A nuclear arms race is unavoidable without serious intervention.
This one-upmanship will never provide a solution to the existential threat posed by nuclear weapons. The only winning move is to step off the track and return to the negotiating table. The parties to the 1970 nuclear non-proliferation treaty, including the P5 nuclear weapon states, are obliged to “pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race”. They will meet in January 2022 to take stock of their progress. Diplomacy, for all its certain challenges, is the only path forward.
A nuclear arms race is unavoidable without serious intervention. China, the US and Russia are each investing in highly effective missiles and defence systems, https://www.ft.com/content/e30c0402-32a1-4c96-846d-48f2a2da7276 Ft.com LAURA GREGO 27 Oct 21, There are conflicting interpretations of the news that China has tested a specialised new long-range missile, capable of carrying a nuclear weapon around the Earth. US officials claimed it was part of a fractional orbital bombardment system (FOBS) which could travel in Earth orbit and then release a manoeuvring vehicle to glide toward a terrestrial target. China’s Foreign Ministry objected to that description, calling the launch simply a test of reusable space technology.
Details may be obscure, but a few things are clear. One, none of these technologies are new, and it should be no surprise that China is capable of fielding them. Two, while China’s nuclear arsenal remains much smaller than that of the US or Russia, Beijing is pursuing strategies to make it larger and more sophisticated. A nuclear arms race is on, absent a serious effort to stop it.
So why is China building new nuclear delivery systems and modernising its weapons after decades of retaining a modestly sized arsenal? One core driver is to make clear to an unconvinced United States that it is vulnerable to Chinese nuclear retaliation despite enormous investments in missile defences. Many of the technologies China is pursuing, including those believed to have been tested this summer, are designed to overwhelm or evade such defences.
If this sounds familiar, it should. This dynamic has echoes of the US-Soviet Cold War arms race. Many of the technologies — FOBS, hypersonic gliders, missiles equipped with multiple nuclear warheads — are even the same. It took years for the United States and Soviet Union to arrive at a shared understanding that unconstrained pursuit of missile defences was destabilising the strategic balance.
However, having exited the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty designed to halt that race, the US has been developing a defence against intercontinental-range ballistic missiles for the past two decades. China’s new missiles hedge against the possibility that the United States may one day believe its technical advances permit it to strike China first while remaining invulnerable to a retaliatory nuclear attack.
If this sounds familiar, it should. This dynamic has echoes of the US-Soviet Cold War arms race. Many of the technologies — FOBS, hypersonic gliders, missiles equipped with multiple nuclear warheads — are even the same. It took years for the United States and Soviet Union to arrive at a shared understanding that unconstrained pursuit of missile defences was destabilising the strategic balance. However, having exited the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty designed to halt that race, the US has been developing a defence against intercontinental-range ballistic missiles for the past two decades. China’s new missiles hedge against the possibility that the United States may one day believe its technical advances permit it to strike China first while remaining invulnerable to a retaliatory nuclear attack.
This one-upmanship will never provide a solution to the existential threat posed by nuclear weapons. The only winning move is to step off the track and return to the negotiating table. The parties to the 1970 nuclear non-proliferation treaty, including the P5 nuclear weapon states, are obliged to “pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race”. They will meet in January 2022 to take stock of their progress. Diplomacy, for all its certain challenges, is the only path forward.
America’s F-35 fighter jet to quietly join the nuclear arsenal
The F-35 is one step closer to carrying nuclear bombs. What’s next??
America’s most advanced fighter jet is on its way to becoming the newest addition to the nuclear arsenal.
The Air Force recently wrapped up the flight testing needed to ensure the B61-12 thermonuclear bomb design is compatible with the F-35A Lightning II, paving the way for the jet to begin carrying nuclear weapons. The airframe must still become certified to conduct nuclear operations as well.
By Rachel S. Cohen Two F-35As launched realistic test versions of the B61-12 for the first time on an unspecified date earlier this year at the Tonopah Test Range in Nevada, the Air Force said Oct. 6. Past versions of the B61 have relied on gravity to drop onto their targets, but the newest design can also hit coordinates using digital guidance…………….
The F-35′s atomic ambitions are a piece of the country’s nuclear modernization plan — slated to cost $634 billion from 2021 to 2030 alone — that flies under the radar…………….. https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2021/10/27/the-f-35-is-one-step-closer-to-carrying-nuclear-bombs-whats-next/
10 Ways We Pretend War Is Not a Crime and How to Change Them by David Swanson
10 Ways We Pretend War Is Not a Crime and How to Change Them by David Swanson, Journalism as Art, https://denniscambly.wordpress.com/, 27 Oct 21
The U.N. Charter not only makes war a crime, but it makes the threat of war, including the long-standing White House mantra “All options are on the table” a crime. It does something else, though. It gives the U.N. the power to impose economic sanctions. This often brutal tool has led to massive death and suffering and laid the groundwork for wars. However, the Fourth Geneva Convention — which, for whatever it’s worth, came after the U.N. Charter — bans the use of collective penalties. That law is apparently not hard to ignore, and the Geneva Conventions in general may be the most frequently ignored laws in the world.
via 10 Ways We Pretend War Is Not a Crime and How to Change Them by David Swanson
Even the mind of Dante could not imagine the inferno a nuclear war will plunge us in
 |
|
The first step in the direction of a world rule of law is the recognition that peace is no longer an unattainable ideal but a necessary condition of continued human existence.
Our civilisation will, through wars, be plunged into the abyss of annihilation, and our earthly habitat could be transformed into an inferno that even the mind of Dante could not imagine.
We must refuse to accept the cynical notion that nation after nation must spiral down a militaristic stairway into the hell of nuclear annihilation.
Because deterrence sets no limits on the size and composition of military forces, tens of thousands of nuclear weapons were created.
Even the mind of Dante could not imagine the inferno a nuclear war will plunge us into https://mg.co.za/opinion/2021-10-25-even-the-mind-of-dante-could-not-imagine-the-inferno-a-nuclear-war-will-plunge-us-into/Farouk Araie25 Oct 2021 n commemoration of the International Day for The Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons, which was celebrated on 26 September, humanity must urgently strive to halt the escalating nuclear arms race.
North Korea’s testing of a submarine-launched missile and her recent launch of a hypersonic missile and associated high technology systems will trigger off a nuclear arms race in Asia. As deadly global events unfold, many aspiring nuclear nations will go the nuclear route. Pakistan will probably increase her nuclear might, which could enable it to have the third largest nuclear arsenal.
The volatile situation in the Middle East could prompt nations in that area to acquire nuclear weapons. World War II ended with the historic understanding that recourse to war between states could no longer be treated as a matter of national discretion, but must be regulated to the extent possible through rules administered by international institutions.
The pursuit of peace and progress cannot end in a few years in either victory or defeat. The pursuit of peace and progress, with its trial and errors, its success and setbacks, can never be relaxed and never abandoned. Humanity is still at the far stage of maturity needed for the realisations of its aspirations, for the construction of a harmonious and peaceful society and the elimination of wars. People are not yet ready to shape their own destinies, to control and direct world events, of which, instead, they become the victims.
The first step in the direction of a world rule of law is the recognition that peace is no longer an unattainable ideal but a necessary condition of continued human existence. One problem that we face is simply that we must find an alternative to war and bloodshed. Anyone who feels that there are still a lot of people who believe that war can solve problems facing humankind is sleeping through a great revolution.
Our civilisation will, through wars, be plunged into the abyss of annihilation, and our earthly habitat could be transformed into an inferno that even the mind of Dante could not imagine. We must refuse to accept the cynical notion that nation after nation must spiral down a militaristic stairway into the hell of nuclear annihilation.
If the ultimate goal of national security is to ensure the survival of any nation, then the pursuit of this goal through nuclear deterrence should be viewed as an utter failure. Because deterrence sets no limits on the size and composition of military forces, tens of thousands of nuclear weapons were created.
Thus the consequences of a single failure of deterrence could be the end of human history. Leaders who choose to “defend” their nation with nuclear weapons must face the fact that nuclear war is suicidal and not an option if their citizens are to survive. Suicide is not a defence.
Should we choose to accept the assertion that “there is no realistic path to a world free of nuclear weapons”, then we sentence the children of the world to a dark future. We must instead reject the 21st century mindset, which is still driving us towards the abyss, through an understanding that nuclear weapons pose a threat to the human species.
Those who see utility and legitimacy in the perpetual maintenance of nuclear weaponry often tend to regard nuclear abolition as a “destabilising” goal, and apparently assume that deterrence will forever prevent a nuclear war. Their long-term optimism is supported neither by logic nor history.
$6000 a day to one US advisor to Australia on getting nuclear submarines. How much to the 3 new ones?
American-dominated panel advising government on submarines as Defence eyes US and UK choices for nuclear fleet, By defence correspondent Andrew Greene, ABC, 25Oct 21.
Three senior American shipbuilding executives are being paid to advise Australia on submarines, but the defence department and government are refusing to say what their work involves or how much they are costing.
Key points:
- Defence is refusing to discuss the role or salaries of the American officials on the Submarine Advisory Committee
- Senators are expected to examine the work of the submarine committee during Senate Estimates hearings this week
- Industry insiders believe the submarine committee needs a British official given the UK’s role in AUKUS
Senators are this week expected to grill officials over the role of the Submarine Advisory Committee, which was formed by the Turnbull government in 2017, a year after a French company was selected for the now dumped $90 billion Attack-class program.
……… Over the next year and a half, the defence department’s Nuclear-Powered Submarine Task Force will work with Australia’s British and American AUKUS partners to identify the best way to acquire a fleet to replace the scrapped French project……. Retired Admiral Donald Kirkland, Jim Hughes and Donald McCormack are all veterans of the US shipbuilding sector and their current three-year appointments to the committee are due to end in May 2024.
Admiral Kirkland is the chairman of American company Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII), which builds US Virginia-class submarines, Mr Hughes has also worked for HII, and Mr McCormack is an executive director at the US military’s Naval Sea Systems Command.
Questions sent by the ABC to the defence department last week concerning how much Submarine Advisory Committee members are paid, and what interactions they now have with the Nuclear-Powered task force, remain unanswered.
While Defence is yet to respond to questions about remuneration, an 18-month contract from 2018 uncovered by the ABC, shows Admiral Kirkland was paid $675,000 for his advisory services.
Earlier this month, Vice Admiral Jonathan Mead confirmed his secretive “Capability Enhancement Review” completed ahead of the Morrison government’s nuclear submarine announcement had not worked with the advisory committee.
Jostling between British and American companies for Australia’s future nuclear-powered fleet is well underway with early debate emerging over whether a US Virginia-class or UK Astute-class submarine is the best base model
Defence industry insiders are now privately questioning whether the government will appoint any British experts to the Submarine Advisory Panel given the United Kingdom’s membership of AUKUS and the country’s extensive experience with nuclear boats.
Last month, it was revealed former US Navy Secretary Donald Winter was being paid $US6,000 a day as an advisor to the federal government on shipbuilding matters.Defence industry insiders are now privately questioning whether the government will appoint any British experts to the Submarine Advisory Panel given the United Kingdom’s membership of AUKUS and the country’s extensive experience with nuclear boats.
Last month, it was revealed former US Navy Secretary Donald Winter was being paid $US6,000 a day as an advisor to the federal government on shipbuilding matters. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-10-26/american-dominated-panel-advising-nuclear-submarine-fleet/100567052
Israel preparing for possible strike on Iranian nuclear sites
Israel preparing for possible strike on Iranian nuclear sites, La Prensa Latina, By Sara Gomez Armas Online News EditorOctober 25, 2021
Ovda Airbase, Israel, Oct 25 (EFE).- The Israeli Air Force is preparing for a potential attack on Iran to stop the Islamic Republic from producing nuclear weapons in case negotiations with world powers in Vienna collapse.
The IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) have continuously trained and upgraded their capabilities to deal with the different Iranian threats. It’s definitely one of the most important core issues we are dealing with in the 2022 plan,” army spokesman Lt. Col. Amnon Shefler tells Efe from the Ovda Airbase in southern Israel, where the military drills are taking place.
The Israeli army has launched a new department in charge of dealing “solely and directly with the Iranian threat,” says Shefler.
Military sources confirmed to Efe that Aviv Kohavi, the IDF chief of general staff, has ordered the Israeli Air Force to step up training for a possible strike on Iran and that the defense ministry has requested a budget increase for the military in 2022.
Backing the budget hike, which needs to be approved in parliament before November 14, finance minister Avigdor Lieberman said last week that “a confrontation with Iran is only a matter of time and not a lot of time.”……..
Israel is currently hosting the Blue Flag international training exercise at Ovda Airbase, with the air forces from the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, Greece and India.
“This is the biggest and most advanced exercise ever hosted in Israel,” says the chief of Air Force training, Brig. Gen. Amir Lazar. https://www.laprensalatina.com/israel-preparing-for-possible-strike-on-iranian-nuclear-sites/
Fear of ‘devastating’ nuclear war as world’s major powers enter a new arms race
|
|
experts have called into question the reasons why nuclear-armed states are spending billions on weapons they are saying will never be used.
”The enmity created by nations threatening each other with indiscriminate, mid-20th century weapons of mass destruction prevents development of global solidarity and trust we so desperately need to address critical 21st century challenges like the climate crisis and pandemics,”
Fear of ‘devastating’ nuclear war as world’s major powers enter a new arms race
Countries including the UK have entered a new arms race, with growing stockpiles of more advanced weapons
By Taz Ali i news UK, October 24, 2021 Since the end of the Cold War, major powers across the globe made huge efforts to reduce their nuclear arsenals in efforts to ensure the world is safer from weapons of mass destruction that could wipe out entire cities.
But now, those countries including the UK have entered a new arms race, with growing stockpiles of more advanced weapons and smarter technology allowing missiles to evade defence systems, all of which experts fear could lead to a nuclear war.
“We’re in a new, multipolar nuclear arms and strategic technologies race, including the rush to weaponise space,” Lyndon Burford, a visiting research associate in the Centre for Science and Security Studies at King’s College London, told i.
He said there were multiple new risk factors, with technologies such as artificial intelligence and increasing political instability in major nuclear-armed countries.
“That could lead to nuclear war, with devastating global humanitarian, economic and ecological effects,” Dr Burford warned.
The nuclear arms race has accelerated in recent years, with the US, Russia, North Korea and China testing nuclear-capable hypersonic missiles which can potentially evade early warning systems and are harder to track.
Last month, the US and UK announced they will help Australia build a new fleet of nuclear submarines, as part of a trilateral alliance known as Aukus to counteract the influence of China.
It prompted warnings from the UN’s nuclear watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that Aukus may spark off another race for nuclear submarines by other states, and that a team has been established to explore the deal’s safety and legal implications.
Matt Korda, a senior research associate for the nuclear information project at the Federation of American Scientists (FAS), told i that campaigns to modernise weapons were driven by a “global competitive environment that is being embraced by all of these nuclear arms states”………………..
Even as the pandemic devastated lives and economies around the world, the world’s nine nuclear states continued to increase spending on such weapons to a total of $72.6bn in 2020, an increase of $1.4bn from the previous year.
“This is a massive drain on public resources globally and a massive threat,” Kate Hudson, general secretary of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) told i.
“The very dangerous thing is that nuclear strategies have moved beyond the idea that we’d never use them, that they only exist as a deterrent. Now so-called ‘usable nukes’ are being developed and use postures outlined.”…………
“The US identifies China as a threat to its pre-eminence. What we are seeing now is the intensification of US militarisation in the Pacific.
“I assume that with the kind of build up against them, having not wanted to go into massive military spending, China will be doing more because of this intensification of activity by other great powers in what can essentially be seen as their backyard.”
Earlier this year, world-renowned naturalist Sir David Attenborough told the UN Security Council that climate change is “the biggest threat to security that modern humans have ever faced”, and few major powers would disagree with him.
Consequently, experts have called into question the reasons why nuclear-armed states are spending billions on weapons they are saying will never be used.
“The enmity created by nations threatening each other with indiscriminate, mid-20th century weapons of mass destruction prevents development of global solidarity and trust we so desperately need to address critical 21st century challenges like the climate crisis and pandemics,” said Dr Burford https://inews.co.uk/news/world/fear-of-devastating-nuclear-war-as-worlds-major-powers-enter-a-new-arms-race-1263713
Campaign to get NatWest bank to stop investing in nuclear weapons
Campaign criticises Natwest nuclear arms firms’ investments, The National, By Greg Russell @National_Greg 24 Oct 21, WITH the eyes of the world on Glasgow for the COP26 climate conference, a campaign group aimed at raising the profile of the health and humanitarian impacts of the use of nuclear weapons has highlighted a major sponsor’s investment in firms that produce nuclear weapons.
Scotland’s biggest bank, Natwest, is a major sponsor of the event, which will bring together representatives of almost 200 countries aimed at agreeing measures to address the global climate emergency.
However, Medact Scotland said the bank’s ongoing investments in companies that make nuclear weapons contradicts its climate and environmental commitments.
“The detonation of just one nuclear bomb would generate a fireball and shockwave that would destroy everything within the blast zone and spread radioactive contamination far beyond it”, said retired GP Dr Guy Johnson, of Medact Scotland.
“A nuclear exchange using less than 1% of the world’s nuclear weapons would alter the Earth’s climate, leading to widespread famine, while the climate impacts of a full-scale nuclear war could make human existence impossible.”
According to pressure group Don’t Bank on the Bomb Scotland, NatWest Group held investments worth £2 billion in 15 nuclear weapons producers over a two-year period, which included investments in major arms companies BAE Systems, Thales and General Dynamics.
Linda Pearson, from the campaign group, said: “NatWest Group cannot claim to be a leader in addressing climate change while continuing to finance the nuclear weapons industry.
“Nuclear weapons production is energy intensive and environmentally damaging.
“Ultimately, any efforts to address the climate crisis will be in vain if the world is destroyed by nuclear war.”
In March this year, Don’t Bank on the Bomb Scotland and its partners sent an open letter to NatWest CEO, Alison Rose, calling on the bank to comprehensively exclude nuclear weapons producers from investment.
The letter was co-signed by 42 organisations including the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, Church of Scotland, Unison Scotland and Friends of the Earth Scotland.
Don’t Bank on the Bomb Scotland is also encouraging individuals to contact the bank directly.
“We want NatWest to live up to its climate commitments”, Johnson said.
“That means the bank must recognise the catastrophic consequences of nuclear weapons and cut all financial ties with the companies that make them.”………. https://www.thenational.scot/news/19669192.campaign-criticises-natwest-nuclear-arms-firms-investments/
China backs ‘no first use’ nuclear policy, calls on nations to cut warhead stockpile
China backs ‘no first use’ nuclear policy, calls on nations to cut warhead stockpile
Recent statement by former Chinese ambassador for disarmament suggests Beijing should rethink ‘no first use’ policy to counter US military presence in region
Position paper marks 50th anniversary of Beijing being awarded UN seat representing China over Taipei, SCMP, Liu Zhen in Beijing, 22 Oct, 2021 China has underlined its “no first use” nuclear policy in a position paper amid discussion over its commitments in a developing nuclear arms race.
In the “Position Paper on China and United Nations Cooperation” issued by the foreign ministry on Friday, China declared it had a history of initiating the no first use (NFU) principle, and said nuclear-weapon states should abandon pre-emptive deterrence policies.
| “Bear in mind that ‘a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought’,” the paper said.It called on all nuclear powers to reduce the role of nuclear weapons as part of their national security policy, stop developing and deploying global anti-ballistic missile systems and cease deployment of land-based intermediate-range ballistic missiles overseas. It called on them to promote global strategic balance and stability…………. Besides making a statement on NFU, Friday’s position paper continued to stress that “countries with the largest nuclear arsenals have special and primary responsibilities in nuclear disarmament”, with Beijing also under international pressure to do more in nuclear arms control and disarmament efforts……..https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3153387/china-backs-no-first-use-nuclear-policy-calls-nations-cut |
Nuclear disarmament: how Africa can play a role in securing a nuclear weapons free world
Nuclear disarmament: how Africa can play a role in securing a nuclear weapons free world, The Conversation October 22, 2021 Joelien Pretorius, Associate Professor in Political Studies, University of the Western Cape.
Why should African states and people be concerned about nuclear disarmament? After all, there are no nuclear weapons on the continent. South Africa, the only African nation to have had nuclear weapons, gave them up in 1989, and Libya stopped its nuclear weapons programme in 2003.
Today, all African states bar South Sudan are members of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. And enough support for the Pelindaba Treaty, an agreement among African states that prohibits the acquisition, stockpiling, testing and other activities that promote nuclear weapons or assist in their production, has turned the continent into a Nuclear Weapons Free Zone.
Nuclear weapons may seem to be an issue far removed from Africa’s immediate security concerns, which is rather centred on small arms, intra-state conflict and human security issues. Nevertheless, nuclear disarmament should still be high on the priority list of African states’ foreign policy pursuits.
Nuclear weapons matter to every country in the world because they pose a threat on three grounds. Firstly, nations that have them are disregarding arms control agreements. Secondly, they are pursuing technologies that have increased the risk of nuclear war in an era of increasing geopolitical tension – particularly between China, the US and Russia. Thirdly, nuclear war poses an existential threat to everyone.
African countries have a role to play in promoting a total ban on nuclear weapons. They can throw their diplomatic weight behind the calls to eliminate them and use the power of their numbers to strengthen the pressure on nuclear-armed states to disarm.
The danger nuclear weapons pose………………….
African states and civil society played an important role in the Ban Treaty process, but need to keep the momentum by asserting Africa’s role on this issue. They can do so by prioritising nuclear disarmament in their foreign policy, creating awareness among Africans that nuclear disarmament is a worthy cause.
They should also encourage more states to join the treaty, especially African states – only nine are members. With every state that joins, the value of the Ban Treaty grows. African states and people can also participate in transnational networks to stigmatise nuclear weapons, with a view to extending the Ban Treaty’s legal reach to include nuclear armed states. https://theconversation.com/nuclear-disarmament-how-africa-can-play-a-role-in-securing-a-nuclear-weapons-free-world-170149
War fears soar as NASA claims it needs nuclear rockets to rival China in space
| |||
War fears soar as NASA claims it needs nuclear rockets to rival China in space
NASA has prompted fears of a conflict after pleading with the US Government to invest in nuclear-powered spacecraft to speed ahead of rivals in the space race., Express UK, By JACOB PAUL, Oct 23, 2021
The agency’s officials were testifying at a House Science, Space, and Technology subcommittee hearing on Wednesday – and called for new weapons to help the US reach Mars before powers such as Russia and China. NASA called on US lawmakers to invest more resources into researching and developing nuclear-powered rockets. They said this would which help humans reach the planet in just three to four months……….
NASA are now scrambling for the US to boost their space defences as China appears to advancing its space technology at a rapid pace……….
while the NASA are hoping to ramp up their space defence systems as they prepare to fend off China in the space race, the move would also come at high risk.
A spokesperson for Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament told Express.co.uk: “The idea of using nuclear-power in space is not new and has long been suggested as a way of getting to Mars quickly.
“But the launch into space of a nuclear reactor also risks a catastrophic spread of radioactive material if, for example, the launch vehicle were to malfunction and explode – which would be quite possible if an over competitive rush to space were to occur.
“Nuclear power has also been suggested for other applications, such as powering space weapons and military bases on the Moon and Mars. So, there really needs to be international consideration of the possible applications of nuclear power in space and their desirability. Some of the risks may well outweigh any possible advantages.” https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/1510292/world-war-three-news-space-race-mars-nasa
Diverse American groups file a lawsuit against DOE opposing production of plutonium pits
What do activist groups from California, New Mexico, and South Carolina
have in common? And why might such a diverse crew have filed a group
lawsuit in June of this year, against the Department of Energy and the
National Nuclear Security Administration?
The answer to that question says
a lot about the environmental implications of nuclear weapons, and what
tactics exist to protect communities – and the world – against the
threat nuclear weapons pose.
The first plutonium pit was produced at Los
Alamos in 1945 and detonated at the Trinity test site. The second plutonium
pit was detonated in Nagasaki shortly after that, killing over 70,000
people. Plutonium pits act as the radioactive core of nuclear weapons,
existing as the central “shell” of nuclear fission chains or what
triggers the detonation. They serve a central role in the existence of
nuclear weapons. Producing plutonium pits, however, is a technically
challenging process that in the past, frequently resulted in environmental
contamination.
Beyond the Bomb 18th Oct 2021
China did not test hypersonic nuclear missile, foreign ministry says.
China did not test hypersonic nuclear missile, foreign ministry says
China tested a space vehicle for possible reuse, not a nuclear-capable hypersonic missile as reported by the Financial Times, ministry saysAnalysts blame speculation over the ‘China threat’ on a lack of transparency, while playing down chances Beijing will launch nuclear weapons into space SCMP
Minnie Chan 18 Oct 21 China has denied reports that it recently tested a nuclear-capable hypersonic missile, saying it was only carrying out routine test flights in a bid to recycle spacecraft to reduce exploration costs.
“This was a routine test of a space vehicle to verify the technology of their reusability,” Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian told a regular briefing in Beijing on Monday.
The launched object “was not a missile” with a military purpose, but “a space vehicle” for civilian aims, he emphasised….. https://www.scmp.com/news/china/military/article/3152791/china-did-not-test-hypersonic-nuclear-missile-foreign-ministry
The U.S. doesn’t need more nuclear weapons to counter China’s new missile silos
The U.S. doesn’t need more nuclear weapons to counter China’s new missile silos
Our current nuclear arsenal is more than enough for whatever Beijing is building. WP, 18 Oct 21, By Edward GeistEdward Geist is a policy researcher at the nonprofit, nonpartisan RAND Corporation.
The discovery of what appear to be hundreds of new missile silos under construction in China has inspired arguments that imply the United States needs more nuclear weapons. Matthew Kroenig, a Defense Department adviser during the Trump administration, suggested in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed that “the Pentagon should study whether it can meet its deterrence requirements with existing stockpile numbers” in case “an increase … is necessary.”……….
But there’s little reason for the United States to worry much about whatever the Chinese military is building in these silos — and plenty of alternatives to building more nuclear weapons for dealing with it. The current U.S. nuclear arsenal was designed to guarantee deterrence even in the case of surprises such as this one. The nuclear weapons the United States already has should be adequate to counter the threat posed by new Chinese missiles even under very pessimistic assumptions. And if U.S. officials eventually decide they have to target the Chinese silos, nonnuclear weapons and sensors would provide a more credible deterrent than building additional nuclear weapons would……………………………………………….
| deploying more nuclear weapons might not be necessary. If a “shell game” is China’s aim, the United States could use remote sensing or other intelligence means to ascertain where the actual missiles are located. This could enable planners to avoid targeting empty silos and minimize the needed weapons.A real game-changer, however, would be a conventional weapon that could kill a silo without using a nuclear warhead. Such weapons were researched extensively during the late Cold War. They weren’t achieved with 20th-century technology, but progress in fields such as machine vision, terminal guidance and geospatial mapping may make them feasible in the not-distant future.A nonnuclear option would give a U.S. president a much easier choice for countering the silos. Such weapons would not violate the nuclear taboo or risk the hard-to-predict collateral damage of nuclear detonations………. https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/10/18/china-silos-missiles-nuclear |
1 This Month
4 May -West Suburban Peace Coalition to discuss Iran war at May Educational Forum
Monday, May 4, 7:00 – 8:00 PM Central Standard Time
Title: : How Trump’s Narrative Tries to Shape the Reality of the War on Iran.
Contact Walt Zlotow, zlotow@hotmail.com 630 442 3045 for further information
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- May 2026 (37)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 