nuclear-news

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

North Korea has ‘undeclared’ ICBM base near China border, according to new report.

ABC News, 23 Aug 25

In short:

A missile base near North Korea’s border with China poses a nuclear threat to Australia, East Asia and the US, a new report and an expert say.

There are likely up to nine nuclear-capable intercontinental ballistic missiles and launchers at the secret site.

A retired South Korean Army Lieutenant General says it is a “world problem”.

North Korea has built a secret military base near its border with China which may house Pyongyang’s newest long-range ballistic missiles, according to new research.

The Sinpung-dong Missile Operating Base lies about 27 kilometres from the Chinese frontier, the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) said in a report published on Wednesday.

The facility in North Pyongan Province likely houses six to nine nuclear-capable intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and their launchers, the study said.

It said the weapons “pose a potential nuclear threat to East Asia and the continental United States”.

North Korea has ramped up its nuclear weapons programme since a failed summit with the US in 2019, and leader Kim Jong Un recently called for the “rapid expansion” of the diplomatically isolated nation’s nuclear capability.

The report — which CSIS called the first in-depth, open-source confirmation of Sinpung-dong — says the base is one of about “15-20 ballistic missile bases, maintenance, support, missile storage, and warhead storage facilities which North Korea has never declared”.

The facility is “not known to have been the subject of any denuclearisation negotiations previously conducted between the United States and North Korea”, the study said.

Citing their analysts’ current assessments, CSIS said the launchers and missiles could leave the base in times of crisis or war, link up with special units and conduct harder-to-detect launches from other parts of the country.

The base, along with others, “represent the primary components of what is presumed to be North Korea’s evolving ballistic missile strategy, and its expanding strategic-level nuclear deterrence and strike capabilities”, the report said.

Site built near China to deter attacks

In-Bum Chun, a retired South Korean Army Lieutenant General, told ABC’s Radio National that North Korea believed it could scare the US out of its alliance with South Korea by building these kind of missile bases…………………………………………….https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-08-22/north-korea-secret-missile-base/105684760

August 23, 2025 Posted by | North Korea, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Europe To Spend $100BN It Doesn’t Have, To Buy Weapons America Doesn’t Have, To Arm Soldiers Ukraine Now Lacks.

by Tyler Durden, Wednesday, Aug 20, 2025 , https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/europe-spend-100bn-it-doesnt-have-buy-weapons-america-it-doesnt-have-arm-soldiers

Part of Zelensky’s motive for wearing a suit Monday to the White House has become clearer with fresh reporting in the Financial Times, which reviewed a document showing Ukraine will promise to buy $100 billion of American weapons financed by Europe in a bid to obtain robust US security guarantees.

Additionally, “Under the proposals, Kyiv and Washington would also strike a $50bn deal to produce drones with Ukrainian companies that have pioneered the technology since Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022,” the report continues. Ukraine pitched its plan during the Monday White House summit, which also involved seven EU leaders – and the $100BN arms deal became part of the key talking points pushed by the European allies.

This is an effort by design meant to ensure Ukraine can procure what it wants – and that its war efforts can still be funded uninterrupted – while still ultimately appeasing Trump. “We’re not giving anything. We’re selling weapons,” Trump had said Monday in response to a reporter’s question on the matter.

It remains very obvious that Europe’s demands of keeping up huge pressure on Russia, including through sanctions, are intended to stymie any US-backed deal seen as too favorable to Moscow. The FT report comments on this as follows:

The document details how Ukraine intends to make a counter-pitch to the US after Trump appeared to align himself with Russia’s position for ending the war following his meeting with President Vladimir Putin in Alaska last week.

It reiterates Ukraine’s call for a ceasefire that Trump had espoused but then dropped after his Putin meeting in favor of the pursuit of a comprehensive peace settlement.

Geopolitical analyst and commentator Glenn Diesen has pointed out, however, that Kiev is essentially attempting to create leverage out of nothing.

“Europe will spend $100 billion it does not have, to buy weapons from America that it does not have, to arm soldiers that Ukraine now lacks,” he wrote, explaining further: “This is to confront Russia, which for 30 years warned it would respond to NATO militarizing its borders.”

Diesen followed by doing something that Washington policy-makers refuse to do, and that is look at the big picture of how we got here [emphasis ZH]:

There was no threat to Ukraine before 2014, as only a tiny minority of Ukrainians wanted to join NATO, and Russia laid no claim to any of Ukraine’s territory. Western governments then supported a coup to pull Ukraine into NATO’s orbit – something that CIA Directors, Ambassadors, and Western state leaders had warned would instigate a security competition and likely trigger a war.

Russia predictably reacted fiercely. Ever since then, the only acceptable narrative has been that Russia wants to restore the Soviet Union and that Putin is Hitler. Any dissent is labelled as “disinformation”, “propaganda”, “hybrid warfare”, or even treason.

The war has now been lost, and the Americans are pulling away from it, asking the Europeans to absorb the consequences. How do the Europeans respond? By doubling down on this madness, which will destroy Ukraine, our economies, and our relevance in the world – and possibly trigger a nuclear war. – What is the strategy? More of the same? The best thing for Ukraine is to remove it from the frontlines of the geopolitical struggle over where to draw the new dividing lines in Europe: End the war, rebuild Ukraine, and replace expansionist military blocs with the principle of indivisible security.

This week, as negotiations proceed and Europe keeps up its drive to pile more and more pressure on Putin, the big question will be whether the Western side can indeed understand that it has lost the proxy war.

Many immense hurdles remain, and one could also point out there are too many cooks in the kitchen (judging by the over a half-dozen European leaders present in the Oval yesterday), making things all the more unnecessarily complicated – and that’s probably by design.

Glenn Greenwald agrees with this bleak assessment of Europe’s role in thwarting peace… DC foreign policy elites now know that Ukraine cannot win, but they would rather continue fueling a fruitless and deadly war than admit they were wrong and delusional about Ukraine’s prospects against Russia.

August 22, 2025 Posted by | EUROPE, Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Israeli Military To Call Up 60,000 Reservists as It Prepares for Gaza City Ethnic Cleansing Campaign.

Under the plan, the IDF will forcibly evacuate over 1 million civilians from the city, then spend over a year destroying it.

by Dave DeCamp | August 19, 2025, https://news.antiwar.com/2025/08/19/israeli-military-to-call-up-60000-reservists-as-it-prepares-for-gaza-city-ethnic-cleansing-campaign/

About 60,000 Israeli reservists will receive call-up orders that the Israeli military will issue tomorrow as it’s preparing for a major offensive on Gaza City, The Times of Israel reported on Tuesday.

The report said that reservists will have two weeks before they need to report for duty and that not all of them will take part in the offensive on Gaza City since some will replace IDF troops deployed in other areas of Gaza.

The Israeli military’s plans to take over Gaza City involve the ethnic cleansing of over 1 million Palestinian civilians from the area. Since civilians are expected to remain in the city after evacuation orders, the IDF is prepared to use artillery strikes as its means of forcibly moving them, according to Haaretz.

While the IDF hasn’t yet launched its ground offensive, it has ramped up strikes on Gaza City in recent weeks with a focus on the eastern Zeitoun neighborhood. Thousands of Palestinians have already fled the area, and an investigation from Al Jazeera found that many of the Israeli attacks were hitting displacement shelters.

Once the city is taken over, the IDF plans to spend more than a year destroying it, similar to how it made the northern cities of Beit Hanoun, Beit Lahia, and Jabalia uninhabitable. The IDF will demolish homes in Gaza City under the guise of “dismantling Hamas infrastructure,” but Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has previously told a Knesset committee that the IDF’s destruction of homes would force Palestinians to leave Gaza altogether.

The idea of the Gaza City offensive is to force all the Palestinians to the south, and from there, Israel will pressure them to leave Gaza, but it remains unclear where they could go. Israel has reportedly been in talks with several countries on taking in a large number of Palestinian refugees, but so far, none have publicly committed to the idea.

FacebookTwitterWhatsAppRedditLinkedInTumblrEmailPrint

https://www.facebook.com/v17.0/plugins/like.php?app_id=0&channel=https%3A%2F%2Fstaticxx.facebook.com%2Fx%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter%2F%3Fversion%3D46%23cb%3Df0d6e32fe3ef8ad24%26domain%3Dnews.antiwar.com%26is_canvas%3Dfalse%26origin%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fnews.antiwar.com%252Ff1284ffe79cf7df43%26relation%3Dparent.parent&container_width=0&href=https%3A%2F%2Fnews.antiwar.com%2F2025%2F08%2F19%2Fisraeli-military-to-call-up-60000-reservists-as-it-prepares-for-gaza-city-ethnic-cleansing-campaign%2F&layout=button&locale=en_US&ref=addtoany&sdk=joey&width=90https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/tweet_button.2f70fb173b9000da126c79afe2098f02.en.html#dnt=false&id=twitter-widget-0&lang=en&original_referer=https%3A%2F%2Fnews.antiwar.com%2F2025%2F08%2F19%2Fisraeli-military-to-call-up-60000-reservists-as-it-prepares-for-gaza-city-ethnic-cleansing-campaign%2F&related=AddToAny%2Cmicropat&size=m&text=Israeli%20Military%20To%20Call%20Up%2060%2C000%20Reservists%20as%20It%20Prepares%20for%20Gaza%20City%20Ethnic%20Cleansing%20Campaign&time=1755737285624&type=share&url=https%3A%2F%2Fnews.antiwar.com%2F2025%2F08%2F19%2Fisraeli-military-to-call-up-60000-reservists-as-it-prepares-for-gaza-city-ethnic-cleansing-campaign%2FShare

Dave DeCamp is the news editor of Antiwar.com, follow him on Twitter @decampdave.

August 22, 2025 Posted by | Gaza, Israel, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Israelis Understand That Trump Can End The Nightmare In Gaza. Americans Should Know This Too.

Caitlin Johnstone, Aug 19, 2025, https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/israelis-understand-that-trump-can?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=82124&post_id=171337355&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

It’s so revealing how Israelis keep begging Trump to end the killing in Gaza, because they understand that the US president has the power to force Israel to stop. It seems like Israelis understand this far better than Americans do.

Six former Israeli hostages and the widow of a slain hostage have released a video pleading with President Trump in English to support a comprehensive deal to make peace in Gaza so that the remaining hostages can be freed.

“You have the power to make history, to be the president of peace, the one who ended the war, ended the suffering, and brought every hostage home, including my little brother,” implores one of the hostages.

“President Trump, please act now before it’s too late for them, too,” pleads the widow.

This is not the first time Israelis have begged Trump to force an end to the slaughter. Earlier this month more than 600 former senior Israeli security officials from Mossad and Shin Bet sent Trump a letter urging him to compel Netanyahu to make peace in Gaza. They did this because they understand something that many Americans do not: that the US president has always had the power to end the Gaza holocaust.

It’s crazy how many times I’ve encountered Americans telling me that this is “Israel’s war” and there’s nothing the president can do to end it. It was mostly Democrats doing this back when Biden was president and I was slamming Genocide Joe for continuing this mass atrocity, and now that Trump is in office it’s his supporters who show up in my comments section white knighting for the president.

“It’s not our war and we should stay out of it,” they sometimes claim, mistakenly thinking that critics of the US-backed genocide are asking for some kind of US intervention.

But the call isn’t for the US to intervene, it’s for the US to stop intervening. To end the US interventionism that has been underway for two years. The Gaza holocaust can be ended by the US simply ceasing to add wood to the fire.

Israeli military insiders have been saying again and again that the onslaught in Gaza would not be possible without US support.

A senior Israeli air force official told Haaretz last year that “without the Americans’ supply of weapons to the Israel Defense Forces, especially the air force, Israel would have had a hard time sustaining its war for more than a few months.”

In November 2023 retired Israeli Major General Yitzhak Brick told Jewish News Syndicate that, “All of our missiles, the ammunition, the precision-guided bombs, all the airplanes and bombs, it’s all from the US. The minute they turn off the tap, you can’t keep fighting. You have no capability. … Everyone understands that we can’t fight this war without the United States. Period.”

Former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert wrote the following last year:

“The entire Israel Air Force relies completely on American aircraft: fighter planes, transport planes, refueler planes and helicopters. All of Israel’s air power is based on the American commitment to defend Israel. We have no other reliable source for essential supplies of equipment, munitions and advanced weapons that Israel cannot manufacture on its own. In recent months, hundreds of American transport planes have landed at IAF bases carrying thousands of tons of advanced, vital military equipment and munitions.”

The Israelis clearly understand that they’ve been entirely dependent on the US for the IDF’s acts of butchery in Gaza this entire time, and they clearly understand that the US president has the ability to turn off the tap whenever he wants.

And now they are begging the president to do so with increasing urgency, because it’s been made clear to them that their own government isn’t going to stop until it is forced to stop. They can’t stop the gunman, so they’re turning to the man who’s feeding him the ammo.

It would be good if Americans understood this as well. Trump is committing genocide in Gaza, just as surely as Netanyahu is, and he could end it at any time. The fact that he still has not chosen to do so makes him one of the most evil people on earth.

August 22, 2025 Posted by | Israel, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Billions in Israel defence contracts put Australia at risk.

by Stephanie Tran | Aug 17, 2025, https://michaelwest.com.au/billions-in-israel-defence-contracts-put-australia-at-risk/

The Australian Government risks breaking international law, splashing billions in public money on Israel weapons deals. A Stephanie Tran analysis.

The Australian government has funnelled $2.5 billion of taxpayer funds to Israeli arms manufacturers over the past two decades via government contracts.

An analysis of Austender data shows that since 2004, the Australian government has signed dozens of deals with Israel’s largest defence companies, making them some of the country’s most significant foreign suppliers of arms.

But this is just the tip of the iceberg. The true sum is certainly much higher, as the government is not required to disclose subcontracting arrangements, such as the $900 million deal between Elbit Systems and South Korean firm Hanwha to supply the Australian Army with armoured vehicles.

The breakdown of the funds is as follows:

  • $1.92 billion to Elbit Systems and its subsidiaries Elistra Electronic System Ltd, Universal Avionics Systems, Geospectrum Technologies and Ferranti Technologies
  • $307 million to Israel Aerospace Industries and its subsidiaries, Elta Systems and Elta Electronics industry
  • $180 million to Rafael Advanced Defense Systems, its subsidiary Pearson Engineering and a joint venture with Australian company Varley Group, “Varley Rafael”
  • $10 million to Israel Military Industries, also known as IMI Systems. (Note: IMI Systems was acquired by Elbit Systems in 2018)
  • $870,000 to Plassan
  • $210,00 to Rada Electronic Industries

Breaking international law

Lara Khider, Senior Lawyer at the Australian Centre for International Justice, said the contracts place Australia at risk of breaching its international legal obligations.

“States have been put on notice that Israel may be committing internationally wrongful acts in relation to its military and other operations in Gaza and through its unlawful occupation of Palestinian territory,” Khider said, citing multiple International Court of Justice (ICJ) rulings in the South Africa v Israel genocide case and its advisory opinion on Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory. 

“On this basis, States have an obligation to cease aid and assistance to Israel in relation to the commission of these acts. Otherwise, States may be deemed complicit in internationally wrongful conduct.”

She said the ICJ was unequivocal that all states must avoid trade or economic dealings that entrench Israel’s unlawful presence in occupied Palestinian territory and refrain from aiding or assisting its maintenance. Under the Arms Trade Treaty, to which Australia is a signatory, governments are required to block weapons transfers if there is an overriding risk they would be used to commit serious violations of the Geneva Conventions.

The Australian Centre for International Justice has called for a two-way arms embargo “as a bare minimum” to ensure Australia does not contribute directly or indirectly to violations of international law in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

Department of Defence did not respond – does it ever?


The Department of Defence did not respond to a request for comment regarding whether it would cancel its existing contracts and refrain from entering into new contracts for the procurement of arms from Israeli defence companies in light of the ongoing genocide in Gaza.

Greg Barns SC, a spokesman for the Australian Lawyers Alliance, said continuing the contracts undermines Australia’s moral and legal credibility.

“Australia has an obligation to comply with all of the international agreements, treaties and covenants to which it is a signatory. That any Australian government would allow the supply of defence equipment to a country committing war crimes and genocide is morally reprehensible and a clear breach of international law,” Barns said. “This reduces Australia’s standing globally in terms of adherence to the rule of law.”

August 21, 2025 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

European military-industrial output for Ukraine outpaces the US.

By Linus Höller, Thursday, Aug 14, 2025, https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2025/08/13/european-military-industrial-output-for-ukraine-outpaces-the-us/?utm_source=sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=c4-overmatch

THE HAGUE, Netherlands — European military industrial production in support of Ukraine has overtaken American output for the first time since Russia’s invasion, new numbers released Tuesday show.

According to the tally by the German Kiel Institute for the World Economy, Europe allocated at least €35.1 billion ($41.1 billion) in military industrial output to Ukraine between the start of the war in February 2022 and the end of June 2025. This is €4.4 billion ($5.15 billion) more than the U.S. committed in the same period.

The continent also overtook the U.S. in terms of total military aid in the spring, following a sharp rise in European support for Ukraine in response to America’s withdrawal under the nascent Trump administration. EU countries have allocated over $65 billion in military assistance to Ukraine, according to the Union’s own tally. Additionally, several non-EU European countries are major donors, bringing up the European total.

The numbers do not include the recently announced American weapons deliveries, which are the first large batch approved by President Donald Trump’s administration, because they will be purchased by Kyiv, rather than donated.

The disparity is even greater when accounting for other forms of aid, too. Europe has allocated €167.4 billion ($196.1 billion) in government aid to Kyiv and pledged another €90 billion ($105.4 billion), according to the Kiel Institute’s tracker. The U.S. has allocated and pledged €114.6 billion ($134.3 billion) and €4.35 billion ($5.1 billion), respectively.

Although Europe’s combined clout has consolidated to buttress Ukraine, the U.S. nonetheless remains the single largest donor. Its combined total is nearly twice that of the second-largest donor, the European Union, which has provided €60.5 billion ($70.9 billion) in financial aid and €2.7 billion ($3.2 billion) in humanitarian assistance.

The U.S. has also provided to Ukraine more infantry fighting vehicles and howitzers than any other single country, as well as multiple launch rocket systems and air defense systems. However, European tallies combined surpass the U.S. in all of these categories.

The No. 1 European donor country is Germany, although as a portion of their gross domestic product, Denmark, Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia lead the pack. Denmark’s aid to Ukraine amounts to 2.9% of the country’s GDP, plus a further 0.4% if EU-provided assistance is considered in the tally.

Poland has also been a significant supporter, including coming out as the No. 1 tank provider for Ukraine, having sent Kyiv a total of 354 tanks. The Netherlands has provided 104 and Denmark 94.

Kiel Institute researchers noted that many of the weapons now going to Ukraine come straight from the military-industrial output of the sending countries, rather than from preexisting stockpiles, as had been the case in the earlier days of the war.

Early on, stockpiles of weapons and gear had run low across many Western countries as the systems were rushed to the frontlines in Ukraine in defense against the Russian invasion.

Unlike unpredictable American assistance, European support has remained consistent — and even expanded — as fighting in Ukraine dragged on into its fourth year.

In May and June 2025 alone, European governments allocated €10.5 billion ($12.3 billion) in new military assistance, of which at least €4.6 billion ($5.4 billion) is being routed through procurement contracts, rather than pulled from existing stockpiles, underscoring the growing centrality of industrial output over surplus arsenals.

About Linus Höller

Linus Höller is Defense News’ Europe correspondent and OSINT investigator. He reports on the arms deals, sanctions, and geopolitics shaping Europe and the world. He holds a master’s degrees in WMD nonproliferation, terrorism studies, and international relations, and works in four languages: English, German, Russian, and Spanish.

August 20, 2025 Posted by | EUROPE, weapons and war | Leave a comment

French monitor: Ukraine, NATO provoked Russia in Donbas war

As Trump hosts Zelensky, an international monitor on the ground in Ukraine from 2015 to 2022 blows the whistle on Ukraine’s NATO-backed assault on the Donbas.

Aaron Maté, Aug 19, 2025, https://www.aaronmate.net/p/french-monitor-ukraine-nato-provoked?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=100118&post_id=171287926&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=ln98x&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

Benoit Paré is a former French defense ministry analyst who worked as an international monitor in eastern Ukraine from 2015 to 2022.

In his first interview with a US outlet, Paré speaks to The Grayzone‘s Aaron Maté about the hidden reality of the Ukraine war in the Donbas region, where the US-backed Kyiv government fought Russia-backed rebels following the 2014 Maidan coup. Russia now demands that Ukraine accept its capture of the Donbas as a condition for ending the war.

“I will very clear. For me the fault lies on Ukraine… by far.” Paré also warns that Ukrainian ultra-nationalists, who violently resisted the Minsk accords, remain a major obstacle to peace. Paré worked as a monitor for the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), a predominately European group. He recounts his experience as an OSCE monitor in Ukraine in his new book, “What I saw in Ukraine: 2015-2022, Diary of an International Observer.”

When it comes to which party is responsible for the failure to implement the Minsk accords, the 2015 peace pact that could have prevented the 2022 Russian invasion, Paré says.

“I will very clear. For me the fault lies on Ukraine… by far.” Paré also warns that Ukrainian ultra-nationalists, who violently resisted the Minsk accords, remain a major obstacle to peace. Paré worked as a monitor for the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), a predominately European group. He recounts his experience as an OSCE monitor in Ukraine in his new book, “What I saw in Ukraine: 2015-2022, Diary of an International Observer.”

Benoit Paré’s book: “What I saw in Ukraine: 2015-2022, Diary of an International Observer.”

August 19, 2025 Posted by | Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

US flies nuclear bombs to Britain.

“The new nuclear bombs which are now based at Lakenheath are entirely under the control of Donald Trump and could be used without the UK having any say at all in the matter.

    by beyondnuclearinternational

Nukewatch UK reveals how US nuclear gravity bombs were deployed on US soil for the first time in 17 years

By Peter Burt

US nuclear bombs were delivered to Lakenheath air base on Thursday 17 July as part of NATO plans to deploy new battlefield nuclear nuclear weapons intended for war-fighting in Europe. The following is an examination of how we know this, with an update also below.

The flight

The arrival of a special flight transporting the bombs was observed by Nukewatch UK, who judge that the evidence publicly available from our observations and flight-tracking data now supports the conclusion that nuclear weapons are based at the Lakenheath US air base in Suffolk. This article explains how the weapons were brought to Lakenheath by the US Air Force and sets out the evidence which indicates they are now stationed at the British base.

Shortly after 7 am local time on Tuesday 15 July a giant C-17 Globemaster transport aircraft, flight number RCH4574 (‘Reach 4574’), assigned to the US Air Force’s 62nd Airlift Wing left Joint Base Lewis–McChord, its home base in Washington state. The 62nd Airlift Wing is an elite, highly trained transport unit which serves as the US Air Force’s Prime Nuclear Airlift Force: the only Air Force section tasked with the role of supporting the US Department of Defence and Department of Energy with their nuclear airlift operations. The aircraft undertaking the flight was a C-17 with the serial number 08-8200, flying on high priority mission with the air force mission number PAM112271196.

The aircraft flew across the continental United States to Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque, New Mexico – the hub of the US Air Force’s nuclear operations, where the largest nuclear weapons storage facility in the world is located: the Kirtland Underground Munitions Maintenance and Storage Complex(KUMMSC). KUMMSC stores a significant portion of the US nuclear arsenal, including gravity bombs and warheads.

At Kirtland the aircraft almost certainly loaded up with a cargo of anything up to 20 newly manufactured B61-12 nuclear weapons – a new, modernised version of the US Air Force’s principal nuclear gravity bomb with greater accuracy than older variants of the weapon. Manufacturing of the B61-12 variant was completed in December 2024 and the weapon is currently being rolled out on deployment. Whilst at Kirtland the aircraft was parked on Pad 5 – the section of the airbase designated for handling hazardous cargoes. Other aircraft at the airport were given a warning not to overfly the aircraft on Pad 5 for a period of over five hours, which ended only once the C-17 had departed.

Mid evening local time on Wednesday 16 July Reach 4574 took off, with the pilot reminding the ground controller that the aircraft has “haz cargo” on board. The aircraft flew through the night across the Atlantic Ocean, rendezvousing with two KC-46 tanker aircraft from Pease Air National Guard Base and McGuire Air Force Base to refuel over the ocean east of New York.

In a co-ordinated operation, a second C-17 aircraft (aircraft number 09-9211, flight number RCH4205, mission number PAM112472196) also left Lewis-McChord on 15 July and flew to Ramstein Air Force Base in Germany (stopping briefly at Lakenheath) to be on standby in the event of a failure or emergency involving the primary aircraft. This standby aircraft may have been loaded with nuclear emergency response equipment for dealing with an accident involving the primary aircraft.

Reach 4574 approached the UK flying south of Ireland, then flew up the Bristol Channel, cut across north Devon, and flew north west along a corridor taking it close to Oxford and Milton Keynes, but avoiding overflying major centres of population. The plane landed at Lakenheath air base at 12.50 local time.

Unloading the bombs

Nukewatch UK was able to observe the aircraft landing and unloading from outside the Lakenheath base. During the unloading operation base security was at an unusually high level, with USAF security patrols and police cars undertaking patrols inside the base’s security fence and plain-clothed (but badged) personnel from the Air Force Office of Special Investigations patrolling outside the base……………………………………………………………………………………………..

 Nukewatch UK believes that this C-17 aircraft was transporting a batch of B61-12 nuclear weapons to Lakenheath. Our reasons for arriving at this conclusion are given below.

US nuclear weapons in Europe

The 62nd Airlift Wing regularly conducts Prime Nuclear Airlift Force missions across the Atlantic to transport materials and equipment to air bases in Europe which support NATO’s nuclear mission in Europe, under which B61 bombs are stored at US bases in Europe and bases of European nations which take part in NATO nuclear-sharing arrangements with the US. Nukewatch has been actively tracking these flights for three years, and has used archived tracking data to analyse flights since the beginning of 2020. Over this period missions have included occasional operations which have been unusually complex, involving up to seven aircraft as stand-bys and for in-flight refuelling. In addition to operations involving nuclear weapons, the unit also conducts missions transporting special nuclear materials which visit several NATO nuclear bases in Europe in sequence, and also conducts missions involving training with ground personnel at several nuclear bases.  

It is possible that the earliest of these missions were training and rehearsal flights for the delivery of new B61-12 nuclear bombs to Europe, with more recent flights actually transporting the nuclear bombs across the Atlantic for deployment at bases in Europe. Nukewatch has observed that Lakenheath has been involved in many of these missions, initially as a location for basing a stand-by aircraft in Europe – possibly for use by a nuclear emergency response team. More recently Lakenheath appears to have been involved in a series of ‘work up’ exercises and security drills involving aircraft from 62 Airlift Wing to prepare the base for the arrival of nuclear weapons, culminating in a large-scale exercise over two days on 10 – 11 June 2025 which may have been a dress rehearsal for the nuclear delivery operation. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

What we think

Speaking on the delivery of US B61-12 nuclear weapons to Lakenheath, Juliet McBride of Nukewatch UK said:

“The new nuclear bombs which are now based at Lakenheath are entirely under the control of Donald Trump and could be used without the UK having any say at all in the matter. In fact, we wonder whether the UK government has even been notified by the US Air Force that the weapons are now stationed at Lakenheath.

“The nuclear weapons now stored at Lakenheath have an explosive power of up to 50 kilotons. For comparison, the atom bomb that devastated Hiroshima in 1945 had an explosive yield of 15 kilotons. Far from protecting Europeans during wartime, these nuclear weapons would contribute to turning Europe into a radioactive wasteland.

“Despite the significant issues and risks involved in basing these weapons of mass destruction in Europe, neither the US nor the UK government have bothered to inform citizens or Parliament that they have been deployed here. Nukewatch UK believes that UK citizens have a right to know that these preparations for fighting a nuclear war are under way, and we will continue to report on nuclear movements to Lakenheath and other European nuclear bases”.

Update: Second nuclear flight arrives at Lakenheath

Following a delivery of nuclear weapons to Lakenheath US air base in Suffolk on 17-18 July 2025, a second Prime Nuclear Airlift force flew to Lakenheath on 24-25 July to delivery a high priority hazardous cargo……………………………………………………………………….

Nukewatch concludes the following:

  • A high security unloading operation for hazardous materials took place at Lakenheath.
  • The operation seemed to follow slightly different procedures to the one observed the previous week.
  • Nevertheless, the degree of security and general circumstances of the flight seem to indicate that a nuclear-related load was probably delivered in the aircraft. This may have been components and equipment related to nuclear weapons, or possibly weapons themselves.
  • Between four to six loads seemed to be transported away from the aircraft in small convoys to a location on the airbase nearby.
  • Assuming two or three transporting vehicles in each convoy, and each convoy carried one nuclear bomb, this suggests that between around 8 and 18 ‘units’ of cargo were delivered by this flight. https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2025/08/17/us-flies-nuclear-bombs-to-britain/

August 18, 2025 Posted by | UK, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

  Russia says it prevented a Ukrainian drone attack on the Smolensk nuclear power plant.

 Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) said that it had prevented a
Ukrainian drone attack on the Smolensk nuclear power plant in western
Russia on Sunday. The Soviet-era Smolensk nuclear power station, about 330
km (200 miles) southwest of Moscow near the border with Belarus, has three
RBMK reactors – the same basic design as the reactors at the Chernobyl
nuclear power station. The FSB, the main successor to the Soviet-era KGB,
said that Russian radio-electronic warfare systems intercepted a Ukrainian
drone over the territory of the Smolensk nuclear power station.

 Reuters 17th Aug 2025, https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-says-it-prevented-ukrainian-drone-attack-smolensk-nuclear-power-plant-2025-08-17/

August 18, 2025 Posted by | Russia, Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Don’t believe the hype about nuclear weapons.

13 Aug 25, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/aug/12/dont-believe-the-hype-about-nuclear-weapons

We must continue to challenge claims that nuclear weapons are a ‘necessity’, says Caroline Lucas, while Gerry Weston says they don’t protect us from Russian aggression and Michael Newman says they didn’t end the second world war.

Polly Toynbee is right to point out that while nuclear war has been pushed down the “league table of fear”, most recently by concerns about the climate crisis, the nuclear threat itself remains “as great or greater” and should be the subject of much more urgent debate (I changed my mind on banning the bomb, but the threat of nuclear war is growing – and so is complacency, 7 August). All the more surprising, then, that she overlooks some of the more promising steps towards nuclear disarmament.

In particular, momentum is building behind the UN treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons, which came into force in 2021 and is now supported by nearly half the countries in the world. The treaty was the focus of much of the debate in Hiroshima, where I attended the 80th anniversary commemorations, and it deserves to be much better known.

How disappointing, then, that the UK government is not only failing to support it but is actively trying to suppress information about the impact of nuclear war as one of just three countries to vote against the creation of a UN scientific panel on its effects. Instead, it’s choosing to accept a recommendation from the recent strategic defence review to run a PR campaign to convince people of the “necessity” of a growing nuclear arsenal.

If we are to have any success in challenging this, we need to promote a public education campaign that sets out the existential threat posed by nuclear weapons, the flaws in so-called deterrence theory and measures that could immediately reduce risk – taking weapons off hair-trigger alert, for example, and joining China in a “no first use” policy.

Recent polling from More in Common suggests that young people believe nuclear conflict is the greatest threat to Britain. We owe it to them not to give up.
Caroline Lucas
Vice-president, Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament; former Green party MP

I normally agree with Polly Toynbee, and was also on the Aldermaston marches as a child, but she is misguided in believing that a joint European nuclear capability would make us safer from Russian aggression. If Russian tanks were to roll into Poland, does she envisage Europe threatening to take out Moscow? If so, I hope that it would be an empty threat and hence useless; if a real threat, we are on the road to Armageddon.

Maybe it would deter a nuclear attack or threat, but is such a situation conceivable? After all, Vladimir Putin could launch a nuclear attack on Ukraine, which has no nuclear umbrella. The more places that have such weapons, the more the risk of misjudged situations. In practice, the nuclear option is useless, unsafe and costly, as well as immoral.
Gerry Weston
Willesden Green, London

 The dangerous myth that the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima ended the Pacific war is perpetuated in all the coverage of its 80th anniversary. When I attended an intensive summer course with my students, organised by Hiroshima City University in 2005, we discussed the evidence against this contention. Subsequently, Tsuyoshi Hasegawa, in his book Racing the Enemy: Stalin, Truman, and the Surrender of Japan, laid out the overwhelming evidence that it was the Soviet entry into the war that finally forced the surrender. Nuclear weapons kill people and may destroy the planet – they do not end war.
Michael Newman
Emeritus professor, London Metropolitan University

August 17, 2025 Posted by | weapons and war | Leave a comment

In major shift, Germany ends arms exports to Israel amid Netanyahu’s Gaza takeover plan

Chancellor Friedrich Merz bans shipments of military equipment that could be used in Gaza

 The Week, By Ajish P Joy  August 09, 2025

Germany has announced it will halt approval of weapons exports to Israel for use in the Gaza Strip “until further notice,” marking a sharp policy shift for one of Israel’s staunchest allies. Chancellor Friedrich Merz made the declaration yesterday after weeks of publicly criticising Israel’s “unclear” goals in Gaza and expressing concern over the worsening humanitarian crisis, though until now he had avoided altering policy.

The decision followed intense domestic debate over how to respond to credible reports of widespread malnutrition and even starvation in Gaza. The immediate trigger was Israel’s decision yesterday to step up military operations in the territory and take over Gaza City.

Merz said the new offensive, approved by the Israeli cabinet, made it “increasingly difficult” to see how Israel could achieve its stated aims of disarming Hamas and freeing the remaining 50 hostages. He affirmed Germany’s commitment to those objectives but stressed that a ceasefire and relief for civilians were top priorities. He also urged Israel to halt any moves towards annexing parts of the West Bank.

Under the new policy, Berlin will not approve the export of any military equipment that could be used in Gaza. Merz said the government was “deeply worried about the continued suffering of the civilian population” and that the planned offensive placed “even stronger responsibility” on Israel to ensure humanitarian provisions……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… https://www.theweek.in/news/middle-east/2025/08/09/in-major-shift-germany-ends-arms-exports-to-israel-after-netanyahu-s-gaza-takeover-plan.html

August 17, 2025 Posted by | Germany, Israel, weapons and war | Leave a comment

It’s not ‘Who lost Ukraine?’ It’s ‘Who destroyed Ukraine?

Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL , 15 Aug 25

When Mao won the Chinese civil war in 1949, adding China to the USSR in the roster of commie countries, the US war hawks of that era excoriated the Truman administration for ‘losing’ China’. Their unhinged claim was that the commie filled State Department made Mao’s inevitable takeover possible. That helped fuel Sen. Joe McCarthy’s equally unhinged campaign to smoke out all those imagined commies in the Truman administration a year later.

A whiff of that 1949 anti commie hysteria is playing out on mainstream media ahead of Friday’s sit down between President Trump and Russian President Putin seeking a ceasefire and end to this disastrous war destroying Ukraine.

Morning Joe Scarborough this morning pondered whether Trump will cave to evil Putin’s Ukraine dismembership demands to achieve the peace that might garner him a Nobel Peace Prize. Yep, Moring Joe laid out the ‘Who lost Ukraine’ meme on Trump to prepare us for the onslaught of anti-Trump, anti-Russian hysteria sure to follow if a settlement reflecting the reality of Ukraine’s dismembership is inked in Alaska tomorrow.

A settlement is only possible if a US/Russia settlement verifies the battlefield reality. Ukraine’s military is teetering on collapse with over a million dead cannon fodder and 4 oblasts gone to Russia forever. If Trump accomplishes peace…which is far from likely, the blame game will focus on Trump who ‘lost’ Ukraine which will end up as a greatly diminished rump state dependent on US/European life support for years to come.

Historians instead should begin with the 6 administrations preceding Trump’s second term 2.0: George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, W. Bush, Barack Obama, Donald Trump 1.0 and most grievously Joe Biden. H.W. Bush, Clinton, W. Bush, Obama, Trump 1.0 and Biden all promoted NATO expansion into Ukraine and dismissed all Russian security pleas that such expansion was a Red Line Russia would view as an existential threat.  

While his predecessors put Ukraine on the road to destruction, Joe Biden essentially pulled the trigger on a war Ukraine had no chance of winning. Putin tried to avoid invading. He saw Ukraine massing 60,000 elite troops on the Donbas border to polish off the Ukrainian separatists there seeking independence and safety from Kyiv neo fascists. His plea of December 21 2021 was dismissed out of hand. Biden told Putin that Russia’s security interests, which included autonomy for Ukrainian separatists as well as a neutral Ukraine not in NATO, were ‘not subject to discussion whatsoever.’

Biden knew that response would provoke a Russian invasion. But Biden miscalculated that US weapons combined with draconian Russian sanctions would result in a Vietnam style defeat for Russia, possibly even the overthrow of President Putin.

So here we are three years, eight months later with Putin, not Trump holding all the cards in tomorrow’s negotiation. Trump knows the correct outcome is settling on Russia’s terms: no return of Ukraine territory, no NATO for Ukraine and a demilitarized Ukraine that can never attack inside Russia territory again. He also knows he’ll be branded by America’s ravenous war hawks as ‘The man who lost Ukraine’ should he end the war.

Nobody lost Ukraine. But we now know who destroyed Ukraine. The only question to be answered is…How severely Ukraine will be destroyed before the guns go silent.

August 16, 2025 Posted by | Ukraine, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

The ‘third nuclear age’ is a politically motivated label that seeks to justify a renewed arms race.

Tom Vaughan, Lecturer in International Security, University of Leeds, August 16, 2025, https://theconversation.com/the-third-nuclear-age-is-a-politically-motivated-label-that-seeks-to-justify-a-renewed-arms-race-263009

In August 1945 the United States dropped atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, killing more than 200,000 people, overwhelmingly civilians. Eighty years on from this slaughter – which the then US army commander and later president Dwight D. Eisenhower called “completely unnecessary” – is an apt time to ask how the world has changed since Japan’s skies lit up with atomic fire.

Many in the military as well as academics and nuclear theorists argue that a “third nuclear age” has begun. By this they mean that a new and different set of nuclear threats are emerging which fundamentally challenge the existing tenets of nuclear “deterrence”. The response, some argue, is to invest heavily in our nuclear weapons systems to secure ourselves against this new age of uncertainty.

To understand this claim, it’s worth looking back at the history of the nuclear era. Most (but not all) scholars working on “nuclear ages” accept that the first nuclear age, between 1945 and 1991, was characterised by the cold war nuclear stand-off between the world’s two nuclear armed superpowers: the US and the Soviet Union.

The second nuclear age, from 1991 to 2014, is usually understood to have started when the cold war ended. Policymakers worried about “proliferation” – the spread of nuclear weapons to new states and even non-state terrorist groups. Western policy focused on countering this process, often through military means.

The third nuclear age, which is thought to have begun in 2014, it thought to reflect a new set of challenges. This will involve the entry of more nuclear-armed states into the fray, erosion of longstanding non-proliferation and arms control agreements and the development of so-called “strategic non-nuclear weapons”. This term refers to non-nuclear technologies, including artificial intelligence (AI) command and control networks, hypersonic missiles and advanced missile defence systems.

There are fears that non-nuclear armed “adversaries” might use these systems to directly attack other states’ nuclear arsenals, undermining their ability to deliver a retaliatory nuclear strike. This is likely to pose a challenge to established practices on which the doctrine of nuclear deterrence is based.

But how much has really changed in the past decade? No new nuclear powers have emerged – the most recent was North Korea in 2006. China, often seen as the bogeyman of the third nuclear age, has had a nuclear weapons capability since 1964. AI integration into nuclear command and control systems, while extremely risky, has yet to happen.

Reliable missile defence against modern nuclear warheads is still widely considered to be technologically impossible. The impact of hypersonic missiles on the calculus of nuclear deterrence is debated, since intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) are already very fast.

In short, what’s different this time around?

Western-centric thinking

A more penetrating line of questioning is to ask about the politics underlying the idea of a third nuclear age. Ideas are never neutral, and they shape our understanding of the world. The third nuclear age concept (like that of the second nuclear age before it) came out of the US defence establishment, which was trying to understand how it could remain globally dominant against challenges to its supremacy from China.

The idea has since been filtered through academia and back into the policy world, where it has started to gain “common sense status”: as night follows day, the dawn of the third nuclear age is around the corner. But this is neither objective nor inevitable. It’s a conceptual tool for thinking about nuclear politics in a particular way.

It’s a US-centric perspective reflecting a fear that western dominance of the nuclear arena is under threat. US and allied militaries need to progressively integrate new technologies into their nuclear systems and modernise their arsenals to deal with a “more uncertain” world, ignoring the fact that massive risk and uncertainty have always been a built-in feature of nuclear deterrence strategies.

Here, the biggest threats to nuclear stability come not from the thousands of nuclear warheads held by the established nuclear weapons states, but from would-be disruptors who can threaten nuclear arsenals with non-nuclear systems – echoing old second nuclear age fears about proliferation.

This is why Iran remains a villain of the story alongside China, as we can see from the hyperbole about Iran’s “hypersonic” missile capabilities and how its behaviour gave Israel and the US the excuse to launch “counter-proliferation” strikes against its nuclear facilities in June this year.

It bears repeating that Iran is still not a nuclear-armed state. But the new emphasis placed on non-nuclear technologies in third nuclear age thinking also puts states which don’t even have nuclear programmes in the crosshairs of Iraq-style wars of aggression in the name of “counter-proliferation”.

New arms race

To be crystal clear: the nuclear world is as dangerous as ever. The problem is that third nuclear age thinking, with its focus on supposedly unprecedented disruptions, leads us to think that new solutions are necessary. “Old” ideas about nuclear disarmament become irrelevant, because the instabilities introduced by new technologies supposedly make it impossible for nuclear weapons states to give up their arsenals.

The third nuclear age becomes a conceptual stalking horse for a fresh nuclear arms race.

When the British armed forces chief Admiral Sir Tony Radakin warned of a dawning third nuclear age in December 2024, he was not making a neutral observation. He was arguing for resources to be funnelled into nuclear modernisation at the expense of welfare and healthcare programmes. Today, before any modernisation, Britain maintains a first-strike deliverable total of 31 megatons of nuclear explosive power. That’s more than 2,000 Hiroshimas’ worth of destruction.

So we should be sceptical of this concept. The threat of nuclear annihilation has been with us since August 1945 and comes – as always – from nuclear weapons and the states who operate them.

August 16, 2025 Posted by | spinbuster, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Over 100 Children Have Died of Severe Hunger Amid Israeli Siege: Gaza Health Ministry.

“People are being starved, children are being killed, families have lost everything,” said the United Nations agency for Palestinian Refugees.


Brad Reed, Aug 11, 2025, https://www.commondreams.org/news/gaza-children-starvation-2673875979

The Gaza Health Ministry announced on Monday that more than 100 children in Gaza have died of severe hunger during Israel’s siege of the territory.

As Al Jazeera reported, the Hamas-run Health Ministry said that a total of 222 Palestinians have died from hunger during the siege, including 101 children. The vast majority of these deaths have come in just the last three weeks when the hunger crisis in Gaza started to garner international media attention, the ministry said.

The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East on Monday emphasized the direness of the situation in a statement calling for a cease-fire to allow more aid into Gaza.

“People are being starved, children are being killed,” the agency said. “Families have lost everything. Political will and leadership can stop an escalation and end the war. Every heartbeat counts.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has claimed that there is no starvation crisis in Gaza and has said such reports are part of a “fake” propaganda campaign waged by Israel’s enemies.

However, it isn’t just the Gaza Health Ministry warning of a hunger crisis in the region, as international charity Save the Children last week said that 43% of pregnant and breastfeeding women who showed up to its clinics in Gaza last month were malnourished, which represented a threefold increase since March, when the Israeli military imposed a total siege on the area.

The latest numbers about starvation in Gaza come as the Israeli government is pushing forward with a plan to fully invade and occupy Gaza, which experts have warned will only exacerbate the humanitarian crisis among its people.

“If these plans are implemented, they will likely trigger another calamity in Gaza, reverberating across the region and causing further forced displacement, killings, and destruction,” said Miroslav Jenca, the United Nations assistant secretary general, over the weekend.

August 16, 2025 Posted by | Atrocities, Gaza, Israel | Leave a comment

Russia makes battlefield breakthrough in urgent push for land.

Telegraph, Kieran Kelly. Fermin Torrano in Ukraine, 12 Aug 25

With Trump talks looming, Russia’s army punches through exposed Ukrainian defences.

Russia is racing to seize as much Ukrainian territory as possible ahead of peace talks with Donald Trump on Friday.

In what may prove to be a major breakthrough for Vladimir Putin, Russian sabotage and reconnaissance units punched through exposed defences in eastern Ukraine, slipping as far as six miles behind the front line in just 48 hours, according to battlefield reports.

Kyiv has diverted special forces units to confront the insurgents on the ground in an attempt to prevent any more of Ukraine falling under Russia’s control before the summit in Alaska.

The location, near Dobropillya in Donetsk, is strategically significant. If Moscow’s forces are able to establish a foothold, the breach could allow Russia to cut off the city of Kramatorsk, one of the most vital strongholds in the Donbas still under Kyiv’s control.

If the city falls, it would give Putin almost full control over the Donbas and strengthen his negotiating power when bargaining over Ukraine’s fate with the Trump administration……………………………………… https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/08/12/russia-battleground-breakthrough-exposes-putin-push-land/

August 16, 2025 Posted by | Russia, Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »