Growing risk of nuclear war in Europe
Risk of nuclear war in Europe growing, warns Russian ex-minister, Reuters, BRUSSELS | BY ROBIN EMMOTT, 20 Mar 16, The East-West standoff over the Ukraine crisis has brought the threat of nuclear war in Europe closer than at any time since the 1980s, a former Russian foreign minister warned on Saturday.
“The risk of confrontation with the use of nuclear weapons in Europe is higher than in the 1980s,” said Igor Ivanov, Russia’s foreign minister from 1998 to 2004 and now head of a Moscow-based think-tank founded by the Russian government.
While Russia and the United States have cut their nuclear arsenals, the pace is slowing. As of January 2015, they had just over 7,000 nuclear warheads each, about 90 percent of world stocks, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.
“We have less nuclear warheads, but the risk of them being used is growing,” Ivanov said at a Brussels event with the foreign ministers of Ukraine and Poland and a U.S. lawmaker.
NATO’s secretary general Jens Stoltenberg has warned Russia of intimidating its neighbors with talk about nuclear weapons, publicly voicing concerns among Western officials.
MISSILE DEFENSE
Ivanov blamed a missile defense shield that the United States is setting up in Europe for raising the stakes. Part of that shield involves a site in Poland that is due to be operational in 2018. This is particularly sensitive for Moscow because it brings U.S. capabilities close to its border………http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-russia-idUSKCN0WL0EV
North Korea’s ballistic missiles, and claim to have miniaturized nuclear warhead
N. Korea launches ballistic missiles, claims miniaturized nuclear warhead http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/03/n-korea-launches-ballistic-missiles-claims-miniaturized-nuclear-warhead/ As if to seal THAAD deal, ballistic missiles flew 500 miles across Korean peninsula. by Sean Gallagher – Mar 19, 2016
Just over a month after successfully putting a satellite into orbit, the government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) claimed to have successfully built a miniaturized nuclear warhead capable of being placed on ballistic missiles. As if to add emphasis to that message, North Korea’s military has gone on a missile testing binge.
On March 10, North Korea launched two “Scud” tactical ballistic missiles from North Hwanghae Province, the North Korean border region just north of Seoul, toward the Sea of Japan. Then on March 17, the North Korean military test-launched longer-ranged ballistic missiles from South Pyongan Province, near the Yellow Sea, across the Korean peninsula. The missiles flew 500 miles, again landing in the Sea of Japan. The latest launches took place early on Thursday morning local time, 20 minutes apart, according to a statement from the Republic of Korea (South Korea) joint chiefs of staff.
John Grisafi, director of intelligence for North Korean watchdog site NK News, believes the miss
iles launched Thursday were likely the Rodong-1 missile. “It’s beyond any known Scud variant’s range,” he said.
North Korea built the Rodong-1, introduced in 1990, based on Scud designs obtained from Egypt and China, with modifications to increase its range.
Previous launches of North Korean ballistic missiles have come from the east coast of the country toward the sea. Analysts believe that the cross-country missile launches show that the North Korean military is confident in the reliability of their missile systems.
The launches coincided with the joint US-South Korean military exercise Key Resolve, which ends today. Those exercises were accompanied by a threat from North Korea to launch a nuclear strike on New York City and carry out other attacks on the US mainland as well as threatening to invade South Korea “with an ultra-precision blitzkrieg strike of the Korean style.” The nuclear test earlier this year and North Korea’s continued missile tests led the Republic of Korea’s government to officially request the US deploy the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) to South Korea, over China’s objections. Talks on the deployment began March 5. The US military will be in command of THAAD batteries sent to South Korea.
US State Department spokesperson John Kirby said in a prepared statement, “We call again on North Korea to refrain from actions that further raise tensions in the region and focus instead on taking concrete steps toward fulfilling its international commitments and obligations.” He added that the US would continue to “coordinate closely” with South Korea and Japan.
$Billions for US nuclear submarines
‘Top priority’: Next-generation US nuclear submarines head Navy’s budget Rt.com 15 Mar, 2016 The US Navy is requesting over $1.8 billion from Congress for the upcoming fiscal year to begin developing and building new nuclear ballistic missile submarines, a top priority for the military branch, according to a Congressional Research Service report.
