nuclear-news

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

The Script of Anxiety: Poland’s Nuclear Weapons Fascination

we can only assume that the desire to have massively lethal weapons on one’s own soil that would risk obliterating life, limb and everything else is but a sporting parlour game of misplaced assumptions.  

March 17, 2025 Dr Binoy Kampmark , https://theaimn.net/the-script-of-anxiety-polands-nuclear-weapons-fascination/

With the Ukraine War and the retreat of the United States from what has routinely been called Europe’s security architecture, states are galloping to whatever point of presumed sanctuary is on offer. The general presumption is that the galloping is done in the same step and rhythm. But Europe, for all the heavy layers of union driven diplomacy, retains its salty differences.

Poland is particularly striking in this regard, having always positioned itself as a defender against the continent’s enemies, perceived or otherwise. This messianic purpose was well on show with the exploits of King John III Sobieski in his triumphant defence of Vienna against the Ottoman Empire in 1683. The seemingly endless wars against Russia, including the massacres and repressions, have also left their wounding marks on a fragile national psyche.  These marks continue to script the approach of Warsaw’s anxiety to its traditional enemy, one that has become fixated with a nuclear option, in addition to a massive buildup of its armed forces and a defence budget that has reached 4.7% of its national income. While there is some disagreement among government officials on whether Poland should pursue its own arsenal, a general mood towards stationing the nuclear weapons of allies has taken hold. (As a matter of interest, a February 21 poll for Onet found that 52.9 percent of Poles favoured having nuclear weapons, with 27.9 percent opposed.)

This would mirror, albeit from the opposite side, the Cold War history of Poland, when its army was equipped with Soviet nuclear-capable 8K11 and 3R10 missiles. With sweet irony, those weapons were intended to be used against NATO member states.

The flirtatious offer of French President Emmanual Macron to potentially extend his country’s nuclear arsenal as an umbrella of reassurance to other European states did make an impression on Poland’s leadership. Prudence might have dictated a more reticent approach, but Prime Minister Donald Tusk would have none of that before the Polish parliament. In his words, “We must be aware that Poland must reach for the most modern capabilities also related to nuclear weapons and modern unconventional weapons.” According to the PM, “this is a race for security, not for war.”

The Polish President, Andrzej Duda, is also warm to the US option (he has been, over his time in office, profoundly pro-American), despite Tusk’s concerns about a “profound change in American geopolitics.” He was already ruminating over the idea in 2022 when he made the proposal to the Biden administration to host US nuclear weapons, one that was also repeated in June 2023 by then-Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki. To have such weapons in Poland was a necessary “defensive tactic […] to Russia’s behaviour, relocating nuclear weapons to the NATO area,” he explained to the BBC. “Poland is ready to host this nuclear weapon.”

Duda then goes on to restate a familiar theme. Were US nuclear weapons stored on Polish soil, Washington would have little choice but to defend such territory against any threat. “Every kind of strategic infrastructure, American and NATO infrastructure, which we have on our soil is strengthening the inclination of the US and the North Atlantic Alliance to defend this territory.” To the Financial Times, Duda further reasoned that, as NATO’s borders had moved east in 1999, “so twenty-six years later there should also be a shift of the NATO infrastructure east.”  

Much of this seems like theatrical, puffy nonsense, given Poland’s membership of the NATO alliance, which has, as its central point, Article 5. Whether it involves its protection by a fellow NATO ally using conventional or nuclear weapons, hosting such nuclear weapons is negated as a value. Poland would receive collective military aid in any case should it be attacked. But, as Jon Wolfsthal of the Federation of American Scientists reasons, an innate concern of being abandoned in the face of aggression continues to cause jitters. Tusk’s remarks were possibly “a signal of concern – maybe to motivate the United States, but clearly designed to play on the French and perhaps the British.”

The crippling paranoia of the current government in the face of any perceived Russian threat becomes even less justifiable given the presence of US troops on its soil. According to the government’s own information, a total of 10,000 troops are present on a rotational basis, with US Land Forces V Corps Forward Command based in Poznań. In February, Duda confirmed to reporters after meeting the US envoy to Ukraine Gen. Keith Kellogg that there were “no concerns that the US would reduce the level of its presence in our country, that the US would in any way withdraw from its responsibility or co-responsibility for the security of this part of Europe.”  

Duda goes further, offering a sycophantic flourish. “I will say in my personal opinion,America has entered the game very strongly when it comes to ending the war in Ukraine. I know President Donald Trump, I know that he is an extremely decisive man and when he acts, he acts in a very determined and usually effective way.” With those remarks, we can only assume that the desire to have massively lethal weapons on one’s own soil that would risk obliterating life, limb and everything else is but a sporting parlour game of misplaced assumptions.  

March 18, 2025 Posted by | EUROPE, weapons and war | Leave a comment

They had a fairytale American childhood – but was radiation slowly killing them?

Decades later, federal investigators acknowledged an increased cancer risk for some people who played in the creek as children,

Sophie Williams, BBC News, Washington DC, 16 Mar 25

After Kim Visintine put her son to bed every night at a hospital in St Louis, Missouri, she spent her evening in the hospital’s library. She was determined to know how her boy had become seriously ill with a rare brain tumour at just a week old.

“Doctors were shocked,” she says. “We were told that his illness was one in a million. Other parents were learning to change diapers but I was learning how to change chemotherapy ports and IVs.”

Kim’s son Zack was diagnosed with a glioblastoma multiforme. It is a brain tumour that is very rare in children and is usually seen in adults over 45.

Zack had chemotherapy treatments but doctors said there was no hope of him ever recovering. He died at just six years old.

Years later, social media and community chatter made Kim start to think that her son was not an isolated case. Perhaps he was part of a bigger picture growing in their community surrounding Coldwater Creek.

In this part of the US, cancer fears have prompted locals to accuse officials of not doing enough to support those who may have been exposed to radiation due to the development of the atomic bomb in the 1940s.

A compensation programme that was designed to pay out to some Americans who contracted diseases after exposure to radiation expired last year – before it could be extended to the St Louis area.

This Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (Reca) provided one-time payouts to people who may have developed cancer or other diseases while living in areas where activities such as atomic weapons testing took place. It paid out $2.6bn (£2bn) to more than 41,000 claimants before coming to an end in 2024.

Benefits were paid to such neighbours, frequently called “downwinders”, in Arizona, Utah and Nevada, but not New Mexico, where the world’s first test of a nuclear weapon took place in 1945. Research published in 2020 by the National Cancer Institute suggested that hundreds of cancers in the area would not have occurred without radiation exposure.

St Louis, meanwhile, was where uranium was refined and used to help create the atomic bomb as part of the Manhattan Project. After World War Two ended, the chemical was dumped near the creek and left uncovered, allowing waste to seep into the area.

Decades later, federal investigators acknowledged an increased cancer risk for some people who played in the creek as children, but added in their report: “The predicted increases in the number of cancer cases from exposures are small, and no method exists to link a particular cancer with this exposure.”

The clean-up of the creek is still ongoing and is not expected to finish until 2038.

A new bill has been put forward in the House, and Josh Hawley, a US senator representing Missouri, says he has raised the issue with President Donald Trump.

When Kim flicks through her school yearbook, she can identify those who have become sick and those who have since passed away. The numbers are startling.

“My husband didn’t grow up in this area, and he said to me, ‘Kim, this is not normal. It seems like we’re always talking about one of your friends passing away or going to a funeral’,” she says.

Just streets away from the creek, Karen Nickel grew up spending her days near the water picking berries, or in the nearby park playing baseball. Her brother would often try and catch fish in Coldwater Creek.

“I always tell people that we had just the fairytale childhood that you would expect in what you consider suburban America,” says Karen. “Big backyards, big families, children playing out together until the street lights came on at night.”

But years later, her carefree childhood now looks very different.

“Fifteen people from the street I grew up on have died from rare cancers,” she says. “We have neighbourhoods here where every house has been affected by some cancer or some illness. We have streets where you can’t just find a house where a family has not been affected by this.”

When Karen’s sister was just 11 years old, doctors discovered that her ovaries were covered in cysts. The same had happened to their neighbour when she was just nine. Karen’s six-year-old granddaughter was born with a mass on her right ovary.

Karen helped found Just Moms STL, a group that is dedicated to protecting the community from future exposures that could be linked to cancers – and which advocates for a clean-up of the area.

“We get messages every day from people that are suffering from illnesses and are questioning whether this is from exposure,” she says. “These are very aggressive illnesses that the community is getting, from cancers all the way to autoimmune diseases.”

Teresa Rumfelt grew up just a street away from Karen and lived in her family home from 1979 until 2010. She remembers every one of her animals passing away from cancer and her neighbours getting ill from rare diseases.

Years later, her sister Via Von Banks was diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), a form of motor neurone disease. Some medical studies have suggested there could be a link between radiation and ALS, but this is not definitive – and more research needs to be done to firm it up.

That does not reassure people like Teresa who are concerned that more needs to be done to understand how locals are being affected.

“ALS took my sister at 50,” Teresa says. “I think it was the worst disease ever of mankind. When she was diagnosed in 2019, she’d just got her career going and her children were growing. She stayed positive through all of it.”

Like Hawley, Just STL Moms and other community members want the government’s compensation act to be expanded to include people within the St Louis area, despite the programme being in limbo after expiring.

Expanding it to the Coldwater Creek community would mean that locals could be offered compensation if they could prove they were harmed as a result of the Manhattan Project, during which the atomic bomb was developed with the help of uranium-processing in St Louis. It would also allow screenings and further study into illnesses other than cancer.

In a statement to the BBC, the US government’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said it took concerns very seriously and had actively worked with federal, state and local partners – as well as community members – to understand their health concerns, and to ensure community members were not exposed to the Manhattan Project-era waste.

The BBC has also contacted the US Army Corps of Engineers, which is leading the clean-up – but has not received a response to a request for comment.

“My sister would have loved to be part of the fight. She’d be the first to picket,” says Teresa of her efforts to get greater support from the government.

The trend in people around Coldwater Creek getting unwell has not gone unnoticed among healthcare professionals.

Dr Gautum Agarwal, a cancer surgeon at Mercy Hospital in St Louis, says he has not noticed a “statistical thing”, but notes that he has seen husbands and wives and their neighbours presenting cancers.

Now, he ensures that his patients are asked where they live and how close they are to Coldwater Creek.

“I tell them that there’s a potential that there’s a link. And if your neighbours or family live near there, we should get them screened more often. And maybe you should get your kids screened earlier.”

He hopes that over time more knowledge will be gained about the issue, and for a study into multi-cancer early detection tests to be introduced that could help catch any potential cancers, and help reassure people in the area……….. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c2e7011n03vo

March 18, 2025 Posted by | health, PERSONAL STORIES, USA | Leave a comment

Canada to review the purchase of US-made F-35 fighter jets in light of Trump’s trade war

By  ROB GILLIES, March 16, 2025

TORONTO (AP) — Canada’s new Prime Minister Mark Carney has asked Defense Minister Bill Blair to review the purchase of America’s F-35 fighter jet to see if there are other options “given the changing environment,” a spokesman for Blair said Saturday.

Defense ministry press secretary Laurent de Casanove said the contract to purchase U.S. military contractor Lockheed Martin’s F-35 currently remains in place and Canada has made a legal commitment of funds for the first 16 aircraft. Canada agreed to buy 88 F-35’s two years ago.

Carney, who was sworn in on Friday, has asked Blair to work with the military “to determine if the F-35 contract, as it stands, is the best investment for Canada, and if there are other options that could better meet Canada’s needs,” de Casanove said……………………………………………………………………………………………………..more https://apnews.com/article/f35-canada-trump-0d3bf192d3490d87570d48475ff2c3a6

March 18, 2025 Posted by | Canada, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Putin Signals He’s Open to Ceasefire as Witkoff Arrives for Talks.

An aide to Putin said the proposal would only help Ukraine regroup and that it would need to be adjusted to meet Moscow’s position

by Dave DeCamp March 13, 2025, https://news.antiwar.com/2025/03/13/us-envoy-arrives-in-russia-to-discuss-30-day-ceasefire-proposal-with-putin/

Russian President Vladimir Putin has signaled that he’s open to a ceasefire in Ukraine but that he has “questions” about the 30-day US-Ukraine proposal that need to be discussed.

“The idea itself is the right one, and we definitely support it,” Putin said, according to The New York Times. “But there are questions that we need to discuss, and I think that we need to talk them through with our American colleagues and partners.”

The Russian leader listed potential conditions for a 30-day truce, including a guarantee that Ukraine wouldn’t be supplied with more weapons. “We also want guarantees that during the 30-day ceasefire, Ukraine will not conduct mobilization, will not train soldiers, and will not receive weapons,” he said, according to RT.

Putin also questioned who would monitor the ceasefire. “Who will determine where and who has violated a potential ceasefire agreement along a 2,000-kilometer line? Who will attribute blame for any violations? These are all questions that require thorough examination from both sides,” he said.

The Russian leader said any long-term peace deal needs to address the “root causes” of the war. He made the comments as US envoy Steve Witkoff arrived in Russia to discuss the proposal. Yuri Ushakov, a Kremlin official, said Witkoff would be holding a closed-door meeting with Putin.

Ushakov also said the US-Ukraine proposal would only give Ukraine a chance to regroup, and it would need to be adjusted to meet Moscow’s interests.

“As for the 30-day temporary ceasefire, what is it about? There is nothing in it for us. It will only provide the Ukrainians with the opportunity to regroup and gain strength to continue doing what they are doing,” he said, according to Russia’s TASS news agency.

“These are some hasty actions that do not benefit a long-term settlement … We will need to work on it, to think it over so that it reflects our position, too. It reflects only Ukraine’s stance at this point,” he added.

Ushakov said that Russia wanted a long-term peace deal and that the “official” Russian position on the US-Ukraine proposal would be formulated by Putin.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov made similar comments opposing the idea of a temporary ceasefire, pointing to the Minsk Accords, which were first reached in 2014 for a truce in Ukraine’s eastern Donbas region. Lavrov also mentioned the “Istanbul agreement,” referring to a peace deal that was on the table in March and April 2022, which was discouraged by the US and its allies.

“I’m talking about the Minsk Accords, the deal that was discarded after the 2014 coup, and the Istanbul agreements. All of those included a ceasefire. And every time, it turned out that they had lied to us. The Ukrainians lied with the support of their European partners,” Lavrov said.

A joint statement between the US and Ukraine that was released after talks in Saudi Arabia on Tuesday said that Ukraine had “expressed readiness to accept the US proposal to enact an immediate, interim 30-day ceasefire, which can be extended by mutual agreement of the parties, and which is subject to acceptance and concurrent implementation by the Russian Federation.”

The statement also said that the US had resumed military aid and intelligence sharing for Ukraine, which was briefly paused. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said that if Russia doesn’t accept the 30-day proposal, the US would then know who the “impediment” to peace is, signaling he wants the proxy war will continue as usual if a deal isn’t reached.

March 17, 2025 Posted by | politics international, Russia, Ukraine | Leave a comment

China, Russia back Iran as Trump presses Tehran for nuclear talks

By Ryan Woo, Xiuhao Chen and Laurie Chen, March 14, 2025,

  • Summary
  • China, Russia, Iran say talks should be based on mutual respect
  • They say ‘unlawful’ unilateral sanctions should be lifted
  • China, Russia urge respect for Iran’s right to peaceful uses of nuclear energy

BEIJING, March 14 (Reuters) – China and Russia stood by Iran on Friday after the United States demanded nuclear talks with Tehran, with senior Chinese and Russian diplomats saying dialogue should only resume based on “mutual respect” and all sanctions ought to be lifted.

In a joint statement issued after talks with Iran in Beijing, China and Russia also said they welcomed Iran’s reiteration that its nuclear programme was exclusively for peaceful purposes, and that Tehran’s right to peaceful uses of nuclear energy should be “fully” respected………………………………………………… https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/china-iran-russia-kick-off-talks-beijing-over-irans-nuclear-issues-2025-03-14/

March 17, 2025 Posted by | China, Iran, politics, Russia | Leave a comment

Royal Navy: Powerful new nuclear submarines being built costing £41bn – when will they enter the fleet?

 Ben Obese-Jecty MP, Conservative MP for
Huntingdon, enquired about the construction in a parliamentary written
question to the Ministry of Defence (MoD). Minister of defence procurement,
Maria Eagle, said: “The programme remains on track to manufacture four
Dreadnought Class submarines within the original cost estimate of £41bn,
consisting of £31bn and a contingency of £10bn. The First of Class, HMS
Dreadnought, will enter service in the early 2030s.”

 Portsmouth News 14th March 2025.
https://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/defence/royal-navy-new-nuclear-submarines-when-5033798

March 17, 2025 Posted by | UK | Leave a comment

How multi-billion nuclear weapons facility aims to overcome challenge of limited supply chain


 New Civil Engineer 14th March 2025,  By Tom Pashby

The UK’s nuclear warhead manufacturing organisation is facing recruitment challenges as it attempts to attract civil engineering firms to work on its multi-billion pound Future Materials Campus (FMC) project.

What is AWE’s FMC?

AWE (the Atomic Weapons Establishment) is seeking construction and engineering partners to build a new manufacturing facility at its AWE Aldermaston site in Berkshire for its next generation ‘Astraea’ nuclear warhead.

In December, AWE launched a prior information notice (PIN) kicking off preliminary market engagement for its FMC to support the proposed procurement in 2025. AWE invited parties across the construction supplier base to register their interest in participating in future market engagement activities.

AWE said: “[The FMC] is part of a wider, multi-year multi-billion-pound portfolio of infrastructure investment that will support us in our overall purpose to protect the UK through nuclear science and technology and enable nuclear science for generations to come.”

AWE recognises supply chain capacity is ‘one of the biggest challenges’

NCE spoke with AWE to learn about what the organisation is doing to address supply chain constraints as the civil nuclear sector – and infrastructure more broadly – gears up for expected increase in investment and demand.

“One of the biggest challenges we anticipate is ensuring sufficient supply chain capacity and capability to deliver a programme of this scale and complexity,” AWE said.

……………………………………….NCE recently spoke with University of Sussex principal research fellow Phil Johnstone, who said that the demand for more skills capacity in the wider UK nuclear sector is push factor for the demand for the FMC, in addition to its role in providing warheads. This aligns with AWE’s assertion that its FMC will “enable nuclear science for generations to come”……………………………………………………………………………………..

Civil engineering trade representative says all projects facing skills challenges………………………………………………………………………………. https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/how-multi-billion-nuclear-weapons-facility-aims-to-overcome-challenge-of-limited-supply-chain-14-03-2025/

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

Dialogue only viable option to solve Iranian nuclear issue

Diplomacy must remain the primary tool for resolving disputes and crises, and not be used only as a last resort after aggressive policies have failed

 Xinhua, Editor: huaxia, 2025-03-15 more https://english.news.cn/20250315/0e246e2703d64d58a08113de887e3932/c.html

 The Iranian nuclear issue is not just about Iran — it is a test of whether global governance will be defined by cooperation or coercion.

BEIJING, March 15 (Xinhua) — In a world fraught with geopolitical tensions, the Iranian nuclear issue is a critical test of the international community’s commitment to peace, diplomacy and multilateralism.

Whether diplomacy prevails or “maximum pressure” tactics take center stage will shape the region’s stability and set a precedent for global non-proliferation efforts.

The joint statement issued by China, Russia and Iran on Friday after a trilateral meeting in Beijing reaffirms a shared conviction: political and diplomatic engagement and dialogue are not merely preferable but the only viable and practical option to address this complex challenge.

At the heart of the discussions was a shared commitment to rejecting unilateral sanctions and coercive measures. Diplomacy must remain the primary tool for resolving disputes and crises, and not be used only as a last resort after aggressive policies have failed.

In an increasingly complex and fragile international environment, relying on sanctions and military posturing is not only counterproductive but also dangerously short-sighted, promoting instability rather than fostering meaningful engagement.

A sustainable resolution requires a holistic approach, one that balances nuclear non-proliferation with the legitimate right to peaceful nuclear energy. While Iran must continue to uphold its commitment not to develop nuclear weapons, all parties must also fully respect its right to civilian nuclear programs, as recognized under international law.

The 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) once demonstrated the power of dialogue, proving that even the most entrenched disputes can yield to diplomacy when all parties engage in good faith.

However, the unilateral withdrawal of the United States from the agreement and its subsequent “maximum pressure” campaign have left the JCPOA in jeopardy.

Xinhua Commentary: Dialogue only viable option to solve Iranian nuclear issue

Source: Xinhua

Editor: huaxia

2025-03-15 09:43:15

   

This photo taken on Jan. 1, 2025 shows the sunrise scenery in Tehran, Iran. (Xinhua/Shadati)

The Iranian nuclear issue is not just about Iran — it is a test of whether global governance will be defined by cooperation or coercion.

BEIJING, March 15 (Xinhua) — In a world fraught with geopolitical tensions, the Iranian nuclear issue is a critical test of the international community’s commitment to peace, diplomacy and multilateralism.

Whether diplomacy prevails or “maximum pressure” tactics take center stage will shape the region’s stability and set a precedent for global non-proliferation efforts.

The joint statement issued by China, Russia and Iran on Friday after a trilateral meeting in Beijing reaffirms a shared conviction: political and diplomatic engagement and dialogue are not merely preferable but the only viable and practical option to address this complex challenge.

At the heart of the discussions was a shared commitment to rejecting unilateral sanctions and coercive measures. Diplomacy must remain the primary tool for resolving disputes and crises, and not be used only as a last resort after aggressive policies have failed.

In an increasingly complex and fragile international environment, relying on sanctions and military posturing is not only counterproductive but also dangerously short-sighted, promoting instability rather than fostering meaningful engagement.

A sustainable resolution requires a holistic approach, one that balances nuclear non-proliferation with the legitimate right to peaceful nuclear energy. While Iran must continue to uphold its commitment not to develop nuclear weapons, all parties must also fully respect its right to civilian nuclear programs, as recognized under international law.

The 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) once demonstrated the power of dialogue, proving that even the most entrenched disputes can yield to diplomacy when all parties engage in good faith.

However, the unilateral withdrawal of the United States from the agreement and its subsequent “maximum pressure” campaign have left the JCPOA in jeopardy.

Against this backdrop, China’s call to uphold the JCPOA as the foundation for renewed consensus is both practical and visionary. The agreement remains a rare diplomatic achievement that balances Iran’s right to peaceful nuclear energy with non-proliferation imperatives — a balance that must guide future diplomatic efforts.

By advocating for a process rooted in respect rather than ultimatums, China seeks to bridge divides and restore the JCPOA’s original spirit.

The trilateral meeting came after six of the United Nations (UN) Security Council’s 15 members — the United States, France, Greece, Panama, South Korea and Britain — met behind closed doors on the Iranian nuclear issue.

This exclusive gathering raises concerns about the politicization of the issue. What is needed now is dialogue and cooperation, rather than an imposed intervention by the Security Council.

Under the current circumstances, a hasty intervention by the Security Council will not help build trust or bridge differences. Meanwhile, triggering a snap-back of sanctions would undo years of diplomatic efforts.

A step-by-step and reciprocal approach is urgently needed. Instead of escalating tensions through unilateral measures, major countries should focus on restoring trust and ensuring compliance through engagement.

The Iranian nuclear issue is not just about Iran — it is a test of whether global governance will be defined by cooperation or coercion.  

March 16, 2025 Posted by | Iran, politics international | Leave a comment

Europe going nuclear would be a catastrophic mistake

Proposals for nuclear sharing as a form of deterrence risk bringing more insecurity to Europe.


Olamide Samuel, International security expert, 11 Mar 25 https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2025/3/11/europe-going-nuclear-would-be-a-catastrophic-mistake

The second administration of US President Donald Trump has brought about tectonic shifts in the European security calculus. Growing anxieties about American retrenchment and the collapse of post-World War II security arrangements have sent European leaders scrambling to put forward alternatives.

Ahead of the German elections last month, Friedrich Merz, the head of the Christian Democratic Union, who was already expected to become the next German chancellor, opined: “We need to have discussions with both the British and the French – the two European nuclear powers – about whether nuclear sharing, or at least nuclear security from the UK and France, could also apply to us”.

Last week, French President Emmanuel Macron said that in response to Merz, he has decided to “open the strategic debate on the protection of our allies on the European continent through our [nuclear] deterrence”.

The proposal for some form of European nuclear sharing arrangement with France and the United Kingdom to protect against threats from Moscow is not new. Versions of it have been floated around for decades.

But today, resurfacing this proposal is not just a geopolitical miscalculation; it is a strategic dead end. It reflects a misreading of both the nuclear balance of power and the existential risks of fragmenting Europe’s security architecture further. Rather than bolstering deterrence, this gambit risks accelerating the very instability it seeks to avert.

Amid the growing unpredictability of United States-Russia relations under the second Trump administration, Europe must pivot from nuclear escapism to a bold agenda of diplomatic engagement on nuclear disarmament.

The fantasy of European nuclear sharing

The proposal for European nuclear sharing founders on arithmetic and strategic reality. Russia’s nuclear arsenal boasts 5,580 warheads, including hypersonic Avangard glide vehicles and Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). This dwarfs the combined Anglo-French stockpile of 515 warheads.

This asymmetry isn’t merely quantitative; it is also doctrinal. Moscow’s “escalate to de-escalate” strategy represents a calculated approach to conflict escalation designed to coerce adversaries into concessions. It is a strategy the British and French nuclear arsenals, optimised for minimal deterrence, cannot counter.

Data on defence spending reveals a deeper flaw: Europeans do not have the funds or the technological capabilities to carry it out while executing their ambitious rearmament plans.

Germany’s 90.6-billion euro ($98bn) military budget remains crippled by inefficiencies, with only 50 percent of army equipment meeting NATO readiness standards. Meanwhile, France and the UK lack the conventional force multipliers – global surveillance networks, intelligence capabilities, or even complete nuclear triads – that underpin US extended deterrence. Even if every euro cent of the European Union’s recently announced 800 billion-euro ($867 billion) defence boost were spent on nuclear weapons programmes, cold-starting the sort of production complexes required for a credible deterrent would still take decades.

Attempting to replicate NATO’s nuclear-coalition model at a European level ignores six decades of integrated command structures and fails to address hybrid threats now defining modern conflict.

What is more, replacing one dependency with another solves nothing. Proponents claim nuclear sharing offers protection, but the reality is that it can lead to strategic subjugation.

Neither France nor the UK is likely to give up control over its nuclear arsenals and transfer it to the EU. That means that a nuclear-sharing agreement would reduce Germany and other European countries participating in the arrangement to Franco-British warhead warehouses with no real agency. This Potemkin deterrence—all ceremony, no substance—would only further irritate Washington.

Trump has already shown that he has no qualms about abandoning allies if he sees no benefit for the US strategic interest. His recent moves to stop intelligence sharing and military aid for Ukraine and his conditioning mutual defence on military spending have exposed NATO’s fraying norms – the alliance is witnessing a collapse of shared purpose.

As experts note, Trump’s “MAGA Carta” foreign policy explicitly rejects strategic altruism. A European nuclear caucus would signal panic, validating Trump’s transactional world view while undermining NATO’s cohesion.

A European nuclear club would deepen fragmentation, emboldening revisionist actors like Russia and China while diverting resources from critical gaps in AI advancement, sustainable economic output, and energy resilience that define 21st-century power.

The economic argument compounds the folly. Pouring billions of euros from Europe’s finite resources into redundant warheads while neglecting practical gaps in conventional capability isn’t statecraft—it’s generational malpractice.

Disarmament and fiscal realpolitik

The EU’s opportunity lies not in nuclear posturing, but in revitalising arms control and mediation. The collapse of the US-Russia strategic dialogue since the invasion of Ukraine has left critical arms control frameworks in disarray.

The New START treaty, which limits deployed strategic nuclear warheads to 1,550 each for Russia and the US, remains the last pillar of bilateral arms control. Its expiration in 2026 without a successor would mark the first time since 1972 that the world’s nuclear superpowers operate without mutually verified limits—a scenario that could trigger a new nuclear arms race.

Herein lies Europe’s opportunity. Rather than pursuing a European nuclear umbrella, it could lead efforts to revive nuclear disarmament dialogue.

Austria, an EU member, has already played a key role in nuclear talks between the West and Iran as well as the 2020 US-Russia-China trilateral arms control discussions. This positions it as an ideal venue for restarting negotiations on nuclear risk reduction issues, especially at a time when Washington is open to renewed dialogue with Moscow.

Taking a lead on nuclear disarmament would be the sort of leadership that would reflect a more mature interpretation of security policy, as opposed to seeking an impossible nuclear deterrence.

Some critics maintain that negotiating with Russia rewards aggression. Yet history shows even bitter adversaries can cooperate on arms control when interests align. The 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, which eliminated 2,692 missiles, was finalised after years of heightened tensions between the USSR and the US in the early 1980s.

The treaty succeeded not because US President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev trusted each other, but because dismantling missiles saved both sides a significant amount of funds that would have gone into continuing the arms race and maintaining the destroyed ordinance.

Today, with Russia’s economy faltering amid the war in Ukraine and Trump’s fixation with cost-cutting, there is an opportunity to pursue another deal if disarmament is framed not as idealism, but as fiscal pragmatism. Europe can help broker a deal that serves all parties’ wallets—and humanity’s survival.

The unintended consequences of Trump’s first-term nuclear gambits – escalated arms racing, eroded alliances, and emboldened adversaries – offer cautionary lessons. His second term, however, can offer an opportunity to shift the Doomsday Clock back from its position of 89 seconds to midnight.

Europe now faces a choice: to cling to Cold War relics while the planet burns, or to pioneer a security paradigm prioritising planetary survival over great-power vanity. The decision it makes will define not just Europe’s future—but all of humanity’s.

Olamide Samuel

Olamide Samuel. International security expert

Dr Olamide Samuel is a renowned international security expert and Network Specialist at the Open Nuclear Network. Previously, he served as Special Envoy of the African Commission on Nuclear Energy (AFCONE), established by the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty, also known as the Treaty of Pelindaba.

March 16, 2025 Posted by | EUROPE, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Court upholds two legal challenges to the Chalk River Radioactive Megadump.

Gordon Edwards, 14 Mar 25

 The radioactive megadump planned for Chalk River (an “engineered mound” intended to contain about one million tonnes of so-called “Low-level” radioactive waste in a permanent landfill-like toxic waste dump just one kilometre from the Ottawa River) was planned by Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) and approved by CNSC.

Three legal challenges against this decision were launched in the Federal Appeals Court. The first had to do with the inadequacy of the safety case and the lack of adequate monitoring of the contents of the megadump. The second had to do with the failure to consult the Indigenous Algonquin peoples as required by the “Duty to Consult” and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). The third challenge had to do with the failure to consider alternative sites for such a toxic waste facility to provide adequate protection for endangered species.

Although the first challenge was not successful, the good news is that the second and third challenges were upheld by the court and CNSC and CNL will have to re-open the regulatory process to correct the inadequacies that have been noted. This does not mean that the existing megadumo has been forbidden but that more work must be done by both the proponent and the regulator to satisfactorily address these inadequacies.

The success of the third challenge was only announced yesterday.

The Federal Court overturned the Species at Risk permit for the nuclear waste facility planned for Chalk River, just 180 km up the Ottawa River from Ottawa.

The project proponent, CNL, said that the construction would harm, harass, or kill the endangered Blanding’s Turtle and 2 endangered bat species.

The Court found that CNL did not consider all reasonable alternative locations, and CNL admitted that it picked Chalk River even though it was less favourable for protecting species at risk than two other viable sites.

This violated s. 73(3)(a) of the Species at Risk Act, which says that “all” reasonable alternatives that would reduce the impact on species at risk must be considered and the best solution must be adopted.

 There’s a lot to parse, but essentially, Justice Zinn agreed about the first 2 issues (not all reasonable locations were considered, and the best option was not chosen), but disagreed about the others (bat boxes, wildlife corridors, bird nests, the Monarch).

The win on the location issue is huge, of course. If they have to pick a new location, they have to start over from scratch and none of the other issues matter. See para 48 (of the decision) for some good reasoning by Zinn J:

“During both the hearing and public consultation with the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, CNL conceded that it would only consider non-AECL properties if no suitable AECL-owned site was identified. This admission confirms that CNL’s default approach was to confine its search to AECL lands unless compelled to broaden it. This methodology is directly at odds with the statutory mandate under paragraph 73(3)(a). The Minister failed to reconcile this self-imposed limitation with the statutory requirement for a comparative assessment of ecological impacts on protected species. I am of the view that, even if a non-AECL site posed greater logistical challenges, such as increased transportation distances, the Act would still require CNL to consider it if it offered reduced harm to at-risk species. Administrative or logistical difficulties do not absolve the project’s proponent of its duty to evaluate such alternatives under paragraph 73(3)(a), even if those factors later justify rejecting them.”

Unfortunately, this does not mean that ECCC will not approve the permit for Chalk River. The decision is being sent back for redetermination, as is normal in admin law cases. From Zinn’s interpretation of the statutory language, it’s hard to see how it could be approved for Chalk River, given CNL’s deficient siting process, but Zinn seemed to be aware of these massive implications and tried to avoid these repercussions. He goes out of his way to say that it could be possible for ECCC to approve the permit for Chalk River if 1) they give appropriate justification for only looking at AECL sites (para 50) and 2) interpreted “best option” differently than ECCC has in the past, to include non-species-at-risk factors, and justified this different interpretation (paras 57-61).

March 16, 2025 Posted by | Canada, Legal, wastes | 1 Comment

‘Ukraine will not recognize any territory occupied by Russia’: Zelensky


Tyler Durden, Zero Hedge, Wed, 12 Mar 2025,  https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/moscow-studying-30-day-truce-plan-while-making-steady-battlefield-gains-meantime

 On Wednesday Zelensky shut the door on territorial concessions, awkwardly at a moment Ukraine has just agreed to a US plan for a 30-day ceasefire intended to pave the way for extended peace negotiations. An initial statement from the Kremlin said that Putin likely to eventually agree to truce but with own terms as Moscow “studies” the Trump-sponsored proposal hammered out during the Tuesday Jeddah talks.

Zelensky said in fresh comments:

“We are fighting for our independence. Therefore, we will not recognize any occupied territories as Russia’s. This is a fact. Our people have fought for this, our heroes died. How many injured, how many passed. No one will forget about it… This is the most important red line. We will not let anyone forget about this crime against Ukraine.”

But Russia’s red line in any near-future negotiations will be to demand recognition of the Russian Federations sovereign control over the four easter territories of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhia regions – which President Putin has previously referred to as “our citizens forever.”

As for Zelensky’s new proclamation that he won’t cede territory, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters just after the Ukraine-US talks in Saudi Arabia that discussions with Kiev’s delegations included “territorial concessions” as part of a negotiated settlement. The suggestion from the US side is that Ukraine showed openness and willingness on this question. So either the two allies can’t get on the same page (which is no surprise), or else Zelensky is trying to tank these negotiation efforts before they ever get off the ground, also as the White House has pressed Kiev to hold new presidential elections.

Fresh comments from Zelensky asserting Ukraine will NOT recognize any territory occupied by Russia…

Certainly Russia sees no need to rush into negotiations, especially if Zelensky is unwilling to budge on territory in the east, given all the battlefield gains of late. Kursk will also soon return to full Russian control, as Ukrainian forces there are reportedly in disarray, and as Moscow has taken back over a dozen key sites just this week.

The Kremlin says it is “studying” statements issued by the US and Ukrainian delegations following yesterday’s talks in Jeddah, and further describes Russian officials are waiting for a fuller briefing from the US on the proposal. The 30-day ceasefire plan calls for a halt to all the fighting on land, sea and in the air – whichcan be extended by mutual agreement, with a hoped-for path to a permanent truce based on negotiations in the interim.

Zelensky in a Tuesday X post said the ceasefire will apply to missile, drone and bomb attacks “not only in the Black Sea, but also along the entire front line” – though its as yet unclear what mechanism there will be to monitor this.

The joint statement issued from Jeddah said the sides “will communicate to Russia that Russian reciprocity is the key to achieving peace.” Thus nothing will happen unless Moscow agrees.

Washington has agreed to lift the Trump ban on arms and intelligence for Kiev, while at the same time Kiev and Washington agreed on inking a deal on Ukraine’s critical minerals “as soon as possible”.

Russian state media is meanwhile reporting that President Putin is open to holding a telephone conversation with his US counterpart.

On the potential for a new Trump call to discuss progress toward setting up negotiations and a truce, spokesman Dimitry Peskov said Wednesday:

“We also do not rule out that the topic of a call at the highest level may arise. If such a need emerges, it will be organized very quickly. The existing channels of dialogue with the Americans make it possible to do this in a relatively short time.”

If it happens this would mark the second call since Trump’s inauguration, after the prior February 12 call. Theoretically this could lead to an in-person meeting between the two leaders if all goes well.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio is traveling back from the meeting in Saudi Arabia, and gave some remarks to a press conference in Ireland:


  • Deterrence against future attacks on Ukraine will be a crucial element of future negotiations.
  • The US-Ukraine minerals deal benefits both nations and deepens Washington’s interest in Ukraine, but “I would not couch it as a security guarantee”.
  • European sanctions against Russia will be part of the negotiations, making Europe’s involvement in the process essential.
  • Any truce could be effectively monitored, but “one of the things we’ll have to determine is who both sides trust on the ground” to oversee it.

Ukraine continues to hold little to no leverage, given Russia is fast taking back its territory in Kursk as of mid-week. Over a dozen settlements have been liberated, and by all accounts Ukraine forces are in retreat there, also as Russian troops are currently in the center of Sudzha town.

One regional sources says that the Russian advance has been swift especially after one particularly daring operation: “Reports over the weekend claimed that 800 Russian special forces had crawled for 15 kilometers through an unused section of pipeline, which once carried Russian gas to Europe via Ukraine, in order to carry out a sneak attack on Ukrainian forces in Sudzha,” writes Moscow Times.

These developments mean that Putin is even less likely to agree to any temporary pause in fighting. In January statements he had warned the Kremlin will not sign off on any temporary truces – given Ukraine could just use it to rearm, resupply, and regroup. Moscow has less incentive to sign onto a deal unless territorial concessions are part of it, given that at this rate it can just keep advancing in territory, particularly in the Donbass.

March 16, 2025 Posted by | politics international, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Uranium fever collides with industry’s dark past in Navajo country

Mining.com, Bloomberg News | January 14, 2025

A few miles south of the Grand Canyon, thousands of tons of uranium ore, reddish-gray, blue and radioactive, are piled up high in a clearing in the forest.

They’ve been there for months, stranded by a standoff between the mining company that dug them deep out of the ground, Energy Fuels Inc., and the leader of the Navajo Nation, Buu Nygren.

Back in the summer, Energy Fuels had triggered an uproar when it loaded some of the ore onto a truck, slapped a “radioactive” sign over the taillights and drove it through the heart of Navajo territory.

Radioactive is an alarming word anywhere, but here in Navajo country, surrounded by hundreds of abandoned uranium mines that powered America’s nuclear arms race with the USSR and spewed toxic waste into the land, it causes terror. Those fears have only grown the past couple years as nuclear power came back in vogue and sparked a uranium rush in mining camps all across the Southwest.

So when the news made it to Nygren that morning, he was furious. No one had sought his consent for the shipment. He quickly ordered dozens of police officers to throw on their sirens, fan out and intercept the truck.

The dragnet turned up nothing in the end — the truck snuck through — but the hard-line response delivered a warning, amplified over social media and ratified days later by the governor of Arizona, to the miners: Stay out of Navajo country.

Cut off from the lone processing mill in the US — all the main routes cut through Navajo territory — executives at Energy Fuels stockpiled it by the entrance of the mine. When the heaps of crushed rock grew too sprawling, they pulled the miners out of the tunnels and turned the drilling machines off…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Animosity towards mining companies runs high on Navajo land. It’s visible everywhere. On huge roadside billboards and small office signs, in fading pinks and yellows and jet blacks, too. They read “Radioactive Pollution Kills” and “Haul No” and, along the main entrance to Cameron, a hard-scrabble village on the territory’s western edge, “No Uranium Mining.”

A few miles down the road, big mounds of sand streaked gray and blue rise, one after the other, high above the vast desert landscape. They are the tailings from some of the uranium mines that were abandoned in the territory last century.

To Ray Yellowfeather, a 50-year-old construction worker, the tailings were always the “blue hills,” just one big playground for him and his childhood friends.

“We would climb up the blue hills and slide back down,” Yellowfeather says. “Nobody told us they were dangerous.”

Years later, they would be cordoned off by the Environmental Protection Agency as it began work to clean up the mines. By then, though, the damage was done. Like many around here, Yellowfeather says he’s lost several family members to stomach cancer. The last of them was his mother in 2022.

Yellowfeather admits he doesn’t know exactly what caused their cancer but, he says, “I have to think it has to do with the piles of radioactive waste all around us.” It’s in the construction material in many of the homes and buildings and in the aquifers, too. To this day, drinking water is shipped into some of the hardest-hit areas.

The US government has recognized the harm its nuclear arms projects have done to communities in the Southwest. In 1990, Congress passed a law to compensate victims who contracted cancer and other diseases. It paid out some $2.5 billion over the ensuing three decades. The EPA, meanwhile, has been in charge of the clean-up of the abandoned mines. Two decades after the program began, though, only a small percentage have been worked on at all.

This is giving mining companies an opportunity to curry favor in tribal communities by offering to take over and expedite the clean-up of some mines.

…………………………………………………………………………..the EPA released a detailed study on Pinyon Plain. In it, the agency found that operations at the mine could contaminate the water supply of the Havasupai, a tribe tucked in such a remote corner of the Grand Canyon that it receives mail by mule. The report emboldened Havasupai leaders to step up their opposition to the mine, adding to Chalmers’s growing list of problems.

For the Navajo, the risks that come from the hauling of uranium through its territory are far smaller — so negligible as to be almost non-existent, according to Chalmers. Nygren is unmoved. The Navajo have heard such reassurances many times before, he says, only to pay dearly in the end.

Nygren grew up near a cluster of old mines right along the territory’s Arizona-Utah border, which makes the whole Energy Fuels affair “incredibly personal,” he says. His voice grows louder now and his tone more emphatic, indignant. To him, the Energy Fuels incursion feels no different than all the abuses committed over the course of decades by the US government and the mining companies that supplied it with a steady stream of uranium.

“We played a big role in the national security of the United States and we played a big part in the Cold War, providing energy for nuclear weapons. We’ve done our part. And now it’s time for the US to do its part by cleaning up these mines and respecting our laws.”  https://www.mining.com/web/uranium-fever-collides-with-industrys-dark-past-in-navajo-country/

March 16, 2025 Posted by | environment, indigenous issues, Uranium, USA | Leave a comment

High stakes as Iran nuclear issue reaches crunch moment

Caroline Hawley, BBC diplomatic correspondent,  BBC 14th March 2025

Almost a decade since world powers sealed a historic deal to limit the Iranian nuclear programme, this is a crunch moment for Iran and the international community.

The country is now closer than ever to being able to make a nuclear bomb.

And the agreement – designed to prevent Iran developing a nuclear weapon – expires later this year.

“It’s a real fork in the road moment,” says Dr Sanam Vakil of the London-based think tank Chatham House. “Without meaningful and successful diplomacy we could see Iran weaponise or we could see a military strike against the Islamic Republic.”

The deal, painstakingly negotiated over nearly two years under Barack Obama’s presidency, imposed restrictions on Iran’s nuclear activities in return for relief from sanctions that crippled the country’s economy.

But after Donald Trump pulled out of the agreement in 2018 during his first presidency and reinstated US sanctions, Iran gradually stopped complying with its commitments.

It has accelerated its enrichment of uranium – used to make reactor fuel but also potentially nuclear bombs – to close to weapons-grade.

Experts say it would now take Iran less than a week to enrich enough material to make a single nuclear weapon.

Hence a flurry of urgent diplomatic activity by the US and the five other parties to the deal – the UK, China, France, Germany and Russia.

A closed-door meeting of the UN Security Council discussed Iran’s nuclear programme on Wednesday.

And China is hosting talks with Iran and Russia on Friday in search of a “diplomatic” resolution.

“In the current situation, we believe that all parties should maintain calm and restraint to avoid escalating the Iran nuclear situation, or even walking towards confrontation and conflict,” Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning said this week.

On Wednesday, a letter from President Trump was delivered in Tehran by a senior diplomat from the United Arab Emirates.

The contents have not been made public.

But President Trump, after imposing new sanctions on Iran as part of a “maximum pressure” campaign, last week issued a televised ultimatum to Iran: make a deal or else.

“I’ve written them a letter saying, ‘I hope you’re going to negotiate because if we have to go in militarily, it’s going to be a terrible thing,'” he said.

Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, appeared to reject the idea of talks with a “bullying” US.

So too – publicly – has President Masoud Pezeshkian, who had previously supported a resurrection of the nuclear deal, in return for an end to sanctions.

But the country has been sending out mixed messages.

“There are camps inside the country that favour negotiations,” says Dr Vakil. “And there are camps that see weaponisation as the best opportunity for Iran to manage its security.”

Trust in the Trump administration is in very short supply.

“They have seen his erratic, very bullying approach to [Ukraine’s President Volodymyr] Zelensky. And his outlandish proposals on Gaza and they don’t want to be put in that position,” Dr Vakil adds.

Iran hates the humiliation of having a gun held to its head. But it is currently vulnerable – weakened militarily by Israeli air strikes last year, which are believed to have destroyed most of the air defences protecting its nuclear programme.

Israel has long wanted to take the facilities out.

Iranian authorities continue to insist the country’s nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes.

But concern in the international community is becoming increasingly acute……………………………………………………… https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c86pvyd2qeno

March 16, 2025 Posted by | Iran, politics international | Leave a comment

Poland’s president urges U.S. to move nuclear warheads to Polish territory, FT reports

By Reuters, March 13, 2025, Reporting by Gnaneshwar Rajan in Bengaluru, Pawel Florkiewicz and Alan Charlish in Warsaw; Editing by Christopher Cushing and Gareth Jones, https://www.reuters.com/world/polands-president-urges-us-move-nuclear-warheads-polish-territory-ft-reports-2025-03-13/

WARSAW, March 13 (Reuters) – Poland’s president has called on the U.S. to transfer nuclear weapons to its territory as a deterrent against future Russian aggression, the Financial Times reported on Thursday.

President Andrzej Duda also told the newspaper he had discussed the proposal recently with U.S. President Donald Trump’s special envoy for Ukraine and Russia, Keith Kellogg.

Poland has previously said it would be ready to host U.S. weapons under a nuclear arms sharing programme, and Polish policymakers have also more recently expressed interest in an idea floated by French President Emmanuel Macron that Paris’s nuclear umbrella could be extended to its European allies.

The borders of NATO moved east in 1999, so 26 years later there should also be a shift of the NATO infrastructure east. For me this is obvious,” the FT cited Duda as saying in an interview.

It would be safer if those weapons were already in the country, Duda added.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, a political opponent of Duda, said on Thursday he thought it was better to address such issues discreetly rather than in media interviews, although he added that he believed the president had good intentions.

“We should formulate certain expectations… publicly when we are certain, or have reasons to be convinced, that such appeals or calls will be heard and that the addressee, in this case the American administration, President Trump, is prepared for a positive response,” Tusk told reporters.

Galvanised by Russia’s invasion of neighbouring Ukraine three years ago, Poland now spends a higher proportion of its gross domestic product (GDP) on defence than any other NATO member, including the United States.

Last year Poland’s defence spending reached 4.1% of GDP, according to NATO estimates, and it plans to hit 4.7% this year. Duda has suggested enshrining defence spending of at least 4% of GDP in the Polish constitution.

March 16, 2025 Posted by | EUROPE, weapons and war | Leave a comment

State Police to Hold Major Radiological Incident Exercise with International, Federal, State and Local Partners

March 13, 2025, https://www.michigan.gov/mspnewsroom/news-releases/2025/03/13/state-police-to-hold-major-radiological-incident-exercise#:~:text=The%20Cobalt%20Magnet%202025%20exercise,ensure%20preparedness%20against%20radiological%20threats.

The Michigan State Police, Emergency Management and Homeland Security Division (MSP/EMHSD) is playing a lead role in the planning, hosting and execution of a historic full-scale radiological exercise. More than 70 local, state, provincial and federal agencies from the United States and Canada will participate in this major radiological incident exercise at various locations in Lansing, southeast Michigan, Indiana, Ohio and Ontario from March 14 – 21.

The Cobalt Magnet 2025 exercise is led by the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), in partnership with the MSP/EMHSD. It will bring numerous agencies together to ensure preparedness against radiological threats.

“Michigan is home to two active nuclear power plants, with a third slated to return online within the next year,” said Col. James F. Grady II, director of the Michigan State Police and state director of emergency management and homeland security. “Given our location near Canada and other Great Lakes states, Michigan is uniquely positioned to play a critical role in this vital exercise, where the lessons learned will improve safety and response actions impacting the nation and beyond.”

Cobalt Magnet 2025 represents the culmination of 18 months of planning by local, state, provincial and federal responders. The exercise, with more than 3,000 participants, will simulate a nuclear power plant accident. It will enable response personnel to practice scanning for radiological materials, protecting public health and safety, providing emergency relief to affected populations and restoring essential services.

“During the exercise, members of the public may see field teams in protective clothing using radiological monitoring and detection equipment, low-flying aircraft conducting data-gathering overflights and groups of first responders and others staged at various locations,” explained Capt. Kevin Sweeney, deputy state director of Emergency Management and commander of the MSP/EMHSD. “The MSP/EMHSD will host a large portion of the Cobalt Magnet 25 exercise at the State Emergency Operations Center at MSP Headquarters in Dimondale. Multiple State of Michigan agencies will join the MSP in this full-scale exercise.”

Cobalt Magnet 2025 is part of a regular program of training, exercises and planning that help first responders prepare in case of a public health and safety emergency.

For more information on how to prepare before, during and after an emergency or disaster, visit www.michigan.gov/miready or follow MSP/EMHSD on X at @MichEMHS.

March 16, 2025 Posted by | safety, USA | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »