nuclear-news

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

Russia’s Northern Fleet will not send nuclear sub to main Navy parade

Amid Baltic Sea NATO expansion and growing east-west mistrust, Russia has decided not to sail a nuclear-powered submarine from the Kola Peninsula to the annual high-profile naval parade taking place in St. Petersburg on July 30.

Barents Observer, By Thomas Nilsen, July 14, 2023

State-controlled TASS news agency quotes unnamed military officials confirming the non-appearance of Russia’s most potent naval assets.

“Nuclear submarines of the Northern Fleet will not take part in the Main Naval Parade 2023, unlike previous parades,” the new agency’s source said.

This is the first time since the current Navy Day format was established in 2017 that no nuclear subs from the Northern Fleet sail south to participate. ………………………………………………….

With Finland joining NATO in April and Sweden given the green light just ahead of this week’s NATO Summit in Vilnius, Russia is surrounded by NATO members in the Baltic Sea. Previous Northern Fleet subs at Naval Parade in St. Petersburg:

  • 2022: Akula Vepr, Yasen Severodvinsk and Borei Knyaz Vladimir
  • 2021: Oscar-II Orel and Akula Vepr
  • 2020: Oscar-II Orel
  • 2019: Oscar-II Smolensk
  • 2018: Oscar-II Orel
  • 2017: Typhoon Dmitry Donskoi

 https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/security/2023/07/northern-fleet-will-not-send-nuclear-sub-main-navy-parade—

July 17, 2023 Posted by | Russia, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Drone crashes in Russian ‘atomic city’ – governor

Rt.com 14 July 23

There were no injuries or damage to critical infrastructure resulting from the incident in Kurchatov, Roman Starovoyt says

A drone went down and exploded early on Friday in the Russian city of Kurchatov, an industrial hub adjacent to the Kursk Nuclear Power Plant, the governor of Kursk Region has said.

“Fortunately, none of the residents were hurt. Critical facilities weren’t damaged,” Roman Starovoyt wrote on his Telegram channel.

…….. Earlier, several Telegram channels reported a loud explosion in Kurchatov. Videos from the scene also captured locals finding what appear to be parts of a drone on the ground.

The city of Kurchatov is located in Kursk Region, which shares a border with Ukraine. It was founded in the late 1960s and named after physicist Sergey Kurchatov, dubbed the “father” of the Soviet atomic bomb.

The Kursk Nuclear Power Plant sits roughly 4 kilometers (2.4 miles) outside urban areas in Kurchatov. The Energotex company, which makes equipment for nuclear reactors, is also based in the city, home to 40,000 people.

A “powerful explosion” was also reported by local media overnight in the city of Voronezh, the capital of the region to the east of Kursk. ……………………………………… more https://www.rt.com/russia/579676-kurchatov-drone-attack-reports/

July 16, 2023 Posted by | Russia, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Daniel Kovalik: Why Russia’s intervention in Ukraine is legal under international law

One must begin this discussion by accepting the fact that there was already a war happening in Ukraine for the eight years preceding the Russian military incursion in February 2022. And, this war by the government in Kiev against the Russian-speaking peoples of the Donbass – a war which claimed the lives of around 14,000 people, many of them children, and displaced around 1.5 million more even before Russia’s military operation – has been arguably genocidal. That is, the government in Kiev, and especially its neo-Nazi battalions, carried out attacks against these peoples with the intention of destroying, at least in part, the ethnic Russians precisely because of their ethnicity.  

The argument can be made that Russia exercised its right for self-defense

10 July 23 https://www.rt.com/russia/554166-international-law-military-operation-ukraine/

Daniel Kovalik teaches International Human Rights at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, and is author of the recently-released book Nicaragua: A History of US Intervention & Resistance.

For many years, I have studied and given much thought to the UN Charter’s prohibition against aggressive war. No one can seriously doubt that the primary purpose of the document – drafted and agreed to on the heels of the horrors of WWII – was and is to prevent war and “to maintain international peace and security,” a phrase repeated throughout. 

As the Justices at Nuremberg correctly concluded, “To initiate a war of aggression … is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.” That is, war is the paramount crime because all of the evils we so abhor – genocide, crimes against humanity, etc. – are the terrible fruits of the tree of war.

In light of the above, I have spent my entire adult life opposing war and foreign intervention.  Of course, as an American, I have had ample occasion to do so given that the US is, as Martin Luther King stated, “the greatest purveyor of violence in the world.”  Similarly, Jimmy Carter recently stated that the US is “the most war-like nation in the history of the world.” This is demonstrably true, of course. In my lifetime alone, the US has waged aggressive and unprovoked wars against countries such as Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, the former Yugoslavia, Iraq (twice), Afghanistan, Libya, and Somalia. And this doesn’t even count the numerous proxy wars the US has fought via surrogates (e.g., through the Contras in Nicaragua, various jihadist groups in Syria, and through Saudi Arabia and the UAE in the ongoing war against Yemen).  

Indeed, through such wars, the US has done more, and intentionally so, than any nation on earth to undermine the legal pillars prohibiting war.  It is in reaction to this, and with the express desire to try to salvage what is left of the UN Charter’s legal prohibitions against aggressive war, that a number of nations, including Russia and China, founded the Group of Friends in Defense of the UN Charter. 

In short, for the US to complain about Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as a violation of international law is, at best, the pot calling the kettle black. Still, the fact that the US is so obviously hypocritical in this regard does not necessarily mean Washington is automatically wrong. In the end, we must analyze Russia’s conduct on its own merits.  

One must begin this discussion by accepting the fact that there was already a war happening in Ukraine for the eight years preceding the Russian military incursion in February 2022. And, this war by the government in Kiev against the Russian-speaking peoples of the Donbass – a war which claimed the lives of around 14,000 people, many of them children, and displaced around 1.5 million more even before Russia’s military operation – has been arguably genocidal. That is, the government in Kiev, and especially its neo-Nazi battalions, carried out attacks against these peoples with the intention of destroying, at least in part, the ethnic Russians precisely because of their ethnicity.  

While the US government and media are trying hard to obscure these facts, they are undeniable, and were indeed reported by the mainstream Western press before it became inconvenient to do so. Thus, a commentary run by Reuters in 2018 clearly sets out how the neo-Nazis battalions have been integrated into the official Ukrainian military and police forces, and are thus state, or at least quasi-state, actors for which the Ukrainian government bears legal responsibility. As the piece relates, there are 30-some right-wing extremist groups operating in Ukraine, that “have been formally integrated into Ukraine’s armed forces,” and that “the more extreme among these groups promote an intolerant and illiberal ideology… ”  

That is, they possess and promote hatred towards ethnic Russians, the Roma peoples, and members of the LGBT community as well, and they act out this hatred by attacking, killing, and displacing these peoples. The piece cites the Western human rights group Freedom House for the proposition that “an increase in patriotic discourse supporting Ukraine in its conflict with Russia has coincided with an apparent increase in both public hate speech, sometimes by public officials and magnified by the media, as well as violence towards vulnerable groups such as the LGBT community.” And this has been accompanied by actual violence. For example, “Azov and other militias have attacked anti-fascist demonstrations, city council meetings, media outlets, art exhibitions, foreign students and Roma.”  

As reported in Newsweek, Amnesty International had been reporting on these very same extremist hate groups and their accompanying violent activities as far back as 2014.

It is this very type of evidence – public hate speech combined with large-scale, systemic attacks on the targets of the speech – that has been used to convict individuals of genocide, for example in the Rwandan genocide case against Jean-Paul Akayesu. 

To add to this, there are well over 500,000 residents of the Donbass region of Ukraine who are also Russian citizens. While that estimate was made in April 2021, after Vladimir Putin’s 2019 decree simplified the process of obtaining Russian citizenship for residents of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, this means that Russian citizens were being subjected to racialized attack by neo-Nazi groups integrated into the government of Ukraine, and right on the border of Russia.  

And lest Russia was uncertain about the Ukrainian government’s intentions regarding the Russian ethnics in the Donbass, the government in Kiev passed new language laws in 2019 which made it clear that Russian speakers were at best second-class citizens. Indeed, the usually pro-West Human Rights Watch (HRW) expressed alarm about these laws. As the HRW explained in an early-2022 report which received nearly no coverage in the Western media, the government in Kiev passed legislation which “requires print media outlets registered in Ukraine to publish in Ukrainian. Publications in other languages must also be accompanied by a Ukrainian version, equivalent in content, volume, and method of printing. Additionally, places of distribution such as newsstands must have at least half their content in Ukrainian.”  

And, according to the HRW, “Article 25, regarding print media outlets, makes exceptions for certain minority languages, English, and official EU languages, but not for Russian” (emphasis added), the justification for that being “the century of oppression of … Ukrainian in favor of Russian.” As the HRW explained, “[t]here are concerns about whether guarantees for minority languages are sufficient. The Venice Commission, the Council of Europe’s top advisory body on constitutional matters, said that several of the law’s articles, including article 25, ‘failed to strike a fair balance’ between promoting the Ukrainian language and safeguarding minorities’ linguistic rights.” Such legislation only underscored the Ukrainian government’s desire to destroy the culture, if not the very existence, of the ethnic Russians in Ukraine.

Moreover, as the Organization of World Peace reported in 2021, “according to Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council Decree no. 117/2021, Ukraine has committed to putting all options on the table to taking back control over the Russian annexed Crimea region. Signed on March 24th, President Zelensky has committed the country to pursue strategies that . . . ‘will prepare and implement measures to ensure the de-occupation and reintegration of the peninsula.’” Given that the residents of Crimea, most of whom are ethnic Russians, are quite happy with the current state of affairs under Russian governance – this, according to a 2020 Washington Post report – Zelensky’s threat in this regard was not only a threat against Russia itself but was also a threat of potentially massive bloodshed against a people who do not want to go back to Ukraine.

