nuclear-news

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

Experts: Full nuclear weapons tests would backfire on US

Defense News, By Stephen Losey, 6 Nov 25,

Resuming full testing of nuclear weapons — as President Donald Trump called for last week — would be unnecessary, costly, undermine nonproliferation efforts, and empower the nation’s adversaries to use their own tests as intimidation, expertstold Defense News.

Trump’s unexpected announcement, which came in the form of an Oct. 29 social media post, surprised many nuclear specialists — and sparked concerns that the UnitedStates may end its 33-year moratorium on nuclear weapons testing.

“Because of other countries testing programs, I have instructed the Department of War to start testing our Nuclear Weapons on an equal basis,” Trump posted on TruthSocial.

“That process will begin immediately,” he wrote.

When asked for comment about nuclear testing plans, the Pentagon’s public affairs office pointed to an Oct. 31 video of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth in Malaysia, in which he said testing nuclear weapons is a responsible way to ensure the country has “the strongest, most capable nuclear arsenal so that we maintain peace through strength.”

“The president was clear: We need to have a credible nuclear deterrent,” Hegseth said, “That is the baseline of our deterrence.

“Having understanding and resuming testing is a pretty responsible — very responsible — way to do that. I think it makes nuclear conflict less likely, if you know what you have and make sure it operates properly,” he said.

Hegseth also said the military would work with the Energy Department on this testing.

Energy Secretary Chris Wright said on Fox News Nov. 2 that tests focusing on the subsystems of new nuclear weapons are already in the works, but he said the tests would not result in a full nuclear detonation………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

“The U.S. had conducted over 1,000 nuclear tests,” Erath said Monday in an interview with Defense News. “We had all the data necessary to know how nuclear weapons work, to verify that U.S. nuclear weapons would work, and other people didn’t. So by stopping testing when we did, we sort of locked in an advantage in knowledge that persists to this day.”

Since then, U.S. nuclear testing has relied on computer simulations designed to predict how a weapon would respond if triggered.

Wright said on Fox News that the United States’ advanced laboratories and computing power devoted to nuclear weapons provide a major advantage over other nations.

“We can simulate incredibly accurately exactly what will happen in a nuclear explosion,” Wright said. “And we can do that because in the ’60s, ‘70s and ‘80s, we did nuclear test explosions. We had them detailedly instrumented, and we measured exactly what happened. Now we simulate what were the conditions that delivered that, and as we change bomb designs, what will they deliver?”

Hans Kristensen, director of the nuclear information project at the Federation of American Scientists, speaking Monday to Defense News, pointed to the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s National Ignition Facility in California as an example of the kind of state-of-the-art facilities that the U.S. developed for safe nuclear testing purposes……………………………………………………………………………

As the government modernizes and extends the life of aging weapons in its nuclear stockpile, through efforts such as the W80-4 life extension program, it uses experiments at places such as the NIF to determine whether the weapons will still react properly if used.

Those simulation capabilities obviate the need for any testing of existing, upgraded, or new weapons,Kristensen said.

“It’s just a fundamentally different situation for the United States,” he said.

The U.S. now is modernizing its nuclear forces by creating a new gravity bomb, the B61-13, and new warheads to go on the upcoming LGM-35A Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile and the Trident II D5 missile.

Part of that work will involve tests of the warheads’ critical subsystems, Erath said.

He said, though, that is it not necessary to go through the entire process and trigger the nuclear reactions that create devastating blasts to know whether the weapon will work.

“What happens after the plutonium goes critical is well known,” Erath said, “So you don’t need to do an explosive mushroom cloud-and-crater kind of nuclear test.

“You can do the smaller-scale subcritical testing, and that has been happening.”

Rattling a house of dynamite?

If the United States shatters the taboo against nuclear tests it helped create, other nations are sure to follow with their own tests, Erath said. Once that happens and they start to gather more detailed information on their own nuclear devices, he said, they will start to catch up to America…………

In an interview with 60 Minutes that aired Sunday, Trump claimed without evidence that China and Russia have conducted clandestine nuclear weapons tests deep underground……………………………………………………………………………………………………

If the U.S. government were to proceed with full tests that explode nuclear weapons, Erath said, it would likely happen underground. That would minimize the environmental impact, he said, but not eliminate it entirely, because leaks can happen.

The diplomatic consequences and harm to nonproliferation efforts would be far more severe, Erath said. The United States would likely receive a storm of condemnation from other nations, he said.

With the global moratorium on nuclear weapons testing broken, Erath said, nations such as Russia, China, North Korea, India and Pakistan would likely follow Washington’s example…………………………………………………………..

“This kind of confusion and uncertainty undermines U.S. credibility with its allies,” Kristensen said. “They need to know if they can trust U.S. policies. … If the U.S. president now begins to signal that he’s interested in [nuclear testing] in some shape or form … it’s going to add to the pool of uncertainties [allies] have about what kind of partner the United States is now, and will be in the future.”…………………………………………………

Digging a hole deep enough for a nuclear bomb test would take months, Kristensen said — and finding the right digging equipment would be another challenge, since not many organizations have needed to dig such holes in the desert for a long time. Once the nuclear device is in there, it has to be sealed properly with materials such as gravel and concrete to keep radioactive materials from venting.

“They would have to build a whole tower over the hole in which they have this instrument package that would be lowered in there,” Kristensen said. “Those instruments would have to be designed by the nuclear laboratories to be able to do what it is that they want to record. There’s so many levels of this that have to fall into place.” https://www.defensenews.com/global/the-americas/2025/11/05/experts-full-nuclear-weapons-tests-would-backfire-on-us/

About Stephen Losey

Stephen Losey is the air warfare reporter for Defense News. He previously covered leadership and personnel issues at Air Force Times, and the Pentagon, special operations and air warfare at Military.com. He has traveled to the Middle East to cover U.S. Air Force operations.

November 10, 2025 Posted by | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Radioactive waste from Canada would be buried in Utah under EnergySolutions proposal.

The company wants to import more than 1 million cubic yards of low-level radioactive waste from Canada to its facility in Utah’s West Desert.

Salt Lake Tribune, By  Leia Larsen  and  Jordan Miller, Nov. 8, 2025

A Utah company wants to import massive amountsof Canadian radioactive waste to a facility less than 100 miles from the state’s largest population center.

EnergySolutions seeks to transport up to 1.3 million cubic yards of low-level radioactive and mixed waste — enough to fill roughly 400 Olympic-sized swimming pools — from Ontario, Canada, to its Clive facility in Tooele County,it confirmed in a statement Thursday. The international nuclear services company is headquartered in Salt Lake City.

Its proposal, if approved, would mark the first time Utah allows foreign radioactive waste to be stored within state boundaries.

The company currently accepts low-level radioactive and other hazardous waste from across the nation at the Clive site for burial, which opened in 1988.

The request is under consideration by the Northwest Interstate Compact on Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management, which manages the disposal of such waste in Utah and seven other states. At least six states must approve the proposal, and Utah can veto it.

EnergySolutions says it will ask Utah regulators for permission to expand its storage capacity to accept the waste from Canada and shipments from across the U.S. The company expects to pay $30 million under a new tax imposed by the state Legislature in order to generate money for Gov. Spencer Cox’s Operation Gigawatt — his initiative to double energy production in Utah over the next decade…………………………………………………………………..

What kind of radioactive waste could come to Utah?

……………………..Typical low-level radioactive materials include contaminatedprotective clothing, filters, cleaning rags, medical swabs and syringes, according to the NRC. However, a lobbyist for EnergySolutions told lawmakers this year, while discussing the proposed expansion, the waste could include components of decommissioned nuclear power plants.

The Canadian shipments would also include mixed waste, which is any type of radioactive material that is combined with hazardous waste.

The Clive facility currently holds Class A radioactive “soil, concrete rubble, demolition debris, large components and personal protective equipment,” a company spokesperson said. That waste comes from the federal government and domestic power plants.

EnergySolutions will only accept foreignwaste generated within the province of Ontario, it noted in a letter filed Sept. 9 seeking approval from the interstate compact. The materials cannot be shipped from other locations. No depleted uranium will travel from Canada to the landfill site, the company confirmed.

This case would mark the first time a state in the compact accepts foreign radioactive waste, confirmed Kristen Schwab, executive director of the Northwest Interstate Compact. And only two states in the compact accept low-level radioactive waste for disposal at all — Utah and Washington.

…………………………………… HEAL Utah, an environmental watchdog, said it has concerns about potential spills along the route.

“Historically, Utah residents have been concerned about waste coming through their communities to be dumped in our state,” said Carmen Valdez, a senior policy associate for the nonprofit.

EnergySolutions previously sought to ship parts of a dismantled nuclear plant from Italy to its Utah location in 2008. The state vetoed the plan with the backing of then-Gov. Jon Huntsman, who bristled at the idea of storing radioactive materials from other countries.

“As I have always emphatically declared,” Huntsman said at the time, “Utah should not be the world’s dumping ground.”

Cox did not directly respond Friday to a question about whether he supports EnergySolutions’ proposal.

In order to import the Canadian waste, EnergySolutions must get a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, the company confirmed.

The company also needs approval from the Utah Department of Environmental Quality to move forward with its facility expansion. The company estimates will keep the Clive site operational for another 45 years.

The Utah Legislature earlier this year passed Senate Bill 216, which streamlined the process for such expansions and added a new tax on facilities that plan to scale up. Revenue generated from that tax would go to the Utah Energy Research Fund.

EnergySolutions said it would apply for the expansion by Dec. 31, and DEQ confirmed it has not yet received an application.

The company wants compact officials to approve the Ontario deal ahead of that state process, EnergySolutions said in an Oct. 31 follow-up letter. Waiting until DEQ approves its expansion would cause delays, it said.

One member of the compact committee suggested imposing a 10-year deadline for EnergySolutions to import the 1.3 million cubic yards of waste from Ontario to the Clive site. The company opposed the timeline, saying it would jeopardize its ability to “reasonably recover its investment,” including the $30 million expansion tax………

Shipments from Ontario will account for a fraction of the waste ultimately stored in the planned expansion, the company and DEQ said.

……………………………….Environmental advocates at HEAL remain wary about importing waste from other countries.

“We do have to find solutions to storing that waste safely,” Valdez said, “but we want to really ensure that we have enough means to manage the waste that already exists in the United States before we start accepting international waste at the benefit and profit of a private company.”

Low-level radioactive waste generated in Utah — from facilities like medical labs or universities, for example — is not disposed of in the state. As a member of the compact, Utah sends its waste to a facility in Richland, Washington.

The compact committee plans to discuss EnergySolutions’ proposal again at a meeting on Nov. 25. https://www.sltrib.com/news/environment/2025/11/07/utahs-energysolutions-proposes/

November 10, 2025 Posted by | USA, wastes | Leave a comment

Trump and the Deep State: The Tomahawk deadlock and the illusion of presidential autonomy

This oscillation reflects, more than personal indecision, the tension between two competing power projects within the United States. On one hand, Trump seeks to maintain a more restrained foreign policy, focused on avoiding the strain of a direct confrontation with Russia. On the other hand, the military-industrial complex and its allies in Congress, the media, and the intelligence services continue to push for the escalation of the war in Ukraine.

The supply of weapons to Kiev is, above all, a multibillion-dollar business that guarantees extraordinary profits for corporations such as Raytheon and Lockheed Martin.

Lucas Leiroz, November 5, 2025, https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/11/05/trump-and-deep-state-tomahawk-deadlock-and-illusion-of-presidential-autonomy/

The Tomahawk issue is vital in determining Donald Trump’s political future.

The current controversy over the possible delivery of Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine reignites a crucial debate in American politics: to what extent does the president of the United States truly control his country’s strategic decisions? The episode suggests that Donald Trump, despite his rhetoric of independence and his supposed desire for a “pragmatic rapprochement” with Moscow, remains bound by the constraints of the so-called Deep State — the bureaucratic-corporate-military structure that has dictated the course of Washington’s foreign policy for decades.

According to Western media sources, the Pentagon had given the White House the green light to release the Tomahawks, arguing that the transfer would not harm U.S. stockpiles. The final decision, however, would rest with Trump. Initially, the president indicated that he did not intend to send the missiles, stating that “we cannot give away what we need to protect our own country.” A few days later, however, he reversed his stance — and then reversed it again, after a phone conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

This oscillation reflects, more than personal indecision, the tension between two competing power projects within the United States. On one hand, Trump seeks to maintain a more restrained foreign policy, focused on rebuilding the domestic economy and avoiding the strain of a direct confrontation with Russia. On the other hand, the military-industrial complex and its allies in Congress, the media, and the intelligence services continue to push for the escalation of the war in Ukraine.

The Deep State does not act solely out of abstract strategic interests. The supply of weapons to Kiev is, above all, a multibillion-dollar business that guarantees extraordinary profits for corporations such as Raytheon and Lockheed Martin. The Tomahawks, in particular, symbolize this economic power. Mass-produced and widely used in previous wars, they represent both a military tool and a currency of political influence. Allowing Ukraine to use them against strategic targets deep inside Russia would, however, be a dangerous act of escalation — something that Trump, in a rare moment of prudence, seems to understand.

Putin’s phone call to Trump, as reported by the press, was likely a direct reminder that the use of missiles with a thousand-mile range against cities such as Moscow or St. Petersburg would have incalculable consequences. Contrary to the Western narrative, which tries to portray Russia as isolated and vulnerable, Moscow maintains full retaliatory capability, including nuclear. By avoiding authorization for the Tomahawks’ transfer, Trump did not yield to “Russian blackmail” — as the Atlanticist media would claim — but rather to the elementary logic of global security.

Even so, the fact that the Pentagon and European allies pressured the White House to approve the delivery shows how the structure of real power in the U.S. transcends the president himself. The Deep State shapes not only foreign-policy decisions but also the perceptions of what is “possible” or “acceptable” for an American leader. When Trump seeks dialogue with Moscow, he is immediately accused of “weakness” or “complicity.” When he imposes sanctions, even tactical ones, he is praised for his “toughness.” Thus, a political siege is created in which any attempt at rationality is seen as betrayal of American hegemony.

Analyzing this episode, it becomes clear that presidential autonomy in the United States is largely an illusion. Trump, who came to power promising to break with globalism and restore national sovereignty, now finds himself in a dilemma: either he resists establishment pressure and risks political isolation, or he yields and becomes just another administrator of Washington’s perpetual wars.

The hesitation over the Tomahawks is, therefore, a symptom of the deeper struggle that defines contemporary American politics. Russia, for its part, watches cautiously, aware that the true interlocutor in Washington is not the president but the system surrounding him — a system that profits from war and fears, above all, peace.

November 9, 2025 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

The rise of the US ‘digital-military-industrial complex’

Xinhuanet, Editor Huang Panyue2 025-10-20 http://eng.chinamil.com.cn/2025xb/W/N/16416523.html

On Oct 13, Anduril Industries, an American defense technology company, unveiled its “Eagle Eye” headset at the Association of the United States Army (AUSA) annual meeting as part of the Army’s Soldier Borne Mission Command program. The system — offered in four variants — integrates multiple augmented-reality devices designed to provide timely, accurate battlefield information, enhance soldiers’ situational cognition, and improve both offensive and defensive decision-making. This unveiling highlights the growing trend of digital technology firms entering the US defense market, with Anduril emerging as one of the most typical representatives of this shift.

Over the past decade, the familiar concept of the “military-industrial complex” — coined by President Dwight D Eisenhower in 1961 — has evolved into a new hybrid: the “digital-military-industrial complex”. This variant revolves around firms that specialize in data, artificial intelligence and digital platforms, as well as startups deliberately positioned as defense-oriented technology providers. These entities are collaborating closely with the US military and traditional defense contractors to accelerate the digitization and intelligent transformation of military capabilities. Some analysts warn that this digital variant could drive large-scale US intervention abroad — potentially becoming a “new war machine”.

Traditional defense giants such as Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman and General Dynamics, now face intense competition from two kinds of digital players. The first category comprises big tech corporations — Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Oracle, HP, Dell, Motorola, IBM and others — many of which have secured sizable Pentagon contracts to supply advanced systems software and cloud, data and AI services. The second category consists of venture-backed startups, often funded by Silicon Valley investors that focus on AI, autonomy, sensing and networked command-and-control systems tailored to military and intelligence needs. These startups market “national security” as a core product attribute in pursuit of a share of US defense procurement.

Examples are plentiful. Anduril, founded in 2017 by investors including Palmer Luckey and Peter Thiel, now supplies autonomous systems that combine AI and robotics — from unmanned aerial systems (UAS) and counter-UAS solutions to semi-portable autonomous surveillance systems and networked command and control (C2) software. Palantir, founded in 2003, has long partnered with government agencies and has significantly expanded military collaboration in recent years. Its market capitalization soared in 2024, exceeding the combined valuations of several legacy defense giants. Other comparable companies include Rebellion Defense (AI military applications), Shield AI (autonomous flight and navigation), Skydio (drones for military and law enforcement), HawkEye 360 (satellite-enabled radio-frequency monitoring), Epirus (directed-energy and electromagnetic defense), and various private ventures targeting dual-use space capabilities.

At first glance, Silicon Valley’s deepening ties to the Pentagon may appear anomalous. For years, Silicon Valley projected liberal, antiwar values, resisting the militarization of its technologies. Yet the region’s militarized trajectory represents a return to its historical roots rather than a novel development. Since the 1950s, US federal agencies — particularly the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) — decisively shaped the development of transformative technologies like the Internet and GPS.

Traditional defense firms also played formative roles in Silicon Valley’s rise. Although these ties waned after the Cold War, in recent years, major tech figures have publicly embraced national-security collaboration. In 2019, Amazon’s Jeff Bezos publicly urged big tech to show greater patriotism and actively participate in defense cooperation with the Department of Defense. In June 2025, the Army formalized the fusion of tech expertise and military innovation by appointing four tech leaders as reserve lieutenant colonels to its newly established “Detachment 201”, also known as the “Executive Innovation Corps” — a symbolic merger of commercial tech leadership and military roles.

Three drivers underpin the rise of the digital-military-industrial complex. First, the advent of AI has made integration of commercial data and algorithms essential to military modernization. The Defense Innovation Unit (DIU), established by the Pentagon in Silicon Valley in 2015, channels venture-style procurements to accelerate conversion of commercial technologies for defense.

By September 2022, DIU had awarded roughly $1.2 billion in contracts to over 320 startups, and it was elevated in 2021 to report directly to the Secretary of Defense. Second, escalating global tensions such as the Russia-Ukraine conflict and turmoil in the Middle East have heightened US urgency to field technologies proven effective on modern battlefields. Third, China’s rapid advances in AI have fueled US concerns, prompting American policymakers to increasingly frame the competition as, in essence, an AI arms race.

Operationally, the digital-military-industrial complex differs from the traditional procurement model. Legacy contractors depend on large, long-term, bureaucratic contracts focused on platform performance. Tech firms, by contrast, move with commercial speed and market leverage, adapting civilian technologies for defense use — a model that strengthens their bargaining power and reduces regulatory constraints. To engage these new actors, the Department of Defense has adopted more agile acquisition mechanisms — notably “Other Transaction Agreements” (OTAs) — and established accelerators and programs to welcome nontraditional vendors.

n short, the US defense ecosystem is undergoing structural change: from a Washington-centered “contractor + Pentagon” system to a Silicon Valley-centric network combining venture capital, tech firms, legacy defense primes and the military. This emerging “Silicon Valley-Pentagon axis” is reshaping the tools, logic and ethical contours of warfare. The trend may intensify great-power rivalry and arms races, lower the threshold for war, obscure responsibility, and accelerate the militarization of technology — posing new threats to global peace and security.

Whether Silicon Valley will ultimately evolve into a cradle for militarism, and whether the digital-military-industrial complex will operate as a fully activated “war machine”, are questions that deserve the vigilance, concern, and reflection of people worldwide.

Shi Bowei is a lecturer from the Department of Political Science at the Party School of Zhejiang Provincial CPC Committee.

November 9, 2025 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

Los Alamos National Laboratory Prioritizes Plutonium “Pit” Bomb Core Production Over Safety

Santa Fe, NM – The independent Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board recently released its Review of the Los Alamos Plutonium Facility Documented Safety Analysis. It concluded that:

“While LANL facility personnel continue to make important upgrades to the Plutonium Facility’s safety systems, many of those projects have encountered delays due to inconsistent funding and other reasons. DOE and LANL should consider prioritizing safety-related infrastructure projects to ensure that the Plutonium Facility safety strategy adequately protects the public, as the facility takes on new and expansive national security missions.” (Page 24)

In early October 2024, the Department of Energy’s semi-autonomous National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) announced with great fanfare that the Los Alamos Lab had produced its first “diamond stamped” plutonium pit for the nuclear weapons stockpile. Tens of billions of taxpayers’ dollars have been sunk into LANL’s long delayed and over budget pit production program. Given no further announcements, it is not currently known whether or not the Lab is meeting its congressionally required production goals. Endemic nuclear safety problems have long been an intractable issue, at one point even forcing a three-year halt to plutonium operations at LANL’s Plutonium Facility-4 (“PF-4”).

In its recent Review, the Safety Board reported:

“The [2009] Plutonium Facility safety basis described very large potential [radioactive] dose consequences to the public following seismic events…. DOE committed to upgrade and seismically qualify the ventilation system, with a particular focus on a specific ventilation subsystem…”

“As the only facility in the DOE complex that can process large quantities of plutonium in many forms, [PF-4] represents a unique capability for the nation’s nuclear deterrent. The Board has long advocated for the use of safety-related active confinement systems in nuclear facilities for the purposes of confining radioactive materials…Passive confinement systems are not necessarily capable of containing hazardous materials with confidence because they allow a quantity of unfiltered air contaminated with radioactive material to be released from an operating nuclear facility following certain accident scenarios. Safety related active confinement ventilation systems will continue to function during an accident, thereby ensuring that radioactive material is captured by filters before it can be released into the environment… (Page 2, bolded emphases added)

The Safety Board referred to DOE Order 420.1C, Facility Safety, which has a clear requirement that:

“Hazard category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities… must have the means to confine the uncontained radioactive materials to minimize their potential release in facility effluents during normal operations and during and following accidents, up to and including design basis accidents… An active confinement ventilation system [is] the preferred design approach for nuclear facilities with potential for radiological release. Alternate confinement approaches may be acceptable if a technical evaluation demonstrates that the alternate confinement approach results in very high assurance of the confinement of radioactive materials.” (Page 2, bolded emphases added; PF-4 is a Hazard Category 2 nuclear facility)

Plutonium pit production at LANL is slated for a 15% increase to $1.7 billion in FY 2026. But in a clear example of how the NNSA prioritizes nuclear weapons production over safety, the DNFSB reported:

The active confinement safety system “remained the planned safety strategy for the Plutonium Facility for many years… However, in a March 2022 letter to the Board, the NNSA Administrator stated that the planned strategy would shift away from safety class active confinement… A safety class would require substantial facility upgrades far in excess to those that are currently planned… facility personnel also noted that some projects [for alternate confinement approaches] have been paused or delayed due to funding issues…” (Pages 3 and 21, bolded emphases added)

Instead of a technical evaluation demonstrating that “the alternate confinement approach results in very high assurance of the confinement of radioactive materials,” the Board concluded:

“Predicting the amount of release under passive confinement conditions can be quite complex. Fire or explosions could add energy to the facility’s atmosphere and introduce a motive force that could carry hazardous materials through an exhaust path… Therefore, determination of the amount of radioactive material that could escape the facility becomes very complex and uncertain.” (Page 8, bolded emphases added)

In sum, DOE reneged on its commitment to retrofit a safety class confinement system at PF-4, even as it ramps up plutonium pit production. At the same time, LANL has not demonstrated that its “alternate confinement approach results in very high assurance of the confinement of radioactive materials” in the event of an accident or earthquake.

This also contradicts the NNSA’s position that potential radioactive doses are vanishingly small. For example, the agency claims that the “Most Exposed Individual” of the public would have only a one in a million chance of developing a “Latent Cancer Fatality” from an accidental fire in gloveboxes at PF-4, which commonly process molten, pyrophoric plutonium. (Draft LANL Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement, January 2025, Page D-23)

Moreover, pit production that involves plutonium-239 is not the only nuclear safety issue. PF-4 also processes plutonium-238, a dangerous gamma emitter, as a heat source for radioisotope thermoelectric generators (AKA nuclear batteries). The Safety Board’s Review noted:

While newly installed gloveboxes meet seismic requirements, and facility modifications associated with the pit production mission prioritize upgrades for some gloveboxes, others have known seismic vulnerabilities and will not be able to perform their credited post-seismic function. Many of these deficient gloveboxes are associated with processing heat source plutonium, a high-hazard material which accounts for much of the facility’s overall safety risk… Upgrading glovebox support stands is important to return the facility to a safety posture more reliant on credited engineered features…” (Pages 22-23, bolded emphases added)

Nuclear safety issues will always be inherent to plutonium pit production, yet new pit production itself is simply not necessary. No currently planned production is to maintain the safety and reliability of the existing nuclear weapons stockpile. Instead, it is all for new-design nuclear weapons, which could prompt the U.S. to resume full-scale testing, as Trump has recently ordered. Pit production is the NNSA’s most expensive program ever, but it has no credible cost estimates. Independent experts have concluded that pits last at least a century (their average age now is ~43) and there are at least 15,000 existing pits already stored at the Pantex Plant near Amarillo, TX.

Moreover, the future of the independent Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board is in doubt, without whom the DOE’s chronic nuclear safety record would not be publicly known. The DNFSB’s five-member Board recently lost its quorum because of term limits. The Board desperately needs nominations from the Trump Administration, which so far has not happened either by design or neglect.

Jay Coghlan, Director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, commented, “We are facing a perfect storm of expanding plutonium pit production and diminishing oversight by the Safety Board. LANL’s expanding nuclear weapons programs are sucking money from the Lab’s other programs that are truly needed, such as nonproliferation, cleanup and renewable energy research (which is being completely eliminated). NNSA’s prioritization of plutonium pit production for the new nuclear arms race and the erosion of nuclear safety could have disastrous results for northern New Mexico.”

The DNFSB’s Review of the Los Alamos Plutonium Facility Documented Safety Analysis is available at https://www.dnfsb.gov/sites/default/files/2025-10/Review of the Los Alamos Plutonium Facility Documented Safety Analysis %5B2026-100-001%5D.pdf https://nukewatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/LANL-Prioritizes-Plutonium-Pit-Bomb-Core-Production-Over-Safety.pdf

November 8, 2025 Posted by | - plutonium, USA | Leave a comment

IAEA chief condemns Trump’s nuclear test plan.

5 Nov, 2025, https://www.rt.com/news/627359-iaea-grossi-us-nuclear/

The US president’s decision undermines international security, Rafael Grossi has said.

US President Donald Trump’s decision to resume nuclear weapon testing is indicative of a deepening global crisis and weakens the international system of security and peace, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Rafael Grossi, has said.

Speaking to France’s LCI TV channel on Tuesday, Grossi described Trump’s announcement as a “manifestation of profound unease, tension, and increasing fragmentation,” adding that it undermines both global peace and the non-proliferation regime.

Last week, Trump ordered the US Department of War to begin preparations for nuclear testing, claiming that the US is “the only country that doesn’t test” and accusing Russia and China of conducting “secret” nuclear explosions. Both Moscow and Beijing have refuted the allegations.

Grossi questioned the veracity of Trump’s claims, emphasizing that any nuclear detonations by other nations would be detected by the international monitoring system established under the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty. The IAEA chief noted that the organization responsible for overseeing compliance “can immediately record such phenomena.”

Grossi called for the restoration of the United Nations’ role in maintaining global peace and safeguarding the nuclear non-proliferation system amid rising tensions.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has so far refrained from commenting on Trump’s statements, explaining that Moscow is still waiting for “clarifications from the American side.” He stressed that neither Russia nor China had resumed nuclear testing and both remain committed to their obligations under the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty.

Trump’s announcement came after Russia conducted a series of tests, including the launch of its new Burevestnik nuclear-powered cruise missile and the Poseidon underwater drone. However, neither of these trials involved actual nuclear detonations. 

Russian President Vladimir Putin has said that Moscow would consider resuming the testing of nuclear weapons only if other nuclear powers officially abandon the moratorium.

November 8, 2025 Posted by | safety, USA | Leave a comment

Trump’s Threat to Resume Nuclear Testing

In 1963 John Kennedy and Nikita Khrushchev signed the ban on atmospheric nuclear weapons testing, which was extended to a moratorium in 1992 and secured as the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty in 1996. The Treaty has been signed by 187 states. On October 31st, United Nations member states voted on a resolution in support of the Treaty and the global nuclear test moratorium. The United States was the only “no” vote.

Donald Trump is now threatening to resume nuclear testing because “he believes others are doing it.” They aren’t. The threat came after Vladimir Putin announced that the Kremlin https://www.reuters.com/world/china/putin-says-russia-tested-poseidon-nuclear-capable-super-torpedo-2025-10-29/

Tied to this is the situation at Los Alamos National Laboratory, or LANL, the heart of the new trillion-dollar modernization program that will rebuild every nuclear warhead in the planned stockpile with new military capabilities and produce new-design nuclear weapons as well. LANL will fabricate plutonium pits, or triggers, for these nuclear warheads, along with the Savannah River Site in South Carolina.

A Nuclear Watch New Mexico press release stated: “The underlying point is that new-design plutonium pits for new-design nuclear weapons may create inexorable pressures for resumed nuclear weapons testing by the United States. This would be sure to set off a chain reaction of testing by other nuclear weapons powers [ ]. The final result is a dramatically accelerating nuclear arms race, arguably more dangerous than the first arms race given multiple nuclear actors, new hypersonic and cyber weapons, and the rise of artificial intelligence.”  https://nukewatch.org/press-release-item/trump-orders-nuclear-weapons-testing-for-new-nuclear-arms-race-new-plutonium-pit-bomb-cores-at-los-alamos-lab-could-make-it-real/ 

November 8, 2025 Posted by | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Trump’s Westinghouse Nuclear Fiasco: Wasting Money on a Corrupt Game of Hot Potato.

By now, it is evident that no one is buying Westinghouse’s reactors, so it must be up to the U.S. government to do it. But why?

That still means someone will have to pay the cost of $80 billion-112 billion, plus interest, for loans and/or investor returns, plus the costs of operating, fueling, decommissioning, and nuclear waste storage. Taxpayers will likely pay that cost, too.

October 30, 2025, https://www.nirs.org/trumps-westinghouse-nuclear-fiasco-wasting-money-on-a-corrupt-game-of-hot-potato/?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=965dcb9e-1816-40cc-b87f-9360a124c3b2

On Tuesday, the White House announced an $80 billion deal with Westinghouse to finance construction of eight large new reactors in the U.S. There is not enough in the way of actual details about the deal, resulting in even more unanswered questions. But the promise of a large, direct investment in a pack of new reactors has predictably revved up talk of yet another “Nuclear Renaissance” and made it look like the DJT 2.0 administration is making good on big nuclear power goals from a group of executive orders issued in May. 

$80 billion  sure sounds like a lot! And the news that the announced $80 billion is going to come from Japanese taxpayers and not U.S. taxpayers sounds like a sweet deal!

If we were talking about just about any other energy source, it would be a lot. $80 billion could build:

  • 58,000 megawatts of solar power, or
  • 38,000 MW of wind power, or
  • 48,000 MW of wind and solar combined, or 
  • 14,000 MW of geothermal power plants.

Any of those options would produce about the same amount of electricity each year as 14-16 large-sized nuclear reactors – twice as many as the Westinghouse deal promises to build.

But $80 billion is only enough to build, at most, four Westinghouse AP1000 reactors. That’s because the cost of building nuclear reactors is four to 10 times more than wind, solar, or geothermal power. Even wind and solar paired with battery storage are still several times cheaper than new nuclear reactors.  

But where would the other $80+ billion for eight reactors come from? U.S. taxpayers? Ratepayers? In this case, probably taxpayers. The reactors would probably receive low-interest loans from the Department of Energy’s (DOE) loan guarantee program, and, following construction, they would be eligible to claim the Clean Energy Investment Tax Credit, which provides a 30-50% subsidy for the cost of a new energy project. That would mean $80 billion or more in loans up front, and, later, $48-80 billion in rebates from U.S. taxpayers. 

That still means someone will have to pay the cost of $80 billion-112 billion, plus interest, for loans and/or investor returns, plus the costs of operating, fueling, decommissioning, and nuclear waste storage. Taxpayers will likely pay that cost, too. One of the projects that would probably be included in the deal is the proposed four-reactor Donald J. Trump Nuclear Power Plant (DJT NPP), which former Energy Secretary Rick Perry’s new company Fermi, Inc. has proposed. Fermi’s stock price surged on Tuesday after the Westinghouse deal was announced. The DJT NPP is to be built at the DOE’s Pantex nuclear weapons plant in Texas, to power AI data centers that Fermi also plans to build there. The reactors and data centers are likely to be categorized as “critical defense facilities”, per Executive Order 14299. Presumably, federal taxpayers would pay for the data centers and their power bills through DOE’s budget. 

Another feature of the deal is a U.S. government profit-sharing and partial ownership in Westinghouse. The company’s Canadian owners – Brookfield Renewable Partners (BRP, an equity investment firm) and uranium company Cameco – would give the U.S. government a 20% share of Westinghouse profits, after the company earns its first $17.5 billion. Then, if Westinghouse’s corporate value reaches $30 billion, Brookfield and Cameco would have to take Westinghouse public on the stock market – and give the U.S. government at least 8.3% of the company’s stock. 

This would benefit Brookfield and Cameco, but not U.S. taxpayers. Another Brookfield affiliate bought Westinghouse from Toshiba when it went bankrupt in 2017 due to soaring costs of building four AP1000 reactors for utilities in South Carolina and Georgia. The South Carolina reactors (V.C. Summer 2&3) were canceled, and the Georgia reactors (Vogtle 3&4) were completed in 2024, seven years late and $23 billion over budget. Brookfield Business Partners (BBP) was unable to sell Westinghouse after pulling it out of bankruptcy, but after countries started sanctioning Russia over its war on Ukraine, it looked like Westinghouse could replace Russia as the largest supplier of reactor fuel and services, so BBP sold the company to Brookfield Renewable Partners and Cameco. 

Westinghouse’s value hasn’t exactly seen explosive growth, so it has been seeking deals to sell AP1000 reactors in Poland, Ukraine, Slovenia, the Czech Republic, and other countries, in partnership with the U.S. government, which has become increasingly convinced that it must retake global leadership in reactor construction from Russia and China. The Biden administration tried to convince states and utilities that all of the problems with Westinghouse’s AP1000 reactor had been resolved. But still, no state or utility has taken the plunge. 

By now, it is evident that no one is buying Westinghouse’s reactors, so it must be up to the U.S. government to do it. But why? Japan’s offer to pitch in $80 billion will soften the blow to U.S. taxpayers. It may even be enough to build the four reactors Rick Perry wants to name after the president. But we would still end up paying the rest of the cost of too-expensive power and never-ending nuclear waste storage, from reactors that mostly will not be providing electricity to our homes and businesses, but to data centers to power AI. Westinghouse is being passed around like a hot potato and we’ll likely be on the hook when the music stops.

November 7, 2025 Posted by | business and costs, USA | Leave a comment

Rusting nuclear facilities hamper Trump’s plans for new tests

President insists new trials will begin, but officials say US not capable of doing so.

Benedict Smith, US Reporter

 The United States is not ready to restart nuclear weapons testing and
risks losing ground to China and Russia if it pushes ahead with Donald
Trump’s plans, experts believe.

The president announced this week that
the US would conduct tests of nuclear weapons for the first time in more
than three decades, breaking one of the few remaining taboos among the
superpowers.

Experts fear that in doing so, Mr Trump has fired the starting
gun on a race Washington is ill-prepared to win, and that it could find
itself matched or overtaken by Moscow and Beijing.

Visitors to America’s
vast testing site in the Nevada desert said it is filled with equipment
that is slowly rusting away, while former officials say it simply has not
had the investment to match the president’s ambitions. Now there are
fears that Mr Trump has opened a “Pandora’s Box” that has remained
shut almost since the end of the Cold War. And he might not be prepared for what comes next.

 Telegraph 3rd Nov 2025, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/politics/2025/11/03/trump-could-not-launch-nuclear-weapon-if-he-wanted/

November 7, 2025 Posted by | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Trump doubles down on nuclear tests as Russia issues warning.

By Reuters, November 1, 2025 , https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-america/trump-doubles-down-on-nuclear-tests-as-russia-issues-warning-20251101-p5n6z4.html

Washington: President Donald Trump has reaffirmed that the United States will resume nuclear testing, but he would not answer directly when asked whether that would include underground nuclear tests that were common during the Cold War.

“You’ll find out very soon, but we’re going to do some testing,” Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One on Friday (Saturday AEDT) as he flew to Palm Beach, Florida, when asked about underground nuclear tests.

“Other countries do it. If they’re [going] to do it, we’re going to do it, OK?”

Trump said on Thursday that he had ordered the US military to immediately restart the process for testing nuclear weapons after a halt of 33 years, a move that appeared to be a message to rival nuclear powers China and Russia, whose last known tests were in the 1990s.

Trump made that surprise announcement on social media while aboard his Marine One helicopter flying to meet Chinese President Xi Jinping for a trade-negotiating session in Busan, South Korea.

It was not immediately clear whether Trump was referring to nuclear-explosive testing, which would be carried out by the National Nuclear Security Administration, or flight testing of nuclear-capable missiles.

Continue reading →

November 6, 2025 Posted by | politics international, Russia, USA | Leave a comment

The Nastiest Warmongers Are Trump’s Biggest Fans Now.

Caitlin Johnstone, Nov 03, 2025, https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/the-nastiest-warmongers-are-trumps?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=82124&post_id=177879309&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

Massacre fetishist Lindsey Graham said “Trump is my favorite president” because “we’re killing all the right people and we’re cutting your taxes” during a speech to the Republican Jewish Coalition Annual Leadership Summit on Friday.

“We’ve run out of bombs; we didn’t run out of bombs in World War II,” the senator said.

If Lindsey Graham ever gushed about me this effusively for any reason I think I would have to shave my head and join a convent or something, because it would be a clear and undeniable sign that I had been living my whole entire life completely wrong.

It says a lot about how much of a warmonger Trump has become that he himself actually slammed Lindsey Graham repeatedly during his first crack at the presidency for being such a firebreathing war slut.

In 2016 Trump said of Graham, “I hear his theory for the [Iraq] war; you’ll be in there forever. You’ll end up starting World War III with a guy like that.”

In 2017 Trump slammed Graham and his war porn circle jerk partner John McCain, saying “The two senators should focus their energies on ISIS, illegal immigration and border security instead of always looking to start World War III.”

In 2018 Trump attacked Graham for opposing the withdrawal of US troops from Syria, tweeting “So hard to believe that Lindsey Graham would be against saving soldier lives & billions of $$$. Why are we fighting for our enemy, Syria, by staying & killing ISIS for them, Russia, Iran & other locals? Time to focus on our Country & bring our youth back home where they belong!”

In 2019 Trump said during a press conference, “Lindsey Graham would like to stay in the Middle East for the next thousand years with thousands of soldiers and fighting other people’s wars. I want to get out of the Middle East.”

Trump used to at least posture as an anti-interventionist who didn’t get along with the warmongers of the DC swamp. Now he’s best butt buddies with the most bloodthirsty swamp creatures alive.

They love him, and why wouldn’t they? He bombed Iran. He bombed Yemen. He poured genocide weapons into Israel to incinerate Gaza and to bomb Lebanon, and has been aggressively stomping out free speech that is critical of Israel’s war crimes. He’s been bombing Somalia at an unprecedented rate. He’s giving every sign that he’s getting ready to do something truly horrible in Venezuela. He’s even threatening to invade Nigeria now.

Back in March, Trump’s intelligence chief Tulsi Gabbard embarrassingly tweeted that “President Trump IS the President of Peace. He is ending bloodshed across the world and will deliver lasting peace in the Middle East.” Now she’s spending her whole career helping Trump commit mass military violence around the globe.

Trump duped his base into believing he’ll make peace, and he turned out to be Lindsey Graham’s gooiest wet dream incarnate.

Hopefully some lessons are being learned here.

November 6, 2025 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

Resuming U.S. Nuclear Tests Is Reckless and Dangerous, One Expert Says

“The only countries that will really learn more if [U.S. nuclear] testing resumes are Russia and, to a much greater extent, China,” says Jeffrey Lewis, an expert on the geopolitics of nuclear weaponry

By Dan Vergano edited by Lee Billings, October 29, 2025, https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trumps-baffling-call-for-resuming-u-s-nuclear-tests/

Editor’s Note (11/3/2025): Energy secretary Chris Wright stated on Sunday that any new nuclear testing pursued following Trump’s remarks would be of the “noncritical” variety, entailing already standard routine tests of weapons components and other parts of the U.S. arsenal. Scientific American will continue reporting any new developments on nuclear testing.

Ahead of a meeting with Chinese president Xi Jinping on Thursday, President Donald Trump said the U.S. will resume nuclear testing, ending a 33-year moratorium.

“Because of other countries [sic] testing programs, I have instructed the Department of War to start testing our Nuclear Weapons on an equal basis,” Trump announced on his social media platform Truth Social.

The U.S. last tested a nuclear weapon in an underground experiment in the Nevada Test Site in 1992, a marker of the end of the cold war. That last test concluded a decades-long testing program that included more than 1,000 detonations conducted by the civilian Department of Energy, which oversees the U.S. nuclear stockpile.

The Project 2025 report, now acknowledged by Trump as an indicator of his administration’s policies, had called for resuming U.S. nuclear testing to ensure the performance of the nuclear stockpile. Trump’s announcement follows recent Russian tests of a nuclear-powered cruise missile and a nuclear-capable underwater drone, but there have not been any known nuclear detonations recently made by either Russia or China. Both of those nations are signatories to the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which the U.S. has signed yet never ratified. (China also hasn’t ratified the treaty, and Russia revoked its ratification in 2023, however.) China last tested a bomb in 1996, and the Soviet Union last tested one in 1990. Both countries have expressed concern about Trump’s announcement, and Russia has threatened to start its own tests.

To ask what is at stake in Trump’s call to resume U.S. nuclear tests, Scientific American spoke with Jeffrey Lewis, an expert on the geopolitics of nuclear weaponry at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies.

[An edited transcript of the interview follows.]

We haven’t done a nuclear test since 1992. So what is the argument for doing this? Are there any technical benefits to resuming testing?

The question is: What sort of testing are we talking about? The U.S can presently test nuclear weapons in every way, shape or form—except for doing explosive tests that create yield. The U.S. now does so-called subcritical tests about 1,000 feet under the Nevada desert. And so it’s very unclear what the president means.

Are we talking about a full-yield test out in the desert? Or are we talking about small lab experiments that produce much less yield? It’s very unclear. And all of those [tests] have different yields [that have] different purposes.

But if I were to back up to issue one sweeping statement, it would be: No, [there aren’t any benefits to resuming testing] because the U.S. already conducted more than 1,000 nuclear tests. It has a vast trove of data that underlies the most sophisticated computer models imaginable. The U.S. knows more about its nuclear weapons today than it did in the period when it was testing them. The only countries that will really learn more if testing resumes are Russia and, to a much greater extent, China.

Project 2025 called for resuming underground nuclear tests, though. Would Trump’s announcement seem to point in that direction—basically, to the U.S. once again blowing up such weapons underground?

During the last [Trump] administration, [officials] spoke of being ready to resume nuclear testing. And they discovered that it would be a couple of years before they could do it. Then they started talking about doing uninstrumented tests—which are literally pointless.

You get no data from an uninstrumented test. It’s just a demonstration. All you do is demonstrate that we have functional nukes. It’s really unclear why you would do that.

What would this do to the nonproliferation movement, with the whole idea of a testing moratorium going out the window?

It’s possible the test ban collapses. But it is also possible that the nonproliferation treaty [the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which entered into force in 1970] collapses because that requires the U.S., Russia and other nuclear-weapon states to make good-faith efforts to work toward the elimination of nuclear weapons.

But non-nuclear-weapon states have made it clear that this test ban is literally the bare minimum. And most of those countries aren’t very happy that the U.S hasn’t ratified the [CTBT]. But the fact that there has at least been an end to nuclear testing has been really important to sustaining a sense around the world that nonproliferation is a common good rather than just an effort at a nuclear monopoly by a few countries.

Normally I am not one of those people who believes in that kind of symbolic stuff. But so much of [the Trump administration’s] foreign policy seems to be about being transgressive. Whatever effect a resumption in testing would have on our domestic politics, it also affects how people abroad see us. It becomes difficult to persuade people to do the things we want them to do when we seem reckless and selfish.

There’s also this matter of modernizing the U.S nuclear program, a long-running effort that’s over budget and delayed. How would new nuclear testing play into that?

If there were a technical reason to resume testing, you could imagine that would reduce the need for modernization—because successful testing would suggest that the existing systems are in excellent shape.

That said, I don’t think this is a sincere effort to get additional data to be more informed about the state of the U.S. arsenal. I think this is intended as a transgressive act that’s supposed to bully the Russians and the Chinese and aggravate the president’s domestic enemies.

So why do it?

Well, the real fundamental question here is: What the hell does [Trump] mean in that Truth Social post? Because Russia hasn’t conducted a nuclear test; it’s tested nuclear-capable or nuclear-powered assets.

And the Russians and Chinese aren’t accused of doing clandestine things at their test sites—or, at least, they haven’t been accused of that on an unclassified basis. And the Department of Defense doesn’t have any role in this, really, because nuclear testing is handled by the Department of Energy. So you just kind of stare at Trump’s statement, and you’re like, “What?”

I just don’t know what any of this means. I thought I was an expert, and I can’t parse the words he’s using.

It’s also confusing because, in some ways, Trump has seemed worried about nuclear war. He makes statements along the lines of saying that we all have too many weapons and should work together to disarm, and then he comes out with something like this.

I think what’s happened is that he’s been told that the Russians or the Chinese are doing bad things and that we’re at a disadvantage because we can’t do the same bad things. And he’s feels we ought to be able to do the same things. I doubt it’s any deeper than that.

But let me say a positive thing: [Trump] has political power here, in that he could force Senate Republicans to ratify the … CTBT if he thinks this is so important. He could absolutely get a verification protocol to the CTBT just like the Reagan administration did with the Threshold Test Ban Treaty [the Treaty on the Limitation of Underground Nuclear Weapon Tests, which entered into force in 1990], which would address some of these concerns about what the Russians and the Chinese are doing—if Republicans would accept it and ratify the treaty.

And then, you know what, he really would get a Nobel Peace Prize. If Trump got a verification protocol to the CTBT and then brought that treaty into effect, I would write in support of him getting a Nobel Peace Prize.

All right, let’s hope that, somehow, that idea gets whispered in his ear. Thanks for your thoughts.

November 5, 2025 Posted by | politics, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

The AI Drones Used In Gaza Now Surveilling American Cities

Skydio shows once again how Gaza is the laboratory for weapons makers, the place where new surveillance and apartheid technologies are tested, before being refined and used in the west.

Nate Bear, Nov 01, 2025, https://www.donotpanic.news/p/the-ai-drones-used-in-gaza-now-surveilling

AI-powered quadcopter drones used by the IDF to commit genocide in Gaza are flying over American cities, surveilling protestors and automatically uploading millions of images to an evidence database.

The drones are made by a company called Skydio which in the last few years has gone from relative obscurity to quietly become a multi-billion dollar company and the largest drone manufacturer in the US.

The extent of Skydio drone usage across the US, and the extent to which their usage has grown in just a few years, is extraordinary. The company has contracts with more than 800 law enforcement and security agencies across the country, up from 320 in March last year, and their drones are being launched hundreds of times a day to monitor people in towns and cities across the country.

Skydio has extensive links with Israel. In the first weeks of the genocide the California-based company sent more than one hundred drones to the IDF with promises of more to come. How many more were delivered since that admission is unknown. Skydio has an office in Israel and partners with DefenceSync, a local military drone contractor operating as the middle man between drone manufacturers and the IDF. Skydio has also raised hundreds of millions of dollars from Israeli-American venture capitalists and from venture capital funds with extensive investments in Israel, including from Marc Andreessen’s firm Andreessen Horowitz, or a16z.

And now these drones, tested in genocide and refined on Palestinians, are swarming American cities.

According to my research almost every large American city has signed a contract with Skydio in the last 18 months, including Boston, Chicago, Philadelphia, San Diego, Cleveland and Jacksonville. Skydio drones were recently used by city police departments to gather information at the ‘No Kings’ protests and were also used by Yale to spy on the anti-genocide protest camp set up by students at the university last year.

In Miami, Skydio drones are being used to spy on spring breakers, and in Atlanta the company has partnered with the Atlanta Police Foundation to install a permanent drone station within the massive new Atlanta Public Safety Training Center. Detroit recently spent nearly $300,000 on fourteen Skydio drones according to a city procurement report. Last month ICE bought an X10D Skydio drone, which automatically tracks and pursues a target. US Customs and Border Protection has bought thirty-three of the same drones since July.

The AI system behind Skydio drones is powered by Nvidia chips and enables their operation without a human user. The drones have thermal imaging cameras and can operate in places where GPS doesn’t work, so-called ‘GPS-denied environments.’ They also reconstruct buildings and other infrastructure in 3D and can fly at more than 30 miles per hour.

The New York police were early adopters of Skydio drones and are particularly enthusiastic users. A spokesman recently told a drone news website that the NYPD launched more than 20,000 drone flights in less than a year, which would mean drones are being launched around the city 55 times per day. A city report last year said the NYPD at that time was operating 41 Skydio drones. A recent Federal Aviation Authority rule change, however, means that number will undoubtedly have increased and more generally underpins the massive expansion in the use of Skydio drones.Prior to March this year, FAA rules meant that drones could only be used by US security forces if the operator kept the drone in sight. They also couldn’t be used over crowded city streets. An FAA waiver issued that month opened the floodgates, allowing police and security agencies to operate drones beyond a visual line of sight and over large crowds of people. Skydio called the waiver ground-breaking. It was. The change has ushered in a Skydio drone buying spree by US police and security forces, with many now employing what is called a ‘Drone As First Responder’ program. Without the need to see the drone, and with drones free to cruise over city streets, the police are increasingly sending drones before humans to call outs and for broader investigative purposes. Cincinnati for example says that by the end of this year 90% of all call outs will be serviced first by a Skydio drone.

This extensive level of coverage is enabled by Skydio’s docking platform hardware. These launch pads are placed in locations around a city enabling drones to be remote charged, launched and landed many miles away from police HQs. After launch, all the information gathered by these flights is both saved to an internal SD card and automatically uploaded to special software configured for law enforcement. This software is made by Axon, a major financial backer of Skydio and the controversial maker of Tasers and ‘less-lethal weapons’ used by police departments in the US and across the west. The software, Axon Evidence, enables, in the words of an Axon press release, ‘the automatic uploads of photos and video footage from drones into a digital evidence management system.’

Axon’s equipment is also central to Israel’s infrastructure of apartheid, with the company providing body cameras and Tasers to Israeli police forces and prison guards who routinely torture Palestinians. Axon, which participated in a $220 million Series E round of funding in Skydio, is just one of the many entities backing Skydio who serve a Zionist agenda.

Skydio’s first investor in 2015 was Andreessen Horowitz (a16z) which provided $3 million of seed capital to the three-man team behind the drone maker. They have since invested tens of millions across numerous funding rounds. The founders of a16z, Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz, are both notorious Zionists. The firm was the most active venture capital investor in Israel in 2024 and this summer Andreessen and Horowitz visited Israel to meet with tech companies founded by ex-IDF and Unit 8200 war criminals.

Other Skydio investors include Next 47, which has an office in Israel headed by Moshe Zilberstein who worked in the IDF’s computer spy centre Mamram, and Hercules Capital whose managing director Ella-Tamar Adnahan is an Israeli-American described by Israeli media as “Israel’s go-to tech banker in the US.”

The saturation of US police departments with drone technology so closely connected to Israel, technology used to carry out war crimes is a frightening, if not unsurprising, development. Skydio drones will be central to the rapidly advancing proto-fascism in the US and the crack down on Antifa and other so-called ‘domestic terrorists’ by the Trump administration. In this context, the bigger surprise is that the rapid expansion of Israel-linked surveillance drone technology across America has so far gone largely under the radar.

Skydio should also make it on to the agenda of Zohran Mamdani. Recently criticised for saying “when the boot of the NYPD is on your neck, it’s been laced by the IDF,” Skydio is just another example that shows he’s right. If he has the courage of his convictions, he could do worse than use his powers as mayor to shut down the NYPD’s Skydio deal.

Skydio is also a large supplier to the Department of Defence, recently signing a contract to provide the US Army with reconnaissance drones. As a significant supplier to both military and civilian security forces, it raises questions about what information is or will be shared between the US military and domestic security agencies via the Skydio-Axon digital evidence management system.

Skydio shows once again how Gaza is the laboratory for weapons makers, the place where new surveillance and apartheid technologies are tested, before being refined and used in the west. And next year Skydio is rolling out new indoor drones. We can only speculate as to what extent these new drones were informed by the ‘learnings’ accrued via genocide.

The story of Skydio shows that what happens in Gaza doesn’t stay in Gaza.

The logic of capitalist imperialism means these technologies will always find their way home.

November 5, 2025 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, USA | Leave a comment

Hegseth Declines To Say Whether the US Is Planning To Bomb Venezuela.

The Miami Herald reported on Friday that strikes could begin at any moment

by Dave DeCamp | November 2, 2025, https://news.antiwar.com/2025/11/02/hegseth-declines-to-say-whether-the-us-is-planning-to-bomb-venezuela/

US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth on Saturday declined to comment on whether the US was planning to bomb Venezuela amid a major US military buildup in the Caribbean and frequent strikes on alleged drug boats in the waters of Latin America.

“Appreciate the question, but, of course, we would not share any amount of operational details about what may or may not happen,” Hegseth said in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, when asked if the US was preparing to strike inside Venezuela.

The Miami Herald reported on Friday that the US has made a decision to attack military targets inside Venezuela as part of a campaign against the government of President Nicolas Maduro, whom the US seeks to oust. The report said that the US strikes could begin within a matter of “hours or days.”

When asked by reporters on Friday if he was planning strikes inside Venezuela, Trump said “no,” but he was asked again on Sunday and declined to answer. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who also serves as Trump’s national security advisor and has been leading the push toward regime change in Venezuela, also denied the Miami Herald report.

“Your ‘sources’ claiming to have ‘knowledge of the situation’ tricked you into writing a fake story,” Rubio wrote on X in response to the report.

For weeks, multiple media outlets have been reporting that the US is considering launching strikes in Venezuela, and the US has built up a force in the region that’s well beyond what is needed to bomb small, defenseless boats. US officials have also made clear that the real goal of the campaign is regime change in Venezuela, something Rubio has wanted for many years.

A US aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald Ford, is also being deployed to the Caribbean, and the US has begun to run weekly bomber flights near the coast of Venezuela. Much of the military action and the leaks to the media are part of a psychological campaign aimed at getting Maduro to voluntarily step down or someone in his inner circle to turn on him, but it’s unlikely that will happen.

November 5, 2025 Posted by | USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

US amassing 16,000 troops off Venezuelan coast – Washington Post

1 Nov, 2025, https://www.rt.com/news/627242-us-amass-troops-venezuelan-coast/

The American forces in the area reportedly include eight Navy ships, a special operations vessel, and a nuclear-powered submarine.

The US is deploying a massive military contingent to an area near Venezuela, including 10,000 soldiers and 6,000 sailors, the Washington Post has reported. The move may indicate plans to expand regional operations.

The US has repeatedly accused Venezuela of aiding “narcoterrorists” and has imposed sweeping sanctions on the country. The American military has also attacked about a dozen vessels since September, claiming they were used by drug smugglers.

Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro has denied the allegations, accusing Washington of “fabricating a new war” amid the continuing military buildup.

According to the Washington Post, eight US Navy warships, a special operations vessel, and a nuclear-powered attack submarine are already in the Caribbean. The aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford, expected to arrive next week, will reportedly bring with it three more military vessels, with a total of over 4,000 military personnel onboard.

Additionally, F-35 fighter jets are stationed at a US base in Puerto Rico, the Post reported, citing satellite images.

The arrival of the carrier group suggests Washington’s plans could extend beyond a counter-narcotics operation, Ryan Berg, the director of the Americas Program and the Center for Strategic & International Studies, told the outlet. He added that US President Donald Trump has about a month to make “a major decision” before the group would need to be redeployed.

Multiple media outlets have recently reported that the White House was weighing potential military actions in Venezuela. Senator Rick Scott told CBS last Sunday that Maduro’s “days are numbered.” The WaPo claimed on Thursday that Washington had already identified some targets, including military facilities allegedly used for drug-smuggling.

When asked about the reports on Friday, Trump said, “No. It’s not true.” Last month, Trump confirmed authorizing the CIA to carry out lethal covert operations in the region.

November 5, 2025 Posted by | SOUTH AMERICA, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »