‘Pay price for wrongdoing’: China Sanctions 20 US defence firms after Trump approves Taiwan arms sale
China on December 27 announced sanctions on 20 U.S. defense companies and 10 senior executives, including Palmer Luckey of Anduril Industries, following the Trump administration’s approval of an $11.1 billion arms package for Taiwan.
by Aditi, December 27, 2025 , https://www.financialexpress.com/world-news/pay-price-for-wrongdoing-china-sanctions-20-us-defence-firms-after-trump-approves-taiwan-arms-sale/4089711/
China announced sanctions against 20 US defence companies and 10 top executives on Friday — the latest in a series of tit-for-tat measures. The announcement came soon after the Trump administration approved a major weapons sale to Taiwan. The sanctions list includes well-known companies like Northrop Grumman and Boeing’s defence unit in St. Louis, as well as Palmer Luckey, founder of Anduril Industries.
China said it will freeze the assets of these companies in the country, block them from doing business with Chinese organisations, and prevent the executives from entering mainland China, Hong Kong, and Macau, according to a report from the Wall Street Journal. Both Washington and Beijing have also announced export controls, investment restrictions, visa and travel bans and curtailed use of sensitive technology over the past year.
The Chinese Foreign Ministry said the US arms sale “interferes in China’s internal affairs and seriously undermines China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.” The sanctions were announced on December 27, and according to a Global Times report, took immediate effect. Officials said the US decision went against the one-China principle and the three China-US Joint Communiques.
China sanctions US defence firms over Taiwan arms sale
Under the new measures, China has imposed sanctions on 20 US defence-related companies that it claims are involved in supplying weapons to Taiwan in recent years. The companies named include Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation, L3Harris Maritime Services, Boeing in St. Louis, Gibbs & Cox, Advanced Acoustic Concepts, VSE Corporation, Sierra Technical Services, Red Cat Holdings, Teal Drones, ReconCraft, High Point Aerotechnologies, Epirus, Dedrone Holdings, Area-I, Blue Force Technologies, Dive Technologies, Vantor, Intelligent Epitaxy Technology, Rhombus Power, and Lazarus Enterprises.
China announced that all movable and immovable assets of these companies located within the country will be frozen. Chinese individuals and organisations have also been barred from doing business or cooperating with these firms in any form.
Sanctions extended to senior executives
In addition to companies, China has also imposed restrictions on 10 senior executives in the defence sector. Among them is Palmer Luckey, founder of Anduril Industries, along with top executives from companies such as L3Harris and VSE Corporation, according to ANI. According to the Foreign Ministry, these executives will face restrictions on assets located in China and activities related to the country.
Taiwan is a ‘red line’, says China
A spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry said the Taiwan issue is at the very core of China’s national interests and is a red line in China-US relations. The spokesperson warned that anyone attempting to provoke China on the Taiwan question would face a firm response. In a statement, the ministry said, “Anyone who attempts to cross the line and make provocations on the Taiwan question will be met with China’s firm response. Any company or individual who engages in arms sales to Taiwan will pay the price for the wrongdoing. No country or force shall ever underestimate the resolve, will and ability of the Chinese government and people to safeguard national sovereignty and territorial integrity.”
China claims Taiwan as part of its territory — contending that the autonomously governed island must eventually be reunified with the mainland. The United States does not officially recognise Taiwan as a sovereign nation under the ‘One China’ policy, but maintains unofficial ties with the administration.
US arms supply to Taiwan
The reaction from China comes after the administration of US President Donald Trump approved a major arms package for Taiwan last week. According to the US State Department, the proposed sales are valued at more than USD 10 billion and include medium-range missiles, howitzers, and drones.
According to Focus Taiwan, the potential sale involves eight arms packages, including HIMARS rocket systems, anti-tank missiles, and drones, with a total estimated cost of USD 11.1 billion.
Former Japanese PM Ishiba again criticizes remarks advocating nuclear armament.
Asia18:02, 27-Dec-2025. CGTN, https://news.cgtn.com/news/2025-12-27/Ex-Japan-PM-Ishiba-in-fresh-broadside-against-nuclear-armament-remarks-1JrH8p2oIaA/p.html
Former Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba has again criticized recent remarks by a senior government official suggesting that Japan should possess nuclear weapons.
Speaking on a program aired Friday night by Japan’s BS11 television, Ishiba said that as the only country in the world to have suffered atomic bombings, Japan should take a clear stance on preventing nuclear proliferation and should not make statements that undermine that position.
On December 18, an anonymous senior official in charge of security at the Prime Minister’s Office told reporters that Japan should possess nuclear weapons. After the remarks were made public, they sparked widespread criticism and controversy within Japan.
Addressing the issue earlier, Ishiba said that if Japan were to acquire nuclear weapons, it would be forced to withdraw from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons as well as the International Atomic Energy Agency.
He stressed that such a move would render Japan’s nuclear energy policy – which underpins the country’s energy system – untenable, adding that “this would by no means be beneficial for Japan.”
According to a report on the online edition of the Japanese magazine Shukan Bunshun on December24, the official who made the remarks was Oue Sadamasa, a special advisor to Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, whose portfolio includes nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation.
1A 15 years after Fukushima disaster locals fear return of Japan’s nuclear power.
Sarah Hooper, December 24, 2025, https://metro.co.uk/2025/12/24/15-years-after-fukushima-disaster-locals-fear-return-of-japans-nuclear-power-25764288/
Japan is returning to nuclear energy almost 15 years after the Fukushima disaster – but not everyone is convinced it’s a good idea.
The world’s largest nuclear power plant, Kashiwazaki-Kariwa, shut down most of its reactors after the deadly 2011 earthquake and tsunami.
The Fukushima nuclear disaster was triggered in March 2011 when four of the plant’s reactor buildings were damaged in the most powerful earthquake in Japan’s history, which had a magnitude of 9.0.
In the aftermath, Japan began the process of shutting down many of its nuclear power plants, including Kashiwazaki-Kariwa, north of Tokyo.
But as the country looks to become self-sufficient when it comes to energy, it’s rebooting many of the nuclear plants shut down after the tsunami.
Restarting nuclear facilities is a ‘significant move’ for Japan
Dr Leslie Mabon, a Senior Lecturer in Environmental Systems in the School of Engineering and Innovation at the Open University, has researched how nuclear facilities affect the environment and communities near Fukushima in Japan.
He told Metro that none of the reactors which are going to be restarted are in nuclear stations in Fukushima Prefecture, but restarting Kashiwazaki-Kariwa is a significant move
‘What is significant about this restart is not only the size of the plant – the largest in Japan – but also that it is operated by Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), who are also responsible for the Fukushima Dai’ichi plant that faced the meltdowns in 2011,’ he explained.
‘A crucial question at the heart of the controversy over nuclear restarts in Japan is: who does it benefit?’
Local governments and citizens living near nuclear plants have raised concerns about the safety of the plants, especially because the electricity produced won’t power their own communities.
‘Electricity from the plant primarily benefits those living in the Tokyo metropolitan area, some 200km south-east,’ Dr Mabon added.
‘Citizens and political figures in Niigata, and other regions like it, where restarts are on the horizon, may well be asking why they have to take up the risk for a power plant that benefits those living far away.’
An ageing and declining population in rural areas where the nuclear power plants are also located poses another problem.
‘Local and regional politicians face a very difficult balancing act between the jobs and economic benefits that hosting a nuclear plant brings on one hand, versus the concerns some of their citizens might have about safety and fairness on the other,’ he said.
Widespread outcry over nuclear power
Local residents aren’t supportive of the move, however, with dozens of protesters assembling outside after politicians voted to reopen the plant.
TEPCO, the energy company which will operate the plants, said in a statement: ‘We remain firmly committed to never repeating such an accident and ensuring Niigata residents never experience anything similar to 2011.’
Despite widespread outcry by residents – some 60% of whom don’t believe conditions to restart the plant have been met – it will reopen in January.
Local resident Ayako Oga was protesting after the vote – she was forced to relocate after the meltdown of the Fukushima plant placed her home inside the exclusion zone.
She said: ‘As a victim of the Fukushima nuclear accident, I wish that no one, whether in Japan or anywhere in the world, ever again suffers the damage of a nuclear accident.’
Radioactive substance leaks from Fukui nuclear power plant in Japan
Jen Mills, Metro 24 Dec 2025
Radioactive water leaked from a disused power plant in Japan today during work to decommission it.
Parts of the Fugen nuclear plant in Fukui Prefecture are being dismantled, and while this took place, around around 20ml of water containing a ‘high’ amount of the radioactive isotope tritium leaked from a pipe.
Japanese broadcaster NHK One reported earlier that detailed investigations were underway to see if any workers were splashed with the water, though internal exposure via inhalation had been ruled out.
Citing the Nuclear Regulation Authority, they said no radioactive material had leaked outside the controlled area of the plant.
Israel’s growing role in Taiwan’s air defense alarms Beijing.
Israel’s expanding ties with Taiwan, particularly in missile defense, are quietly reshaping regional geopolitics and alarming Beijing. In this context, even small defense transfers could undermine years of careful diplomatic calibration.
Uriel Araujo, BRICS, Monday, December 22, 2025
Uriel Araujo, Anthropology PhD, is a social scientist specializing in ethnic and religious conflicts, with extensive research on geopolitical dynamics and cultural interactions.
Israeli-Taiwanese cooperation, long discreet and underreported, is now moving into far more sensitive terrain. Recent reports indicate that Israeli know-how has been quietly feeding into Taiwan’s emerging missile-defense architecture, the so-called “T-DOME,” a system explicitly inspired by Israel’s Iron Dome. As a matter of fact, this development has already triggered a blunt diplomatic rebuke from Beijing, raising uncomfortable questions about Israel’s long-standing balancing act between rival global powers.
A detailed account of this growing cooperation comes from Nadia Helmy, Visiting Senior Researcher at the Centre for Middle Eastern Studies (CMES), who notes that Chinese intelligence agencies have detected expanding Israeli assistance to Taiwan’s missile shield, particularly in radar integration, command-and-control architecture, and layered interception concepts. According to Helmy, Beijing views this cooperation not as an isolated commercial exchange but as a strategic signal, thereby crossing a political red line.
Taiwan’s T-DOME project is ambitious enough. Taipei plans to spend over USD 40 billion on a multi-layered air and missile defense system combining indigenous technology with foreign expertise, drawing lessons from Israel’s battlefield experience.
What makes the situation more delicate is not simply the technology itself but the political choreography surrounding it. Taiwan’s deputy foreign minister reportedly made a secret trip to Israel in December 2025 to discuss defense cooperation, a visit confirmed by multiple outlets. Israeli lawmakers have also traveled to Taiwan, prompting a formal condemnation from China’s embassy in Israel.
There is a context to such moves. Taiwan’s political discourse has increasingly framed Israel as both a security model and a civilizational reference point. One may recall that Taiwanese officials have even invoked biblical imagery when criticizing authoritarianism, explicitly citing Israel as an example. Meanwhile, pro-Israel lobbying networks linked to AIPAC have been expanding their presence in Taiwan, a fact documented but rarely discussed in mainstream Western media.
Israel, for its part, has historically prided itself on its ability to balance competing global relationships. Thus far, it has managed to maintain workable ties with Russia and Ukraine simultaneously, for instance, while also navigating relations with both the US and China.
Be as it may, Taiwan represents a different category of sensitivity altogether. Unlike commercial technology transfers or infrastructure investments, missile defense cooperation touches the core of China’s security concerns. Suffice to say, Beijing’s reaction has been measured rather than escalatory, but unmistakably firm nonetheless. In any case, from China’s perspective, Israeli involvement in Taiwan’s air defense is not neutral, regardless of how it is framed in Tel Aviv.
Some analysts, such as geopolitical expert Sergio Restelli, have already warned that this (and other developments) could mark the end of Israel’s careful balancing with China.
Others argue that Israel is simply responding to pressure from Washington, especially under the Trump administration, which has doubled down on strategic competition with China while encouraging allies to “choose sides.” I’ve written before about how the Trump administration has been pressuring, “sidelining” and “leveraging” the Jewish State in a number ways, including through its Gaza Plan, apparently as part of an effort to rebalance the complex US-Israeli relationship………………………………….. https://infobrics.org/en/post/74234
Hiroshima urges Japanese government to uphold non-nuclear principles
Japan’s Hiroshima Prefecture on Monday issued a statement urging the national government to uphold the country’s non-nuclear principles, after a security official recently suggested the country should possess nuclear weapons.
The Hiroshima prefectural assembly unanimously adopted the written opinion, citing local concerns about reviewing the long-standing Three Non-Nuclear Principles, which prohibit possessing, producing or permitting the introduction of nuclear arms into Japanese territory, Kyodo News reported.
“It is our duty, as the only country to have suffered atomic bombings, to continue striving toward the realization of a world without nuclear weapons,” the statement said.
The statement comes after an official involved in devising security policy under the government led by Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi recently said that Japan should possess nuclear weapons, inciting backlash from locals, including atomic bomb survivors.
It is the first written opinion by the prefectural or city assemblies of Hiroshima or Nagasaki, both devastated by U.S. atomic bombs, regarding the country’s reconsideration of the non-nuclear principles, the report said.
Itsunori Onodera, head of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party’s security research council, said on a TV program on Sunday that Japan needs to debate the future of its non-nuclear principles.
Last month, Japanese media quoted government sources as saying that, as the Takaichi administration gears up to revise the country’s key national security documents by the end of 2026, Takaichi was considering reviewing the third of the Three Non-Nuclear Principles, which prohibits nuclear weapons from entering Japan’s territory, raising strong doubts and concerns at home.
Japan set to restart world’s biggest nuclear power plant.
Kashiwazaki-Kariwa will be the latest plant to restart 15 years after the Fukushima disaster shut down the country’s nuclear energy programme.
Aljazeera, By Lyndal Rowlands and News Agencies, 22 Dec 25
Japan is set to resume operations at the world’s largest nuclear power plant: Kashiwazaki-Kariwa.
The partial restart of the plant got the green light in a vote on Monday by the Niigata local government. Japan has reopened several nuclear facilities as it seeks to reduce emissions, reversing policy 15 years after 54 reactors were shut in the wake of the Fukushima disaster despite public opposition.
Niigata prefecture’s assembly passed a vote of confidence on Governor Hideyo Hanazumi, who backed the restart last month, effectively allowing the plant to begin operations again.
The 2011 triple meltdown at Fukushima, following an earthquake and tsunami, destroyed Japan’s trust in its nuclear energy infrastructure…………..
Fourteen of the 33 nuclear plants that remain operable in the country have been resurrected. However, Kashiwazaki-Kariwa is the first to be operated by Tokyo Electric Power Co (TEPCO), which ran the Fukushima plant.
TEPCO is considering reactivating the first of seven reactors at the plant on January 20, Japanese public broadcaster NHK reported……………………
While lawmakers voted in support of Hanazumi, the assembly session showed that the community remains divided over the restart, despite the promise of new jobs and potentially lower electricity bills.
About 300 protesters rallied to oppose the vote, holding banners reading “No Nukes”, “We oppose the restart of Kashiwazaki-Kariwa” and “Support Fukushima”.
Farmer and antinuclear activist Ayako Oga, 52, joined the protests on Monday in her new home of Niigata, where she settled after fleeing the area around the Fukushima plant in 2011 with 160,000 other evacuees. Her old home was within the 20km (12-mile) radius irradiated exclusion zone.
“We know firsthand the risk of a nuclear accident and cannot dismiss it,” said Oga, adding that she still struggles with post-traumatic stress disorder-like symptoms……………………………… https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/12/22/japan-set-to-restart-worlds-biggest-nuclear-power-plant
Fukushima Now (29) – Part 1: What Constitutes Responsibility?
by Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center · December 21, 2025, By Yamaguchi Yukio, https://cnic.jp/english/?p=8747
n the 14 and a half years that have passed since March 2011, the cesium-137 that was released has finally made it to the halfway point of its half-life. After 90 years, its radioactive concentration will have diminished to one-eighth its initial level, and after 300 years, one-thousandth. According to the current medium-to-long-term roadmap, decommissioning measures should be completed around 2041 to 2051. Even by then, however, the radioactivity will have decreased only by a little more than half. Not even what these “decommissioning measures” are supposed to include has been decided on yet.
In places with serious radioactive contamination, nobody will be able to live there for another century. The area thus affected is said to exceed 300 square kilometers. The first sample of fuel debris taken from the Unit 2 reactor weighed 0.7 grams, and the second, 0.2 grams. The information gained from their analysis is just as miniscule. Meanwhile, the total amount of fuel debris in the Unit 1-3 reactors is estimated at 880 tons. Whether it will be necessary to retrieve all of it to begin with is a matter of great contention.
Idogawa Katsutaka, who was mayor of Futaba Town at the time of the accident, evacuated the entire town to protect everyone there from radioactive exposure, leading many of them as far as 250 kilometers away to Kazo City, Saitama Prefecture, near Tokyo, where they took refuge in a gymnasium that had belonged to the town’s former Kisai High School. This was just one of the municipalities that evacuated from Fukushima Prefecture to escape radioactivity. The town’s population totaled 6,971 people overall, of whom 187 took refuge at the former Kisai High School (as of September 18, 2012). Details of their evacuation were relayed widely around the world by the 2012 film “Nuclear Nation” (Japanese: “Futaba kara Toku Hanarete,” directed by Funahashi Atsushi, music by Sakamoto Ryuichi).
As of 1 August 2025, the registered population of Futaba Town had dwindled to 5,157 in all, of whom 59 percent were living within Fukushima Prefecture and 41 percent were still evacuees elsewhere among 43 of Japan’s 47 prefectures. Idogawa’s hope is, “We want somehow to go home, all of us, together, to a safe hometown.” The number of returnees so far, however, is a mere 87 people (as of August 2025).
■ Idogawa filed suit in May 2015 against the government of Japan and Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO), seeking 755 million yen in damages. A decision on the case was rendered on 30 July 2025 in Tokyo District Court, finding no responsibility on the part of the government, but ordering TEPCO to pay compensation of about 100 million yen for damages to real estate and compensation for the evacuations.
The reasoning behind this decision was that even if the government had required TEPCO to take measures against a possible tsunami, there was a good likelihood that a similar accident could have occurred anyway, so the government bore no responsibility for it. This followed the precedent of a Supreme Court’s ruling on 17 June 2022 denying the government’s responsibility.
Nor did they recognize Idogawa’s claim that his health had been damaged by his exposure in the course of evacuating. This angered Idogawa, who called it a terrible decision against a person who had faithfully fallen in line with Japan’s atomic energy administration.
I think what caused this tragic nuclear accident, unprecedented in scale, was Japan’s fundamentally flawed nuclear power system, adopted by the government in the name of “peaceful use of the atom.” It can only be called a huge transgression by the politicians, bureaucrats, scientists, and business leaders of that time on account of their lackadaisical inattention to safety.
The theory of plate tectonics teaches us not to expect to see broad regions of stability, free from concerns about earthquakes, tsunamis or volcanic activity in the Japanese archipelago. We are only part way toward clarifying the causes and circumstances of the Fukushima nuclear accident. Despite this, the government is ignoring the lessons of history and clearly announcing a “nuclear renaissance” in its 7th Strategic Energy Plan. Even if it intends to “put safety first” as a condition, it cannot create safety measures if it has yet to elucidate the causes of the accident. This is no way to ensure “safety first.” It’s a contradiction.
Establishing nuclear power plants in the Japanese archipelago in itself is a mistake. The first chairman of Japan’s Nuclear Regulation Authority publicly stated that even if the new safety standards created in 2012 were fulfilled, it would not guarantee safety. Even now, the phrase “safety first” commonly uttered by nuclear proponents is a fiction and can only be called irresponsible.
A Serious Proposal: Russia and China Call for Global Strategic Stability
By Alice Slater, World BEYOND War, October 8, 2025
It’s ironic that the arms control community is protesting the idea of resuming nuclear test detonations. The nuclear test detonations have never stopped.
Although Bill Clinton signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) in 1996, he swiftly funded the “Stockpile Stewardship” program at the US nuclear weapons complex, allowing the Dr. Strangeloves in their labs to continue to perform laboratory tests as well as blowup plutonium with chemical explosives,1,000 feet below the desert floor at the Nevada Test Site on Western Shoshone holy land.
Since there was no chain reaction causing criticality, Clinton claimed these “sub-critical” tests were not nuclear tests and didn’t violate the new treaty. Of course, Russia and China swiftly followed the US lead; the Russians continued to test at Novaya Zemlya, and China at Lop Nor.
Indeed, it was the US’s refusal to promise that the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty would be truly “comprehensive” that caused India and Pakistan to test their nuclear arsenals after the US rejected their pleas to include prohibitions against “sub-critical” and laboratory tests in the CTBT. Although Clinton signed the CTBT, the US, unlike Russia and China, never ratified it. Sadly, Russia announced during the Ukraine war that it was leaving the CTBT.
People of goodwill who are alarmed at new reports of proliferating nuclear weapons and would like to put the nuclear genie back in the bottle, stop the endless wars and huge budgets for useless atomic weapons, would do well to take some advice from Russia and China. On May 8, they issued a “Joint Statement by the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China on Global Strategic Stability” in the context of the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II.
They note “the serious challenges facing the international community” and lay out several recommendations that would strengthen “global strategic security”, acknowledging that “the destinies of all countries are interrelated” and urging that states not “seek to ensure their own security at the expense and to the detriment of the security of other states.”
U.S. “Golden Dome”
They proceed to explain a whole series of provocative actions that threaten the peace, including states deploying nuclear weapons and missiles outside their territories. They are particularly critical of the US “Golden Dome” program, which is expected to create a new battleground in space. Reiterating their pleas over many years to keep space for peace, they state the following:
The two sides oppose the attempts of individual countries to use outer space for armed confrontation. They will counter security policies and activities aimed at achieving military superiority, as well as at officially defining and using outer space as a ” warfighting domain”. The two Sides confirm the need to start negotiations on a legally binding instrument based on the Russian-Chinese draft of the treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space and of the Threat or Use of Force Against Outer Space Objects as soon as possible, that would provide fundamental and reliable guarantees for preventing an arms race in outer space, weaponization of outer space and the threat or use of force against outer space objects or with their help. To safeguard world peace, ensure equal and indivisible security for all, and improve the predictability and sustainability of the exploration and peaceful use of outer space by all States, the two Sides agree to promote on a global scale the international initiative/political commitment not to be the first to deploy weapons in outer space.
The US and its allies, sheltering under the US nuclear umbrella, would do well to take Russia and China up on their offers for making a more peaceful world! With Mother Earth sending cascading warnings about the need for nations to cooperate, we can ill afford business as usual. Time to change course!
*Alice Slater serves on the Boards of World BEYOND War and the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space. She is an NGO representative at the UN for the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation.
Nuclear power’s role in Japan is fading. The myths of reactor safety and energy needs can’t change that reality.
By Tadahiro Katsuta , Bulletin of Atomic Scientists 11th Dec 2025
On November 24, the Niigata Prefecture approved the partial restart of the seven-unit Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant—the world’s largest, with a 7,965-megawatt-electric capacity—the first time it would be operated since the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi accident. The decision follows a series of efforts by the Japanese government to revive its nuclear industry since the Fukushima disaster led to the temporary shutdown of all its reactors.
In February, the Japanese government unveiled the country’s latest revised strategic energy plan with one significant shift: It no longer includes the commitment to “reduce dependence on nuclear power as much as possible.” Since the 2011 Fukushima accident, this objective has been reaffirmed in all three revisions preceding the 2022 plan. Its removal marks a clear departure from the government’s previously cautious stance on Japan’s nuclear policy.
Decommissioning work of the Fukushima Daiichi plant is still falling behind schedule, and there are no prospects for fully lifting the evacuation orders in the Fukushima Prefecture. This uncertainty surrounding post-accident Fukushima casts doubt on the government’s ability to manage another nuclear crisis. Meanwhile, the government’s plan actively promotes the “effective use” of plutonium through the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel and the “usefulness” of nuclear power as a decarbonized power source in its newest plan.
The Japanese government had consistently maintained a strong policy of promoting nuclear power since the initial planning stage in the 1950s until the Fukushima accident. Its current position, therefore, comes as little surprise. But in the nearly 15 years since the accident, Japan’s energy structure and society have changed—and all evidence shows that nuclear power cannot simply be switched on again, despite what the government claims.
Displaced by renewable energy. As a result of new safety regulations that the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) established in 2012, nuclear power plants with inadequate accident prevention measures are still unable to operate.
Japan used to operate 54 commercial nuclear power plants before the Fukushima accident, but so far only 14 have obtained operating permits and resumed operations. This translated into nuclear power’s share of electricity supply dropping to just over 5 percent from the 29 percent before the accident. The government is seeking a 20-percent share by fiscal 2040 but has not presented any specific measures to achieve this goal.
Meanwhile, renewable energy has increased rapidly since the Fukushima accident, partially filling the vacuum of the shutdown reactors. Renewable energy now supplies 226 terawatt-hours of electricity—more than twice the 84 terawatt-hours supplied by nuclear power. And renewables will continue to dominate the electricity market with a target share of 40 to 50 percent by 2040, also more than double that of nuclear power……………..
While nuclear power lacks competitiveness in the electricity market, Japan’s electricity demand has already plateaued. Demand has decreased by more than 10 percent since 2010,[2] according to the latest figures. The government insists that electricity consumption will increase sharply over the next 10 years due to the growing demand in data centers and semiconductor factories. However, even if this happens, it will still result in a lower electricity demand compared to 2010.
Unlike France, Japan does not allow output adjustments for nuclear power generation, and being an island nation, it cannot export electricity overseas. Moreover, with a slowing economy and a shrinking population, electricity demand has already peaked. In a market that seeks to maximize profits by anticipating short-term electricity demand and avoiding excess power generation, nuclear power is not an attractive option.
Does Japan need MOX fuel?
……………………………………………..Power companies and the government have not disclosed what the cost will be for Japan of manufacturing this MOX fuel abroad and then importing it. But trade statistics indicate that the MOX fuel commissioned at a French reprocessing plant cost approximately $11,000 per kilogram of heavy metal (primarily plutonium and uranium), while uranium fuel imported from the United States cost approximately $1,000 per kilogram of heavy metal. In other words, MOX fuel is more than 10 times as expensive as imported non-reprocessed reactor fuel.[3]………………….
Does nuclear power mean fewer CO2 emissions?
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..As spent nuclear fuel continues to accumulate in Japan, the government claims that it can be reduced by reprocessing. If so, the reduction cost can be estimated as ¥488 million ($3.3 million) per ton.[5] That’s an emission reduction cost per ton 300,000 times higher than for other mitigation measures indicated by the IPCC. Moreover, spent nuclear fuel does not disappear through reprocessing. Even at the end of a closed fuel cycle, the reprocessed and recycled used fuel will require permanent geological disposal, which comes with its own set of challenges. That’s particularly the case with MOX fuel, which generates high decay heat associated with plutonium and accumulated minor actinides.
Advocates of nuclear power argue that combining fast reactors and transmutation technology after reprocessing can reduce the volume of high-level radioactive waste. But, beyond their many scientific and economic challenges, those measures will not be available in time to solve the climate change crisis, which requires immediate solutions. The only way to stop the generation of spent nuclear fuel is to stop operating nuclear reactors in the first place.
The myth of nuclear power disappears. The Fukushima accident demonstrated—once again—that the claimed inherent safety of nuclear power is a myth. Japan’s reduced reliance on nuclear power since the accident has now also debunked a second myth—that the Japanese society needs nuclear energy. The government’s reversal of its passive stance in favor of a proactive nuclear power policy goes against the current facts. It should revise its energy plan accordingly.
Unfortunately, the new Japanese cabinet formed this October, like its predecessors, is sidestepping the many current and future challenges of nuclear power………………………… As long as the government continues to avoid confronting the difficult reality of nuclear power in Japan, the myth will go on. Until it doesn’t.
India’s Parliament approves bill to open civil nuclear power sector to private firms
DailyMail, By ASSOCIATED PRESS, 19 December 2025
NEW DELHI (AP) – India´s Parliament approved new legislation Thursday that enables opening the tightly controlled civil nuclear power sector to private companies.
The government termed it a major policy shift to speed up [?] clean energy expansion while the opposition political parties argued that it dilutes safety and liability safeguards.
The lower house of parliament passed the legislation Wednesday and the upper house on Thursday. It now needs the assent from the Indian president, which is a formality, to come into force.
………….. critics say it opens the door to risks, mainly health hazards, that could have long term consequences…………..
some are skeptical about India´s ambitions as the country´s nuclear sector is still very small, and negative public perceptions about the industry remain.
Opposition parties flagged concerns related to several provisions of the bill and urged the government to refer it to a parliamentary panel for examination. The government didn´t adhere to the request.
“The bill doesn´t have sufficient safeguards when it comes to mitigating the bad health of those impacted by living in areas closer to nuclear plants,” Ashok Mittal, a lawmaker from the opposition Aam Admi Party, told The Associated Press.
G. Sundarrajan, an anti-nuclear energy activist, called the bill a “disastrous law,” saying it takes away essential safeguards that are needed to make sure companies invest in safety and reduce the chances of a major disaster that can impact millions from occurring.
“It also provides little recourse for any Indian citizen to claim damages from nuclear companies even if they are affected by radiation leaks or suffer from any other health impact as a result of a nuclear plant in their region,” he said. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/article-15396015/Indias-Parliament-approves-bill-open-civil-nuclear-power-sector-private-firms.html
How nuclear submarines could pave the way for nuclear weapons in South Korea
Bulletin, By Sharon Squassoni | December 12, 2025
Share
The mystique of nuclear-powered submarines has been captured by at least half a dozen popular Hollywood films. Some have centered on the drama of undersea warfare and the risk of global nuclear apocalypse should the nuclear-tipped missiles aboard most of them be launched. Others confront the issues of rogue submarine commanders or the dilemmas of decision-making when out of communication with national leadership. One or two, including Kathryn Bigelow’s K-19 Widowmaker, portray real-world disasters of a reactor meltdown aboard submarines. (Bigelow is also the director of the new film, A House of Dynamite, which depicts the last 20 minutes before a nuclear-armed missile of unknown origin falls on an American city.)
The underlying message of these fictional works is that nuclear submarines—powered by reactors and armed with atomic missiles—are a tightrope act. One misstep could endanger many, many lives.
The United States’ recent nuclear submarine deal with South Korea is a tightrope act for a different reason. Lost in the noise about nuclear submarines, the Trump administration has agreed to let South Korea enrich uranium and reprocess commercial nuclear spent fuel. This step—which could give South Korea a virtual or latent nuclear weapons capability—is needlessly destabilizing.
US nuclear technology exports. In the last five years, the United States has made deals with Australia and South Korea to hasten the day when some countries will deploy nuclear-powered submarines that don’t carry nuclear missiles. Under the 2021 AUKUS deal (a partnership between Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States), Australia will build nuclear-powered submarines using UK reactors and US highly enriched uranium fuel at the latest estimated cost of $368 billion. And in October, South Korea scored a political coup in convincing US President Donald Trump to allow its pursuit of nuclear-powered submarines.
South Korea has sought nuclear-powered submarines for more than 30 years. Sparked by the first international crisis over North Korea’s nuclear weapons program, Seoul has dabbled in the relevant technologies in an on-again, off-again fashion. Past forays included a 1994 directive to the Korean Atomic Energy Research Institute to design a nuclear-powered submarine (cancelled in 1998) and the so-called “362” covert task force formed in 2003 that reportedly utilized Russian help to design a submarine reactor. This task force was disbanded in 2004 after South Korean officials revealed that scientists had enriched uranium without declaring it to the International Atomic Energy Agency.
More recently, Moon Jae-in campaigned on South Korea acquiring nuclear-powered submarines in 2017, and Korean officials since 2020 have suggested that their next generation of submarines would be nuclear-powered. Speculation persists over whether South Korean efforts to develop small modular reactors fueled with 19.5 percent high-assay low-enriched uranium could be adapted or modified for naval applications.
Many details about South Korea’s nuclear submarines are still unknown— when, where, and how they will be built. Those details will matter a great deal in terms of the proliferation implications. Allowing South Korea to indigenously produce its own nuclear submarines could be riskier than if South Korea were to purchase US subs or the reactors that go into these subs.
Nuclear-powered vs. nuclear-armed. Nuclear-powered submarines make total sense to nuclear weapon states, which weigh the risks and costs of these vehicles against the benefits of stealth, range, and having a platform for assured, nuclear retaliation. (In theory, such submarines can enhance stability because they provide assured destruction in case an opponent seeks advantage by striking first—the so-called delicate balance of terror.) Already engaged in high-cost and high-risk nuclear projects, nuclear-powered submarines are not a huge step up for countries with nuclear weapons.
For countries without nuclear weapons, however, the costs far outweigh the benefits.
Per unit, a single modern diesel-electric attack submarine with air-independent propulsion costs between $500 million and $900 million. A modern nuclear-powered attack submarine will cost between $3 billion and $4 billion each, based on the current cost of Virginia-class nuclear attack submarines in the United States, a country with experience in building such ships. This is on top of the considerable investment in shipbuilding that countries like South Korea and Australia would have to make. For instance, South Korea has vowed to invest $350 billion in the United States, of which half will be spent on US shipbuilding…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… https://thebulletin.org/2025/12/how-nuclear-submarines-could-pave-the-way-for-nuclear-weapons-in-south-korea/
Japan rejects EU plan to steal Russian assets – Politico.
09 Dec 2025, https://www.sott.net/article/503419-Japan-rejects-EU-plan-to-steal-Russian-assets-Politico
The bloc wants to use Moscow’s funds immobilized in the West to cover Ukraine’s budget deficit.
Japan has reportedly dismissed a European Union initiative to tap frozen Russian sovereign assets to help finance Ukraine’s massive budget shortfall.
Brussels hopes to issue a so-called “reparation loan” backed by Russian funds immobilized in the West – a plan that Moscow has denounced as outright theft. Belgium, where most of the money is held by the Euroclear clearinghouse, has refused to greenlight the proposal unless other nations agree to share associated legal and financial risks.
Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever has said broader international backing, particularly from non-EU countries holding Russian assets, would bolster the European Commission’s case for what he called the effective confiscation of a foreign state’s funds. But at a meeting of G7 finance ministers on Monday, Japan’s Satsuki Katayama made clear her government would not support the plan due to legal constraints, Politico reported, citing EU diplomatic sources.
Officials told the outlet they believe Japan’s stance aligns with that of the United States, which also opposes the EU approach and views the frozen assets as leverage in negotiations with Moscow.
France has reportedly likewise declined to touch any assets held on its soil, while Canada and the UK have signaled possible participation if the EU ultimately pursues the scheme.
Ukraine’s parliament last week adopted a 2026 budget with a staggering $47.5 billion deficit, expecting foreign donors and creditors to fill the gap. Roughly half that anticipated support – an estimated $23.6 billion – remains uncertain pending the fate of the EU loan plan.
Ukrainian media noted that lawmakers pushed the budget through despite unresolved questions over foreign financing, in part to project stability following the removal of Andrey Yermak, formerly the most powerful aide to the country’s leader, Vladimir Zelensky. Yermak was dismissed as a corruption scandal engulfed Kiev’s political establishment.
Japan inspects nuclear sites as seismologists warn of another large quake.
Authorities assessed the damage from Monday’s 7.5-magnitude earthquake, amid warnings of aftershocks and a potentially larger tremblor in the coming days.
Nuclear facilities were inspected in Japan on Tuesday as
authorities assessed the damage from a 7.5-magnitude earthquake, amid
warnings of aftershocks and a potentially larger tremblor in the coming
days. As cleanup operations began, Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi told
reporters that an emergency task force was formed to urgently assess
damage, according to The Associated Press. “We are putting people’s
lives first and doing everything we can,” she said……………………………………………………………..
Japanese officials found “no abnormalities” at Fukushima, the International Atomic Energy Agency said early Tuesday.
But as inspections were carried out on other nuclear sites, the country’s Nuclear Regulation Authority said in a statement that nearly 120 gallons of water spilled from a fuel cooling system at a nuclear fuel processing plant in the city of Aomori near the epicenter of Monday’s earthquake……………………….
NBC News 9th Dec 2025, https://www.nbcnews.com/world/asia/japan-earthquake-nuclear-sites-damage-injuries-emergency-rcna248160
Japan pulls out of Vietnam nuclear project, complicating Hanoi’s power plans
Japan has dropped out of plans to build a major nuclear power plant in
Vietnam because the time frame is too tight, Japanese ambassador Naoki Ito told Reuters, potentially complicating Vietnam’s long-term strategy to
avoid new power shortages.
Vietnam, home to large manufacturing operations for multinationals including Samsung and Apple, has faced major power blackouts as demand from its huge industrial sector and expanding middle class often outpaces supplies, strained by increasingly frequent extreme weather, such as droughts and typhoons.
“The Japanese side is not in a position to implement the Ninh Thuan 2 project,” the ambassador to Vietnam said, referring to a plant with a planned capacity of 2 to 3.2 gigawatts. The project is part of Vietnam’s strategy to boost power generation capacity.
Asahi Shimbun 8th Dec 2025, https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/16208469
1 This Month
31st January – Challenging the War Machine – a DECLASSIFIED UK SUMMIT
Website of the Week
Now until to February 10, 2026 Radioactive waste storage in France: the debate is finally open! How to participate?
-
Archives
- January 2026 (227)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
-
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 