Without more, this situation represents a much more compelling case for justifying Russian intervention under the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine which has been advocated by such Western ‘humanitarians’ as Hillary Clinton, Samantha Power, and Susan Rice, and which was relied upon to justify the NATO interventions in countries like the former Yugoslavia and Libya. And moreover, none of the states involved in these interventions could possibly make any claims of self-defense. This is especially the case for the United States, which has been sending forces thousands of miles away to drop bombs on far-flung lands.  

Indeed, this recalls to mind the words of the great Palestinian intellectual, Edward Said, who opined years ago in his influential work, ‘Culture and Imperialism’, that it is simply unfair to try to compare the empire-building of Russia with that of the West. As Dr. Said explained, “Russia … acquired its imperial territories almost exclusively by adjacence. Unlike Britain and France, which jumped thousands of miles beyond their own borders to other continents, Russia moved to swallow whatever land or peoples stood next to its borders … but in the English and French cases, the sheer distance of attractive territories summoned the projection of far-flung interest …” This observation is doubly applicable to the United States.

Still, there is more to consider regarding Russia’s claimed justifications for intervention. Thus, not only are there radical groups on its border attacking ethnic Russians, including Russian citizens, but also, these groups have reportedly been funded and trained by the United States with the very intention of destabilizing and undermining the territorial integrity of Russia itself.  

As Yahoo News! explained in a January 2022 article:

“The CIA is overseeing a secret intensive training program in the U.S. for elite Ukrainian special operations forces and other intelligence personnel, according to five former intelligence and national security officials familiar with the initiative. The program, which started in 2015, is based at an undisclosed facility in the Southern U.S., according to some of those officials.

The program has involved ‘very specific training on skills that would enhance’ the Ukrainians’ ‘ability to push back against the Russians,’ said the former senior intelligence official.

The training, which has included ‘tactical stuff,’ is ‘going to start looking pretty offensive if Russians invade Ukraine,’ said the former official.

One person familiar with the program put it more bluntly. ‘The United States is training an insurgency,’ said a former CIA official, adding that the program has taught the Ukrainians how ‘to kill Russians.’”

(emphasis added).  

To remove any doubt that the destabilization of Russia itself has been the goal of the US in these efforts, one should examine the very telling 2019 report of the Rand Corporation – a long-time defense contractor called upon to advise the US on how to carry out its policy goals. In this report, entitled, ‘Overextending and Unbalancing Russia, Assessing the Impact of Cost-Imposing Options’, one of the many tactics listed is “Providing lethal aid to Ukraine” in order to “exploit Russia’s greatest point of external vulnerability.”

In short, there is no doubt that Russia has been threatened, and in a quite profound way, with concrete destabilizing efforts by the US, NATO and their extremist surrogates in Ukraine.  Russia has been so threatened for a full eight years. And Russia has witnessed what such destabilizing efforts have meant for other countries, from Iraq to Afghanistan to Syria to Libya – that is, nearly a total annihilation of the country as a functioning nation-state.  

It is hard to conceive of a more pressing case for the need to act in defense of the nation. While the UN Charter prohibits unilateral acts of war, it also provides, in Article 51, that “[n]othing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense… ”  And this right of self-defense has been interpreted to permit countries to respond, not only to actual armed attacks, but also to the threat of imminent attack.  

In light of the above, it is my assessment that this right has been triggered in the instant case, and that Russia had a right to act in its own self-defense by intervening in Ukraine, which had become a proxy of the US and NATO for an assault – not only on Russian ethnics within Ukraine – but also upon Russia itself. A contrary conclusion would simply ignore the dire realities facing Russia.

July 10, 2023 Posted by | Legal, Reference, Russia | Leave a comment

‘Kiev inflating regional conflict into World War III’, Russian envoy warns US

Hindustan Times, By Prapti Upadhayay, Jul 07, 2023 

Russian Ambassador Anatoly Antonov denies involvement in false-flag provocation at Ukraine’s nuclear plant, warns of grave consequences.

Russia’s ambassador to the United States, Anatoly Antonov, has vehemently dismissed media reports suggesting Moscow’s involvement in a false-flag provocation at Ukraine’s largest nuclear power plant. In an exclusive interview with Newsweek, Ambassador Antonov alleged that Ukraine was using this narrative to draw NATO into a devastating conflict, cautioning against the grave repercussions that such a situation could entail.

We call on the curators of the Kiev regime to exercise responsibility and exert influence on their ‘wards’ in order to avoid a large-scale catastrophe, Antonov told Newsweek. He further emphasized that the failures of the Ukrainian counter offensive were driving them to create a pretext for NATO deployment, potentially inflating a regional conflict into World War III……………………………………… more https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/kiev-inflating-regional-conflict-into-world-war-iii-russian-envoy-warns-us-101688712799513.html—

July 10, 2023 Posted by | Russia, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Russian K-278 sub sank 30 years ago but continues to leak radiation

By Boyko Nikolov On Jul 7, 2023  https://bulgarianmilitary.com/2023/07/07/russian-k-278-sub-sank-30-years-ago-but-continues-to-leak-radiation/

Imagine a Russian nuclear submarine, resting at the bottom of the Arctic sea for over 30 years, still leaking radiation. It may sound like a plot from a sci-fi movie, but according to Norwegian researchers, this is indeed reality. 

For several years, a joint team of Russian and Norwegian scientists has been investigating this phenomenon. They found that the water around the K-278 Komsomolets submarine is 100,000 times more radioactive than uncontaminated water. The results of their research revealed in 2019, raise alarming questions about the potential short and long-term effects of radioactive water surrounding the vessel beneath the Barents Sea. 

An essay in The Drive from 2019 suggests that the submarine may now be actively leaking radiation. This could be from its reactor or a pair of nuclear-armed torpedoes, both having remained submerged in the Barents Sea for over three decades. 

The researchers collected samples from 5,500 feet below the sea surface, around 100 miles southwest of Norway’s Bear Island. This incident, and its potential long-term effects, highlight the importance of managing and disposing of radioactive material responsibly. This is even more crucial given the current geopolitical tensions between the US and Russia. 

The submarine, known as Soviet Project 685, is believed to be leaking radiation either from its reactor or from its nuclear-armed torpedoes. This leakage is likely due to the submarine’s prolonged stay at the bottom of the Barents Sea. 

The contaminated water was collected by the Egir 600, a Norwegian-designed remotely operated submersible. The research was carried out by Norway’s Institute of Marine Research and Norway’s University of Bergen. 

One of the samples showed a significantly elevated radiation level. While the findings were preliminary, researchers stressed the need for continued monitoring of the sunken submarine. The ongoing analysis likely examines the extent of potential contamination and its possible impact on wildlife, ships, and coastal regions. The currents, water flow, and concentrations of radioactive material were probably scrutinized to minimize damage and contamination. 

In conclusion, a plan was likely set in motion to mitigate the leakage of radioactive materials. Perhaps the nuclear-armed torpedoes were safely removed, or the contaminated materials were disposed of in a manner that would prevent any further leakage.

July 9, 2023 Posted by | oceans, radiation, Russia | Leave a comment

War can be ended quickly either through peace treaty or nuclear weapons: Top Russian official

Deputy head of Security Council, ex-president says war in Ukraine will be over in days if NATO stops supplying weapons to Kyiv

Elena Teslova  |05.07.2023  https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/war-can-be-ended-quickly-either-through-peace-treaty-or-nuclear-weapons-top-russian-official/2937713

Any war can be ended quickly either through signing a peace treaty or using nuclear weapons, deputy head of the Russian Security Council Dmitry Medvedev said on Wednesday.

In an interview with Russian state-run TASS news agency, Medvedev said Japan capitulated after the US dropped nuclear bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

“In general, any war, even a world war, can be ended very quickly. Either if a peace treaty is signed, or if you do what the Americans did in 1945, when they used their nuclear weapons and bombed two Japanese cities Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They (the Japanese army), indeed, then curtailed the military campaign. The price is the life of almost 300,000 civilians,” he said.

As for the Russian “special military operation” in Ukraine, it will be over in days if NATO stops supplying Kyiv with weapons, the official claimed.

If NATO, the US, and their vassals stopped supplying weapons and means of destruction to Ukraine, then the special military operation would be completed in just a few months, and if they stop supplying their weapons now, then their military operation will be over in a few days,” he said.

Medvedev, who served as the Russian president from 2008-2012, also praised the Russian army, calling it “heroic.”

July 7, 2023 Posted by | Russia, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Russia and Ukraine step up rhetoric around Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant

By Euronews Digital   05/07/2023  https://www.euronews.com/2023/07/05/russia-and-ukraine-step-up-rhetoric-around-zaporizhzhia-nuclear-power-plant

President Zelenskyy and other senior Ukrainian officials have intensified warnings that Russian forces plan to sabotage the Zaporizhzhia power plant, the largest nuclear facility in Europe.

Russian and Ukrainian officials have escalated the rhetoric surrounding the situation at the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant.

The plant has been under Russian control since the early days of the full-scale invasion in 2022. All six reactors have since been shut down.

The Ukrainian Armed Forces are now warning of a “possible provocation in the near future” saying “items similar to explosive devices were placed on the external roof of the third and fourth power units of ZNPP.”

A few days earlier, Ukraine’s military intelligence directorate claimed that Moscow had approved a plan to blow up the station and has mined four out of six power units, as well as the cooling pond. 

July 6, 2023 Posted by | politics international, Russia, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Key moments of aborted Wagner revolt in Russia

 https://www.rt.com/russia/578650-recap-failed-coup-wagner/ 25 June 23

RT breaks down how the private military company’s attempted rebellion unfolded

The Wagner private military company led by Evgeny Prigozhin launched an insurrection in Russia that began on Friday evening and lasted through Saturday.

The armed contractors managed to seize an army headquarters in the southern part of the country.

However, they failed to rally other units and eventually aborted their advance towards Moscow after a deal was reached with the authorities.

The agreement, which includes an amnesty for Prigozhin, was brokered by Belarusian leader, Aleksandr Lukashenko.

Simmering Wagner-MOD tensions

The private military company Wagner Group was founded by restaurateur and catering tycoon Evgeny Prigozhin. The group’s members fought alongside regular Russian troops and distinguished themselves in the bloody battle for the Donbass city of Artyomovsk, known to Ukrainians as Bakhmut.
Prigozhin is a vocal critic of the country’s top military brass. He has publicly accused Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu and General Valery Gerasimov, the Chief of the General Staff, of mishandling the military operation in Ukraine. Prigozhin has also refused to sign an official contract with the Russian Defense Ministry. 

Prigozhin begins ‘march on Moscow’

Late on Friday, Prigozhin accused the Russian military of striking Wagner’s field camps. The MOD quickly rejected his claim as “informational provocation.” Nevertheless, Prigozhin announced that his forces were beginning a “march for justice” with a plan to reach Moscow. 
In the early hours of Saturday, an armored Wagner convoy, which included tanks, rolled into the southern city of Rostov-on-Don. In the city, Wagner members took control of the headquarters of the Southern Military District without a fight. Several gunshots were heard in Rostov later during the day, but no casualties were reported.

Putin condemns revolt 

Shortly after Prigozhin declared his “march,” the Federal Security Service accused the Wagner boss of inciting an armed rebellion and opened a criminal case against him. In a video address on Saturday morning, President Vladimir Putin said Wagner’s actions were tantamount to treason, describing them as the “backstabbing of our country and our people.” He called for unity and stated that all necessary steps were being taken to restore order.

Meanwhile, counter-terrorism measures were enacted in Moscow and the surrounding Moscow Region. All public events were canceled in several cities, and traffic along major highways leading to Moscow was suspended.
Meanwhile, Prigozhin’s endeavor failed to attract support from other military units. On the contrary, several high-profile commanders and officials called on Wagner to lay down their arms.

Mutinous unit turns back after deal reached

On Saturday evening, Belarusian President Aleksandr Lukashenko, who had spoken to Prigozhin on Putin’s behalf, said the Wagner boss agreed to end his attempted insurrection in exchange for security guarantees. Prigozhin stated hours later that the Wagner convoys were halting their advance towards Moscow and returning to their bases. After some time, the regional authorities confirmed that Wagner fighters had left Rostov-on-Don.
The Kremlin said that, in order to avoid bloodshed, the case against Prigozhin would be dropped, and that he would “leave for Belarus.” Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov added that Wagner members would not be prosecuted due to “their achievements on the frontline” in Ukraine.

June 26, 2023 Posted by | Russia, weapons and war | 1 Comment

Russia asks IAEA to ensure Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant security

Reuters, June 23, 2023  https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-asks-iaea-ensure-zaporizhzhia-nuclear-plant-security-2023-06-23/

June 23 (Reuters) – Russia urged the International Atomic Energy Agency on Friday to ensure Ukraine does not shell the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, saying it was otherwise operating safely.

Alexei Likhachev, chief executive of the Russian state nuclear energy firm Rosatom, made the comments at a meeting with IAEA chief Rafael Grossi in the Russian city of Kaliningrad, Rosatom said in a statement, after Grossi visited the plant last week.

“We expect concrete steps from the IAEA aimed at preventing strikes by the Armed Forces of Ukraine, both on the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant and on adjacent territory and critical infrastructure facilities,” Rosatom quoted its chief as saying in a statement.

The IAEA said this week that the power plant was “grappling with … water-related challenges” after the destruction of the Kakhovka dam emptied the vast reservoir on whose southern bank the plant sits.

It also said the military situation in the area had become increasingly tense as Kyiv began a counteroffensive against the Russian forces that have seized control of swathes of eastern and southern Ukraine.

Moscow and Kyiv have regularly accused each other of shelling Europe’s largest nuclear power station, with its six offline reactors. International efforts to establish a demilitarised zone around it have so far failed.

Ukraine this week accused Russia of planning a “terrorist” attack at the plant involving the release of radiation, while Moscow on Friday detained five people who it said were planning to smuggle radioactive caesium-137 at the request of a Ukrainian buyer in order to stage a nuclear incident.

Reporting by Reuters; Editing by Kevin Liffey

June 24, 2023 Posted by | Russia, safety | Leave a comment

Is Russia planning to use nuclear weapons?

 https://www.sbs.com.au/news/podcast-episode/is-russia-planning-to-use-nuclear-weapons/7vcas0f5l 23 June 23

President Vladimir Putin has announced the imminent deployment of Russia’s advanced Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missiles, capable of carrying multiple nuclear warheads.

This comes as Russia’s defence head says intelligence indicates Ukraine is planning to strike the annexed territories including Crimea.

Ukraine has warned Russians to flee from the occupied territories as Russia warns any strike on Crimea will be met with strikes at the centre of Ukraine’s leadership

June 24, 2023 Posted by | Russia, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Putin warns NATO over being drawn into Ukraine war

By Zahid Mahmood, CNN, June 17, 2023

Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned there is a “serious danger” of NATO being drawn further into the Ukraine war if members of the alliance continue to supply military weaponry to Kyiv.

“NATO, of course, is being drawn into the war in Ukraine, what are we talking here,” Putin said at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum on Friday.

“The supplies of heavy military weaponry to Ukraine are ongoing, they are now looking into giving Ukraine the jets.”

The comment appeared to be a reference to the F-16 fighter jets some members of the NATO alliance are making plans to supply Ukraine with.

NATO, or the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, was formed in the aftermath of World War II to defend Western nations from the Soviet Union [despite USSR being their ally in WW2 !]and the alliance contains a mutual defense clause where an attack on any one member is considered an attack on all. While Ukraine is not a member of NATO, some NATO members have been supplying Kyiv with tanks, armored vehicles and other weaponry – prompting threats of retaliation from Russia.

German Leopard 2 tanks, British Challenger 2 tanks and American Bradley and Stryker vehicles are among the Western equipment that has been sent to Ukraine.

In late April, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said that NATO allies and partners had delivered more than 1,500 vehicles and 230 tanks to the country.

During his speech in St. Petersburg, Putin said Russia had destroyed tanks “including Leopards” at the front lines.

“And if they are based abroad, but used in fighting we’ll see how to hit them, and where we can hit those means that are used against us in fighting,” Putin said.

“This is a serious danger of further drawing NATO into this military conflict,” he added………………………….. https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/17/europe/nato-danger-ukraine-war-putin-intl-hnk/index.html

June 20, 2023 Posted by | politics international, Russia, weapons and war | Leave a comment

USSR Sprinkled More Than 2,500 Nuclear Generators Across The Countryside

Hundreds of these tiny atomic terrors are still unaccounted for in the rugged landscape of the former Soviet Union.

By Erin Marquis, 16 June 23, https://jalopnik.com/ussr-sprinkled-more-than-2-500-nuclear-generators-acros-1850501190

Ah, the USSR. It was a strange place with strange ideas. Ideas such as planting unprotected mini nuclear power sources into inhospitable and hard-to-reach areas. I mean, nothing should go wrong as long as the government always exists to maintain them, right?

Welcome to the world of Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators or RTGs. It’s a piece of nuclear history I only recently learned about and thought I should bring this whole new horror to your attention as well. These things are just kind of rolling around famously stable Russia, and it seems like it should be a cause for concern.

RTGs are not nuclear reactors, nor are they “nuclear batteries.” Rather they work by converting the heat caused by radioactive decay into electricity. Due to the dangerous nature of the materials used however, countries like America only use RTGs in applications such as space exploration. Voyager, Cassini and New Horizons uses RTGs for power, as do the Mars rovers Perseverance and Curiosity. These probes however, use expensive plutonium-238 as their power sources and we launch them far the hell away from us.

The USSR though? Nah. It’s going to use super cheap, super radioactive Strontium-90 instead, though later, smaller RTGs used equally cheap Caesium-137 or Cerium-144. These three isotopes all have one thing in common; they’re all the products of spent nuclear fission. In other words, waste. The terrestrial Beta-M RTG is about 1.5 meters wide and 1.5 meters tall and weight about one metric ton, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency. The entire unit put out about between 1 and 1000 watts (quite the spread) and had a working life of 10 to 20 years.

Originally built by the USSR’s Navy to power lighthouses and radio navigation beacons along Russia’s expansive arctic coastline, the RTGs provided power hundreds or even thousands of miles from civilization, occasionally completely unprotected and always unsupervised. They were occasionally secured by metal frames or sheds, but sometimes these lighthouses and radio beacons were set up on little more than rough structures hastily constructed out of nearby timber with the RTG stuck outside to face the harsh arctic elements. While the USSR provided regular rolling patrols to maintain the RTGs, that came to a screeching halt in 1991 when the Soviet Union fell. After that, there was no money to maintain the hard-to-reach RTGs, and they became victims of neglect and metal thieves.

After it proved useful for the Navy, the Soviets put the RTGs into service in other rough terrains. That’s how several ended up in the mountains of the former Soviet state of Georgia. Three residents from the village of Lia, Georgia, found a canister high up in the mountains. Since this strange material gave off heat, the three used it to stay warm overnight, but they woke up vomiting and dizzy. A week later, a military hospital diagnosed the three with radiation sickness. Two of the men would make it out with the help of dozens of skin grafts and months in the hospital. But the man who slept closest to the radioisotope source and handled it the most could not be saved.

Their arrival at the hospital launched a mad scramble from the international atomic community to find the orphan source of radiation. Footage of the clean-up crew both training for retrieval and actually snaring the Strontium-90 core shows just how dangerous RTGs are:

That wasn’t the only incident involving RTGs however. In 2001, scrappers broke into a lighthouse on Kandalashka Bay and stole three radioisotope sources (all three were recovered and sent to Moscow). Three men in the mountains of Georgia were also exposed in 2002 after stumbling upon cores left out in the woods. In 2003, scrappers hurled a core into the Baltic Sea, where a team of experts retrieved it.

June 18, 2023 Posted by | environment, Russia, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, wastes | 1 Comment

Why Russia must not take the Western bait, to use nuclear weapons in the Ukraine war

 Western commentators ………… actively urging Moscow to break the taboo of proactive nuclear use. ………to put Russia in a position of moral equality with the US, which was the first and only country in the world to use atomic weapons on the battlefield. 

One should not think about turning Poland into a nuclear wasteland (i.e. akin to beheading an irrational child for occasionally breaking your front window), but rather about creating a world order in which the very idea of using military force and politico-military pressure to impose a so-called “rules-based order” becomes impossible and universally condemned.

Ilya Fabrichnikov: Why I disagree with the call for Russia to use its nuclear weapons against the West.

Sergey Karaganov’s call for a preemptive strike has unleashed a major debate, but I don’t agree that we should take NATO’s bait 

By Ilya Fabrichnikov, member of the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy and a communications advisor,  https://www.rt.com/russia/578165-russia-shouldnt-use-nuclear-weapon/  16 June 23,

This is a response to Sergey Karaganov’s article ‘By using its nuclear weapons, Russia could save humanity from a global catastrophe.’ 

The respected Sergey Karaganov, in his widely discussed article, suggests that we should stop haggling with the collective West, which is pumping modern weapons into the Ukrainian armed forces, and start moving quickly up the ladder of atomic escalation. All the while, he believes we must demonstrate our readiness to launch a “pre-emptive defensive nuclear strike” on the territory of one of the Western European countries, who are the sponsors of the Kiev leadership.

We seem to be talking about Poland. If such an escalation would not force European leaders to come to their senses then it would be necessary to strike at a “group of countries.”

The Russian nuclear doctrine is enshrined in the ‘Foundations of State Policy of the Russian Federation in the Area of Nuclear Deterrence’ as of June 2, 2020. It states very clearly: “The Russian Federation views nuclear weapons exclusively as a means of deterrence, the use of which is an extreme and compelled measure, and is making all the necessary efforts to reduce the nuclear threat and not allow an aggravation in interstate relations which could provoke military conflicts, including nuclear ones. The Russian Federation is prepared to use nuclear weapons in four scenarios (or a combination of them): 

a) [if it has] credible information about the launch of ballistic missiles to attack the territory of the Russian Federation and/or its allies; 

b) an enemy’s use of nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction on the territory of the Russian Federation and/or its allies; 

c) an enemy strike on critical state or military facilities of the Russian Federation, the deactivation of which would disrupt the response actions of the nuclear forces; 

d) aggression against the Russian Federation using conventional weapons, where the very existence of the state is threatened.” 

At this point, none of the scenarios under which the Russian president could order the use of nuclear weapons are even in the early stages of becoming possible. Nevertheless, there are clear contours of a verbal escalation from the West that has not yet been matched by a symmetrical response from Russian officials. So far, this verbal escalation has been an informational confrontation aimed at probing a purely psychological reaction from the main decision-maker on the use of nuclear weapons – President Vladimir Putin. There are no other individuals in the country with responsibility for the use of strategic weapons – they are not provided for in the Constitution, relevant regulations or presidential decrees. 

It should be stressed that Russia’s “nuclear doctrine” was developed under conditions where Western countries had been making constant attacks on our core national interests and was about indicating our readiness and ability to defend ourselves. In this sense, it is unambiguous and not open to broad interpretations, but calibrated and practical. 

Speaking of verbal escalation, we are not even referring to a recent proposal from a former American official of comparatively low rank, Michael Rubin (now of the American Enterprise Institute) in which he proposed handing over tactical nuclear weapons to Ukraine. We are also not talking about a hypothetical US willingness to transfer F-16 Block 40/42 aircraft to the Ukrainian armed forces, some of which can be adapted to use B-61 freefall nuclear bombs. 

In reality, this is all part of an information campaign in the Western European and – to some extent – American media that had gained considerable momentum by the middle of last year. Western commentators actively and imperatively speculated about when, not if, Russia would finally use its tactical nuclear capability against Kiev. In doing so, they were actively urging Moscow to break the taboo of proactive nuclear use. 

The goal of this information campaign is clear: to provoke a public backlash, not only from the Russian media or expert community, but also to put psychological pressure on Russia’s foreign policy decision makers to lower the threshold of susceptibility to such decisions. In other words, to put Russia in a position of moral equality with the US, which was the first and only country in the world to use atomic weapons on the battlefield. 

So far, this task has not been achieved and the Russian leadership’s approach to the use of our national nuclear capabilities has remained reliably constrained by doctrinal frameworks, a pragmatic view of the issue from the president, and a responsible attitude to questions of military escalation. 

It is not simply that, but according to some estimates – including those of senior Russian diplomats and other practitioners of international relations – a limited and preventive nuclear strike by Russia (e.g. against Poland) wouldn’t provoke a similar response from the US and its satellites. Rather, it’s about the fact that lowering the threshold for the use of atomic weapons and their use against non-nuclear states, however vehemently anti-Russian their policies and agendas may be, will not lead to the appeasement of the Western world. Rather it would lead to an increased possibility of the use of nuclear weapons by countries outside the big nuclear club such as Pakistan, India, Israel and North Korea. Simply because it could irreversibly become the norm in politico-military confrontation. 

Moreover, by arguing in practical terms for a proactive, preventive nuclear strike in self-defense “for all the evil they have done to us, for all the good we can achieve,” we would be playing by the rules that have been imposed on us. Instead, we should be consistently, through pragmatic politico-military actions, demonstrating the flawed nature of those very rules and, in the not too distant future, dismantling them altogether – together with other responsible actors in the international community. 

One should not think about turning Poland into a nuclear wasteland (i.e. akin to beheading an irrational child for occasionally breaking your front window), but rather about creating a world order in which the very idea of using military force and politico-military pressure to impose a so-called “rules-based order” becomes impossible and universally condemned. 

On the other hand, Russia has made it clear to its Western European and American interlocutors that if conventional Western forces are used directly against Russian troops on the ground (e.g. if Polish soldiers openly come into contact with our combat ranks in the event of Polish units occupying territory in western Ukraine, attempting to invade Kaliningrad, or carrying out military actions against Belarus), the national doctrine of nuclear deterrence will be enacted in full compliance with the spirit and letter of Russian law. Reading it carefully is a good and necessary exercise for the relevant NATO politico-military planning authorities. And in this case, no one will think twice as it is clear and well-defined. 

Paradoxical as it may seem, the NATO states are now demonstrably proactive in the delicate and error-prone business of escalation. And Russia’s foreign policy leadership seems to have reacted belatedly to these initiatives. In fact, the Western bloc’s demonstrative restlessness only confirms the loss of initiative, and haste always leads to dramatic miscalculations. 

We should not deprive our foreign “partners” of the privilege of making all the mistakes they are trying to program us to make. Instead, we should be conducting sophisticated and multidimensional moral-psychological operations, including through the English-language media space they control, aimed at undermining their reserve and willingness to keep going for the long haul. 

June 17, 2023 Posted by | Russia, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Tit For Tat: Putin says Russia will use depleted uranium against Ukraine if necessary

Don’t you get sick of the belligerent boys and their diabolical toys?

Tuqa Khalid, Al Arabiya English, 14 June 23

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday that Russia will use weapons with depleted uranium if necessary in response to reports of the US supplying such weapons to Ukraine.

“We have a lot of such ammunition, with depleted uranium, and if they [the Armed Forces of Ukraine] use them, we also reserve the right to use the same ammunition,” Putin said as cited by state news agency TASS.

He added during a meeting with war correspondents that Russia has a lot of ammunition with depleted uranium, but so far they were not being used.

Putin’s statement comes after a report by the Wall Street Journal reported that US President Joe Biden’s administration is predicted to supply Ukraine with depleted-uranium rounds to arm the Abrams tanks being provided by the US. The Pentagon has advocated for the use of these rounds, which are frequently utilized by the US Army and are notably potent against Russian tanks…………. more https://english.alarabiya.net/News/world/2023/06/13/Putin-says-Russia-will-use-depleted-uranium-against-Ukraine-if-necessary

June 16, 2023 Posted by | depleted uranium, Russia | Leave a comment

Egypt joining IAEA’s Convention on Nuclear Safety, as Russia successfully markets its nuclear industry to Egypt

“……………………… by joining IAEA’s convention on peaceful nuclear safety, Egypt took another step towards implementing its nuclear power programme.

“Egypt has gone a long way towards implementing its first nuclear power plant at El-Dabaa, 320 kilometres northwest of Cairo,” said Awadallah, adding that the plant will have four nuclear reactors that will begin operating between 2028 and 2030.

He noted that these reactors, which generate energy for peaceful purposes, are designed in collaboration with Russia’s state-owned nuclear engineering company, Rosatom, with a capacity of 1.2 GW each.

The construction of the first three reactors has already begun after obtaining approval from the Egyptian Nuclear and Radiological Regulatory Authority (ENRRA).

On 19 November 2015, Egypt and Russia signed an agreement under which Russia will build and finance Egypt’s first nuclear power plant.

The preliminary contracts for constructing the four nuclear reactors were signed, in December 2017, in the presence of Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The state-owned Rosatom will build the plant and supply Russian nuclear fuel for its entire life cycle.

Russia will finance 85 percent of the cost with a loan of $25 billion, while Egypt will provide the remaining 15 percent in the form of instalments. The Russian loan is repaid over 22 years, with an annual interest of three percent……………………….

The presidential decree on Egypt joining IAEA’s convention on nuclear safety will be submitted for a final vote when Egypt’s parliament – the House of Representatives – reconvenes next Tuesday, 20 June.

June 16, 2023 Posted by | Egypt, marketing, Russia | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »