Russia Closes Border Crossings With Several NATO States After Finland Lifts Nuclear Ban
by Tyler Durden, Thursday, Jul 02, 2026, https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/russia-closes-border-crossings-several-nato-states-after-finland-lifts-ban-nuclear
Finland’s parliament has finally followed through with a previously threatened move to reverse its decades-long ban on nuclear weapons. The June 17 vote to lift the ban in effect legally authorizes the Nordic country to receive, transport, and facilitate the movement of nuclear weapons on its territory as part of allied operations, with the representatives’ final tally at 125 to 61.
Finland officially became the 31st member of NATO in April 2023 – having abandoned its historic neutrality in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, in what was among the fastest accession processes in the Western military alliance’s history. Now it is already willing to host allied nukes on its territory, making it a target of Russian retaliation.
Moscow has long warned against such an ultra-provocative move. The Kremlin said Monday that this requires a response – given also the fact that Russia and Finland share an over 800-mile long border, which is made up largely of Arctic frontier.
“The results of the vote represent both bright and unflattering victory of the blind Russophobia of the past few years over what we have always viewed as pragmatic sanity in Finland,” said Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova.
“And let nobody doubt that [response] measures will be taken timely and effectively. In this light, the Finnish people need to think whether this decision made by their elites will actually enhance security in Finland itself,” she added.
As a start, Russia has moved to shutter more rail crossings to NATO states, including Finland – which is to further severely impact trade:
Russia has closed seven railway border checkpoints with Finland, Estonia and Latvia, according to a government decree published Tuesday.
The suspension, which takes effect July 1, halts the movement of individuals, vehicles and cargo through the designated rail crossings. Five of the shuttered checkpoints are located on the Finnish border, while Estonia and Latvia each have one crossing affected.
Officials have not disclosed the reasons for the closures or when the checkpoints might reopen.
In Estonia, the Ivangorod freight and passenger crossing will remain open, and in Latvia, the Sebezh crossing will also stay open. However, the closures leave Finland with no open railway crossings with Russia, which normally exports fertilizer to Finland by rail.
Finland shut its eastern vehicle and pedestrian border crossings with Russia indefinitely in December 2023 following an influx of asylum seekers.
Since the Ukraine war began, and in context of ratcheting tensions with NATO over its military support to Kiev, Moscow has steadily militarized its border with Finland.
The most significant source of NATO’s nuclear-sharing program is the United States. But lately France has expressed a desire to station some of its atomic arsenal in partner countries, and this could include in Finland, Sweden, Denmark and others.
Polish tycoon backs Britain’s £35bn mini nuclear reactors plan.
Michal Solowow’s Synthos Green Energy is seeking approval for 14 small modular
reactors at three sites including Oldbury in Gloucestershire.
SGE would not
disclose the location of the sites, two of which are privately owned, but
one of those that it has submitted an application to use is understood to
be the state-owned Oldbury nuclear site in Gloucestershire. Oldbury is one
of eight sites that has been designated for new nuclear power stations in
the UK.
The SMRs will deploy designs developed by GE Vernova Hitachi, a
joint venture between GE Vernova, the American energy equipment
manufacturer, and Hitachi, the Japanese conglomerate. It was one of four
technology providers that had been in the running to build the UK’s first
SMRs under a selection process led by Great British Nuclear, an
arm’s-length, state-backed body set up by the previous government, now
renamed Great British Energy — Nuclear.
It is hoped that the first unit
will start generating power by 2034, about the same time as the first
Rolls-Royce SMR, and will be funded by SGE through a mixture of debt and
equity. It is understood to be in discussions with the taxpayer-backed
National Wealth Fund over an investment and is aiming to apply for support
under the contracts-for-difference framework, which guarantees developers a
minimum that they will be paid for the power they generate. If future
wholesale prices are lower than this guaranteed price, developers will
receive a top-up payment, but if they are higher, they will repay the
excess as a saving to consumers.
Times 2nd July 2026, https://www.thetimes.com/business/companies-markets/article/polish-tycoon-britains-35bn-mini-nuclear-reactor-dsj5kc7s9
Revealed: Illegal West Bank settlements advertised at Israeli event in London
Despite denials from organisers, evidence gathered inside the event shows occupied Palestinian land was being marketed
DANIA AKKAD, 15 June 2026, https://www.declassifieduk.org/revealed-illegal-west-bank-settlements-advertised-at-israeli-event-in-london/
Properties from seven illegal settlements were advertised at the Great Israeli Real Estate Event on Sunday in London, days after more than 100 MPs and groups urged the UK government to ban it.
Organisers had told journalists last week that all exhibitors at the event “without exception” would only provide information about properties for sale within the Green Line – the internationally recognised border between Israel and Palestine.
But brochures circulated at the event which Jewish Anti-Zionist Action (JAZA) shared with Declassified and others posted online show companies touting properties for sale in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
In one pamphlet, Harry Zahev Developers advertises apartments and private homes in Kfar Eldad and Teneh Omarim, illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank near Palestinian towns and communities.
“Bringing gardens and spaces where nature is your closest neighbour,” the pamphlet reads.
In another brochure, the Jerusalem Real Estate company offers the city’s “most sought-after Anglo neighborhoods” including French Hill and Ramat Eshkol, two settlement neighbourhoods in occupied east Jerusalem.
Neither company responded immediately to requests for comment on Monday. Declassified attempted to reach the event organisers, but could not find any contact details.
Other illegal Israel settlements featured in the promotional materials which JAZA collected include the West Bank settlements of Ma’ale Adumim and Givat Ze’ev, and Givat Hamatos, a settlement currently under construction in East Jerusalem.
“Through these pamphlets and information we collected on the inside, we can prove that this event was selling properties in the occupied West Bank,” said Guy Zilberman, a JAZA activist who gained entry to the exhibition.
‘Crazy times’
Zilberman described his experience at the real estate show. “After passing through security, I was given a free tote bag and a booklet advertising the different real estate companies present at the fair that day,” he said.
At the stall for one developer, he said he was told the company had “properties they were selling in ‘Judea and Samaria’ that he thought would be perfect for me”.
The company representative “had all the booklets and papers for it but couldn’t get them out because the police had said in order for the event to go ahead they couldn’t advertise properties illegal under international law,” Zilberman said.
The man then told him these were “crazy times we live in” and asked for Zilberman’s contact details so he could follow up after the event.
He visited another stall and said he was given a leaflet advertising properties in Ma’ale Adumim, which is an illegal West Bank settlement.
After about an hour inside, Zilberman disrupted the event, calling for “sanctions now” and saying “don’t steal” in Hebrew.
“After disrupting the event, I was pulled out by my neck by security,” Zilberman said.
He noted that the Board of Deputies had said that the event was “an excuse to harass and intimidate members of the Jewish community”.
“I would invite the Board of Deputies to look at the documents here that clearly depict in writing that these properties in illegally occupied territories…have been advertised at this event,” he said.
The Board of Deputies did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Monday.
What’s in Keir Starmer’s defence investment plan? Key points.
The ten-year military blueprint outlines billions in spending on special forces and hypersonic weaponry but leaves some major equipment programmes uncosted
More than £63 billion will be spent on the nuclear deterrent over four
years, including new warheads for the future Dreadnought-class submarines,
as well as 12 new F-35A aircraft that will be able to carry tactical
nuclear weapons, American B61-12 gravity bombs. The nuclear investment will
also include £26 billion over the next decade in Project Royal Oak, the
largest naval base upgrade for over 45 years. This will see
multi-billion-pound upgrades at Faslane, Portsmouth and Devonport.
Times 30th June 2026 https://www.thetimes.com/uk/defence/article/defence-investment-plan-keir-starmer-key-points-cgxtn69qf
UK: Inside Labour Together’s secret war against Jeremy Corbyn
Documents disclosed to Corbyn expose covert efforts by Starmer’s former chief of staff to combat the British left
DECLASSIFIED UK, PAUL HOLDEN, Jessica Murray and JOHN McEVOY, 24 June 2026
- Labour Together monitored views on antisemitism in Labour while stoking that crisis
- Media outlet The Canary was targeted amid concerns it was trusted among Labour members
- John McDonnell says new information about Labour Together “makes a call for a public inquiry overwhelming”
Newly released documents reveal the inner workings of Labour Together and its role in covertly undermining Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership of the Labour party.
The documents were disclosed to Corbyn in response to a subject access request. They contain emails from Labour Together’s two key figures Morgan McSweeney and Josh Simons.
McSweeney went on to be Keir Starmer’s chief of staff while Simons became a cabinet minister until he resigned following revelations that he had hired a reputation management firm to “proactively undermine” journalistic investigations into Labour Together, McSweeney and Sir Keir Starmer.
Simons subsequently vacated his Makerfield constituency seat for Andy Burnham.
Internal documents detail how Labour Together under McSweeney’s watch (2017-20) conducted polling of the Labour membership to monitor its views on the incidence of antisemitism in the party.
This polling allowed McSweeney and his allies to track responses to the antisemitism narrative that they were simultaneously helping to sustain by placing arguably alarmist stories in the media.
The documents further detail how The Canary media outlet was highly trusted among Labour members and identified as a political challenge because it defended Corbyn amid antisemitism accusations.
The Canary was subsequently targeted by the McSweeney-linked Stop Funding Fake News campaign with an advertiser boycott, which helped to diminish its revenue.
Weaponising antisemitism
McSweeney quietly inflamed the “antisemitism crisis” that would dog Corbyn’s leadership from at least 2018.
He did so by seeding and placing stories into the press that helped to build the narrative that Corbyn’s Labour had become riddled with antisemitism and that this flowed inexorably from a resurgent left-wing anti-imperialism.
At the same time, the new documents show, Labour Together was paying YouGov to repeatedly poll Labour members on whether they agreed with the framing of the party as a hotbed of antisemitism.
The goal was apparently to gain a detailed guide to the opinions of the party’s membership as McSweeney sought to detach it from Corbyn’s leadership.
Although the precise cost is unknown, polling of this kind was likely to be expensive.
It was also at this time that Labour Together unlawfully failed to declare most of its donations, amounting to over £700,000, with key funders of the organisation including hedge fund manager Martin Taylor and pro-Israel lobbyist Trevor Chinn.
‘Deliberately exaggerated’…………………………………………………..
‘Dreadful performance’…………………………………………………..
The Canary……………………………….
Stop Funding Fake News
When read against other emails and Labour Together’s polling, the briefing note points to concerns about how The Canary was undermining the antisemitism narrative that McSweeney and his allies were covertly helping to inflame in this period.
In March 2019, McSweeney and his ally Imran Ahmed would launch the Stop Funding Fake News (SFFN) campaign, which sought to demonetise The Canary by pressuring companies to withdraw advertising from its website.
While being led by factional Labour insiders, the SFFN campaign presented itself as a project run by committed grassroots activists who were concerned with the proliferation of “fake news”.
Interestingly, the internal briefing note, which appears to have been a precursor to the SFFN campaign, made no mention of the accuracy of The Canary’s reporting.
The emphasis was on its political influence, strongly suggesting the subsequent campaign was initiated in response to The Canary’s challenge to the political ambitions of Labour Together, onto which claims of “disinformation” were grafted.
Indeed, McSweeney reportedly told Labour Together colleagues: “Destroy the Canary or the Canary destroys us”.
That campaign, alongside changes to social media algorithms, played a powerful role in circumscribing the impact and reach of The Canary by late 2019.
By then, Labour Together’s plan to install Sir Keir Starmer as the leader of the Labour Party was well-advanced.
McSweeney and Labour Together’s fixation on polling would carry over the organisation while led by Josh Simons (2022 – 2024).
These intense polling efforts apparently also helped the organisation to create caricatures of target voters for the Labour party which were at once crude, bizarre, and insulting.
A version of the “Workington Man” curated by Labour Together was 62 years old, white, “absolutely despised Jeremy Corbyn”, “hates Europe and European culture”, drives an “Audi A4”, and “thinks South Asians who live nearby are terrible drivers”…………………………………………..
Labour Together is now called ThinkLabour. Think Labour, Josh Simons, Imran Ahmed and Morgan McSweeney were asked to comment.
Paul Holden is a journalist for Shadow World Investigations and author of the book The Fraud: Keir Starmer, Morgan McSweeney and the Crisis of British Democracy. Between 2020 and 2021, Holden worked directly with the Zondo Commission to assist its investigations into complex money laundering schemes used to hide and dissipate state capture loot in South Africa. https://www.declassifieduk.org/inside-labour-togethers-secret-battle-against-jeremy-corbyn/
More issues reported during manufacture of Sizewell C’s reactor vessels than Hinkley Point C’s
01 Jul, 2026 By Tom Pashby, https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/more-issues-reported-during-manufacture-of-sizewell-cs-reactor-vessels-than-hinkley-point-cs-01-07-2026/
“Quality issues” relating to the manufacture of the reactor pressure vessels (RPVs) for Sizewell C have been identified by the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) during an inspection by the regulator.
The number of “non-conformance reports” has increased at Framatome St Marcel (FSM) – the French manufacturer of the RPVs – compared to when it was manufacturing the RPVs for Hinkley Point C.
Sizewell C and the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) have regularly highlighted how Sizewell C will be delivered more efficiently than Hinkley Point C because of how much design work can be copied over.
The Sizewell C – Inspection ID: 54200 report from the ONR, which was carried out in April 2026 and published on 22 June, reported that “manufacturing quality issues” had been identified at FSM.
The ONR stressed the importance of the RPV in its report. “The reactor pressure vessel (RPV) is manufactured by Framatome (manufacturer of nuclear equipment based in France),” it said.
“The RPV is a nuclear safety class 1 component which forms part of the primary circuit. It has been categorised as a high integrity component (HIC) within the SZC safety case.
“Therefore, the consequences of failure during operation cannot be tolerated and a highest reliability claim is made on the structural integrity of the RPV.”
The aim of the ONR’s inspection was for it to “make an informed judgement on the adequacy of SZC’s specification, control and oversight of RPV manufacture at FSM in compliance with LC12 and LC19.”
LC12 means License Condition 12, and required that “the licensee (meaning Sizewell C) shall make and implement adequate arrangements to ensure that only suitably qualified and experienced persons perform any duties which may affect the safety of operations on the site or any other duties assigned by or under these conditions or any arrangements required under these conditions.”
Meanwhile, LC19 requires that “where the licensee proposes to construct or install any new plant which may affect safety the licensee shall make and implement adequate arrangements to control the construction or installation.”
Regulator says additional scrutiny was not required over Hinkley Point C bullying concerns
26 Jun, 2026 By Tom Pashby
An MP’s claim that the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) increased
scrutiny of Hinkley Point C over bullying allegations has been contested by
the regulator, NCE understands.
Liberal Democrat MP for Tiverton and
Minehead Rachel Gilmour raised concerns about bullying at Hinkley Point C
(HPC) during the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee (PAC) evidence
session on Sizewell C on 8 June. MPs challenged senior representatives of
Sizewell C on the project’s commitment to transparency around possible
future cost overruns.
Representatives also provided new details on the
infrastructure being built at the site. During the session Gilmour said:
“I want to ask about bullying […] my constituency includes Hinkley A,
Hinkley B and Hinkley C. Once elected, I was inundated with whistleblowers
and people who have great concerns about the bullying culture at Hinkley C,
to such an extent that I had a meeting with Simone Rossi, the chief
executive of EDF Europe, and the ONR.
“The ONR felt that the situation
was so bad that they had to put in extra scrutiny. I was joined by
WhistleblowersUK in that.” However, NCE understands that it is ONR’s
position that no additional regulatory measures or scrutiny have been
required at Hinkley Point C for any bullying or harassment issues.
New Civil Engineer 26th June 2026,
https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/regulator-says-additional-scrutiny-was-not-required-over-hinkley-point-c-bullying-concerns-26-06-2026/
Europe and Russia Edge Toward Direct War as Nuclear Fears Grow
Ray McGovern and Peter Kuznick examine Europe’s accelerating military buildup, Putin’s warning that Russia is prepared for war, and why they fear diplomacy is giving way to a dangerous escalation between nuclear powers.
Peter Kuznick’s sobering warning: “We’re planning for our own annihilation and extinction as a species.”
ScheerPost Staff, June 29, 2026, https://scheerpost.com/2026/06/29/europe-and-russia-edge-toward-direct-war-as-nuclear-fears-grow/
As Europe dramatically expands military spending and NATO leaders openly prepare for what they describe as a possible future conflict with Russia, questions are growing over whether the world is drifting toward a direct confrontation between nuclear powers.
On this week’s edition of The World This Week, Consortium News Editor Joe Lauria is joined by former CIA analyst Ray McGovern and historian Peter Kuznick to examine the increasingly dangerous escalation surrounding the war in Ukraine. The discussion explores Vladimir Putin’s warning that Russia is prepared for war, Europe’s accelerating militarization, the role of NATO-backed drone attacks deep inside Russian territory, and the growing risk that a single miscalculation could trigger a wider conflict.
While McGovern argues that Moscow continues to exercise restraint despite mounting provocations, Kuznick warns that political pressure, expanding military commitments, and increasingly confrontational rhetoric on all sides are creating conditions in which diplomacy is being replaced by dangerous brinkmanship. Together they examine whether Europe’s leaders are pursuing a coherent long-term strategy—or whether escalating military spending, shrinking diplomacy, and domestic political pressures are moving the world toward an outcome that no one can control.
The conversation also explores the fragile U.S.–Iran ceasefire, shifting global power dynamics, and whether recent political developments in New York signal broader changes inside the Democratic Party. Throughout the discussion, the panel returns to a central warning: in an era of nuclear weapons, great-power confrontation carries risks unlike any previous conflict, making diplomacy more urgent than ever.
Much of this discussion is vital and deserves to be widely shared, but perhaps its most important takeaway—and one that should remain our constant watchword—is Peter Kuznick’s sobering warning: “We’re planning for our own annihilation and extinction as a species.”
The greatest danger isn’t simply the war itself—it’s the gradual normalization of confrontation between nuclear powers.
McGovern argues that despite increasingly provocative developments, Putin has consistently sought to avoid a direct military clash with NATO. Drawing on decades of following Soviet and Russian leadership, he contends that Moscow understands that striking targets inside NATO countries could trigger an uncontrollable escalation with nuclear powers. Instead, he believes Russia is attempting to achieve its objectives inside Ukraine while avoiding actions that would give Western governments justification for expanding the conflict.
Kuznick agrees that Putin has generally exercised restraint but warns that restraint alone may not guarantee stability. He notes that Russian infrastructure continues to come under attack, political pressure inside Russia is growing, and influential voices within the country have begun calling for stronger retaliation against European facilities supporting Ukraine’s military operations. While he does not believe Russia seeks a wider war, he cautions that prolonged escalation increases the chances of miscalculation by all sides.
One of the central themes running throughout the discussion is the collapse of diplomacy. Both guests argue that negotiations have steadily been displaced by military planning, larger defense budgets and increasingly confrontational political rhetoric. Rather than emphasizing diplomatic solutions, many European leaders now frame the conflict as a long-term military struggle requiring sustained increases in defense spending.
The discussion also examines the broader political consequences of Europe’s military buildup. Kuznick argues that dramatically expanding military expenditures inevitably comes at the expense of domestic priorities, including housing, education, healthcare and other social programs. Echoing President Dwight Eisenhower’s famous warning about the military-industrial complex, he suggests that the diversion of public resources toward military production represents a significant political and economic transformation occurring across Europe.
Beyond Ukraine, the panel turns to the fragile ceasefire between the United States and Iran. Although open hostilities have subsided, both McGovern and Kuznick describe the agreement as unstable, pointing to continued military exchanges and unresolved disputes that could quickly reignite a broader regional conflict. The discussion places these tensions within a larger international context in which several major geopolitical flashpoints—from Eastern Europe to the Middle East—remain active simultaneously.
Throughout the conversation, Kuznick and McGovern both invoke the lessons of the Cold War. McGovern references President John F. Kennedy’s warning “To force a choice on another nuclear power between humiliation and using nuclear weapons is a colossal failure of statesmanship.”
Kuznick likewise argues that many of today’s political leaders appear increasingly willing to normalize discussions of military confrontation between nuclear-armed states in ways that would have been considered reckless only a generation ago.
The panel also examines the political dynamics inside Europe itself. Rather than portraying European governments as unified, McGovern argues that many leaders pushing for expanded militarization face declining public support while confronting growing economic pressures at home. Kuznick similarly notes that opinion polls across several countries suggest many citizens remain skeptical of continued military escalation even as governments expand defense commitments.
Despite differences over Russia’s battlefield prospects and the likely trajectory of the war, both analysts ultimately agree on one fundamental point: diplomacy has become dangerously marginalized. They warn that history demonstrates how wars often expand not because governments deliberately seek global conflict, but because repeated cycles of retaliation, political pressure and strategic miscalculation gradually narrow the space for peaceful solutions.
The discussion concludes with a sobering assessment of the international moment. As Europe rearms, NATO prepares for additional military commitments, Russia continues its campaign in Ukraine and tensions remain high across the Middle East, McGovern and Kuznick argue that preventing direct confrontation between nuclear powers should remain the overriding priority. Whether today’s leaders are willing—or able—to reverse the current trajectory through diplomacy remains one of the defining questions of the international order.
The conversation offers a detailed examination of competing interpretations of the conflict, the strategic calculations shaping decisions in Moscow and Western capitals, and the broader implications of a world increasingly organized around military competition rather than negotiation. It is a reminder that while battlefield developments dominate headlines, the greatest danger may lie in the gradual normalization of permanent confrontation between nuclear-armed states.
Russia hearing the European clamour for war, announces it is ready
Alastair Crooke, Strategic Culture Foundation, Mon, 29 Jun 2026, https://www.sott.net/article/507152-Russia-hearing-the-European-clamour-for-war-announces-it-is-ready
The de-escalation framework that unfolded in the U.S.-Iran Lucerne talks largely stayed true to the original Iranian 10-point plan. Meanwhile, President Trump and Vice-President Vance deliberately muddy the waters, claiming that Iran has already agreed to IAEA inspections of Iran’s nuclear facilities (a claim repeatedly denied by Iran): Vance announced that the IAEA could have begun inspections this week. No – – the ‘Framework’ only refers to the possible IAEA supervision of the dilution to the 60% enriched stockpile subject to a final agreement with the U.S. having been reached.
Trump, writing on social media, later falsely asserted: “Iran has fully and completely agreed to highest level Nuclear inspections long into the future”. In fact, the IAEA are only inspecting the joint Iran-Russia power station in Bushier at Russia’s request, because Russia wants to ensure compliance on its involvement. In other words, it is a Russian request to satisfy its own IAEA compliance commitment.
Trump then warned Iran that he may have to “finish the job [militarily]” — (if he doesn’t get a very good deal) — which, he says, would take ” about a week”, and adds that Iran will be required to use any unfrozen Iranian funds to be held in ESCROW accounts (accounts controlled by the U.S.) to buy “corn and soybeans for their people, because right now their people are very hungry — and they’re buying exclusively from us”.
So, it’s pretty clear what’s ahead — Trump is reverting to his New York real-estate mode of negotiations. In the Art of the Deal, his 1987 book, ghost written by Tony Schwartz, the text advises the use of “extreme and unpredictable demands to create anxiety and force concessions from rivals”.
Thus, we are back to the General Kellogg playbook – – Kellogg advised Trump that the only thing that works with Putin or the Iranians is pressure — and then still more pressure.
Familiar Trumpian tactics. Show a little initial flexibility to tease out adversaries in order to pull them into negotiations; subsequent false claims of Iranian concessions and extreme demands are then used to increase pressure on Iran (whilst Trump appears tough to the angry neocon constituency and to his ‘base’ back home).
This style of pressure may work for New York real-estate deals, but will be ineffective with both Iran and Russia.
Such threats will be counterproductive with Iran, and place the U.S. on a collision course. “The Islamabad understanding was not the result of pressure and coercion, but rather the result of the resistance and authority of the Iranian nation”, Mr Qalibaf, the chief Iranian negotiator, retorted.
In practical terms, as Will Schryver, a shrewd observer of the U.S. military, notes, Iran has pressure points “more numerous and capable than the U.S. can bring to bear on the battlefield” —
“In my view, [Schryver says], a powerful U.S. military presence in the Persian Gulf region has become utterly untenable. They’re just trying to save face now. I do not believe, [he concludes] the U.S. military can mount even a 72-hour high-intensity operation at this point in time”.
“But I think they’ll try. Probably just Trump bluff, but it would not surprise me if they try to play one last card to gain the upper hand”. (Maybe after the midterms, and with the U.S. having rebuilt somewhat its munitions shortfall).
To which Iran likely will respond by closing the Strait of Hormuz again, and attacking, pari passu, regional (Gulf) infrastructure. Trump will be gaming the economy who first plays ‘Chicken’. A further military venture likely will only further erode American military standing.
Quite possibly, however, Trump may be prepared to cut his losses in Iran — the war anyway is a liability to his Midterm electoral calculus — by circling back to Ukraine and Russia. The Kiev Independentreleased a report yesterday, quoting a “senior Ukrainian official saying that Trump had privately given Zelensky the greenlight to act “more boldly” against Russia”.
Here we go again, roundabout time — “Trump says he doesn’t really believe Putin will do anything without pressure”, the Ukrainian official added.
Simpliciusspeculates:
“Trump has clearly been frustrated by his inability to settle any of the conflicts he had promised easily. And recently, on the heels of the Iranian memorandum saga, he even admitted that he would now be “turning his attention” back to Ukraine.
“As such, it’s plausible that Trump would have given secret encouragement to the Europeans to ‘shape the battlefield’ in order to “soften” Russia up ahead of whatever next Trump might have planned”.
If this is true (and it probably is), the Europeans are playing with matches and risk lighting a conflagration.
The E3 leaders, Starmer, Merz and Macron, met on 7 June with Zelensky to promise both unwavering support and — in the context of pledging further pressure on Russia —
“underlining the urgent need to scale up the production of interceptors; deep strike capabilities and anti-ballistic missile co-development — and further to support the future sustainability of the Ukrainian Armed Forces”.
In short, the Europeans intend to ratchet up deep strikes into Moscow and St Petersburg, which will likely kill and unsettle their inhabitants.
The E3 carefully planned how to stage-manage the upcoming G7 summit, the EU summit, with Zelensky showcased at both events, promising to increase the pressure on “President Putin to agree to an immediate and complete ceasefire, taking the current contact line for its start-point”. European leaders also pledged to co-ordinate ahead of the NATO summit in Ankara (7-8 July) to achieve increased pledges of military support for Ukraine.
The E3 states are explicitly gearing up with new missiles to strike deeper, and more destructively, into Russia. The British government, for example, has announced that —
“the UK project to develop low-cost advanced long-range strike weapons for Ukraine has reached a significant milestone, with three British-designed systems successfully flight tested. The ground-launched strike weapons reportedly are capable of hitting targets more than 500km distant, at a speed of 600 km/h – whilst carrying a 225 kg warhead”.
According to the Financial Times, Trump was “hugely impressed and enthusiastic” with Ukraine’s recent campaign of long-range strikes on targets deep inside Russia at last week’s G7 summit. At the summit, Trump also agreed to increase sanctions on Russian energy.
It is clear that the E3 had been plotting a major psy-op to convince Trump that Ukraine was not on the back-foot against Russia (as Trump may have been briefed); but rather had regained the front foot, and that the U.S. should support the European agenda to force a Russian capitulation agenda (ceasefire, borders unchanged, reparations paid by Russia and war-crimes trials for Russian officials indicted with crimes, etc).
These developments have brought two major developments out of Russia:
Firstly, senior Kremlin aides, notably Yuri Ushakov, Putin’s spokesman, have been saying over the past three days the ‘spirit’ of the Anchorage summit, and its concomitant understandings, “have effectively collapsed” — “The U.S. abandoned them”. Moscow no longer expects those commitments to be honoured and is focused solely on securing its own “victory” through military means.
Foreign Minister Lavrov went further, describing the Alaska meeting as an American “ploy” designed to buy time for Ukraine to rebuild and rearm its military — essentially likening them to the Minsk Accords that similarly were mounted as a deceit.
Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said:
“We also see Washington’s line moving closer to the most rabid anti-Russian policies pursued by the U.S.’s closest European allies – namely, the UK and France”.
This represents a huge strategic shift. Russia no longer seeks a relationship with Washington, though contact with DC will continue.
The second development stems from President Putin’s address at the St George’s Hall to military cadets on 23 June. Putin, in summary, told the young officers that the West manufactures a Russia threat, then accuses Russia of creating that very threat. This, said Putin, is a historically repeated pattern going back to 1941.
Putin implied that a threshold had now been crossed: He stated that whilst, until recently, NATO countries had limited themselves to supporting the Kiev regime to wage war on Russia, the West today is openly talking about preparing for a war against Russia, and is building up their military offensive budgets. German Chancellor Mertz has been quite vocal in this regard, Putin said.
Russia’s response, he said, is focused on modernising its nuclear triad and its Army, and strengthening the combat capability of the Aerospace Forces and the Navy. The explicit mention of the nuclear triad in direct proximity to the discussion of Western preparation for war against Russia was certainly a pointed message to Trump and the Europeans.
Russia has heard the European clamour for war. It has now made the strategic decision in response to prepare for war in Europe.
White Flag Judgments: Palestine Action, Protest and the UK Courts
1 July 2026 Dr Binoy Kampmark, https://theaimn.net/white-flag-judgments-palestine-action-protest-and-the-uk-courts/
The justice system of the United Kingdom, represented by stout cathedral structures and solemn rituals, tends to resemble a casino rather than a priestly haven of solemn judgment. It’s the justice of the punt, the throw of the dice, not the fairness of judicial deliberation, that prevails. That, at least, has been the prevailing view of Richard Ingrams, a co-founder of Britain’s rapier satirical publication Private Eye.
Since the decision by Home Secretary Yvette Cooper to ban Palestine Action in 2025, some 3,000 people have been arrested for doing such unthreatening things as holding placards with the following words: “I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.” Over 700 of these, according to Human Rights Watch, “are pending in the courts of England and Wales, with many more at the recharges stage.” This, in a country where free speech is said to be a verdant forest, and the right to protest a sacred right.
In the middle of last month, the Court of Appeal quashed the decision of the High Court regarding the proscription of Palestine Action which had been made under section 3 and schedule 2 of the Terrorism Act 2000. Palestine Action, described by their founders as “a direct-action protest group aimed at preventing military targets in the UK from facilitating gross abuses of international law,” had made its stock and trade targeting Israeli arms manufacturers such as Elbit Systems and businesses with links to the Israeli arms trade. The proscription followed the group’s break-in at RAF Brize Norton, where two aircraft were spray painted. In the proscribed list, which includes such violent luminaries as Boko Haram and Islamic State, Palestine Action is hysterically assessed as an entity that “prepares for terrorism” and “promotes and encourages terrorism.” Its attacks had included “targets affecting UK national security, and the impact on innocent members of the public.”
Co-founder of Palestine Action, Huda Ammori, challenged the lawfulness of the proscription in the High Court in November 2025, claiming, along with the intervening parties Liberty and Amnesty International UK, that it had involved a disproportionate use of counter-terrorism powers. Initially, Ammori scored a resounding success, all the more remarkable given the persistent record of courts in Britain to side with the national security apparatus.
The Divisional Court held in February 2026 in R (Ammori)v Secretary of State for the Home Department that the Home Secretary’s approach on proscription had failed to follow her own long-standing proscription policy. These involved five factors intended to constrain the office holder’s discretion. The resort to “other factors” would have to be read with that constraining purpose in mind.
The Court also found that a fair balance between the rights of individuals to free speech (Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights) and freedom of assembly under Article 11 of the ECHR as against the national security and protection of the rights of others (Articles 10.2 and 11.2 of the ECHR) had not been struck. In applying the test of proportionality to the decision the Court held that “the nature and scale of Palestine Action’s activities, so far as they [comprised] acts of terrorism, [had] not yet reached the level, scale and persistence that would justify the application of the criminal law measures that are a consequence of proscription, and the very significant interference with Convention rights consequent on those measures.”
The government of Sir Keir “Human Rights” Starmer was never going to let things stand, nor should not be forgotten that the High Court decision was hardly brimming with praise for the actions of Palestine Action. The definition of terrorism in UK counter-terrorism legislation is intentionally outrageous in its broadness, encompassing causing or threatening “serious damage to property” that would suggest an intention to influence government policy and advance a political case. The High Court did, at least, note that the act of proscription was based on 385 actions committed over 5 years, of which only three were deemed “terrorist incidents.”
Back to the casino of justice the case went. On June 15, the Court of Appeal handed down its quashing judgment. The national security state could again rejoice at this grand exhibition of judicial abdication before the alleged, and unfounded wisdom, of executive power. The judges found, for instance, that the Home Secretary had, in fact, conducted a proper evaluation of the rights issue in considering the banning of Palestine Action. This analysis was shallow at best, given the Home Secretary’s continual insistence that neither Article 10 nor 11 off the ECHR applied in the case. Article 17 of the Convention – the prohibition of an abuse of rights – was what counted in her mind.
The Court of Appeal went so far as to admit that the rights of those holding placards opposing genocide and supporting the Palestinian cause “may be affected by proscription, because they may be dissuaded by it from exercising their lawful individual rights to free speech and freedom of assembly.” The Home Secretary had been wrong to assume that Article 10 and 11 rights were not engaged, or that no test of proportionality was required. The court even conceded that the ban was “highly controversial” and possibly even “borderline.” But in their own assessment on proportionality, the judges felt reluctant to challenge the vast, self-evident wisdom of the executive, given that the Home Secretary was “invested with the statutory and constitutional authority to make proscription decisions to protect the public where national security is at stake.” It was not for the court to “take over the function of the primary decision-maker, least of all in a case such as this.” Such proscription decisions were part of national security, an area that no UK judges would have thought inappropriate to scrutinise before the Human Rights Act 1998. (How mothballed can judges be?)
The logic of this abysmal abdication before power was guided by the views of Lord Robert Reed made in the UK Supreme Court decision of ABJ, which was decided in February this year: “Although a strict approach is generally taken to restrictions on political speech, the European Court has recognised that states must enjoy a wider margin of appreciation when countering terrorism.” In a rather conflating, muddled manner, Lord Reed thought judicial supervision, be it by UK courts applying the Human Rights Act or the European court applying the ECHR, had “to respect the institutional expertise and constitutional legitimacy underlying the judgment made by those authorities by according them a correspondingly wide margin of appreciation.” This is what surrender by the wigged classes looks like.
The Court of Appeal also decided to make much of the fact that Palestine Action had committed three deemed “terrorist incidents” over three years, a mere 0.78% of its list of actions. With disapproval, they noted the organisation had not “disowned or condemned” such actions. It was therefore “permissible for the Home Secretary (and, therefore, is permissible for us), in considering Palestine Action’s characteristics and activities, not just its activities classified as terrorist.” The rationale for this bumbling reasoning was that proscription was preventative: the Home Secretary had to “assess the risk of future acts of terrorism. All of an organisation’s activities, such as recruitment, fundraising, radicalisation and all terrorist and non-terrorist activities may be relevant to that assessment.”
Veering off into the feral undergrowth of the bizarre, the appeals court also considered the allegedly more sinister nature of the group, mangling the history of British protest along the way. Its activities had been “planned and undertaken secretly with the objective of avoiding detection.” Its members had not shown “sincerity by accepting” the imposed penalties. But most of all, “on a fair analysis, Palestine Action has little or nothing in common with the suffragettes or the anti-apartheid or Iraq War protest groups.”
With this sort of fair analysis, one rooted in a distorted reading of history, a horrendous refusal to consider a flawed, executive assessment of protest activities, and a general concession to an anti-democratic temper, the only thing left to do is exactly what the suffragettes, anti-apartheid activists, and previous anti-war activists did: break the law with courage and clog the prisons with effect.
Poll shows many Danes worried about planned nuclear reactors at Barsebäck, near Copenhagen
Mon 29 Jun 2026 , https://swedenherald.com/article/poll-finds-many-danes-worried-about-new-nuclear-plant-plans-near-copenhagen
Plans to build new nuclear reactors at Barsebäck worry many Danes, according to an opinion poll conducted on behalf of the Ritzau news agency.
39.5 percent say they agree or completely agree when asked whether they are concerned about plans to locate reactors just over 20 kilometres from Copenhagen, according to a survey conducted by the Voxmeter institute. Almost as many, over 38 percent, believe the reactors should not be built.
Just over 1,000 people responded to the survey.
Earlier in June, Nordic Baseload Power submitted an application to the government for state aid to build two full-scale boiling water reactors of the BWR-N type at Barsebäck. However, Uniper, which owns Barsebäck, has stated that it does not plan to provide any land for the company’s plans.
EDF agrees to sell US, Canada unit to KKR
EDF, which owns and operates France’s nuclear fleet, must raise cash to maintain its 57 aging reactors and finance the construction of six new units.
By Reuter, June 27, 2026, https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/edf-signs-deal-sell-us-canada-unit-kkr-2026-06-26/
June 26 (Reuters) – EDF signed an agreement to sell EDF Power Solutions in the United States and Canada to private equity firm KKR, the company said on Friday.
KKR will acquire the operations and assets. In the U.S. and Canada, EDF Power Solutions operates 5.6 gigawatts of renewable assets.
EDF, which owns and operates France’s nuclear fleet, must raise cash to maintain its 57 aging reactors and finance the construction of six new units.
In November EDF CEO Bernard Fontana told Reuters the company was considering selling between 50% and 100% of its U.S. renewable unit, a deal that could value the business at nearly €4 billion ($4.56 billion).
EDF has developed 26 gigawatts of wind, solar and battery storage projects plus electric vehicle charging sites and has 17 GW under service contracts in North America, which includes a small amount in Canada and Mexico, according to its website.
($1 = 0.8773 euros)
Reporting by Margaux Perrin in Gdansk, Editing by Louise Heavens
All of our submarines are missing
Five nuclear-powered hunter-killers are
out of action leaving the Arctic front door wide open to Russia. None of
the Royal Navy’s attack submarines are currently at sea. A fleet of
nuclear-powered hunter-killers all tied up alongside or in dock, every one
of them, is a serious matter.
This is not the first time it’s happened
and last time it did, the Ministry of Defence trotted out the tired mantra
“we continue to meet all our operational tasks”. We do not. The
excellent Navy Lookout website has set out the position boat-by-boat. HMS
Audacious is only now leaving dry dock in Devonport in Plymouth; HMS Anson,
the only attack boat to have been to sea recently, is alongside after a
curtailed deployment to Australia; HMS Astute is undergoing a multi-year
refit; and Ambush and Artful have not sailed in years. The site described
the overall posture as “a disaster”.
Telegraph 27th June 2026, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/06/27/royal-navy-attack-submarines-absent-harbour-nuclear-missing/
Record heatwave cripples Europe’s energy supply as nuclear reactors are taken offline.
Europe’s brutal heatwave is closing schools and factories and claiming lives. Now, its nuclear power plants are shutting down.
Jamie Seidel, News.au 28th June 2026
Record heatwave cripples Europe’s energy supply as nuclear reactors are
taken offline. Europe’s brutal heatwave is closing schools and factories
and claiming lives. Now, its nuclear power plants are shutting down. France
has already shut down three of its nuclear reactors.
“The main pressure
comes from a triple squeeze: Cooling demand rises sharply, while power
plants and grids become less efficient, and some thermal and nuclear plants
must cut output because cooling water is too warm or scarce,” Simone
Tagliapietra, a researcher for the Bruegel think-tank, told the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Nuclear reactors require water
to keep their radioactive cores cool and contained. But the river water
feeding this process has become hot.
That reduces its cooling effect.
And the wastewater comes out even hotter. Which threatens to breach environmental safety limits.
Other French reactors are operating at reduced power. And more are being wound down as the heatwave lingers.
Blackouts are now a thing. The supply problem, explains MIT climate analyst Casey Crownhart, is being exacerbated by other nuclear reactors being offline.
Peak European electricity demand is traditionally during winter. That’s when everyone turns their electric heaters on. Summer is supposed to experience far less demand. So maintenance cycles and repairs are scheduled for the warmer months. Those months are now unexpectedly hot. Switzerland is experiencing the same problem. It says the output of its Beznau nuclear reactors have been reduced. They will be shut down if the extreme heat continues.
Heat isn’t only a problem for nuclear power plants………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
The French government is scrambling to respond to the reactor shutdown crisis. Emergency meetings are being held in stuffy offices. Similar meetings are happening across Europe.
Meanwhile, El Nino’s fallout is beginning to reach across Africa and Australia and into the Indian Ocean. https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/record-heatwave-cripples-europes-energy-supply-as-nuclear-reactors-are-taken-offline/news-story/5962d04f0b8268a57217dc7ab12f213e
Swiss nuclear power station shut down as river warms
The two Beznau nuclear reactors in Switzerland which are cooled by water from the river Aare, have been taken off grid due to the water overheating.
Swiss Info 26th June 2026, https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/energy-transition/the-river-cooled-beznau-nuclear-power-station-is-being-shut-down-the-aare-is-too-warm/91657359
The energy company Axpo announced the decision on Friday.
Axpo stated that the two reactors are currently in a shut-down state. The temperature of the river Aare reached 25 degrees Celcius, which does not allow sufficient cooling.
The output of the two reactors had already been reduced on Tuesday – most recently to 50%. According to Axpo, the temperature of the River Aare reached 25 degrees for the first time on Wednesday after the cooling water had been fully mixed.
Axpo indicated that if there was no prospect of the Aare cooling down, the reactors would be shut down completely on Friday. The two reactor units on the Aare island in Döttingen had already temporarily suspended electricity production in July 2025.
1 This Month
Shut down the radiation-damaged Heysham nuclear reactors now
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
-
Archives
- October 2026 (268)
- September 2026 (339)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
-
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