Should the request for $773.1 million in advance procurement funding and $1.0911 billion for research and development be met, the Navy would be ready begin work on replacing 14 Ohio-class SSBNs, or nuclear ballistic missile submarines, with 12 new subs of a whole new class.
The total cost of the program, known as SSBN(X) or the Ohio Replacement Program, is currently estimated to be $95.8 billion. The small fraction of $1.8 billion would be spent from the Navy’s fiscal year 2017 budget, which runs October 1, 2016 to September 30, 2017. The first new-generation submarine would be acquired in 2021, according to the Congressional Research Service report.
Known as the nuclear triad, land, air and sea nuclear capabilities are reemerging as areas of priority for rearmament and modernization. Submarines, which can remain underwater for months on end, are more likely to survive nuclear attacks than their land and air nuclear counterparts, although they may not be as accurate when it comes to attacks.
According to Popular Mechanics, the nuclear-armed subs “tend to be assigned retaliatory missions against ‘countervalue’ targets – civilian targets such as cities, factories, oil refineries, and transportation infrastructure.”………https://www.rt.com/usa/335612-new-navy-nuclear-submarines/
Further nuclear tests, threats, from North Korea’s Kim Jong-un
North Korea’s Kim Jong-un orders further nuclear tests, threatens to turn US, South Korea ‘into ashes’ North Korean leader Kim Jong-un has ordered further nuclear tests, state media says, adding to military tensions on the Korean peninsula., ABC News 11 Mar 16
Key points:
- North Korea orders more nuclear tests
- Pyongyang talking up nuclear capabilities as US, South Korea hold joint military exercises
- The North carried out a nuclear test in January
Pyongyang has issued daily warnings and statements talking up its nuclear strike capabilities since US and South Korean forces began joint military exercises on Monday.
In one statement, it threatened to turn Seoul and Washington into “flames and ashes”.
Just days after he was photographed posing in front of what state media described as a miniaturised nuclear warhead, Mr Kim said the weapon required further testing.
Overseeing a ballistic missile launch, Mr Kim ordered “more nuclear explosion tests to estimate the destructive power of the newly produced nuclear warheads”, the North’s official KCNA news agency said.
Experts are divided as to just how far the North may have gone in shrinking warheads to a size capable of fitting on a ballistic missile ……..http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-11/north-korean-leader-orders-further-nuclear-tests/7240344
Russia to disarm huge aging nuclear ballistic missile submarine
Russia to disarm world’s largest nuclear ballistic missile submarine Rt.com 11 Mar, 2016 In 2016 Russia is set to disarm the missile system of the Typhoon-class Arkhangelsk submarine, the largest in the world. The disarmament will be carried out in accordance with the New START agreement between Moscow and Washington.
Working in accordance with the New START treaty between Russia and US, the country’s leading Zvezdochka shipyard in the northern Russian city of Severodvinsk will disarm the missile system of the Arkhangelsk submarine, the shipyard’s press service told TASS news agency on Friday.
“We will remove the covers of the submarine’s missile launchers and seal them, thus making it impossible to use the vessel’s missile weapons,” the press service said. “We are not talking yet about dismantling the submarine itself. The tender for this procedure has not yet been announced.”
According to the data published by the Russian nuclear agency Rosatom, the sub’s disarmament is estimated to cost some 28 million rubles (about US$ 400,000).
The nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine Arkhangelsk TK-17 was designed in 1987 under the Project 941 ‘Shark’ (or ‘Typhoon’ according to NATO classification). The project was aimed to equip the Soviet Navy with nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines, and resulted in the creation of the largest class of submarines ever built – large enough to accommodate decent living facilities for the crew of 179 when submerged for months on end, and to stock an arsenal of 20 intercontinental ballistic missiles.
Three of the six Typhoon-class submarines built in the 1980s have already been dismantled at the shipyards in Severodvinsk. Of the three that remain, Arkhangelsk and Severstal are set to be dismantled. Dmitri Donskoi just recently underwent a modernization procedure and is now equipped to test the latest sea-based missile system Bulava.
The New START treaty (on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms), which was designed to reduce American and Russian nuclear stockpiles, came into force in 2011. It replaced the previous 1991 agreement, introducing lower ceilings for the numbers of warheads and delivery systems deployed……….https://www.rt.com/news/335300-russia-disarms-nuclear-sub/
The ill health legacy of nuclear testing
The legacy of nuclear testing
Physicians project that some 2.4 million people worldwide will eventually die from cancers due to atmospheric nuclear tests conducted between 1945 and 1980.
Since the dawn of the atomic age in July 1945, nuclear weapons have been tested on more than 2,000 occasions – in the atmosphere, underground and underwater. The toll on human health and the environment has been staggering. Today many of us carry in our bodies radioactive substances from the fallout of nuclear testing, increasing our risk of developing cancer. Much of the Earth’s surface has been contaminated at some point with radioactive particles. Nuclear testing enables nations to increase the lethality of their nuclear forces.
Nuclear test sites
Nuclear tests have been carried out at more than 60 locations around the globe, often on the lands of indigenous and minority peoples, far away from those who made the decisions to conduct them. While some test sites have been virtually uninhabited, others have been densely populated. The tests have irradiated people working on the programmes, the downwind and downstream communities, and the whole global population. The International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War has estimated that roughly 2.4 million people will eventually die as a result of the atmospheric nuclear tests conducted between 1945 and 1980, which were equal in force to 29,000 Hiroshima bombs.
A nuclear test ban
Public concern in the 1950s about the health and environmental impacts of nuclear testing, including its effect on mothers’ milk and babies’ teeth, led to the negotiation in 1963 of a treaty banning atmospheric and underwater nuclear tests. A comprehensive nuclear test ban, covering underground tests, was negotiated in 1996. Although the latter treaty has not yet entered into legal force, full-scale nuclear testing has largely come to halt. However, a number of countries continue to test their nuclear weapons sub-critically………..http://www.icanw.org/the-facts/catastrophic-harm/the-legacy-of-nuclear-testing/
USA’s B-52 nuclear-capable B-52 bombers to Iraq and Syria
US sending nuclear-capable B-52 bombers to ISIS fight http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/03/04/us-sending-nuclear-capable-b-52-bombers-to-isis-fight.html The United States is sending nuclear-capable B-52 aircraft to drop bombs on the Islamic State terror group, defense officials confirmed to Fox News Friday. 4 Mar 16
The B-52 Stratofortress will start its first bombing campaign against ISIS in April, the Air Force Times reports. It’s not clear how many B-52s or airmen will be involved.
Officials say the aircraft will replace nuclear-capable B-1 Lancers hitting ISIS targets in Iraq and Syria.
The Lancers returned to home bases in the U.S. in January. They flew only 3% of all strike missions against ISIS, but had dropped 40% of the bombs and other munitions. B-1s could loiter over the battlefield for 10 hours, much longer than jet fighters, and also could fly supersonic, reaching targets across Iraq and Syria within minutes.
“The B-1s are rotated out, so they’re not here right now, they’ve gone back to do some upgrades,” Lieutenant General Charles Q. Brown Jr., commander at U.S. Air Forces Central Command, told reporters. Each B-52 can carry up to 70,000 pounds of payload, officials say. The aircraft, sometimes nicknamed the “Big Ugly Fat Fella,” first took to the skies in 1954 and regularly takes part in military exercises around the world.
The B-52s are based in Louisiana and North Dakota.
Fox News’ Lucas Tomlinson contributed to this report.
UK govt to spend £642 million developing new submarines for Trident nuclear missiles
Anger as £642m Trident nuclear submarines investment is confirmed, Herald Scotland, 3 Mar 16 A further £642 million will be invested in developing the new generation of submarines carrying the UK’s nuclear deterrent, Michael Fallon has confirmed.
The defence secretary said the nuclear deterrent “provides the ultimate guarantee of our security” as he announced the extra spending on the boats which will carry the Trident weapons.
But he was condemned by anti-Trident campaigners for making the announcement before MPs have had a chance to give the final go-ahead for the project……… It takes spending on the project’s assessment phase to £3.9 billion……
Kate Hudson, general secretary of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, said: “I ask Michael Fallon, what is the point of a parliamentary vote on Trident if the Government’s going to spend millions on replacement anyway?
“This is completely unacceptable. This is about huge amounts of money being spent on out-of-date technology that will be redundant by the time it is built.
“There is a growing body of evidence which shows that Trident is vulnerable to cyber warfare and attacks by underwater drones.
“The Government appears to be burying its head in the sand – stuck in a 1980s mindset that we are a great power fighting in the Cold War.
“We ask for some objectivity in considering Trident. It is time the Government thought very carefully about the real security threats we face from terrorism, climate change and global pandemics, but also be honest about the very real threat posed by our own nuclear weapons system.”……
the Trident missile system, which was launched in the 1990s as a replacement for the predecessor, Polaris, is due to end its service from 2028. It takes about a decade to build and prepare a new submarine for service. http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/homenews/14319629.Anger_as___642m_Trident_nuclear_submarines_investment_is_confirmed/?ref=rss
Russia to test launch ballistic missiles from nuclear-powered submarines
Russia to Launch Massive Ballistic Missile Test From Nuclear SubsKim Jong-un orders nuclear weapons readied for use ‘at any time’
North Korea:
Leader reportedly tells military to adopt ‘pre-emptive’ posture after imposition of toughest UN sanctions to date, Guardian, Justin McCurry. 4 Mar 16, North Korea should be ready to use nuclear weapons “at any time” in the face of a growing threat from its enemies, leader Kim Jong-un has decreed in a further escalation of tensions on the Korean peninsula.
Kim’s warning, issued via state-controlled media on Friday morning, appeared to be an attempt to put pressure on the international community after the UN security council on Wednesday adopted a raft of new sanctions against the regime in response to its recent nuclear test and rocket launch.
Kim, who was supervising the test-firing of newly developed multiple rocket launchers, said North Korea’s situation had become so perilous that it should have the option of launching a “pre-emptive attack” – a departure from previous claims that the North’s nuclear capability was purely a deterrent.
In an apparent threat to neighbouring South Korea, Kim said the new rocket launchers should be “promptly deployed” along with other new weaponry.
He said the regime’s enemies – notably the US – were threatening North Korea’s survival, the state-controlled KCNA news agency reported……
In Beijing, foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei said China, North Korea’s closest ally, hoped the UN sanctions would be implemented “comprehensively and seriously”, while harm to ordinary North Korean citizens would be avoided…….
While North Korea is believed to possess a small stockpile of nuclear warheads, most experts say the regime has yet to develop the technology to miniaturise them so they can be mounted on a missile…….. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/04/north-korea-kim-jong-un-orders-country-to-be-ready-to-use-nuclear-weapons-at-any-time
President Obama’s doublespeak on nuclear weapons
Barack Obama’s Broken Nuclear Promise The president made non-proliferation a centerpiece of his administration. What happened?, Pacific Standard, JARED KELLER, 1 Mar 16 In the early days of his presidency, during a visit to Prague’s Hradčany Square, Barack Obama launched what observers saw as a centerpiece of his foreign policy: a doctrine for a nuclear free world. “The Cold War has disappeared but thousands of those weapons have not,” President Obama announced, pointing out the paradoxical twist of the modern nuclear dilemma—as the threat of global nuclear war has subsided, the risk of a singular nuclear attack has only intensified.
“More nations have acquired these weapons. Testing has continued. Black market trade in nuclear secrets and nuclear materials abound. The technology to build a bomb has spread. Terrorists are determined to buy, build, or steal one,” Obama continued. “Our efforts to contain these dangers are centered on a global non-proliferation regime, but as more people and nations break the rules, we could reach the point where the center cannot hold.”
Taken in the context of his other campaign promises—the closure of Guantanamo, (which has only truly blossomed in the twilight hours of his presidency) and the end of the two costly wars he inherited—Obama’s nuclear promise seemed both heroic and unimpeachable, especially given its tacit support by past foreign policy luminaries. Mere months after his Prague address, Obama was awarded the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize—a symbolic endorsement of his nascent doctrine—with the Nobel Committee specifically citing the “special importance to Obama’s vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.”………
The minute things went south with Russia, the United States went back on it’s promise to work toward a nuclear-free world.But six years later, in a book released last year, the former Pulitzer director wrote that the prize “didn’t have the desired effect” of helping to catalyze such change. He’s not wrong. The Obama administration certainly made historic steps in unifying the international community on the issue of nuclear weapons, particularly the historic nuclear deal between Iran and the P5+1 countries. But at the same time, despite promises to pursue new restrictions on nuclear technology and decrease the nation’s nuclear stockpile, the American military’s nuclear posture has remained largely static. Obama’s dream of non-proliferation is, it seems, long dead………
Obama’s nuclear budget has swollen in recent years. In his proposed $620.9 billion defense budget for 2017, Obama called for a $1.8 billion increase in nuclear spending “to overhaul the country’s aging nuclear bombers, missiles, submarines and other systems,” according to Reuters. The budget request allocates millions in taxpayer dollars for the development of a new nuclear-tipped cruise missile, replacing the military’s arsenal of air-launched missiles, and almost doubling the military’s nuclear cruise missile collection to nearly 1,000 missiles—all initiatives seemingly in contradiction to the 2010 Nuclear Posture Review and Obama’s early-term non-proliferation rhetoric. And this isn’t a sudden change, but the latest jump in nuclear arms spending at the cost of non-proliferation efforts since 2011, according to reporting from Mother Jones.
Data from the Center for Arms Control & Non-Proliferation shows a steady increase in nuclear spending in Obama’s defense budget since 2012, all while non-proliferation spending has been on the decline:
“What’s more problematic is the decrease in nuclear nonproliferation programs by over $100 million,” Global Zero executive director Derek Johnson wrote for the Hill. “These are highly functional programs dedicated to keeping the world’s nearly 16,000 nuclear weapons out of terrorist hands and locking down vulnerable nuclear material…. In a global security climate traumatized by the rise of ISIS, decreasing nuclear nonproliferation programs seems a dangerously misguided trade-off.”………
In retrospect, we should have known better. In his Nobel address, Obama didn’t just lay out a doctrine that would define his foreign policy; he delivered a masterclass in doublespeak, using the validation of his campaign rhetoric of a utopian, nuclear-free world while recognizing the permanent reality of modernrealpolitik and nuclear terrorism. And while the promise of a nuclear-free world is an inherently naïve proposition, his doctrine of just war was prescient: Obama has expanded the field of battle against terrorism with a deadly drone program while in turn touching off a “modernization” arms race with Russia, as the Interceptputs it.
The administration is trumpeting its success with Iran—and with good reason—but Obama’s record on nuclear weapons is hardly an affirmation of his Nobel Peace Prize. The dream of a world without nukes, it turns out, was always really just that: a dream, and nothing more. http://www.psmag.com/politics-and-law/broken-nuclear-promise-of-barack-obama
John Kerry asked Pakistan to reduce nuclear arsenal
Kerry asks Pak to reduce nuclear arsenal, Business Standard, 1 Mar 16 Citing the example of the US and Russia which are working to further reduce their nuclear arsenals, Secretary of State John Kerry asked Pakistan to understand this reality and review its nuclear policy
Press Trust of India | Washington March 1, 2016 The US has pressed Pakistan to reduce its growing nuclear arsenal but Islamabad has refused to accept any curbs on it saying America must show “greater understanding” of its security concerns in South Asia. Citing the example of the US and Russia which are working to further reduce their nuclear arsenals, Secretary of State John Kerry asked Pakistan to understand this reality and review its nuclear policy.
The nuclear issue was discussed during security talks held here yesterday as part of the US-Pakistan strategic dialogue.
“I think, it is important for Pakistan to really process that reality and put that front and centre in its policy,” Kerry said in an apparent reference to the reports that Pakistan has the fastest growing stockpile of nuclear weapons in the world.
His remarks come ahead of this month’s Nuclear Security Summit to be hosted here by President Barack Obamathat would be attended by Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif……..http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/kerry-asks-pak-to-reduce-nuclear-arsenal-116030100761_1.html
Start of New UN Talks on Nuclear Weapons
Through a series of international conferences on the humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons and a formal pledge to “fill the legal gap for the prohibition and elimination of nuclear weapons” endorsed by 123 governments, non-nuclear weapon states are working to stigmatize, prohibit and eliminate nuclear weapons.
By stigmatizing nuclear weapons — declaring them unacceptable and immoral for all — the international community can start demanding and pressuring the nuclear-armed states and their military alliances to deliver what they’ve actually promised: a world free of nuclear weapons.
Stigmatize and Prohibit: New UN Talks on Nuclear Weapons Start 
Today, Huffington Post, 02/21/2016 Beatrice FihnExecutive Director, International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons
When North Korea tested a nuclear weapon in January, condemnation from all around the world flowed within minutes. A week later, the United States carried out a mock nuclear weapons test of a new type of “more usable” warhead in the Nevada desert. Aside from a small number of civil society organizations, the international community was silent.
Just two weeks ago, North Korea carried out a rocket launch and thereby tested the capability to launch long-range missiles, capable of delivering nuclear weapons on targets far, far away. The world once again rose up and criticized this, with statements by the United Nations Security Council and condemnations from Foreign Ministers all around the world.
Early this morning, the United States tested its Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile, a missile that is intended for launching nuclear bombs on Russia or any other target on the other side of the world. Again, few seem to care.
The United Nations Secretary-General has said, “There are no right hands for the wrong weapon”. But many in the international community often act with implicit acceptance of American, British, French, Russian, and Chinese nuclear weapons.
The “Humanitarian Initiative”, however, is challenging this implicit acceptance. Through a series of international conferences on the humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons and a formal pledge to “fill the legal gap for the prohibition and elimination of nuclear weapons” endorsed by 123 governments, non-nuclear weapon states are working to stigmatize, prohibit and eliminate nuclear weapons.
By stigmatizing nuclear weapons — declaring them unacceptable and immoral for all — the international community can start demanding and pressuring the nuclear-armed states and their military alliances to deliver what they’ve actually promised: a world free of nuclear weapons.
Negotiating a new international treaty prohibiting nuclear weapons, even without the participation of nuclear-armed states, would be one of the most effective toolsfor achieving such stigmatization.
And that work starts now. Far removed from headlines regarding North Korea’s recent tests or other non-proliferation issues like the Iran deal, a new UN Working Group in Geneva, Switzerland, will start today.
In true UN-style, the Working Group has a blurry and bureaucratic mandate, wrapped inside a Resolution of several pages from the UN General Assembly. However, its task is to work on new legal measures for nuclear disarmament.
Through this Working Group, the 123 states that have endorsed the humanitarian pledge to “fill the legal gap” have an opportunity to start work on a new, legally-binding instrument to prohibit nuclear weapons.
The Working Group might not cause big headlines like the Iran deal, but judging by the strong reaction from the nuclear weapon states and those under the nuclear umbrella, it is clear that they do not see it as just another talking shop.
The nuclear weapon states seem genuinely dismayed about the efforts to stigmatize and prohibit nuclear weapons. They are all boycotting the Working Group and are strong-arming allied states under the US nuclear umbrella and NATO members into representing their interests whilst pretending to be disengaged.
The nuclear weapon states are doing everything they can to stop the process to stigmatize and prohibit nuclear weapons – as they know it will challenge their self-proclaimed right to keep these weapons of mass destruction around for as long as they wish. ……. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/beatrice-fihn/stigmatize-and-prohibit-n_b_9287144.html
France promises more compensation to Pacific nuclear test victims
France pledges more compensation for Polynesia nuclear tests http://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-nuclear-idUSKCN0VV1XW, 28 Feb 16 PAPEETE, FRENCH POLYNESIA Residents of French Polynesia who suffered due to 30 years of French nuclear tests in the Pacific archipelago have a legitimate right to compensation, President Francois Hollande said on his first visit to the region on Monday.
The sensitive issue of reparations for damage caused by the atomic testing between 1966 and 1996 at Mururoa Atoll is top of the agenda of Hollande’s tour of French Pacific territories. “If France is what it is today, with this deterrent capability, it is because there were nuclear tests for a very long period,” he said on arrival in Papeete.
“It’s quite legitimate that France should make good for a number of consequences, whether social, health-related or economic,” he said in a joint news conference with Polynesian president Edouard Fritch.
Regional authorities say compensation approved by a 2010 law has been slow to arrive. An anti-nuclear pressure group said only 19 people, of whom just five Polynesians, had received payments.
An annual 150 million euro ($165.2 million) subsidy fixed when President Jacques Chirac ended nuclear tests in 1996 is set to shrink to 84 million euros this year.
Employers and trade unions that manage the regional health fund are demanding 450 million euros in costs for treating people they say are suffering from cancer due to radiation.
(Reporting by Daniel Pardon; Writing by Paul Taylor)
Now more likely than ever – nuclear Armageddon
Is nuclear Armageddon more likely than ever? Thye Week, 28 Feb 16 New weapons, unstable nations, and terrorism are raising the nuclear stakes. Is a doomsday attack more likely? Here’s everything you need to know about the new nuclear arms race:
How many nuclear weapons are there?
About 16,000. Russia and the U.S. have 93 percent of them, with more than 7,000 each; the rest are split between France, China, the U.K., Pakistan, India, Israel, and North Korea. The global stockpile is much smaller than it was at the height of the Cold War: In 1986, Russia and the U.S. had 64,000 nukes pointed at each other — enough to devastate every square inch of the entire globe. But there are growing fears that nuclear catastrophe is becoming increasingly likely. The established nuclear powers are modernizing their arsenals with smaller, more sophisticated weapons. The unstable regime in nuclear-armed North Korea is trying to develop a hydrogen bomb. ISIS, which is richer and more ambitious than any previous terrorist group, is trying to get hold of a nuclear device. The Doomsday Clock, the symbolic countdown to Armageddon, was last year moved from five minutes to midnight to three minutes. “We are facing nuclear dangers today that are in fact more likely to erupt into a nuclear conflict than during the Cold War,” says former Secretary of Defense William Perry……..
They’re becoming smaller and more advanced, and thus more likely to be used. Last fall, the U.S. Air Force tested its first precision-guided atom bomb, which can be remotely guided like a cruise missile to zero in on small targets. Its explosive power can be dialed up or down, from 50 kilotons to 0.3 kilotons. Critics argue that nuclear weapons should never be used as battlefield weapons — only as a deterrent. “What going smaller does,” says retired Gen. James Cartwright, “is make the weapon more thinkable.” Russia’s new weapons are also causing concerns. Last November, the Kremlin leaked plans for a nuclear torpedo designed to sneak under traditional nuclear defenses and hit cities or military installations along the coasts.
Could terrorists acquire a nuke?
It’s possible……. http://theweek.com/articles/608163/nuclear-armageddon-more-likely-than-ever
1 This Month
of the week- – THE ONENESS of HUMANITY
We the Nuclear Free North
1st July – Webinar Waste of Space: The Environmental Harm of Military and Civil Space Activity st July, 7 pm
Report Launch Online: We are seeing an increasing exploitation of space for military and commercial purposes. This must change.
Protect Sazan Island from the Trump family! https://secure.avaaz.org/campaign/en/protect_sazan_island_from_the_trump_family_loc/?bqFCVab&v=174511&cl=22707147157&_checksum=5e9dde668860e8231c33699735e16a1fbf22ab2cb01da50c999fe8732b9775ef&utm_source=email&utm_medium=blast_email&utm_campaign=174511
Cuba Is Not a Failed State – It Is a Besieged State
PETITION: “Global Appeal to Endorse Palestinian Right of Return of Refugees”
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- June 2026 (258)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 