimir Putin saying the country “has no interest … geopolitically, economically or militarily … in waging war against NATO.”

May 6, 2024 Posted by | EUROPE, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Tell President Biden: WE WANT COOPERATION, NOT CONFLICT!

Biden is still asking for billions of dollars to spend on militarizing the Asia-Pacific region and encircling China. While the China-US summit in November was a good start, we’re a long way to building a sustainable and human-centered bilateral relationship where war is unlikely. Tell Biden we can’t afford one more penny on global aggression.

Dear President Joseph R. Biden,

You made an Oval Office address, during which you said, “American leadership is what holds the world together. American alliances are what keep us, America, safe.” In your more than fifty years of public service, however, the US has been involved in multiple wars. Currently, the US is occupying Syria, Iraq, Somalia in addition to supporting Israel’s siege and ethnic cleansing campaign in Gaza. Meanwhile, the Russia-Ukraine conflict has dragged on with no effort dedicated to peace talks.

As your administration seeks $105 billion in military spending, it seeks to allocate $7.4 billion of that money for militarizing the Asia-Pacific region, including more weapons to Taiwan. That doesn’t even include the $10 billion for weaponizing Taiwan authorized by the US Senate last year. About $3.4 billion of your request is for building a base to host attack submarines targeting China. This is all on top of the $9.1 billion for the Pacific Deterrence Initiative proposed by the Pentagon earlier this year.

Civil society organizations and environmentalists in the Philippines, Papua New Guinea, Japan, South Korea, and Guam have protested our military exercises and bases, which many say will make them the first casualties in a potential war. Military alliances don’t make them feel safe, and it is also taking away funds from targeting real threats like the climate crisis.

As we spend money on militarizing the region, it’s only made China more wary of cooperation. Yet, China is a natural ally in our fight against climate change. From Brooklyn to Beijing, extreme weather events are getting deadlier; 83 million more could die from climate-related disasters this century if we don’t limit global warming to 1.5° C by 2030.  We implore you to strike a global climate finance deal.

Instead of tens of billions going to genocide in Gaza, war in Ukraine, and weapons systems in the Pacific, we must allocate resources to ensure a livable ecosystem. That kind of leadership is exactly what two-thirds of Americans surveyed by the Pew Research Center in 2020 would like to see – leadership focused on the climate crisis. President Xi has pledged to peak carbon emissions by 2030. You have expressed support for $11 billion in climate finance by 2024. If we don’t fund war, we could spend what you proposed on protecting our planet and much more.

May 6, 2024 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, weapons and war, Women | Leave a comment

US Air Force pays $13 billion for new ‘doomsday’ planes that protect president during a nuclear attack – sparking fears America’s preparing for WWIII

  • The contract is to replace the four doomsday planes in use due to them ageing
  • The fleet is used to protect the president in the event of a nuclear attack 
  • READ MORE: America’s ‘doomsday’ plane was sent on a four-hour training

By STACY LIBERATORE FOR DAILYMAIL.COM, 30 April 2024

American is set to get a new fleet of ‘doomsday planes’ that some have said signal the nation could be preparing for World Ward III.

The US Air Forced announced a $13 billion contract to develop craft to replace the aging Boeing planes that are used to protect the president during a nuclear attack.

The funds were awarded to Sierra Nevada Corp, which will design a successor to the E-4B ‘Nightwatch’ that features a mobile command post capable of withstanding nuclear blasts and electromagnetic effects.

The project, called Survival Airborne Operations Center, is expected to be completed by 2036…………………..

The Air Force has a fleet of four E-4Bs, with at least one on alert at all times, but the Boeings are aging and many parts have become obsolete.

Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC), an American aerospace company, said: ‘SNC is building the airborne command center of the future!………………………………..

Boeing was let go as the sole provider of the doomsday planes in December 2023 after the company and US military could not agree on pricing for the next-generation fleet.

Details of SNC’s design have not been shared, but the craft will likely resemble the current E-4B ‘Nightwatch.

The current doomsday plane includes an advanced satellite communications system, nuclear and thermal effects shielding, acoustic control and an advanced air-conditioning system for cooling electrical components.

The planes can also be refueled in the air and have remained airborne and operational for as long as 35.4 hours in one stint. 

The engine can produce 52,500 pounds of thrust and the plane can carry up to 800,000 pounds.

Each E-4B ‘Nightwatch’ is 231 feet long with a 195-foot wingspan – and cost $223 million to make.

The Air Force said in the FY2024 budget request that SAOC will provide ‘a worldwide, survivable, and enduring node of the National Military Command System (NMCS) to fulfill national security requirements throughout all stages of conflict,’ according to SWNS.

As a command, control and communications center directing US forces, executing emergency war orders and coordinating the activities of civil authorities including national contingency plans, this capability ensures continuity of operations and continuity of government as required in a national emergency or after negation/destruction of ground command and control centers,’ the military branch added.

‘SAOC will fulfill the requirements of the AF Nuclear Mission by providing Nuclear Command, Control and Communications (NC3) capabilities to enable the exercise of authority and direction by the President to command and control US military nuclear weapons operations.’

SNC has not revealed what airframe they will use for their doomsday planes.

The E-4Bs are operated by the First Airborne Command and Control Squadron of the 595th Command and Control Group, are coordinated by the United States Strategic Command and are stationed near Omaha, Nebraska, at the Offutt Air Force Base.

One of the doomsday planes was sent on a four-hour training flight in 2022 after Vladimir Putin placed Russia’s nuclear forces on high alert.

Military flight tracking sites showed the modified Boeing 747 had departed from the US Air Force base in Lincoln, Nebraska and carried out a training flight with other specialist military aircraft.  https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-13363035/US-Air-Force-pays-13-billion-new-doomsday-planes-protect-president-nuclear-attack-sparking-fears-Americas-preparing-WWWIII.html

May 5, 2024 Posted by | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Israel’s Finance Minister Smotrich calls for ‘total annihilation’ of Gaza


Julia Conley. Common Dreams, Wed, 01 May 2024,  https://www.sott.net/article/491110-Israels-Finance-Minister-Smotrich-calls-for-total-annihilation-of-Gaza

In just the latest example of a top Israeli official openly calling for the elimination of Gaza and the 2.3 million Palestinians who live there, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich on Tuesday demanded the destruction of cities and refugee camps in the blockaded enclave.

“There are no half measures,” said Smotrich at a government meeting. “Rafah, Deir al-Balah, Nuseirat — total annihilation.”

“‘You will blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven,'” he added, quoting the biblical story of the nation of Amalek, whose people God commanded the Israelites to exterminate and which right-wing Israeli leaders have long invoked to justify the killing of Palestinians.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also referenced Amalek in the first weeks of Israel’s current escalation against Gaza; Smotrich’s comments came as he and other government officials pushed Netanyahu to forge ahead with a planned attack on the southern city of Rafah, where more than 1.5 million people have been displaced as other cities across Gaza have been decimated by Israeli forces.

Ibrahim Hooper, national communications director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), called on President Joe Biden to stop condemning thousands of U.S. college students who have demanded a cease-fire and an end to military aid for Israel and direct his ire toward the Israeli government, which he has repeatedly insisted is targeting Hamas despite its genocidal statements and indiscriminate attacks.

“In case the Israeli government’s genocidal intent in Gaza was unclear to anyone despite its daily war crimes against the Palestinian people, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich’s words should serve as another wake-up call,” said Hooper. “The intent of the Netanyahu government has always been Palestinian land without Palestinians, and violence has always been the route to achieve that heinous goal. Instead of condemning college students, President Biden must condemn Israeli leaders for making and acting on their genocidal threats.”

In recent months, Israeli officials have stated that the “migration” of Gaza residents is their ultimate goal in relentlessly attacking the enclave, that all Palestinians in Gaza are “responsible” for a Hamas-led attack on southern Israel in October and are legitimate targets, that the enclave should be “flattened,” and that the Israel Defense Forces is fighting “human animals.”

Comment: And total annihilation seems to be Israel’s final solution.


Journalist Mehdi Hasan sardonically suggested that Smotrich’s comments will be deemed acceptable by the Biden administration, members of Congress, and the U.S. corporate media because he didn’t “say it on a college campus.”

“Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, a member of the security cabinet, ought to be fired immediately over his latest remarks,” read an editorial in Haaretz Tuesday night that was published as police in New York were storming Columbia University to arrest students.

Comment: It’s notable that Haaretz published that editorial, however the majority of Israelis still support their government’s genocide, and a significant minority claim it is not being aggressive enough.

“That’s how any properly run country would act, and all the more so a country against which the International Court of Justice in The Hague has issued provisional measures requiring it to refrain from genocide, including one requiring it to deal properly with incitement to genocide.”

Smotrich and others have objected to what National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir on Tuesday called a “reckless” deal that would allow for the release of scores of Israeli hostages being held by Hamas in exchange for Palestinian prisoners who have long been detained in Israeli jails. The deal would include a 40-day halt in fighting.

CAIR also pointed out Tuesday that five units of Israel’s security forces have been accused of committing a “gross violation of human rights,” according to a U.S. State Department analysis.

“Our nation’s repeated claim that it supports international law and human rights,” said national executive director Nihad Awad, “is a cruel illusion.”

May 5, 2024 Posted by | Gaza, Israel, weapons and war | Leave a comment

The Fight Over THAAD in Korea

An anti-ballistic missile system can easily be overwhelmed by a full-scale enemy attack. The system’s primary purpose is to support a first-strike capability, in which the United States takes out as many of the enemy’s missiles as possible, leaving the anti-ballistic missile system to counter the few surviving missiles.

In essence, that makes the radar in the THAAD system a first-strike weapon

The effect is to enlist South Korea, willingly or not, in U.S. war plans against China. When residents in Seongju argue that THAAD makes them a target, they are not mistaken.

CounterPunch, BY GREGORY ELICH, 1 May 24

Since the U.S. military brought its Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system to South Korea in 2017, it has met with sustained local resistance. THAAD is the centerpiece of the numerous actions the United States has undertaken to enmesh South Korea in its hostile anti-China campaign, a course that Korean peace activists are fighting to reverse.

In a unanimous decision at the end of March, South Korea’s Constitutional Court dismissed two challenges lodged by residents of Seongju County against the deployment of THAAD. [1] Since its arrival, the THAAD system has met with recurring demonstrations in the nearby village of Soseong-ri. The hope in the Yoon and Biden administrations is that the court’s decision will dishearten opponents of THAAD. In this expectation, they are already disappointed, as anti-THAAD activists responded to the court’s decision by vowing to “fight to the end.” [2]

Although protestors have regularly held rallies on the road leading to the THAAD site, swarms of Korean police cleared them away to allow free passage for U.S. military supply trucks. Opposition to THAAD has angered U.S. officials, leading the Biden administration to dispatch Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin to Seoul to deliver the message that it deemed the situation “unacceptable” and progress on establishing the base needed to accelerate. Austin also raised objections to protests by residents in Pohang over noise from U.S. Apache attack helicopters conducting live-fire exercises. [3] Predictably, the Yoon administration responded by prioritizing U.S. demands over the welfare of the Korean people and promised “close cooperation for normalizing routine and unfettered access to the THAAD site” and “improvement of the combined training conditions.” [4]

THAAD is billed as an anti-missile defense system consisting of an interceptor missile battery, a fire control and communications unit, and an AN/TPY-2 X-band radar. The ostensible purpose of THAAD in Seongju is to counter incoming North Korean missiles, but serious doubts exist about its efficacy in that role. In terms of coverage, THAAD’s position in Seongju puts it in range to cover the main U.S. military base in South Korea, Camp Humphreys in Pyeongtaek, but out of range to protect Seoul, which at any rate is indefensible due to its proximity to the border. Even so, it is questionable how much utility the system offers even for Pyeongtaek.

THAAD’s missiles are designed to intercept incoming ballistic missiles at an altitude of 40 to 150 kilometers. The THAAD battery would have less than three and a half minutes to detect and counter-launch against a high-altitude ballistic missile fired from the farthestpoint in North Korea. By then, the incoming missile would have fallen below the lower-end altitude range of 40 kilometers, leaving it invulnerable to interception. [5] That would be the best-case scenario, as in the event of a war, the North Koreans are not likely to be so accommodating as to launch ballistic missiles from as far away as possible.

Furthermore, the THAAD battery in Seongju is equipped with six launchers and 48 interceptor missiles. With a thirty-minute THAAD battery launcher reload time, incoming missiles would not take long to deplete THAAD’s ability to respond, even under the most accommodating circumstances.

An upgrade was recently made to integrate THAAD with Patriot PAC-3 defense to intercept ballistic missiles at a lower altitude. This enhancement is of doubtful utility, as the radar’s response would still be constrained by the short flight time of an incoming missile. For all the hype about the successful interception of Iranian missiles fired at Israel, the Patriot’s showing in a more suitable scenario was less than stellar. It had an advantage there, as Iranian and Yemeni launch sites were situated much farther away from their target than in the Korean case. Yet, out of 120 Iranian ballistic missiles, the Patriot system shot down only one. The others were intercepted primarily by U.S. warplanes. [6]

North Korea’s development of a solid-fuel hypersonic intermediate-range missile has added another unmeetable challenge for THAAD. Because of its proximity, it is doubtful that North Korea would target US forces with high-altitude ballistic missiles in case of war. Instead, it would likely rely on its long-range artillery, cruise missiles, and short-range ballistic missiles, flying well below the lower limit of THAAD’s altitude coverage.

Despite its doubtful defensive effectiveness on the Korean Peninsula, the United States attaches enormous importance to THAAD’s deployment in South Korea, which suggests an unstated motivation. A clue is provided by the stationing in Japan of two stand-alone AN/TPY-2 radars without an accompanying THAAD system. [7] In other words, it is the radar that matters to the U.S. military, and the linkage to THAAD interceptors is primarily a pretense made necessary by popular feeling in Korea.  

What makes the AN/TPY-2 special is its ability to operate in two modes. In terminal mode, it feeds tracking data to the THAAD missile battery, allowing it to target an incoming ballistic missile as it descends toward its target. In forward-based mode, the THAAD missile battery is not involved, and the role of the radar is to detect a ballistic missile as it ascends from its launching pad, even from deep into China. In this mode, the radar is integrated into the U.S. missile defense system and sends tracking data to interceptor missiles stationed on U.S. territory and Pacific bases. [8] As a U.S. Army publication points out, when in forward-based mode, a field commander may use the radar system “to concurrently support both regional and strategic missile defense operations.” [9]

There are hints that preparations may already be underway to establish the conditions necessary for THAAD to operate in forward-based mode. Last year, South Korea and Japan agreed to link their radars to the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command in Hawaii. [10] The ostensible purpose is to enhance the tracking accuracy of missiles fired from North Korea, but the concept applies equally well to Chinese missiles. It is not a stretch to imagine that if South Korean and Japanese radars have been linked to the United States, the same may be true with the THAAD’s AN/TPY-2. Certainly, if the U.S. Army switches the mode, it will not be informing South Korean authorities, so sure are the Americans that they can freely treat Korean sovereignty with contempt. Switching an AN/TPY-2 radar from one mode to the other takes only eight hours, a quick process that is opaque to outsiders. [11]

An anti-ballistic missile system can easily be overwhelmed by a full-scale enemy attack. The system’s primary purpose is to support a first-strike capability, in which the United States takes out as many of the enemy’s missiles as possible, leaving the anti-ballistic missile system to counter the few surviving missiles. In essence, that makes the radar in the THAAD system a first-strike weapon.

The closer the radar is stationed to an adversary’s ballistic missile launch, the more precise the tracking provided to the U.S.-based anti-missile system. South Korea is ideally located for the AN/TPY-2, where its radar can cover much of eastern China. [12] The effect is to enlist South Korea, willingly or not, in U.S. war plans against China. When residents in Seongju argue that THAAD makes them a target, they are not mistaken.

The Yoon administration is taking integration with the U.S. missile defense system one step further in planning to spend an estimated $584 million to procure American SM-3 interceptor missiles, suitable for protecting the United States and its bases in the Pacific.[13] The SM-3 interceptors are to be deployed on South Korean Aegis destroyers, which will need to be upgraded at additional cost to handle them. [14]

Residents in Seongju are also concerned about potential health risks associated with living adjacent to the THAAD installation.

Continue reading →

May 4, 2024 Posted by | South Korea, weapons and war | Leave a comment

NATO state rejects €100 billion Ukraine war chest ‘madness’

 https://www.rt.com/news/596896-hungary-nato-ukraine-madness/ 02 May 2024

Budapest is opposing a potential €100-billion ($107 billion), five-year NATO plan to fund Ukraine in its conflict with Russia,Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has said. The draft plan on the military aid fund was presented to member states of the US-led bloc by Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg earlier this week, Szijjarto revealed.

The minister made the remarks on Thursday to Hungarian broadcaster M1 before heading for a ministerial meeting of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries in Paris. Szijjarto said:

“On Tuesday, the NATO member states received the secretary-general’s proposal to raise 100 billion that NATO plans to spend on the war. Since the money is to be collected over five years, this means NATO expects the hostilities to continue for this period.”

Budapest will oppose the initiative and is not planning to participate in arming Kiev or training its soldiers, Szijjarto stressed. The draft plan was presented to the bloc’s member states in its “first reading” and is still a subject to negotiations, the senior diplomat noted.

“In the coming weeks during negotiations we will fight for Hungary’s right to stay away from this madness, from collecting these 100 billion and siphoning them out of Europe.”

Budapest prioritizes the security of its own people before anything else and will do its best to “stay out of war,” Szijjarto explained, adding Hungary’s opinion remains that the conflict can only be resolved through negotiations. Nonetheless, Budapest acknowledges mounting global security issues and wants to be ready to face them, he said.

Szijjarto urged:

“We cannot ignore the threat of a new world war and the preparations for a nuclear war. This madness here in Europe must be stopped.”

Hungary has consistently expressed its opposition to the ever-growing involvement of the US-led NATO bloc – and of the EU – in the Ukrainian conflict, refusing to send arms to prop up Kiev or to train its troops, and forbidding use of its territory to funnel such shipments from third countries.

Budapest has also publicly spoken out against the potential accession of Ukraine into NATO, which has long been one of the key goals of Ukrainian leadership.

May 4, 2024 Posted by | EUROPE, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Australia and the F-35 supply chain: in lockstep with Lockheed

The Australian government has continued arms exports to Israel while assuring Australians it has not sent weapons to Israel for five years

MICHELLE FAHY. MAY 03, 2024,  https://undueinfluence.substack.com/p/lockstep-with-lockheed-australia?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=297295&post_id=143751160&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

Australia is one of six western countries that are complicit in the ‘genocidal erasure’ of the Palestinian people by continuing to supply Israel with arms, according to Dr Ghassan Abu-Sittah, a British-Palestinian surgeon and newly elected rector of Glasgow University.

Israel’s relentless bombing campaign has systematically destroyed all of Gaza’s 11 universities plus more than 400 schools, and killed 6,000 students, 230 teachers, 100 professors and deans, and two university presidents.

The elimination of entire educational institutions (both infrastructure and human resources) is ‘scholasticide’ and is a critical component of the genocidal erasure, says Dr Abu-Sittah.

He named the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada and France as comprising an ‘axis of genocide’ because they have been supporting the genocide in Gaza with arms, and had also maintained political support for Israel.

Dr Abu-Sittah worked in Gaza for 43 days in the immediate aftermath of the October 7 attacks. His experience was cited in South Africa’s genocide case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

In his submission to the ICJ, Dr Abu-Sittah wrote: ‘There was a girl with just her whole body covered in shrapnel. She was nine. I ended up having to change and clean these wounds with no anaesthetic and no analgesic. I managed to find some intravenous paracetamol to give her…her Dad was crying, I was crying, and the poor child was screaming…’

Australia defies the UN

The Albanese government has consistently denied it is supplying weapons to Israel, even as the United Nations pointed a finger directly at Australia, alongside the US, Germany, France, the UK, and Canada, asking these countries to immediately halt all weapons transfers to Israel, including weapons parts, and to halt export licences and military aid.

The Defence Department has refused to answer questions about whether it has halted the arms export permits for Israel that were in place before October 7, the day of Hamas’s deadly attack in Israel.

Defence approved new export permits to Israel after October 7

Defence approved three new export permits to Israel in October 2023, and none in November, December or January (to 29/1), according to figures Defence released following a Freedom of Information (FOI) request I lodged on 29 January.

In a Senate estimates hearing on February 14, the Defence Department revealed it had approved two new export permits to Israel since the Hamas attacks of October 7. Asked for clarification about the timing, Defence’s deputy secretary of Strategy, Policy, and Industry, Mr Hugh Jeffrey, said, ‘Two export permits have been granted since the time of the last estimates’. The previous estimates hearing had been on 25 October 2023.

The Senate Estimates and FOI evidence together show that Defence approved one export permit to Israel prior to October 7 and two in the period October 25–31.

Mr Jeffrey refused to say what items the two new permits covered. Instead he said they ‘would have been agreed on the basis that they did not prejudice Australian national interests under the criterion of the legislation’.

Possible implications

Israel has been using its F-35 fighter jets in its bombardment of Gaza. Australia is one of a number of countries that manufacture and export parts and components into Lockheed Martin’s F-35 fighter jet global supply chain. Given this, there are several reasons why the above information may be significant:

  • The head of the F-35 joint program office, Lieutenant General Michael Schmidt, a US Air Force officer, said a year ago that the F-35 program was established with a ‘just in time’ supply chain, where parts arrive just before they’re needed and very little inventory is stockpiled. [Emphasis added.] Lt-Gen Schmidt described that situation as ‘too risky’.

  • In mid-December, a US Congressional hearing on the F-35 program revealed that the F-35 joint program office had been moving ‘at a breakneck speed to support…Israel…by increasing spare part supply rates’. [Emphasis added.]
  • More than 70 Australian companies are involved in the global supply chain for the F-35. Several of the companies are the sole global source of the parts they produce. Without them, new F-35 jets cannot be built and those parts in existing jets cannot be replaced. The US recently authorised the transfer to Israel of 25 more F-35s.

The F-35 global supply chain is vulnerable to disruption, which is why Australia could be under pressure to continue meeting supply contracts.

In his testimony to the December 12 Congressional hearing, Lieutenant General Schmidt also made clear the role of the F-35 joint program office in closely supporting Israel:

I had the opportunity to talk with [Israel’s] Chief of Staff just yesterday… [Israel is] very satisfied with [the] performance [the] sustainment enterprise is giving them. We could learn a lot from them in terms of the quickness with which they’re turning airplanes, [plus] all of the things we’re learning ourselves with moving parts around the world in support of a conflict. [Emphasis added.]

Defence Department and Australian industry partnering with F-35 program office

Defence issued a media release on October 30, around the same time it approved the two additional export permits to Israel.

The release announced that Melbourne company Rosebank Engineering had established an important regional F-35 capability that would also contribute to the global F-35 program. The release said Australian industry is playing an increasingly important role in the production and sustainment of the global F-35 fleet and that Rosebank and the Defence Department had partnered with the US F-35 joint program office and Lockheed Martin to establish the new facility.

Lockheed Martin removes information from its website

US multinational Lockheed Martin is the world’s largest arms manufacturer and the prime contractor for the F-35 fighter jet. As the horror of Israel’s war on Gaza has unfolded over the past seven months, there have been court cases and protests targeting the F-35 and its global supply chain.

In this context, Lockheed Martin recently edited the Australian page of its F-35 website to remove the ‘Industrial Partnerships’ section. The text had acknowledged that Australian parts were used in every F-35 fighter jet.

The deleted section can be viewed at the Wayback Machine web archive. This was the opening paragraph:[screenshot on original]

Lockheed Martin has also deleted other information from its website. A feature post about Marand Precision Engineering, another Melbourne-based company supplying the F-35 program, has been removed. The page had described how Marand engineered, manufactured, and now sustains ‘one of the most technically advanced mechanical systems’ ever created in Australia. The system, an engine removal and installation mobility trailer for the F-35, comprises 12,000 individual parts. The page said, ‘Marand has worked in close concert with Lockheed Martin on the F-35 program for many years’ and revealed that in 2022 the company had established a maintenance facility for its F-35 trailer in the US, ‘to better meet Lockheed Martin’s sustainment needs’. The deleted page can be viewed at the Wayback Machine web archive.

Sydney-based Quickstep Holdings is another long-term Australian supplier to the F-35 program. In December 2020, it announced it had produced its 10,000th component for the F-35 program. Quickstep estimated it had completed just 20% of its commitment to the program. The company revealed it manufactures more than 50 individual components and assemblies for the F-35, representing about $440,000 worth of content in each F-35.

Last year, Lockheed Martin also acknowledged that Queensland’s Ferra Engineering had been providing products for the F-35 since 2004 and that it remained a vital partner supporting delivery of the aircraft.

Despite the Albanese government’s persistent and misleading claim that no weapons have been supplied to Israel for the past five years, all of the above companies have supplied parts and components into the F-35’s supply chain during this period.

Threshold for genocide met, says UN Special Rapporteur

On March 26, Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights Situation in the West Bank and Gaza, said, ‘Following nearly six months of unrelenting Israeli assault on occupied Gaza, it is my solemn duty to report on the worst of what humanity is capable of, and to present my findings.’

Ms Albanese said there were ‘reasonable grounds to believe that the threshold indicating the commission of the crime of genocide… has been met’.

On April 5, the UN Human Rights Council adopted a resolution that included a call for an arms embargo on Israel.

Some 28 countries voted in favour of the resolution and 13 abstained. Israel’s two largest suppliers of weaponry, the US and Germany, along with four other countries, voted against it. (The Council has 47 members elected for staggered three-year terms on a regional group basis. Australia is not currently a member.)

May 4, 2024 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

The Israel-US game plan for Gaza is staring us in the face

The western media is pretending the West’s efforts to secure a ceasefire are serious. But a different script has clearly been written in advance

JONATHAN COOK, APR 30, 2024, https://jonathancook.substack.com/p/the-israel-us-game-plan-for-gaza

One does not need to be a fortune-teller to understand that the Israel-US game plan for Gaza runs something like this:

1. In public, Biden appears “tough” on Netanyahu, urging him not to “invade” Rafah and pressuring him to allow more “humanitarian aid” into Gaza.

2. But already the White House is preparing the ground to subvert its own messaging. It insists that Israel has offered an “extraordinarily generous” deal to Hamas – one that, Washington suggests, amounts to a ceasefire. It doesn’t. According to reports, the best Israel has offered is an undefined “period of sustained calm”. Even that promise can’t be trusted.

3. If Hamas accepts the “deal” and agrees to return some of the hostages, the bombing eases for a short while but the famine intensifies, justified by Israel’s determination for “total victory” against Hamas – something that is impossible to achieve. This will simply delay, for a matter of days or weeks, Israel’s move to step 5 below.

4. If, as seems more likely, Hamas rejects the “deal”, it will be painted as the intransigent party and blamed for seeking to continue the “war”. (Note: This was never a war. Only the West pretends either that you can be at war with a territory you’ve been occupying for decades, or that Hamas “started the war” with its October 7 attack when Israel has been blockading the enclave, creating despair and incremental malnutrition there, for 17 years.)

Last night US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken moved this script on by stating Hamas was “the only thing standing between the people of Gaza and a ceasefire… They have to decide and they have to decide quickly”.

5. The US will announce that Israel has devised a humanitarian plan that satisfies the conditions Biden laid down for an attack on Rafah to begin.

6. This will give the US, Europe and the region the pretext to stand back as Israel launches the long-awaited assault – an attack Biden has previously asserted would be a “red line”, leading to mass civilian casualties. All that will be forgotten.

7. As Middle East Eye reports, Israel is building a ring of checkpoints around Rafah. Netanyahu will suggest, falsely, that these guarantee its attack meets the conditions laid down in international humanitarian law. Women and children will be allowed out – if they can reach a checkpoint before Israel’s carpet bombing kills them along the way.

8. All men in Rafah, and any women and children who remain, will be treated as armed combatants. If they are not killed by the bombing or falling rubble, they will be either summarily executed or dragged off to Israel’s torture chambers. No one will mention that any Hamas fighters who were in Rafah were able to leave through the tunnels.

9. Rafah will be destroyed, leaving the entire strip in ruins, and the Israeli-induced famine will worsen. The West will throw up its hands, say Hamas brought this on Gaza, agonise over what to do, and press third countries – especially Arab countries – for a “humanitarian plan” that relocates the survivors out of Gaza.

10. The western media will continue describing Israel’s genocide in Gaza in purely humanitarian terms, as though this “disaster” was an act of God.

11. Under US pressure, the International Court of Justice, or World Court, will be in no hurry to issue a definitive ruling on whether South Africa’s case that Israel is committing a genocide – which it has already found “plausible” – is proved.

12. Whatever the World Court eventually decides, and it is almost impossible to imagine it won’t determine that Israel carried out a genocide, it will be too late. The western political and media class will have moved on, leaving it to the historians to decide what it all meant.

13. Meanwhile, Israel is already using the precedents it has created in Gaza, and its erosion of the long-established principles of international law, as the blueprint for the West Bank. Saying Hamas has not been completely routed in Gaza but is using this other Palestinian enclave as its base, Israel will gradually intensify the pressures on the West Bank with another blockade. Rinse and repeat.

That’s the likely plan. Our job is to do everything in our power to stop them making it a reality.

May 2, 2024 Posted by | Gaza, Israel, politics international, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Zelensky wants ten more years of US funding

 https://www.rt.com/news/596736-ukraine-us-aid-decade/ 29 Apr 24

The Ukrainian leader has said he is working on getting a long-term assistance package from Washington.

The latest US aid package for Kiev, which was only approved by Congress after more than six months of partisan feuding, might be small potatoes compared to what Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky has in mind for his biggest benefactor.

Kiev is negotiating with the administration of US President Joe Biden on a long-term agreement that would put Washington on the hook to provide Ukraine with military, economic, and political support for the next decade, Zelensky said on Sunday in his daily video address. Such commitments are needed to ensure Ukraine has the “efficiency in assistance” it needs to stem recent battlefield advances by Russian forces and gain the upper hand, he said.

“We are working to commit to paper concrete levels of support for this year and for the next ten years,” Zelensky said. “It will include military, financial, and political support, as well as what concerns joint production of weapons.”

Ukraine has already signed bilateral security agreements with several NATO members, including the UK, Germany, and France. Zelensky said he wants the long-term deal under negotiation with Washington to be the strongest pact yet.

However, Ukraine’s bilateral agreements with Western countries so far have stopped short of mutual-defense commitments. The deals merely pledge long-term aid, including support in the event of a future attack, and they are not legally binding. The agreement with Berlin, for instance, can be terminated with six months’ notice.

Zelensky said he wants Ukraine’s bilateral pact with Washington to include specific levels of aid. “The agreement should be truly exemplary and reflect the strength of American leadership,” he said.

US lawmakers approved $61 billion in additional aid for Ukraine earlier this month, after House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) overrode opposition in his own party to pass the bill with unanimous Democrat support. The Biden administration ran out of funding for Ukraine aid earlier this year, after using up $113 billion in previously approved assistance packages.

Republican lawmakers have argued that Biden is merely prolonging the bloodshed in Ukraine without offering a clear strategy for victory or a peace deal with Russia. A poll released in February showed that nearly 70% of Americans want Biden to push for a negotiated settlement with Moscow, involving compromises on both sides, rather than continuing to fund the conflict.

May 1, 2024 Posted by | politics international, Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Australian Parliamentarians renew their support for the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons

Jemila Rushton, Acting Director, ICAN Australia

Australian parliamentarians from across party lines have renewed their support for Australia joining the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW).

In a new video, members of the Parliamentary Friends of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons show that action on nuclear disarmament is beyond party politics. Their joint message demonstrates how parliamentarians from across the political spectrum are working together to see the Treaty signed and ratified.

Featured in the video are Susan Templeman MP (ALP), Member for Macquarie, Jordan Steele-John (GRN), Senator for Western Australia, Monique Ryan MP (IND), Member for Kooyong, Russell Broadbent (IND), Member for Monash, Sam Lim MP (ALP), Member for Tangney, Louise Pratt (ALP), Senator for Western Australia, Lidia Thorpe (IND), Senator for Victoria, Sharon Claydon MP (ALP), Member for Newcastle, Josh Burns MP (ALP), Member for Macnamara, and Josh Wilson MP (ALP), Member for Fremantle. In the video, they state:

Today, 93 countries around the world are signatories to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons – the TPNW. 

They are signed up to the legally binding commitment to comprehensively ban nuclear weapons.

Developing them, testing them, producing them, assisting with them, possessing them, threatening to use them, and using them are banned.

The TPNW is giving countries and citizens across the world hope, and a new and promising pathway towards the abolition of these weapons.

It’s about understanding that what we cannot prepare for and what we can adequately respond to, we must prevent. 

It’s about continuing Australian leadership when it comes to nuclear disarmament. 

It’s about working with our closest neighbours and collaborating with our Pacific family.

It’s about recognising and supporting victims of nuclear weapons testing. For First Nations survivors, for Australia’s nuclear veterans.

As members of the Australian Parliamentary Friends of the TPNW, we are working together to see the Nuclear Weapons Ban Treaty signed and ratified.

We are proud of our country’s commitment to getting rid of other inhumane weapons, like landmines, cluster munitions, biological, and chemical weapons.

We welcome Australia’s engagement with the TPNW under the Albanese Government and we pay tribute to the community activism being undertaken in support of Australia joining this treaty.

History is calling.  

May 1, 2024 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, politics, weapons and war | Leave a comment

US vs China, Israel vs Iran, India vs Pakistan: Asia plays with fire as nuclear war safety net frays

  • From the Korean peninsula to the Middle East, a string of nuclear flashpoints has emerged with the unravelling of the global post-Cold War detente
  • Amid arms races, sky-high tensions – and the removal of guardrails to avert danger – proliferation ‘threatens to destabilise everywhere’, experts warn

A high-stakes game of geopolitical brinkmanship is playing out across the Middle East and Asia, with Israel and Iran trading missile strikes; India and Pakistan locked in a multi-headed rocket arms race; and power struggles on the Korean peninsula and in the South China Sea combining to create a perilous chain of potential nuclear-conflict zones.

In the past couple of weeks alone, Iran and Israel’s tit-for-tat exchanges amid the war in Gaza have highlighted their ability to target each other’s uranium-enrichment facilities, while the US has deployed mid-range ballistic missiles to the Philippines for the first time since the Cold War………………………………………………….  https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/politics/article/3260551/us-vs-china-israel-vs-iran-india-vs-pakistan-asia-plays-fire-nuclear-war-safety-net-frays?campaign=3260551&module=perpetual_scroll_0&pgtype=article

May 1, 2024 Posted by | ASIA, politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »