nuclear-news

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

24 – 30 October UN Disarmament Week – don’t let the world powers normalise “tactical” nuclear weapons – demand abolition of nuclear weapons now!

This Disarmament Week, Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom Demands Nuclear Abolition Now!

The United Nations is marking its annual Disarmament Week from 24 to 30 October 2022. As the week is used to promote awareness of disarmament issues and initiatives, this year WILPF is focusing on amplifying demands for the abolition of nuclear weapons and urging everyone to get involved to prevent any more harm from these weapons of mass destruction.

WILPF International Secretariat 24 October 2022

…………………… current events have elevated the attention being paid to the risks of nuclear weapons and nuclear power, nuclear dangers have persisted in the shadows for decades. Every day, we all live with the possibility of massive nuclear violence, whether by intention, accident, or miscalculation.

The governments of nuclear-armed states, and many of their mainstream media outlets, do not want people to worry. Spreading misinformation about the allegedly “limited” impacts of “tactical” nuclear weapons, they are trying to normalise the threat and risk of nuclear war in order to prevent mass mobilisation against the bomb, as was seen around the world during the 1980s at the height of the Cold War.

But there is no such thing as a small nuclear weapon, and no such thing as a limited nuclear war. If nuclear weapons are used, the humanitarian and environmental consequences will be devastating. And the risks of escalation could mean a nuclear war that leads to climate catastrophe, global famine, and the end of life on Earth as we know it.

We do not have to accept this. People everywhere in the world have a voice and there are actions we can take. Instead of normalising nuclear war, we must stigmatise nuclear weapons.

Most governments have already rejected nuclear weapons, recognising that they are immoral weapons of insecurity and catastrophic harm. These governments negotiated the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, which has inspired many local, national, and international activities for nuclear disarmament, ranging from economic divestment to public protest.

What can you do?

This Disarmament Week, when we once again can clearly see the risks posed by nuclear weapons every single day, is a good time to get engaged in the work to abolish nuclear weapons, wherever you are.

You can start by signing this Open Letter From Nobel Peace Prize Laureates and Citizens of the World Against War and Nuclear Weapons, which WILPF’s Disarmament programme Reaching Critical Will, together with the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW), presented to the UN High Representative for Disarmament Affairs earlier this year.

You can also join the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) and its many initiatives working with cities, parliamentarians, schools, and financial institutions to end the reign of terror of nuclear weapons.

Also check out WILPF’s resource page on nuclear weapons and current nuclear threats and risks, which includes key messages for talking with media or friends and family; an FAQ for details; links to resources that you can share to spread the word about the dangers of nuclear weapons; and ideas for how you can get engaged in the work to abolish nuclear weapons and prevent nuclear catastrophes.

This Disarmament Week, and beyond, join WILPF and the global antinuclear movement in demanding Nuclear Abolition Now!

October 26, 2022 Posted by | 2 WORLD, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Rocket Lab: Helping the US wage endless wars from space

 https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2022/10/25/rocket-lab-helping-the-us-wage-endless-wars-from-space/By John Minto, October 25, 2022

It’s clear local mana whenua were misled by Rocket Lab founder Peter Beck when iwi land at Mahia Peninsula was leased to launch satellites into space.

At the time Peter Beck was clear Rocket Lab would be used for civilian purposes only and would not take up military contracts, despite this being a particularly lucrative path to take.

Fast forward a few years and we find Beck has abandoned any principles he may have had and his company is now majority owned by the US military and is launching satellites for US military purposes.

The government has to sign off on each launch to make sure it is in line with what’s acceptable to this country but it’s clearly a rubber stamp process conducted by Stuart Nash.

Any assurances from Peter Beck or Economic and Regional Development Minister Stuart Nash, who signs off on the launches for the government, that Rocket Lab’s work is for the betterment of mankind are not credible.

Peter Beck sets up straw man arguments saying claims of Rocket Lab weaponizing space are “misinformation” and the company would “not deal in weapons”. “We’re certainly not going to launch weapons or anything that damages the environment or goes and hurts people,” he told Newshub last year.

What nonsense. These are “straw-man” arguments. No-one has claimed the rockets contain weapons but what is absolutely clear is that the US military launches rockets for military purposes and this is what is happening at Mahia.

The NZ Herald reported last year on the capabilities of “Gunsmoke-J satellites”, which have been launched from Mahia for the US military, saying:

The other is the “Gunsmoke-J” satellite being launched for the US Army’s Space and Missile Defence Command (SMDC).

Gunsmoke-J is a prototype for a possible series of nano-satellites that will collect targeting data “in direct support of Army combat operations” according to a US Army fact sheet and a US Department of Defence budget document.

Green MP and party spokesperson for security and intelligence, Teanau Tuiono, is right to speak out:

“Weaponising space is not in our national interest and goes against our international commitments to ensuring peace in space,”

“The government should put in place clear rules that stop our whenua being used to launch rockets on behalf of foreign militaries”

and

“We should not be a launching pad for satellites for America’s military and intelligence agencies,” Green Party security and intelligence spokesman Teanau Tuiono said.

Rocket Lab is donkey deep with US strategies for “full spectrum dominance of the planet – including space. In doing so Beck and the government have made Mahia a target for conventional or even tactical nuclear weapons if hostilities break out between the US and another world power.

It’s ironic that the government provided start-up funds for Beck to get Rocket Lab off the ground only for Aotearoa New Zealand to find the company has put us to bed with a foreign military and made us target for conventional or nuclear attack.

Mana whenua in Mahia are right to be concerned – and so should the rest of us.

The government is “consulting” at the moment on these issues in their Space Policy Review.

Make a submission for the peaceful use of space here (Deadline 31 October)

October 26, 2022 Posted by | New Zealand, space travel, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Tactical Nuclear Fantasists

one category of nuclear weapon has continued to mark a grey area, lending a disturbed, even lunatic’s legitimacy to the battlefield deployment of such weapons. The tactical nuclear weapon is deceptively seductive to military planners.

Australian Independent Media, October 27, 2022 by: Dr Binoy Kampmark

Bogeyman politics tends to be flatly unimaginative. The image of the nuclear-mad Russian President, counting his diminishing options, has caught the imagination of press and propaganda outlets across the West. Will Mad Vlad go the distance and deploy a nuclear weapon in Ukraine?

Certainly, his rhetoric suggests the possibility. Vladimir Putin has promised to “make use of all weapon systems available to us” in the event Russia’s territorial integrity is threatened. ………….

The moment the innocents of Hiroshima were incinerated in August 1945, a weapon of mass lethality became a political option, the means to extract concessions and terrify opponents. Even more disturbingly, it also created an incentive on the part of powers to prevent others from getting it, thereby creating an exclusive club equipped with special amenities and privileges.

During a number of teeth-chattering moments of the Cold War, the use of nuclear weapons was contemplated. Historians note Cuba, Berlin and the Middle East. That they were not actually unleashed was a matter of unalloyed dumb luck and faux theory. Over time, this spawned an accepted, if nonsensical literature about the merits of having such lethal means. Precisely because of their potency, such weapons would never be used. Possessing them would be, to use a modern comparison, much like having unconvertible digital currency of huge value, more a matter of impressing your rivals than drawing direct benefit from them.

Having said that, one category of nuclear weapon has continued to mark a grey area, lending a disturbed, even lunatic’s legitimacy to the battlefield deployment of such weapons. The tactical nuclear weapon is deceptively seductive to military planners. Being of lower yield than their strategic, all-killing counterparts, they are seen as, in the words of the Union of Concerned Scientists, “more militarily useful, and less politically objectionable, and thus more likely to be used.” This does little to dampen the awful reality that such weapons can have yields greater than that of the first atomic weapon ever used.

The nature of such weapons is disturbingly nebulous in the military argot. In 2018, James Mattis, as US Secretary of Defense, opined to the House Armed Services Committee that there was no “such thing as a ‘tactical nuclear weapon’. Any nuclear weapon used at any time is a strategic game changer.”

Tactical nuclear weapons can comprise any number of devices with yields ranging from 1 kiloton to 50 kilotons. Alistair Millar, writing for Arms Control Today, mentions a few, including nuclear landmines, nuclear artillery shells, and missile warheads dropped by air or launched by missiles.

The 2018 US Nuclear Posture Review does away with much of the sentiment of the 2010 NPR in stressing the need to improve capabilities against Russia in various areas, including nonstrategic nuclear options. Moscow is specifically blamed for embracing a “limited first use” policy involving low-yield weapons that might “provide coercive advantage in crises and at lower levels of conflict.”……………………..

Ambiguity when it comes to a prospective use of nuclear weapons is considered one of the great flaws of military and political planning. Each party should know what the other proposes to do in certain circumstances, be it in terms of command structure, control and communications. Who has the authority to launch what weapons and when? What are the safeguards to cope with error? ………………….

Opacity is another factor complicating the whole business of how we cope with nonstrategic nuclear weapons. Numbers regarding the world’s tactical nuclear stockpiles remain sketchy………..

Paradoxically, even as such measures as the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons gather greater popularity, the old members of the nuclear club continue to make mischief, modernising and adjusting their arsenals with little intention of ever abolishing them. The sheer allure of such weapons is unlikely to dissipate till their political dividends diminish. In the Ukraine War, such dividends abound. https://theaimn.com/tactical-nuclear-fantasists/

October 26, 2022 Posted by | 2 WORLD, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Russian delegation at UN calls on USA to join initiative to renounce weapons in space

Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova’s comment on the US initiative in the UN General Assembly First Committee

The other day, the US delegation submitted to the UN General Assembly First Committee an aide-memoire on proposed UN General Assembly resolution on destructive direct-ascent anti-satellite missile testing. We analysed the text to discover that our apprehensions concerning this US initiative were valid.

As before, we regard the moratorium on testing the above type of anti-satellite weapon (ASW) announced by the White House in April as a purely declarative move. The UN General Assembly statements and draft resolutions are clearly not enough to prevent an arms race in space (PARIS), all the more so for a country that has had experience – at least since 2008 – destroying space objects with ASW.

The United States remains bashfully silent about the most important thing: are they willing to permanently rule out the combat use of this type of weapon? The resolution says nothing about it. There are no commitments regarding the development and production of such systems, or the prospect of ever destroying the Pentagon’s existing anti-satellite capabilities.

Moreover, the possibility of deploying ASW means on the US reusable unmanned space shuttle X-37B, which is capable of staying in orbit for a long time, performing manoeuvres and carrying a payload, cannot be ruled out. By the way, our multiple requests to the United States to clarify the X-37B platform’s goals and objectives have so far remained unanswered.

Military dominance and superiority in outer space being set as clear goals in US doctrinal documents, their view of space as an arena of confrontation and their plans for achieving these goals are quite telling if one wants to understand Washington’s genuine motives. It is no coincidence that the US delegation at the Geneva Conference on Disarmament is doing its utmost to hinder the start of talks on a multilateral instrument which contains reliable international legal guarantees against deploying weapons of any kind in outer space and the renunciation of the use of force or the threat of force against space objects. The Americans are using every pretext to avoid working on the Russian-Chinese draft treaty designed to fulfill PARIS goals………………….

Washington can prove it has serious intentions if it revises its destructive stance and the US delegation that is participating in the Conference on Disarmament joins the efforts to start talks as soon as possible on a legally binding instrument with guarantees of non-deployment of weapons in space, non-use of force or threat of force against space objects.

Specifically, the approach promoted by Russia involves the following commitments:

– not to use space objects as a means of destroying any targets on Earth, in the air or outer space;

– not to create, test or deploy weapons in space to perform any tasks, including for anti-missile defence, anti-satellite activity, or use against targets on Earth or in the air, and to eliminate such systems that the states already possess;

– not to create, test, deploy or use space weapons for anti-missile defence, anti-satellite activity, or use against targets on Earth or in the air;

– not to destroy, damage, or disrupt the normal functioning and not to change the flight paths of space objects owned by other states;

– not to assist or encourage other states, groups of states, international, intergovernmental, or any non-governmental organisations, including non-governmental legal entities that were established, registered or located on the territory under their jurisdiction and/or control, to participate in the above activities.

In addition, the accession of the United States and its allies to the international initiative/political commitment not to be the first to place weapons of any kind in outer space would be a really important confidence-building measure. We are once again calling on Washington to follow the example of more than 30 UN member states and join this initiative, as well as to support the UNGA draft resolution on that matter.

We are ready to substantively and professionally discuss the US initiative in this context of multilateral efforts to arrive at a comprehensive solution to PARIS issues.  https://mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/1835061/

October 26, 2022 Posted by | politics international, Russia, space travel, weapons and war | Leave a comment

US, Japan, S Korea vow response if N Korea tests nuclear bomb

US says full military capabilities will be used, including nuclear, to protect its allies South Korea and Japan.

 https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/10/26/us-japan-s-korea-vow-response-if-n-korea-tests-nuclear-bomb 26 Oct 22,

An “unparalleled” scale of response would be warranted if North Korea conducts a seventh test of a nuclear weapon, the United States, Japan and South Korea have warned.

The warning was issued on Wednesday amid concerns by the US and its regional allies that North Korea could be poised to resume nuclear bomb testing for the first time since 2017.

“We agreed that an unparalleled scale of response would be necessary if North Korea pushes ahead with a seventh nuclear test,” South Korean first vice foreign minister Cho Hyun-dong told a news conference in Tokyo.

Cho made his comments alongside Japan’s vice foreign minister Takeo Mori and US Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman.

North Korea has been carrying out weapons tests at an unprecedented pace this year, firing more than two dozen short and medium-range ballistic missiles in recent weeks, including a missile that over-flew Japan.

We urge (North Korea) to refrain from further provocations,” Sherman said, calling the North’s actions “reckless” and deeply destabilising for the region.

Sherman also said that the US will use its full military capabilities, “including nuclear, conventional and missile defence”, to protect its allies Japan and South Korea.

North Korea needs to understand that the US commitment to the security of South Korea and Japan is “iron clad”, she said.

“And we will use the full range of US defence capabilities to defend our allies, including nuclear, conventional and missile defence capabilities,” she said.

US State Department spokesman Ned Price said in a statement that Sherman also reiterated that the US was continuing to “seek serious and sustained dialogue with the DPRK” (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) – the official name for North Korea.

Cho, during his talks with Sherman, raised concern that a new North Korean nuclear weapons policy adopted in September increases the possibility of its arbitrary use of nuclear weapons.

“This is creating serious tension on the Korean peninsula,” Cho said.

In September, the USS Ronald Reagan and accompanying ships conducted joint military exercises with South Korean forces in response to a North Korean ballistic missile test in what was their first joint military training involving a US aircraft carrier since 2017.

Angered by South Korea’s military activities, Pyongyang last week fired hundreds of artillery shells off its coasts in what it called a grave warning to its neighbour to the south.

Sherman met earlier on Tuesday with Japan’s Mori and reaffirmed the further strengthening of the Japan-US alliance and other shared goals, including the complete denuclearisation of North Korea and their joint response to China’s increasingly assertive actions in the region.

Japanese defence minister Yasukazu Hamada recently said that North Korea is believed to have achieved a miniaturisation of nuclear warheads while significantly advancing its missile capabilities by diversifying its launch technologies, making interceptions more difficult.

Japan has joined South Korea in also warning of a possible nuclear test by North Korea in the near future.

October 26, 2022 Posted by | North Korea, politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

EU ‘dancing on edge of volcano’ with Ukraine – French ex-president

 https://www.rt.com/news/565187-eu-ukraine-peace-sarkozy/ 24 Oct 22, Nicolas Sarkozy says the bloc’s policy is driven by “miscalculation, exaltation, anger, superficial reactions”

It’s high time for the EU to abandon its emotionally driven policies on Ukraine and start talking about achieving peace, former French president Nicolas Sarkozy has suggested.

In an interview with Le Journal du Dimanche on Saturday, Sarkozy criticized Brussels for its involvement in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, which has included sweeping sanctions on Moscow, weapons deliveries to Kiev, and calls for a military solution to the crisis.

“The European Commission is primarily an administrative body. Moreover, I still haven’t understood under which article of the European treaties [the body’s president Ursula] von der Leyen justifies her competence in the field of arms purchases and foreign policy,” he said.

“The only thing the Europeans are hearing now is more and more billions of euros being spent on the purchase of weapons. More weapons, more deaths, more war,” the 67-year-old politician added.

The EU’s policy regarding the conflict in Ukraine is driven by “miscalculation, exaltation, anger, superficial reactions,” and because of this “we’re dancing at the edge of a volcano,” said Sarkozy, who was the president of France between 2007 and 2012.

The bloc was right to condemn Russia and show solidarity with Ukraine, but it also needs to exercise “composure” and work to prevent the escalation of the conflict, he added. “It’s high time for serious initiatives to be taken to start talking about the future and peace.”

Sarkozy also criticized Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky for signing a decree earlier this month, which officially made it “impossible” for him to hold talks with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin.

Such a stance amounted to “demanding a regime change in Moscow,” the veteran politician pointed out. “I consider this to be a dangerous leap into the unknown, although it’s understandable that it’s difficult for the Ukrainian president to talk to Putin,” he said.

Moscow, which has repeatedly invited Kiev to come to the negotiating table in recent months, has blamed the Ukrainian side for undermining any potential for a peaceful settlement of the crisis. It has also repeatedly condemned the deliveries of weapons to Zelensky’s government by the US, EU, UK and some other countries, arguing that they won’t change the outcome of the conflict, but will prolong the fighting and increase the risk of a direct confrontation between Russia and NATO.

October 24, 2022 Posted by | France, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Cities should increase role in effort to abolish nuclear weapons

Mayors for Peace comprises 8,213 cities from 166 countries and regions, including the United States, Russia and other nuclear weapon states.

 https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/14750556, October 24, 2022 

Foreign representatives to the general conference of Mayors for Peace pose for a photograph in Hiroshima on Oct. 20. (The Asahi Shimbun)

While disarmament by nuclear weapon states progresses only at a snail’s pace, Russia has invaded Ukraine and has repeatedly threatened to use nuclear weapons.

The developments have brought home a reality where nuclear arms could be used again in the manner of what was done to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

In light of the situation, we are left to ask what role could be played by local governments, which are closer to citizens than central governments, in striving for the goal of abolishing nuclear weapons.

Mayors for Peace held its 10th General Conference in Hiroshima on Oct. 19-20.

The international nongovernmental organization was founded 40 years ago in the midst of the Cold War in response to a proposal made by Hiroshima’s mayor at a U.N. meeting.

The Hiroshima Appeal, adopted at the meeting last week, expressed alarm at the risk of nuclear war, which it said has been raised to “the highest level,” and emphasized that “the only absolute viable measure for humanity to take against repeated threats of nuclear weapons is their total elimination.”

The document called on nuclear weapon states to fulfill their disarmament obligations spelled out in the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) and to ratify the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), which took effect at the initiative of countries with no nuclear arsenals, in lockstep.

Mayors for Peace comprises 8,213 cities from 166 countries and regions, including the United States, Russia and other nuclear weapon states.

While nuclear weapon states and their allies continue to adhere to the nuclear deterrence theory, the organization has called on local governments to unite across national borders and return to the basic principle that nuclear arms should be abolished. It has played a significant role.

A number of cities, particularly in Europe, have moved to join Mayors for Peace since Russia invaded Ukraine.

In a resolution last year, the U.S. Conference of Mayors called on the U.S. government to welcome the TPNW and take immediate action toward nuclear abolition. Cities that are members of Mayors for Peace played a major part in that process.

Mayors for Peace should expand its activities by capitalizing on the current trend of the growing presence of local governments.

The essential thing is to work hand in hand with civil society in sending out messages.

Mayors for Peace has been supported by pleas from survivors of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki that the error should never be repeated.

During the meeting in Hiroshima, cases of efforts being made in Japan and abroad were presented. They include how a group of 26 cities in western Tokyo have been working together to archive people’s accounts of their war experiences and to provide peace education.

We hope more local governments will draw on their networks to share and expand their diverse attempts.


Japan, as the only nation that has suffered atomic bombings in war, has a major role to play.

Of all municipalities in the nation and Tokyo’s wards, more than 99 percent, or 1,737, are members of Mayors for Peace.

At a general meeting of Japanese member cities held on the sidelines of the 10th general conference, a written request was approved calling on the government to participate as an observer in the second meeting of the state parties to the TPNW, which is scheduled for next year, and sign and ratify the treaty.

Hiroshima is expected to host the first meeting of a new international group of eminent persons to discuss nuclear disarmament by year-end and a Group of Seven summit next spring.

Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, who will be presiding over both meetings, should take the appeal of Mayors for Peace seriously and discard his stance of continuing to turn his back on the TPNW as soon as possible.

October 24, 2022 Posted by | 2 WORLD, politics international, Reference, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Allegations fly about plans to use “dirty bomb” and nuclear weapons in Ukraine war

The warning from the United States comes as Russia alleges Ukraine is in the “final stage” of plans to deploy a “dirty bomb”, with Western nations accusing Moscow of using the claim as a pretext to escalate the war.

Russia warned nuclear weapons use would bring ‘severe consequences’ amid allegations of war escalation plot SBS News 25 Oct 22,

The United States has warned there would be severe consequences if Russia used a nuclear weapon in Ukraine, as Western countries accused Moscow of plotting to escalate the war on the pretext that Ukraine was planning to deploy a so-called “dirty bomb” laced with nuclear material.

With Ukrainian forces advancing into Russian-occupied Kherson province, top Russian officials phoned Western counterparts on Sunday and Monday to tell them of Moscow’s suspicions. Russia plans to raise the issue at the United Nations Security Council on Tuesday, diplomats said

The foreign ministers of France, Britain and the United States rejected the allegations and reaffirmed their support for Ukraine.

“Our countries made clear that we all reject Russia’s transparently false allegations that Ukraine is preparing to use a dirty bomb on its own territory,” they said in a joint statement. “The world would see through any attempt to use this allegation as a pretext for escalation.”

……………………………… Russian military Chief of General Staff Valery Gerasimov spoke to the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mark Milley, on Monday, Russia’s RIA news agency reported. The call was the first between the top generals since May, a US military official said, and came eight months to the day since Russia invaded Ukraine.

US officials said there was no indication Moscow had made the decision to use nuclear weapons.

“We continue to see nothing in the way of preparations by the Russian side for the use of nuclear weapons,” White House national security spokesman John Kirby told reporters. “And nothing with respect to the potential use for a dirty bomb at this point.”

Russia’s defence ministry said the aim of a “dirty bomb” attack by Ukraine would be to blame Russia for the resulting radioactive contamination. The ministry has begun preparing for such a scenario, it said, readying forces and resources “to perform tasks in conditions of radioactive contamination.”

In a statement on Monday, Russian Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov said: “According to the information we have, two organisations in Ukraine have specific instructions to create a so-called ‘dirty bomb’. This work is in its final stage.”

Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov insisted the threat was real and that Russia had a “keen interest in preventing such a terrible provocation.”

But Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy had said the Russian accusation was a sign Moscow was planning such an attack itself and would blame Ukraine.

“If Russia calls and says that Ukraine is allegedly preparing something, it means one thing: Russia has already prepared all this,” Mr Zelenskyy said in an overnight address.

The UN’s nuclear watchdog said on Monday it was preparing to send inspectors in the coming days to two Ukrainian sites at Kyiv’s request, in an apparent reaction to the Russian “dirty bomb” claims.

What is a dirty bomb?

At its most basic, a “dirty bomb” is a conventional bomb laced with radioactive, biological or chemical materials which get disseminated in an explosion.

Using radioactive materials would make it a type of radiological dispersal device, a term often used interchangeably with “dirty bomb”.

Nobody has ever exploded a “dirty bomb”, but there is suspicion that extremists may have tried to build one…………………….  https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/russia-warned-nuclear-weapons-use-would-bring-severe-consequences-amid-allegations-of-war-escalation-plot/q19cw4ou2

October 24, 2022 Posted by | politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

‘The nuclear bomb was so bright I could see the bones in my fingers’: The atomic veterans fighting for justice

 https://inews.co.uk/inews-lifestyle/nuclear-bomb-bright-bones-fingers-atomic-veterans-2-1930293 24 Oct 22, Veterans of British nuclear testing in the Cold War say they – and their children and grandchildren – are still living with the health effects. And 70 years on, they want to see recognition of their part in the missions

RAF veteran John Lax is about to describe what it’s like seeing a nuclear bomb being detonated. “Even if I tell you what it was like,” he tells i, “you probably can’t really imagine it unless you’ve witnessed it yourself.”

Now 81, Lax was a 20-year-old air wireless mechanic when he was sent to take part in Britain’s nuclear testing programme in the Pacific in 1962.

Like many servicemen, he didn’t know there would be bomb tests when he arrived on Christmas Island, then a British territory,  now a republic named Kiribati. 

“We were told to put on long trousers and a long-sleeved shirt,” he says, “and we had these dark goggles which meant you couldn’t see your hand in front of you. Then we had to go and sit on the football pitch with our backs to the detonation, because if we’d faced it, the fireball would have burned our eyes. 

“When the bomb went off, it was so bright that I could see the spine and ribs of the guy sitting a metre in front of me, like an X-ray. I put my hands over my eyes and could see the bones in my fingers, and could see the blood pumping around my hands. It was 4am but the sky turned blue, like it was daytime. The blast was like the sound of a pistol, except 1,000 times louder. After the fireball, a couple of minutes later, you feel the blast and a strong gust of very hot wind – if you had no shirt on it feels like it would burn through your back – then once the fireball starts to dissipate you get the mushroom cloud.”  

This month it is 70 years since Britain first began developing and testing nuclear weapons, becoming the world’s third nuclear power (after the United States and the Soviet Union).

Between 1952 and 1965, detonations were carried out in Australia and the Pacific, in a series of operations involving the participation of more than 20,000 British service personnel, as well as some Fijian and New Zealand soldiers. Inhabitants of the test areas were moved offshore or to protected areas. 

Read more: ‘The nuclear bomb was so bright I could see the bones in my fingers’: The atomic veterans fighting for justice

Lax, who bore witness to 24 nuclear detonations over 75 days, was at the time given a “film badge”, containing photographic material that was intended to measure the levels of radiation the young men had been exposed to.

“They weren’t much good,” he says, “nobody kept a record of who had which badge, and you’d just put it in a box with all the other badges. These badges are pretty much useless in humid conditions, and Christmas Island was a tropical monsoon climate and very humid. So we had no record of radiation exposure.” 

There were no long-term health studies of nuclear test veterans. Those who were there during the tests at Christmas Island were not given medical examinations when they left, and their health was not studied after they finished their service. Many servicemen – and many islanders – later reported severe health problems, which they believed where due to the radioactive fallout from nuclear bomb tests – from rare cancers to organ failure. 

Some said they had fertility issues and difficulty conceiving, and many of those who did have children and grandchildren reported high incidences of birth defects, hip deformities, autoimmune diseases, skeletal abnormalities, spina bifida, scoliosis and limb abnormalities. Lax’s own health has been OK, but he does wonder about his children, who have both undergone surgery for a series of tumours, one at 14 years old.  

Lax’s nuclear veteran friend has three types of cancer, which he says the specialist attributes “100 per cent to exposure to radiation”.

Another veteran, Doug Hern, who witnessed five thermonuclear explosions, says his skeleton is “crumbling” and has skin problems and bone spurs. His daughter died aged 13 from a cancer so rare that doctors didn’t have a name for it, and he believes all of this is due to the genetic effects of radiation exposure. 

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) says it is grateful to Britain’s nuclear test veterans for their service, but maintains there is no valid evidence to link participation in these tests to ill health.

In 1983, the MoD did commission a study of more than 21,000 veterans, but – while the study found a slightly elevated risk of leukaemia – it concluded that the veterans had experienced no ill health as a result of their nuclear exposure. But nuclear veterans and their advocates have questioned the accuracy of the study.

For years, UK veterans have been campaigning with The British Nuclear Test Veterans Association, and Labrats – an organisation for nuclear test survivors – to be formally recognised, urging the Government to honour the nuclear test veterans’ service and sacrifice with an official recognition medal.

“I was a guinea pig,” says Lax, who believes he was placed there to see what would happen to people when the bomb went off.  

The UK is the only nuclear power to deny special recognition and compensation to its bomb test veterans, of which there are estimated to be 1,500 surviving today.

In 2015, Fiji compensated all its veterans of British nuclear tests in the Pacific, with prime minister Frank Bainimarama announcing: “Fiji is not prepared to wait for Britain to do the right thing. We owe it to these men to help them now, not wait for the British politicians and bureaucrats.”

The United States Radiation Exposure Compensation Act has been providing compensation to its nuclear veterans since 1990.     

Ed McGrath, 84, who was based at RAF Mildenhall in Suffolk, was 18 when he was sent to Australia and then flown to Maralinga to witness a test explosion.

At the Australian base camp we had good food and we had sunshine,” he tells i.

“As an 18 year-old,  you’re travelling to places you can only imagine, but then when we were flown to witness the bombs, that’s where it went dark and nasty. They had the scientists and the engineers there, but I did nothing except stand there being told to put my hands over my eyes and turn my back to the blast. You were going up there to stand in the vicinity of a very powerful bomb 1,000 times more powerful than Hiroshima or Nagasaki.” 

Despite persistent allegations by veterans that they had been used as guinea pigs in the tests, the Ministry of Defence denies this. McGrath is not convinced.

“There was no reason for us to be there, and I think the politicians who are responsible for sending us there must have come to the conclusion that, ‘Well, these lads are the price we’ve got to pay to find out what on earth is going on in the future.’  

Veterans say that Boris Johnson recently at least gave them some hope of recognition, because as one of his last outings as Prime Minister, he met a group of veterans and campaigners and wrote in an open letter: “I’m determined that your achievements will never be forgotten. I have asked that we look again at the case for medallic recognition because it is my firm belief that you all deserve such an honour.” 

Campaigners also showed the Prime Minister evidence that servicemen’s medical records from their time at the tests were missing from archives. Former prime minister Liz Truss, who promised to support their fight when she entered No 10,  had not acted to put these promises into action. After she took office, she dismissed the veterans’ minister Johnny Mercer.

The Government’s Office for Veterans’ Affairs has this month announced it will launch a £250,000 oral history project to chronicle the voices and experiences of those who supported the UK’s effort to develop a nuclear deterrent. However, Lax says this is “too little, too late” and nowhere near what nuclear  veterans should have.

McGrath has spent time worrying and feeling guilty that his family may face health problems because of his exposure to nuclear tests. His granddaughter had a brain tumour when she was a child but he says: “It’s very difficult to link the two directly and it’s not something you want to think about, to be honest.” 

A Brunel University study found in 2021 that nuclear test veterans have double the normal levels of psychological stress for their age. 

A survey and interviews by the Centre for Health Effects of Radiological and Chemical Agents found that most of the veterans report having become anxious in the mid-80s, when evidence first emerged of cancers, rare blood disorders, miscarriages in wives and birth defects in their children.

Yet this July, researchers at Brunel University published a study that showed “no significant increases in the frequency of newly arising genetic changes in the offspring of nuclear test veteran fathers. This result should reassure the study participants and the wider nuclear test veteran community.”

However, it seems that the legacy of nuclear testing has taken its toll in ways that we perhaps don’t yet fully understand, because there are communities of people across the world who feel their lives have been hugely affected by their nuclear veteran fathers and grandfathers. 

Susan Musselwhite, 42, was eight when her father walked out on the family. When she saw him once again in her twenties, he said his leaving had all been down to the mental and physical anguish of being a test veteran on Christmas Island. Musslewhite lives with chronic migraines and Grave’s disease, sometimes barely being able to lift her head off the pillow, spending 90 per cent of her time indoors. “Sometimes I’m like an 80-year-old woman with dementia,” she says. She started to talk to other descendants and discovered that they were saying similar things about their mental and physical health. “I realised I wasn’t going through this alone.  I truly believe that if my dad wasn’t at the test site, I wouldn’t be like this.”

Elin Doyle, an actress who has written a semi-autobiographical new play called Guinea Pigs  about the tests’ generational effect, spent her early years witnessing her nuclear veteran father’s fight for justice. He had a rare form of cardiac sarcoidosis, an inflammatory condition that can result in heart rhythm abnormalities, in his forties. “Many years later,” says Doyle, “he was asked by a specialist whether he’d ever worked with radiation. So somebody else made the link and that was a bit of a shock for him. At that point I’d already had a sibling who was born with a birth defect.” 

Doyle’s father died of heart failure in his sixties. “You can argue it’s because of radiation or not, but he didn’t have the sort of morbidities that would expose him to young heart disease, and we don’t have a history of it in the family, so the belief was that it was linked.” 

Doyle also talks about the many of the veterans’ feelings of betrayal.

“Sending a bunch of 19-year-olds off in the 1950s to work on nuclear tests and assuring them that it’s perfectly safe, and then to find out actually, they probably weren’t safe and quite possibly, the powers that be knew that that was the case – that has an impact on the rest of a veteran’s life.” 

Steve Purse, 47, from Denbighshire, Wales, remembers how his father David, an RAF flight lieutenant, was too scared to talk about his experience of being posted to test nuclear  weapons in 1962 because of the Government secrecy around the nuclear mission.

He did, however, open up about it years later when he developed a skin condition over his arms and legs and the dermatologist asked whether he’d spent most of his life exposed to intense sunlight in the tropics. He said no, he had spent one year in Australia with nuclear tests. The dermatologist said that this was severe radiation damage to the skin.

Steve has a form of short stature, which doctors don’t know how to diagnose. “All they say is that I’m unique,” he says, “but my dad was exposed to alpha-radiation which causes mutation in DNA, so I believe it’s down to that. It feels like nuclear tests have left a legacy of genetic Russian roulette.” 

For veteran McGrath, it feels as though the nuclear tests, and the men who were exposed to them, are a forgotten part of Cold War history. “It’s encouraging, though, that young people are beginning to take notice,” he says.

He did, however, open up about it years later when he developed a skin condition over his arms and legs and the dermatologist asked whether he’d spent most of his life exposed to intense sunlight in the tropics. He said no, he had spent one year in Australia with nuclear tests. The dermatologist said that this was severe radiation damage to the skin.

Steve has a form of short stature, which doctors don’t know how to diagnose. “All they say is that I’m unique,” he says, “but my dad was exposed to alpha-radiation which causes mutation in DNA, so I believe it’s down to that. It feels like nuclear tests have left a legacy of genetic Russian roulette.” 

For veteran McGrath, it feels as though the nuclear tests, and the men who were exposed to them, are a forgotten part of Cold War history. “It’s encouraging, though, that young people are beginning to take notice,” he says.

October 24, 2022 Posted by | health, Reference, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Spokane poised to declare city a nuclear free zone

 https://www.thecentersquare.com/washington/spokane-poised-to-declare-city-a-nuclear-free-zone/article_08df369e-53ba-11ed-b3bc-dfdc7a56a890.html By RaeLynn Ricarte | The Center Square 25 Oct 22, (The Center Square) – The Spokane City Council was poised Monday to declare the municipality a nuclear free zone, which would prohibit local resources or facilities from being used to manufacture weapons. 

The proposal to add a new chapter to city code has been brought forward by Council President Breean Beggs and Councilor Karen Stratton.

Beggs was asked by The Center Square on Monday whether the ordinance was being considered due to escalating fears about nuclear weapons being deployed in the Ukraine and Russian war.

“This has been in the works far longer than Russia’s invasion of Ukraine (several years), but that crisis does underline the dangers,” Beggs said in a statement. 

The draft ordinance outlines that the “nuclear arms race has been accelerating for more than three-quarters of a century, draining the world’s resources and presenting humanity with the ever-mounting threat of nuclear holocaust.”

Because there is no adequate method to protect Spokane residents in the event of a nuclear war, which destroys most higher life forms on the planet, Stratton and Beggs want protection rules in place for local residents and businesses.

They also contend that resources used to develop new nuclear weapons are taken away from other human needs, including jobs, housing, education, health care, public transportation and services for youth, the elderly and disabled.

“The United States already has a sufficient stockpile of nuclear weapons to defend itself and destroy the world several times over,” states the proposed ordinance.

As a leading producer of these weapons, Beggs and Stratton say the U.S. should take the lead in the process of a global slowdown of the arms race and the negotiated elimination “of the threat of a pending holocaust.”

“An emphatic expression of the feelings on the part of private residents and local governments can help initiate such steps by the U.S. and the other nuclear weapons powers,” states the proposal. “Spokane is on record in support of a bilateral nuclear weapons freeze and has expressed its opposition to civil-defense crisis relocation planning for nuclear war.”

Because the governments of nuclear nations have failed to adequately reduce or eliminate the risk of nuclear attack, the people and their local representatives must take action, states the ordinance. It notes that nearby Fairchild Air Force Base no longer utilizes nuclear weapons.

If adopted, the new code prohibits work on nuclear weapons, or manufacture of any component, within the city limits.

If city officials determine that a good or service cannot reasonably be obtained from any source other than a nuclear weapons producer, a waiver to the ordinance may be sought. Documented evidence must be provided that the sought-after resource is vital to the health or safety of residents or employees of the city.

The ordinance would allow city residents to seek a court injunction against any perceived violation. If successful, the plaintiff is to be reimbursed attorney fees and court costs.

According to the agenda, the ordinance will not infringe on First Amendment rights, attempt to constrain Congress, or prevent the city council or mayor from addressing an emergency that poses a clear and present danger to the community.

October 24, 2022 Posted by | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Meetings scheduled on compensation for Utah’s ‘downwinders’ affected by nuclear testing

https://www.thespectrum.com/story/news/2022/10/24/meetings-scheduled-compensation-utahs-nuclear-downwinders/10588294002/ David DeMille, St. George Spectrum & Daily News,

Southern Utah’s thousands of “downwinders” — people whose families suffered high rates of cancer attributed to U.S. nuclear weapons testing in the Nevada desert in the 1950s and ’60s — could be eligible for federal compensation.

An estimated 60,000 people were exposed to radioactive fallout in southern Utah during the testing programs that took place at the Nevada Test Site, where nuclear weapons were tested and much of the radiation was sent “downwind” to the east via the prevailing winds.

For years, the federal government has issued money to those affected via the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, which was set to expire this summer but was extended by Congress for another two years. 

Qualifying downwinders, or spouses and/or children of deceased loved ones, may apply for up to $50,000 in compensation.

To help residents learn more about the program and whether they may be eligible for some of the compensation funds, St. George area medical officials are set to host a series of meetings this week in rural communities. Representatives from Intermountain Healthcare are also taking questions via phone from anyone interested.

The act allows qualifying downwinders to receive a one-time payout of $50,000, said Becky Barlow, project director and nurse practitioner at the Radiation Exposure Screening and Education Program (RESEP) Clinic at Intermountain St. George Regional Hospital. Test site workers can apply for $75,000, and certain uranium workers can apply for $100,000.

“We are pleased that the president and Congress would continue to support downwinders and uranium workers that were unknowingly exposed because of nuclear testing or jobs in uranium mining and refinement,” Barlow said.

Applications and information are available by calling 435-251-4760.

The Radiation Exposure Compensation Act was first passed in 1990 as an alternative to costly litigation to ensure the federal government met its financial responsibilities to workers who became sick as a result of the radiation hazards of their jobs. Coverage was broadened a decade later.

There was some question about whether the program might end this year, but the two-year extension takes it through summer 2024. It also covers some different cancers and includes different stipulations, so people who were denied in past attempts might be eligible under the new rules.

If possible, the Department of Justice prefers to award the money directly to the person impacted by the testing. However, if that person is already deceased, their legal spouse can apply for the money, and in some cases the person’s children or grandchildren can also apply.

“If you had a family member impacted and you don’t know if they filed, you can contact us to check,” Barlow said.

Anyone with questions regarding the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, or in need of screenings, should call 435-251-4670.

David DeMille writes about southwestern Utah for The Spectrum & Daily News, a USA TODAY Network newsroom based in St. George. Follow him at @SpectrumDeMille or contact him at ddemille@thespectrum.com.

October 24, 2022 Posted by | health, Legal, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Would the use of a tactical nuclear weapon in Ukraine lead to all-out nuclear war?

The idea of using a single tactical nuclear weapon is starting to be dangerously downplayed as maybe not all that bad, thus normalizing something that should instead be outlawed. Just hide in your basement for a few days while the radiation dissipates and it’ll be OK.

“tactical” is a term that covers a whole panoply of so-called “short range” weapons armed with a nuclear warhead. Such weapons can be launched from the ground, air, or sea, and even from a truck bed.  A single weapon has a typical explosive yield of between 10 and 100 kilotons. The Hiroshima bomb was 15 kilotons. So that’s not exactly small.

Our fears would vanish if nuclear weapons did too

Edging toward Armageddon? — Beyond Nuclear International By Linda Pentz Gunter, 23 Oct 22, https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2022/10/23/edging-toward-armageddon/
As we mark 60 years since the Cuban Missile Crisis, it’s truly horrifying to realize that our present times are considered to be the closest to nuclear war we have been since those 13 terrifying days in 1962.
What saved us then was cooler heads prevailing, as our stories last week described. But can we be assured that those with the power to press the proverbial button — whether at the pinnacle of leadership or lower down the chain of command — will act with similar sense and restraint?

With Kennedy and Khrushchev in command, there was a willingness on both sides to pull back from the brink, not only rhetorically, but through meaningful actions. Khrushchev removed his nuclear missiles from Cuba while the US publicly declared it would not invade the island. Privately, the US also agreed to dismantle its ballistic missiles stationed in Turkey.

And, as we have seen over the years — and in last week’s article by Angelo Baracca — sometimes it takes a person of more humble position to restore rationality and act with restraint. These near-misses ought to have put the halt on nuclear weapons development many decades ago

Instead, that most obvious of lessons was never learned: that nuclear weapons serve only one purpose; the mutual destruction of all of us. Instead, the nuclear arms race escalated to obscene heights and there are still at least 13,000 nuclear weapons in the world, leaving us perpetually on the edge of Armageddon.

And it was that word, “Armageddon,” that current US President Joe Biden used recently when he said at a Democratic gathering, “We have not faced the prospect of Armageddon since Kennedy and the Cuban Missile Crisis.” 

Kennedy had met Khrushchev prior to the 1962 standoff and Biden described Russian president, Vladimir Putin, as “a guy I know fairly well”. But so far, that familiarity hasn’t relieved the current atomic tensions around Russia’s ongoing invasion of Ukraine. Instead, the news is full of alarm bells, warning that yes, Putin might just be mad enough to push the nuclear button and take us all down with him.

Pundits have cautioned that we are “not there yet,” which should not be taken as comfort. It should be taken as an opportunity to ensure that we never, ever get there. And it’s certainly not encouraging that Russia’s new top commander of the war in Ukraine. General Sergei Surovikin, is nicknamed “General Armageddon” for his command of Russia’s Syria bombardments. But, in the meantime, when we talk about Russia “using” nuclear weapons, what could happen?

Russia could use a single tactical nuclear weapon in Ukraine, although “tactical” is a term that covers a whole panoply of so-called “short range” weapons armed with a nuclear warhead. Such weapons can be launched from the ground, air, or sea, and even from a truck bed.  A single weapon has a typical explosive yield of between 10 and 100 kilotons. The Hiroshima bomb was 15 kilotons. So that’s not exactly small.

The idea of using a single tactical nuclear weapon is starting to be dangerously downplayed as maybe not all that bad, thus normalizing something that should instead be outlawed. Just hide in your basement for a few days while the radiation dissipates and it’ll be OK.

But it’s that kind of thinking that prompted Biden to use the word “Armageddon” in the first place. “I don’t think there is any such thing as the ability to easily use a tactical nuclear weapon and not end up with Armageddon,” Biden said.

Because of course it wouldn’t be OK at all. Even after the radiation levels drop, the soil and water, and therefore food sources, would be contaminated. Essential infrastructure would be destroyed. There would be countless fatalities and many sick and dying. To use any nuclear weapon would be an abomination.

The White House has also said it would deliver what it described as a “decisive response”, should Russia use nuclear weapons. Again, it’s unclear what this means. Would the US reply with a nuclear attack of its own?

But what all of this does prove is that the possession of nuclear weapons isn’t deterring anything. What we are most frightened of right now is the possibility that Russia will use nuclear weapons and the US and/or NATO might retaliate.

Those fears would vanish if nuclear weapons did too.

That is why continuing to push for signatures and ratifications of the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons is so important, because it’s the one treaty that spells out the immorality of nuclear weapons and the devastating humanitarian impacts that would result even from their so-called limited use.

Linda Pentz Gunter is the international specialist at Beyond Nuclear and writes for and curates Beyond Nuclear International.

October 23, 2022 Posted by | Ukraine, weapons and war | 1 Comment

US could directly intervene in Ukraine – ex-CIA chief

Rt.com 23 Oct 22, The US and its allies may join the conflict between Moscow and Kiev even if there is no threat to NATO, David Petraeus believes.

The US and its allies might directly intervene in the ongoing conflict between Moscow and Kiev, even if there is no threat to any NATO member states, retired US Army general David Petraeus told France’s L’Express weekly on Saturday.

Washington might form a new coalition of the willing in such a scenario and use it instead of NATO, Petraeus, who also briefly served as the CIA director, believes.

Russia could take some actions in Ukraine that would be “so shocking and so horrific” that it would prompt a response from the US and other nations, he said, adding that they “might react in one way or another, but as a multinational force led by the US and not as a NATO force.”

The military alliance would still likely be bound by its treaty and would only join the conflict if Article 5 is invoked, i.e. if one of its members is attacked, the general believes. Petraeus also said that Moscow is not interested in escalating the conflict and turning it into a global war. A wider conflict is “the last thing” Russian President Vladimir Putin needs right now, he added……………………………. https://www.rt.com/news/565160-petraeus-us-intervene-ukraine-conflict/

October 23, 2022 Posted by | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

NOWHERE TO HIDE -How a nuclear war would kill you — and almost everyone else.

Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists , 20 Oct 22, François Diaz-Maurin (@francoisdm) is the associate editor for nuclear affairs at the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.Thomas Gaulkin (@ThomasGaulkin) is multimedia editor of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.

By François Diaz-Maurin, This summer, the New York City Emergency Management department released a new public service announcement on nuclear preparedness, instructing New Yorkers about what to do during a nuclear attack. The 90-second video starts with a woman nonchalantly announcing the catastrophic news: “So there’s been a nuclear attack. Don’t ask me how or why, just know that the big one has hit.” Then the PSA video advises New Yorkers on what to do in case of a nuclear attack: Get inside, stay inside, and stay tuned to media and governmental updates.

But nuclear preparedness works better if you are not in the blast radius of a nuclear attack. Otherwise, there’s no going into your house and closing your doors because the house will be gone. Now imagine there have been hundreds of those “big ones.” That’s what even a “small” nuclear war would include. If you are lucky not to be within the blast radius of one of those, it may not ruin your day, but soon enough, it will ruin your whole life.

Direct radiation is the most immediate effect of the detonation of a nuclear weapon. It is produced by the nuclear reactions inside the bomb and comes mainly in the form of gamma rays and neutrons. Direct radiation lasts less than a second, but its lethal level can extend over a mile in all directions from the detonation point of a modern-day nuclear weapon with an explosive yield equal to the effect of several hundred kilotons of TNT.

Microseconds into the explosion of a nuclear weapon, energy released in the form of X-rays heats the surrounding environment, forming a fireball of superheated air. Inside the fireball, the temperature and pressure are so extreme that all matter is rendered into a hot plasma of bare nuclei and subatomic particles, as is the case in the Sun’s multi-million-degree core.

The fireball following the airburst explosion of a 300-kiloton nuclear weapon—like the W87 thermonuclear warhead deployed on the Minuteman III missiles currently in service in the US nuclear arsenal—can grow to more than 600 meters (2,000 feet) in diameter and stays blindingly luminous for several seconds, before its surface cools.


The light radiated by the fireball’s heat—accounting for more than one-third of the thermonuclear weapon’s explosive energy—will be so intense that it ignites fires and causes severe burns at great distances. The thermal flash from a 300-kiloton nuclear weapon could cause first-degree burns as far as 13 kilometers (8 miles) from ground zero.

Then comes the blast wave.…………………………………….

Radioactive fallout…………………..

Immediate effects of nuclear war

In a nuclear war, hundreds or thousands of detonations would occur within minutes of each other.

Regional nuclear war between India and Pakistan that involved about 100 15-kiloton nuclear weapons launched at urban areas would result in 27 million direct deaths.

A global all-out nuclear war between the United States and Russia with over four thousand 100-kiloton nuclear warheads would lead, at minimum, to 360 million quick deaths.*  That’s about 30 million people more than the entire US population…………………………..

As horrific as those statistics are, the tens to hundreds of millions of people dead and injured within the first few days of a nuclear conflict would only be the beginnings of a catastrophe that eventually will encompass the whole world.

Global climatic changes, widespread radioactive contamination, and societal collapse virtually everywhere could be the reality that survivors of a nuclear war would contend with for many decades.

The longer-term consequences of nuclear war

In recent years, in some US military and policy circles, there has been a growing perception that a limited nuclear war can be fought and won. Many experts believe, however, that a limited nuclear war is unlikely to remain limited. What starts with one tactical nuclear strike or a tit-for-tat nuclear exchange between two countries could escalate to an all-out nuclear war ending with the immediate and utter destruction of both countries.

But the catastrophe will not be limited to those two belligerents and their allies.

The long-term regional and global effects of nuclear explosions have been overshadowed in public discussions by the horrific, obvious, local consequences of nuclear explosions. Military planners have also focused on the short-term effects of nuclear explosions……………………..

widespread fires and other global climatic changes resulting from many nuclear explosions may not be accounted for in war plans and nuclear doctrines. These collateral effects are difficult to predict; assessing them requires scientific knowledge that most military planners don’t possess or take into account. 

Global climatic changes……………………………………………..

Stratospheric soot injection………………………………

Changes in the atmosphere…………………………………

Changes on land…………………….

Changes in the ocean……………………….

Impacts on food production……………………………………….

Nowhere to hide

The impacts of nuclear war on agricultural food systems would have dire consequences for most humans who survive the war and its immediate effects.

The overall global consequences of nuclear war—including both short-term and long-term impacts—would be even more horrific causing hundreds of millions—even billions—of people to starve to death………………………………………………………

References & Acknowledgments…………………………
 https://thebulletin.org/2022/10/nowhere-to-hide-how-a-nuclear-war-would-kill-you-and-almost-everyone-else/

October 22, 2022 Posted by | 2 WORLD, weapons and war | Leave a comment

“Present Danger: Nuclear Power Plants in War,” The US Army War College Quarterly: Parameters

 

what is still lacking, is a Pentagon assessment of what all this means militarily.

https://npolicy.org/present-danger-nuclear-power-plants-in-war-the-us-army-war-college-quarterly-parameters/ October 19, 2022, Author: Henry Sokolski

As the war in Ukraine drags on, daily developments at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant explode on our Google News screens. Last week, external power needed to prevent a core meltdown at the plant was cut off repeatedly, forcing reliance on emergency diesel generators.

Meanwhile, Russians have tortured, kidnapped, and killed Ukrainian staff at the plant to force them to renounce their loyalty to Ukraine and sign employment contracts with Rosatom, Russia’s electrical utility. Poland, Romania, Ukraine, Moldova, and Finland have all begun distributing iodine pills to reduce thyroid cancers if there is a loss of coolant accident at Zaporizhzhia and a radiological release that drifts their way.

And Washington’s response? Several senior US officials have condemned Russia’s assaults on Zaporizhzhia as being “irresponsible” and “dangerous.” Yet, well after Russia’s military assault on the plant, Westinghouse, the Energy and State Departments, and the President announced plans to construct nuclear power plants in Poland, Romania, and even Ukraine. No one has yet explained how or if these plants can be defended.

This is weird. Plants in Central Europe, like Zaporizhzhia, are not just electrical generators, they are stationary, potential slow-burning nuclear dispersal weapons that could conceivably trigger or even force a NATO response. Plants and such war zones present a real and present danger.

Late last month, the U.S. Army War College asked me to write a short piece on the military risks nuclear plants in war zones present. Attached, “Present Danger: Nuclear Plants in War,” is that analysis. It lays out a basic set of recommendations for the Pentagon.

Present Danger: Nuclear Power Plants in War

Zaporizhzhya’s nuclear plant, as of this writing, has been placed on cold shutdown. The plant and its military vulnerabilities, however, have generated some of the world’s most sensational headlines.1 Earlier this summer, online reports featured photographs of the plant’s damaged transformer, a system critical to assuring a steady supply of electricity to the plant’s all-important reactor coolant and safety systems. Throughout August and September, news organizations detailed how the plant’s external main power lines—built to keep electricity flowing to its reactors—had been cut. Some days, some of the plant’s six reactors were operating. Other days, none were. Repeatedly, the viability of the plant’s emergency diesel fuel electrical generators was “Topic A.”

Each of these stories raised the specter of a military-induced Fukushima: strikes against the plant or the power lines feeding into it that could cut off the electricity needed to run the reactors’ coolant pumps and safety equipment followed by nuclear fuel failures and a massive radiological release over Ukraine and its neighbors. Add to this firsthand accounts of Russian torture, the murder of “disloyal” Ukrainian reactor staff, and an emergency International Atomic Energy Agency visit, and you have everything needed for a Netflix docudrama.

What you would not have, however, and what is still lacking, is a Pentagon assessment of what all this means militarily.

Close friends have offered hints. Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida called for stationing security forces at each of Japan’s nuclear plants, and his administration also suggested the possibility of deploying dedicated missile defense systems (as Belarus has done at its nuclear plant since 2019).2 Seoul crafted military exercises this year with US forces that included explosives detonating at one or more of South Korea’s civilian reactor sites.3 Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky accused Russia of turning Zaporizhzhya into a prepositioned, slow-burning, radiation-dispersing “nuclear weapon.”4 Meanwhile, Tobias M. Ellwood, the British House of Common’s Select Committee on Defense chairman, insisted that if Russia intentionally struck Zaporizhzhya and spread harmful radioactivity to Poland or Romania, it would trigger NATO’s Article 5.5 Moldova, Romania, and Ukraine did more than talk. All three countries prepared to distribute iodine pills to their citizens (to reduce the thyroid cancers radiation might induce if Zaporizhzhya leaked radiation).6


  1. Wikipedia, s.v. “Crisis at the Zaporizhizhia Nuclear Power Plant,” last modified September 14, 2022, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_at_the_Zaporizhzhia_Nuclear_Power_Plant.
  2. Eric Johnston, “Japan to Discuss Creating New Police Unit to Guard Nuclear Plants,” Japan Times (website), March 14, 2022, https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2022/03/14/national/nuclear-plant-police -unit/; and “TOR-M2 Air Defense Missile Systems to Protect Belarus Nuclear Power Plant,” Army Recognition (website), December 8, 2018, https://www.armyrecognition.com/december_2018_global_defense_security_army _news_industry/tor-m2_air_defense_missile_systems_to_protect_belarus_nuclear_power_plant.html.
  3. Sang-ho Song, “Upcoming S. Korea-U.S. Training Involves Drills on Repelling Attacks, Staging Counterattacks,” Yonhap News Agency (website), August 1, 2022, https://en.yna.co.kr/view /AEN20220801004000325.
  4. Rebecca Falconer, “Zelensky Says Russian Forces Using Zaporizhzhia Plant as ‘Nuclear Weapon,’ ” Axios (website), September 4, 2022, https://www.axios.com/2022/09/05/zelensky-russia-zaporizhzhia-plant -nuclear-weapon.
  5. Article 5 requires NATO members come to the defense of any other member that suffers a military attack. See Tobias M. Ellwood (@Tobias_Ellwood), “Let’s make it clear: ANY deliberate damage causing potential radiation leak to a Ukrainian nuclear reactor would be a breach of NATO’s Article 5. @thetimes,” Twitter, August 19, 2022, 1:55 a.m., https://twitter.com/Tobias_Ellwood/status/1560505699179925509?s=20& t=FYfhPvuxW0pHm8lwXfe99w.
  6. Josh Lederman, “Radiation Tablets Are Handed out near Ukrainian Nuclear Plants as Fears of a Leak Mount,” NBC News (website), August 26, 2022, https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/russia-ukraine-war -zaporizhzhia-nuclear-plant-radiation-fears-iodine-rcna45041; Ben Turner, “Ukraine War: Moldova Ships in One Million Iodine Pills amid Fears of Nuclear Disaster,” Euronews (website), August 16, 2022, https: // www.euronews.com /2022 /08 /15 /moldova-ships-in-radiation-pills-as-fighting-rages-near-zaporizhzhia -nuclear-power-plant-i; and Helen Collis, “Romania to Issue Iodine Tablets as Russian War Continues in Neighboring Ukraine,” Politico (website), April 3, 2022, https://www.politico.eu/article/romania-to-issue -iodine-tablets-as-russian-aggression-continues-in-bordering-ukraine/.

Click here to read the full article.

October 21, 2022 Posted by | safety, Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »