Witkoff and Kushner Cite Progress in Kyiv Talks, Push for Renewed Russia-Ukraine Negotiations

U.S. envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner described talks with Ukrainian leaders as encouraging after carrying new proposals from Moscow to Kyiv, though major disputes over territory and security remain unresolved.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom, | Sep 6, 2026
U.S. envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner said they made progress during their first official visit to Kyiv on Sunday, expressing optimism that direct negotiations between Russia and Ukraine can be revived after more than three hours of talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow a day earlier.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy held three rounds of discussions with the Americans, with national security advisers from the United Kingdom, France and Germany joining the final session. The talks covered possible pathways toward ending the more than 4½-year war as well as Ukraine’s immediate military needs, long-term security guarantees and economic support for postwar reconstruction.
Witkoff said Washington remains focused on “a diplomatic resolution to this conflict, not a kinetic resolution.” He said Saturday’s Kremlin discussions produced “new ideas” that he and Kushner brought directly to Kyiv, adding that the participation of advisers from France, Germany and Britain demonstrated that “collaboration is critical” to reaching an agreement.
Both Moscow and Kyiv would have to compromise, Witkoff acknowledged, but he said the administration believes a negotiated settlement remains possible. “We think we have the ingredients to get to that place,” he said.
Kushner similarly said the United States is seeking a “win-win” outcome rather than simply pressuring one side to accept the other’s terms. He said President Donald Trump is focused not only on stopping the fighting but on creating “a framework that could actually lead to a durable peace.” Kushner described Saturday’s meeting with Putin as “constructive and substantive” and said the discussions explored what Russia, Ukraine and the broader international community could gain from a settlement.
The two envoys hope to revive trilateral negotiations involving Russia, Ukraine and the United States, a format last used roughly six months ago. Kushner said Washington has remained in near-daily communication with Ukrainian officials even during the recent slowdown in diplomatic activity, which coincided with the administration’s increased focus on the Iran war.
Zelenskyy said several major issues remain unresolved, particularly territory. He said the territorial question “remains relevant” but argued that such difficult decisions “can only be resolved at the level of leaders.” He also emphasized that any settlement must include lasting security arrangements, saying a strong Ukrainian military remains “one of the main guarantees of security.”
Immediate defense requirements formed another major part of Sunday’s talks. Zelenskyy said Ukraine is seeking “serious volumes” of American support for a winter package combining air defense with protection for energy infrastructure as colder weather approaches. Kyiv is particularly seeking additional Patriot systems and interceptor missiles, with European governments expected to help support the effort.
The Ukrainian president said the United States plans to increase production of Patriot interceptor missiles next year and that Germany is also expanding production under existing licensing arrangements. Ukraine is simultaneously working with 67 domestic companies developing systems capable of destroying Russia’s increasingly common jet-powered drones………………………………………………………………
Zelenskyy said Sunday that Ukraine, the United States and European partners agreed to another meeting, although no location has been selected. The planned session is expected to continue work on territorial questions, security guarantees, military support and the economic framework surrounding any eventual settlement……………………………..
The central obstacles, however, remain substantial. Territory has not been resolved, security guarantees are still being negotiated and the aerial war continues even while diplomats discuss peace. The next test will be whether the “new ideas” carried from Moscow to Kyiv can produce the renewed direct negotiations Washington is now seeking. https://yournews.com/2026/09/06/7187875/witkoff-and-kushner-cite-progress-in-kyiv-talks-push-for/
US universities get millions to do military research for Israel.

xpayers give money to the US government. The US government then sends billions of dollars to Israel. Israel uses that money – there’s not a strict accounting – to purchase goods and services from US war corporations and research from US academic institutions.”
These projects are not funded by traditional academic grants. Instead, they are procured as “defense articles and services,” paid for with U.S. taxpayer dollars via the Foreign Military Financing (FMF) program – the same mechanism Israel uses to purchase F-35 fighter jets and other U.S. defense exports.
The projects, which often fail to disclose their funding, include efforts to create surveillance robots and improve missile guidance
See an insect crawling in the corner of the room? It might be a surveillance robot, thanks to research at Carnegie Mellon University to develop cockroach-like robots with, and for, the Israeli military.
Robot cockroaches, “terror-network” mapping, and rapid missile guidance are just three examples of at least 70 research projects U.S. universities have conducted on behalf of the Israeli Ministry of Defense (IMoD). Over a thousand pages of internal university and U.S./Israeli military documents reveal a sweeping, decades-long program to sponsor military research collaborations with at least 30 U.S. universities, from Cornell to the University of California at San Diego, since at least 2009.
Projects are conducted in collaboration with the Israeli military and sometimes explicitly incorporate environmental conditions in Palestine into the work. One project designed fuel cells for “distributed sensor networks” tailored to the temperature and soil conditions of an Israeli border that could monitor “potential terrorist activity” for “border security.”
Recent reports from Dropsite News, The Nation, and the Anti-War Initiative found millions of Israeli military dollars flowing into U.S. schools. Public records obtained from 13 U.S. universities reveal this money was directed via a U.S. arms export program to fund collaborations with Israeli scientists and military officials.
These projects are not funded by traditional academic grants. Instead, they are procured as “defense articles and services,” paid for with U.S. taxpayer dollars via the Foreign Military Financing (FMF) program – the same mechanism Israel uses to purchase F-35 fighter jets and other U.S. defense exports.
At least 11 contracts sent U.S. scientists to Israel to work face to face with their counterparts at an Israeli university and/or the IMoD, earmarking funds for U.S. professors to attend meetings and present their research to the IMoD.
The research
Though research subjects span the breadth of Israel’s military interests, including drone swarms, missile guidance, fuel cells, and quantum sensing, we highlight just a few threads to illustrate how U.S. universities support Israel’s military.
Alongside robotic cockroaches, Prof. Sarah Bergbreiter built “inchworm-like” crawlers with an IMoD scientist at the University of Maryland. Profs. Indejrit Chopra, also at Maryland, and Kenneth Breuer at Brown University were inspired by hummingbirds and bats to develop micro-drones that can search caves and demolished buildings. Columbia Prof. Hod Lipson built the Flexipod, a “soft quadrupedal robot” agile enough to do backflips and navigate varied terrain.
The IDF has used other drones to collect massive surveillance datasets that are fed into AI software to track targets and accelerate “kill-chains.” Recent Israeli innovations in this area follows years of IMoD-sponsored research at U.S. universities on this kind of technology.
In December 2016, the IDF prototyped an AI tool to “Tell You What’s Happening in a Video,” generating captions to help soldiers “keep an eye on the battlefield.”
The following year, Prof. Kate Saenko received $120,000 from the IMoD for research on “Generating Natural Language Descriptions for Video” using AI to automatically describe and classify people and objects in a video. While sponsored by a second IMoD contract on “Zero Shot Captioning,” or using machine-learning to describe things not seen before, Saenko’s group presented software for the “detection of novel objects” titled “Learning To Detect Every Thing” at a Tel Aviv conference.
Saenko told RS the conference paper was not related to her IMoD funding, but did not answer repeated requests to clarify which of her papers are.
According to an ex-IDF intelligence officer, a human eye “will go over [AI-generated] targets before each attack, but it need not spend a lot of time on them.” One IMoD-sponsored project at the University of California, Berkeley could make that process even faster.
Neuroscientist Robert Knight tested electrodes in a brain-computer-interface (BCI) for “cognitive enhancement” of “high throughput tasks requiring visual recognition.” In his internal proposal to the IMoD, but not in his published study, Knight discusses applications like “detecting ‘suspicious’ activity.”
Prof. V.S. Subrahmanian at the University of Maryland received IMoD funding to study “Targeting of Terror Networks” to “find weak points for the destabilization of terrorist networks.” He has applied these algorithms to identify alleged “sympathizers” of Hezbollah on social media.
Another of Subrahmanian’s IMoD contracts on “Massive Social Networks” involved analyzing “1.04 million person-days” of cellular location data for tracking population flow in Israel and its Occupied Territories. The study notes its algorithms are “related to… monitoring for evading targets by a flock of unmanned air vehicles.”
Other IMoD-sponsored projects studied drone swarms directly.
“Human-Robot Interaction Design for a Single Operator with Many Robots” was the IMoD project of Prof. Holly Yanco, the director of the University of Massachusetts’ Lowell’s Robotics Center. MIT Prof. Emilio Frazzoli devised “trajectory optimization” algorithms for groups of quadrotors, emphasizing his results are “easy to implement and may be used directly.”
When reached for comment, Frazzoli stated his research was on a “very basic/generic problem in robotics: how to generate a path to move one robot from point A to point B,” and that there was “nothing specific to defense” about the work.
Frazzoli’s IMoD-sponsored contract was titled “Rapidly Exploring Random Trees for Missile Guidance.”
Prof. Joaquim Martins at the University of Michigan optimized “package delivery UAV” fleets for the IMoD, given “mission requirements” with “various package weights and delivery distances.” He found that quadrotors are best for “long-range missions with small numbers of customers,” and thanked Israeli arms company Rafael’s CTO of Multi-Domain Warfare for help with “research methodology.” Martins’ published paper only lists civilian applications like delivering “medical supplies” despite its IMoD sponsorship.
This is not the only seeming example of a gap between an IMoD proposal and the published paper that followed it. In 2015, Profs. Alexander Yarin (University of Illinois Chicago) and Eyal Zussman (Technion) submitted a chemical sensing proposal telling the IMoD their “Overall research objective is to develop [a] fundamental understanding of sampling and detect[ing] buried explosives,” elaborating that “the detection of buried improvised explosives and mines [is] a major challenge in the battlefield.”
But a public-facing paper detailing experiments nearly identical to their internal application only listed civilian applications like “mining,” without any references to “explosives” or the “battlefield.” The paper did not acknowledge any funding sources, including the IMoD. Neither professor responded to a request for comment.
The funding pipeline
The research is purchased by the IMoD Mission to USA, the Israeli military procurement office that spends roughly $3.3 billion in annual U.S. aid to buy defense goods and services.
As analyst Christian Sorensen of Eisenhower Media Network explained over e-mail: “US taxpayers give money to the US government. The US government then sends billions of dollars to Israel. Israel uses that money – there’s not a strict accounting – to purchase goods and services from US war corporations and research from US academic institutions.”
To receive IMoD funds, universities like UC Irvine certified they were “entering into an agreement to sell defense articles … to the foreign government listed above,” and that the payment would be made “under the provisions of the Arms Export Control Act.” The projects are classified as Direct Commercial Contracts (DCCs), or sales from a defense contractor to a foreign military, subsidized by the U.S. government. Because only DCCs of over $100 million to Israel require legislative notification, the program has no public reporting mechanism or granular congressional oversight, and we do not know if any other countries use DCCs to sponsor U.S. science. In an e-mail to the IMoD, one university administrator called this funding arrangement a “departure from standard process.”
For over 35 years, Israel was one of just ten countries authorized to use DCCs, spending over a billion dollars annually on defense exports from private entities such as these research projects. But in April 2026, the Pentagon extended this privilege to over 50 countries.
A bureaucratic carve-out known as the Fundamental Research Exclusion allows the IMoD to bypass export controls for defense research it sponsors if the results are eventually “published and shared broadly.”
Both MIT and the University of California systems censored their funding databases after student activists discovered their schools’ IMoD contracts. In July 2025, an MIT professor canceled a proposed IMoD contract due to public backlash.
A spokesperson for the State Department referred questions about this purchasing arrangement to a fact sheet on U.S.-Israeli Security Cooperation. The sheet notes that the U.S. participates in “a variety of exchanges with Israel,” including research and weapons development.
The Israeli Ministry of Defense declined to comment.
UK Nuclear Liabilities Fund selects Brookfield to manage initial $1bn
By IPE Staff10 September 2026
The Nuclear Liabilities Fund (NLF) has selected Brookfield to manage a long-term, multi-asset investment mandate, with an initial commitment of $1bn (€850m).
The mandate will be managed by Brookfield’s Investment Solutions Group (ISG), which will draw on the investment capabilities across the firm to construct a portfolio tailored to NLF’s objectives, risk parameters and investment horizon, it was announced.
The portfolio will invest globally across Brookfield’s infrastructure, energy, private equity, real estate and private credit strategies. Investments are expected to comprise fund commitments, direct investments and co-investments.
The mandate is designed around the multi-decade nature of NLF’s liabilities associated with decommissioning eight of the UK’s nuclear power stations.
Brookfield said the investment horizon will be aligned with NLF’s multi-decade funding requirements, with the aim of supporting long-term capital growth and compounding investment returns to help meet future decommissioning costs.
Investment proceeds are expected to be reinvested into new opportunities rather than routinely distributed, allowing capital to remain invested across market cycles.
For NLF, the mandate is intended to ensure that sufficient assets are available to meet future decommissioning costs “without unnecessary reliance on taxpayers”……………………………………………………………….. https://www.ipe.com/news/uk-nuclear-liabilities-fund-selects-brookfield-to-manage-initial-1bn/10138410.article
N Korea has built two-storey uranium enrichment facility, says watchdog
Yvette Tan, BBC 9th Sept 2026
North Korea has built a new two-storey uranium enrichment facility, the head of the world’s nuclear watchdog said this week, calling it a cause for “serious concern”.
The new building is part of the main Yongbyon nuclear complex, and reportedly capable of housing up to 28 centrifuge cascades used to enrich uranium.
In a report published late last month, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said Pyongyang had also begun operating an expanded annex at another enrichment site.
These findings point to a steady expansion of the North’s sancitoned nuclear infrastructure. The agency, which has no inspectors in North Korea since it was expelled in 2009, relies on satellite imagery for assessments.
“The continuation and further development of the DPRK’s [Democratic People’s Republic of Korea] nuclear programme are clear violations of relevant UN Security Council resolutions and are deeply regrettable,” IAEA director Rafael Grossi said in a statement earlier this week.
The IAEA first referred to the existence of the building in June, although Grossi had mentioned the possibility earlier in the year.
In June, the agency said that North Korean leader Kim Jong Un visited a “newly inaugurated nuclear materials production factory” on 3 June, which it identified as the Yongbyon enrichment facility.
Kim had praised the country’s “greatly expanded production capacity”, adding that this would “offer the possibility of carrying out larger plans”, according to the agency’s report……………………………………………………………………..
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy0zqk2w92lo
Google signs up for electricity from Finnish nuclear power plant
Tech giant Google has signed a long-term power purchase agreement with
Finland’s Fortum covering up to 50% of the Loviisa nuclear power plant’s
capacity and providing financial certainty for power uprates and lifetime
extensions until 2050.
World Nuclear News 9th Sept 2026 https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/google-signs-up-for-electricity-from-finnish-nuclear-power-plant
US to NATO: Keep buying US weapons for lost Ukraine war…it gooses our economy- Walt Zlotow

But not one weapon will be supplied by the US. They must all be purchased by NATO countries struggling with their declining economies due in large part by squandering tens of billion of Euros on Ukaine sinking deeping into failed state status.
Walt Zlotow West Suburban Peace Coalition Glen Ellyn IL, Sep 9, 2026,
If there was a Nobel Prize for the most most cynical foreign posicy among the world’s 193 countries, the US would win weapons down.
Under Secretary of War Elbridge Colby just told European NATO countries to keep buying US weapos to keep Ukraine being destroyed in their lost war with Riussia.
“The situation makes it all the more important for Europe to sustain support for Ukraine while also accelerating its own rearmament and reindustrialization. First, Europe must continue — and where necessary increase — support for Ukraine’s immediate battlefield requirements through Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List (PURL). The continued flow of munitions and critical capabilities is effective; it remains essential to enabling Ukrainian forces to hold the front line and deny further Russian advances. Second, Europe must plan now for sustained procurement that supports both Ukraine’s long-term force reconstitution and Europe’s own defense requirements.” Colby omitted that NATO weapons purchases fit neatly into US economic policy.
But not one weapon will be supplied by the US. They must all be purchased by NATO countries struggling with their declining economies due in large part by squandering tens of billion of Euros on Ukaine sinking deeping into failed state status. The fact Ukraine has suffered over over two million causualties and lost a fifth of their land forever means nothing to Colby and his bosses War Secretary Pete Hegseth and President Trump. All they care about is how those billions in weapons sales will help salvage the declining US economy from Trump and Hegseth’s failed Iran war debacle ahead of the approaching November 3 midterms.
Trump has been lusting for a Nobel Peace Prize since hie took office in January 2017. He’s been tirelessly promoting his candidacy claiming he’s ended 8 wars when he’s ended none while waging war on Iran, Venezuela, Yemen, Somalia, Nigeria and any small boat in the Caribbean he claims is carrying drugs.
Yep, the Nobel Committee should consider awarding a Nobel Cynical Foreign Policy Prize. Donald Trump, on behalf of the United States would be selected unanimously.
Israeli war minister orders army to prepare for ‘all-out war’ on Palestinian Authority
Monday, 07 September 2026 , https://www.presstv.co.uk/Detail/2026/09/07/775858/Israeli-military-ordered-to-prepare-for–all-out-war–on-Palestinian-Authority
Israeli minister of military affairs Israel Katz says he and prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu have ordered the occupation army to prepare for an “all-out war” in the occupied West Bank.
Katz said on Monday that the offensive would be launched if Israel determines that Palestinian Authority (PA) security forces or groups affiliated with them are planning an attack similar to Operation Al-Aqsa Flood – the operation carried out by Gaza-based resistance groups on October 7, 2023.
Under the proposed plan, Israel would target senior PA officials, the Palestinian Authority’s security apparatus, and resistance infrastructure across the territory.
The assault could include targeted killings and the forced evacuation of residents from cities and villages in the occupied West Bank, “just as we did” in Gaza and southern Lebanon, where the Israeli military has flattened large areas and driven people from their homes.
“If the security apparatuses of the Palestinian Authority and the bodies associated with them launch, or we know for certain that they are about to launch, an October 7-style attack against forces and Jewish settlements, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and I instructed the army to prepare to launch an all-out war against senior officials and mechanisms of the [Palestinian] Authority, the bodies associated with them, and against all infrastructure in Judea and Samaria [the occupied West Bank] — in order to quickly bring about their complete defeat,” Katz threatened.
“We will not allow for a return to a reality of a continued intifada spanning years, as was the case in the past,” the Israeli war minister added.
The threat followed an incident on Monday morning in which a Palestinian reportedly stabbed an Israeli settler, about 20 years old, at a farming outpost in the occupied West Bank. Israeli troops later shot the Palestinian man dead after claiming he tried to stab them during a manhunt.
Hebrew-language media reported that the settler was stabbed at the Maoz Yehuda settlement farm near the village of Usarin in the northern West Bank and was wounded in the chest, back, and shoulders.
Hamas condemns surge in settler violence
The Gaza-based Hamas resistance movement condemned the sharp rise in settler attacks on Palestinians in the occupied West Bank, assaults carried out with the protection and backing of Israeli occupation forces.
“This is part of a systematic policy that targets our people and homeland, and intends to materialize annexation, forced displacement, and ethnic cleansing in the territory. This necessitates serious and effective action at all levels to put an end to such crimes, and hold the perpetrators to account,” Hamas said in a statement.
Hamas stressed that the blood of fallen resistance fighters will never be in vain, and that rising settler violence will not break the will of Palestinians or drive them from their ancestral land.
“Rather, it will strengthen their commitment to their rights. It will consolidate their resolve in the face of the occupying regime’s settlement and displacement plans,” the statement said.
Hamas called on Palestinians from all walks of life in the West Bank to confront Israeli military and settler attacks, protect their lands and properties, block plans for displacement, settlement expansion, and annexation, and defend their homeland and national rights.
About 750,000 Israeli settlers live in 156 illegal settlements and 360 settlement outposts in the occupied West Bank, including East al-Quds. They routinely carry out attacks aimed at forcibly displacing Palestinians, according to Palestinian figures.
The international community regards these settlements as illegal under international law and the Geneva Conventions because they are built on occupied land. The UN Security Council has condemned Israel’s settlement activity in several resolutions.
In July 2024, the International Court of Justice declared Israel’s decades-long occupation of historical Palestine illegal and demanded the evacuation of all existing settlements in the West Bank and East al-Quds. Those rulings, like so many before them, have remained mere words.
Sodium cooled nuclear reactors are not necessarily safer

While no sodium-cooled reactors currently operate in the United States, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is working with industry on a number of “advanced” reactor designs, including the Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor (SFR). One of the SFR’s safety advantages, to quote the DOE, is that the design provides a “Long grace period for corrective action, if needed.” SRE’s meltdown transpired over a two-week period. Fermi Unit 1 had indications of inadequate core cooling in June that were repeated in August and dismissed until extensive damage occurred in October 1966. The “if needed” grace period is never long enough when warning sign after warning sign is dismissed or ignored.
DOE did acknowledge some “challenges” for the SFR: their higher speed and higher energy neutrons can embrittle and degrade nearby materials, liquid sodium coolant reactors with air and water and degrades concrete, and the opaqueness of the liquid sodium coolant complicates in-service inspections and maintenance.
Thank goodness for the “Long grace period for corrective actions, if needed.” That and the fact that SFRs only operate in cyberspace where the primary threat is carpal tunnel syndrome
![]()
Nuclear Plant Accidents: Fermi Unit 1, Union of Concerned Scientists Dave Lochbaum, director, Nuclear Safety Project | July 12, 2016, Disaster by Design
Jorge Agustin Nicolás Ruiz de Santayana y Borrás, also known as George Santayana, wrote that “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Continue reading
UK datacentres will create just 25% of jobs predicted by tech sector, analysis finds
Facilities likely to employ 10,400 workers, compared with 40,000 in industry estimates, thinktank says
Datacentres in the UK will
create just a quarter of the jobs predicted by the tech sector, while
consuming vast amounts of energy, according to new research. Environmental
thinktank Verdant predicts that all the datacentres currently planned are
likely to directly employ 10,400 workers – compared with the more than
40,000 cited in projections by the industry lobby group TechUK. Labour has
defended the rapid rollout of AI datacentres in the face of growing public
scepticism, amid concerns about their demand for water and energy. The
government has also echoed TechUK’s claims about job creation.
Verdant’s analysis is based on 20 projects for which data on staffing
levels are publicly available, including via planning applications, company
accounts and press releases – as well as international comparisons.
Guardian 9th Sept 2026, https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/sep/09/uk-datacentres-will-create-just-25-of-jobs-predicted-by-tech-sector-analysis-finds
Inside Assad’s nuclear secrets
Al Majalla chose Bashar al‑Assad’s nuclear programme as this week’s
cover story following reports issued by the International Atomic Energy
Agency in early September, which revealed that the project was much more
extensive than previously believed. This investigation traces the hidden
history of the former Syrian president’s nuclear ambitions, while shedding
light on the roles played by North Korea and Iran, the depth of Israel’s
penetration into the most guarded leadership circles, the destruction of
the al‑Kibar reactor in 2007, and the 2008 assassination of Brigadier
General Mohammed Suleiman—one of the senior officials entrusted with
Syria’s most sensitive strategic weapons programmes.
Al Majalla 10th Sept 2026, https://en.majalla.com/node/332964/politics/inside-assad%E2%80%99s-nuclear-secrets
Hinkley Point C seeking appeal against environmental data transparency tribunal ruling

08 Sep, 2026 By Tom Pashby, https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/hinkley-point-c-seeking-appeal-against-environmental-data-transparency-tribunal-ruling-08-09-2026/
EDF’s Hinkley Point C has told NCE it has requested permission to appeal against a tribunal ruling in favour of an argument from campaigners which would subject the nuclear power station to environmental information transparency rules.
The Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber) decided on 26 June, following a hearing on 29 April, that NNB Generation Co (HPC) Ltd is a public authority according to the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIRs).
NNB Generation Company (NNB GenCo) is the company that owns Hinkley Point C. EDF is the majority owner of the company, with China General Nuclear Power Group (CGN) as a minority owner.
The EIRs are operated in a similar but different way to the Freedom of Information Act.
The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) had decided that NNB GenCo was subject to the EIRs after it made a ruling on behalf of environmental group Fish Legal, which was seeking environmental information about the nuclear power plant.
It announced its position in a decision notice published on 5 September 2024.
The ICO’s decision notice followed a complaint from Fish Legal, which represents anglers and has been repeatedly denied information from the developers of the nuclear power station about its methods of deterring fish from the site.
Hinkley Point C will require vast volumes of water to cool its nuclear reactors. Tunnels for water intake and outfall will circulate 120,000l of water per second. There are concerns this will lead to marine life being sucked into the system and killed.
NNB GenCo had a legal obligation to use an acoustic fish deterrent, based on its approved development consent order, but changed its plans to building a saltmarsh instead. It has now switched back to a plan for an acoustic fish deterrent, having discovered a new “safe and effective” method for implementing it.
Despite this, Fish Legal is continuing to support the ICO position because it covers matters broader than just the fish deterrent at Hinkley Point C – it believes that foreign-owned private companies building and operating nuclear power plants in the UK must comply with domestic environmental information laws and therefore provide details on environmental plans when asked.
A Hinkley Point C spokesperson told NCE: “We have now sought permission to appeal against the tribunal’s decision.
“Hinkley Point C has already made extensive amounts of environmental information available to the public and it will continue to keep stakeholders fully informed about the project.”
Reacting to Hinkley Point C’s decision to seek an appeal, Fish Legal head of policy and strategy Zoe Wedderburn-Day told NCE: “We are aware that NNB Generation Company, the EDF subsidiary responsible for Hinkley Point C, has sought permission to appeal the Upper Tribunal’s decision and we will be watching developments closely.
“The Upper Tribunal judgment was an important decision for environmental transparency, confirming that a privately owned company entrusted with significant public functions and statutory powers can be subject to the Environmental Information Regulations.
“We will consider the implications of any further proceedings once the appeal position becomes clearer.”
An ICO spokesperson told NCE that the ICO noted the judgment but didn’t make any further comment.
Reacting to NNB Gen Co’s request for an appeal, Nuclear Industry Association chief executive Tom Greatrex told NCE: “The single biggest driver of biodiversity loss and habitat destruction is climate change.
“By delaying the deployment of nuclear power, which has the lowest carbon emissions, land use, and overall impact on ecosystems of any electricity source across its lifecycle, we are accelerating that damage and prolonging our reliance on higher-carbon energy sources.”
He added: “To reduce cost and accelerate delivery, we must ensure proportionate regulation.
“To achieve this, the government must fully implement the Nuclear Regulatory Review recommendations to strengthen the UK’s energy security with clean power and enable new nuclear projects to progress at pace while maintaining high environmental standards.”
Gates-backed TerraPower targets British nuclear power plant start by 2034

Sodium cooled nuclear reactors are not necessarily safer. https://blog.ucs.org/dlochbaum/nuclear-plant-accidents-fermi-unit-1/
By Susanna Twidale, September 7, 2026, https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/gates-backed-terrapower-targets-british-nuclear-power-plant-start-by-2034-2026-09-07/
- Summary
- Companies
- Britain would be TerraPower’s first market outside United States
- First UK plant could be operational by 2034
- Electricity cost expected under £100 per megawatt hour
ONDON, Sept 7 (Reuters) – TerraPower, the U.S. nuclear developer backed by Bill Gates, expects its Natrium reactors to begin generating electricity in Britain by 2034, its CEO told Reuters, making the UK its first market outside the United States.
Britain has backed the development of small modular reactors (SMRs) to help to increase energy security and meet climate targets, launching an Advanced Nuclear Framework this year to support privately funded projects.
Chris Levesque, TerraPower’s president and CEO, said progress on the company’s first Natrium reactor, due to be completed in 2031, showed that “2034 nuclear electricity in the UK from Natrium is very possible”.
The technology has cleared regulatory requirements in the United States, where the first plant is being constructed in Wyoming and is currently being assessed under Britain’s Generic Design Assessment (GDA) process.
Each sodium-cooled Natrium reactor generates 345 megawatts of baseload power and includes storage capable of boosting output to 500 MW for more than five hours. The reactors run on high-assay, low-enriched uranium (HALEU).
Britain and the U.S. are both building plants to produce the fuel, which was previously only commercially available from Russia.
Levesque said electricity generated by Natrium plants would be competitive with other low-carbon technologies, including combined solar-and-battery projects, at less than £100 ($135.32) per megawatt hour.
TerraPower has yet to choose a site for its first UK project, but said its British subsidiary is likely to be based in Liverpool, northwest England, close to the country’s nuclear regulator.
In the U.S., the company has an agreement with tech giant Meta (META.O), opens new tab to develop up to eight reactors. Levesque said TerraPower could seek similar partnerships in Britain.
China v. US: The Great Mideast AI Race Heats Up

Officials, activists and academics have warned that while economically Middle Eastern states may benefit from the race between the US and China to offer them investment and technology, this will likely come at an environmental cost.
September 8, 2026, Neil Thompson, https://www.juancole.com/2026/09/china-great-mideast.html
London– Last week, China’s President Xi Jinping made his first state visit to Egypt since 2016, amid deepening economic and security ties between Beijing and one of Washington’s major Arab allies. Egypt’s government said the two sides agreed to launch the third phase of a cooperative industrial zone in the Suez Canal, as Cario seeks to diversify its major foreign policy relations beyond just the US. The latter still supplies Egypt with $1.3 billion in military aid each year but faces growing geopolitical competition from China.
In a statement clearly designed to appeal to Egyptian audiences, where the Suez Canal is a major economic engine, Xi said that China “stands ready to work with countries in the region to safeguard the security of international shipping lanes, advance development cooperation … and eliminate the breeding grounds for conflict.” Instability in the Red Sea since 2023 and the US-Iran conflict since February have caused maritime traffic through the canal to drop sharply, though the major Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd shipping lines signalled last month that they were planning a phased return. hottest year on record in 2024, and that heatwaves there are becoming longer and more intense.
It is also during these months that the region’s new AI infrastructure needs the most water and energy to cool its server farms, too. Even without higher temperatures, the average data centre has the equivalent water demand of around 1,000 households per day, while a large one uses around 5 million gallons a day, the same as a town of up to 50,000 residents. Gulf countries like the UAE are engaged in massive construction of more desalination plants to meet this expected AI-related upsurge in water (and power) demand as a result. UAE regulators have denied the increase in water demand will cause them problems, with the head of regulatory affairs at Abu Dhabi’s Department of Energy saying in April: “We rely on desalination [plants] that have proven in the last 50 years to be a very reliable source for potable water.”
Conclusion
Middle Eastern countries outside the GCC will face similar problems with rising temperatures driving household power and water demand just as AI-related demand also increases. AI infrastructure projects may outpace regional water and power development without careful planning. In May, Egypt said it planned to meet future AI data centre power demand there using renewable energy. It is investing significantly in wind farms and other projects, including expanding regional interconnections with other countries’ power grids in Saudi Arabia, Europe and Sudan. However, these projects are vulnerable to timetable slippages from obstacles like construction sector supply chain disruption or port congestion at Egyptian terminals. With a growing population seeking jobs, Egypt’s government seems likely to press ahead regardless.
China’s expertise in both AI and green technology could likely help ease many Middle Eastern countries’ attempted transition to a digitalised and clean-energy powered economic future. But geopolitical competition with the US will add a political and diplomatic dimension to any projects with Chinese participation. The US is still a major security partner for many Middle Eastern governments, and Washington could threaten to withdraw military aid in response to a growing dependence on Chinese AI systems in allied regional governments or economies. The US fears Egypt allowing Chinese AI systems in its public sector would create cybersecurity risks for its agents and companies there. US fear of China could impede Middle Eastern states’ uptake of Chinese AI infrastructure and models, but also their uptake of Beijing’s greener gifts.
China Dangles Growth, Security Partnership
Beijing has also made Egypt’s government another offer of economic and technological development through state-linked firm Huawei. Egypt has ambitious plans to expand AI’s contribution to its economy to 7.7% of GDP by 2030, offering China an opening to challenge the US lead on global AI infrastructure by starting with a small project in the Middle East. Huawei bid on an Egyptian government tender in August to build public sector AI data centers there, in partnership with iFlytek, a Chinese surveillance company. Both Chinese companies are on a US blacklist, and Washington has approached US firms including Nvidia, AMD and Microsoft to put together a counterbid. Egypt has yet to announce a decision, but the move signals an intensifying race between Beijing and Washington to recruit more regional states into their respective AI stacks.
China’s Middle Eastern AI Footprint Expands Elsewhere
China and the US have each launched their own multinational AI alliances; in China’s case, this is the World AI Cooperation Organisation (WAICO), while the US set up the Pax Silica in December. Both groups contain a few Middle Eastern states so far, with Iran, Algeria and Oman joining WAICO, and Israel, Qatar, and the UAE have joined the Pax Silica. However, Chinese companies have launched AI-related projects in multiple Middle Eastern countries prior to WAICO’s launch, and Beijing’s AI-infrastructure footprint is likely to extend well outside the alliance’s formal Middle Eastern members. Middle Eastern firms are increasingly willing to use Chinese technology to launch their own AI models indigenous to the region, too.
In October, Chinese firm Alibaba opened a sector data centre in Dubai. In January, the UAE’s Emirate of Sharjah signed an agreement with Chinese AI infrastructure and cloud computing services provider DataCanvas to examine establishing data centers there. Finally, in September Saudi technology firm Humain released an Arabic-language AI model based on a Chinese one created by Chinese AI firm MiniMax. Chen Jing, a vice president of China’s Technology and Strategy Research Institute, told state media there that: “Unlike in the past, when Chinese LLMs primarily entered overseas markets through APIs or application products, in this collaboration, MiniMax M3 has directly become the foundational model for overseas indigenous model development.” Humain is financed by Riyad’s Saudi Public Investment Fund, indicating Saudi state backing for the firm’s project, despite Saudi Arabia not being a member of WAICO.
AI Growth, Environmental Cost?
Officials, activists and academics have warned that while economically Middle Eastern states may benefit from the race between the US and China to offer them investment and technology, this will likely come at an environmental cost. In April, the Qatar-based Middle East Council on Global Affairs research centre published a report warning that water and power demand for AI data centres presented a significant ecological challenge to Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states. GCC members already struggle to meet power and water demand during the summer months, when temperatures traditionally soar. This issue is getting worse. In December, the World Meteorological Organization issued its first report on the state of the climate in Arab states. It warned that these states had their
They Can’t Stop the War. They Can’t Survive It.
So European leaders have deployed – to use an Ursula von der Leyen saying – all means possible. Except that those means were never enough to meet Ukraine’s needs.
‘if I give the promise to the people in Ukraine, “we stand with you, as long as you need us,” then I want to deliver. No matter what my German voters think.’
Europe has also closed off access to a consumer market of 143 million people in Russia – Europe was Russia’s biggest trade partner before the Ukraine crisis began – because we can’t stand to trade with those Russians.
The AfD win in Germany and Reform’s landslide in Britain show why Europe’s liberal governments are trapped — continue Ukraine and they lose the voters; end it and they lose them anyway.
Ian Proud, The Peace Monger, Sep 08, 2026
The victory of AfD in a local election in Germany was as consequential as the Reform Party’s landslide in local elections in Britain in May.
Why? Because a nationalist party won. This is another sign that liberalism is dying in Europe. What does this mean for the politics of Europe and for the war in Ukraine?
Politics in Europe Is Changing – The Ukraine War Is Driving a Shift Away from Liberalism
I have said for some time that the changing politics of Europe will ultimately decide the outcome of the war in Ukraine. Foreign policy always starts and ends at home.
And what I mean by that is, even if our governments support a proxy war in Ukraine, they are limited by essentially domestic considerations in how much support they can give.
European states have shown themselves unwilling to commit to direct war with Russia principally because they can’t guarantee they will garner political support at home, not least given the large number of casualties that would result.
Liberalism is predicated on a stable capitalist system, and a direct war would have devastating consequences for the economies of Europe.
Liberal European governments can’t give Ukraine as much money and equipment as they would prefer, as they are heavily indebted and don’t have the fiscal space to do this at a time when ordinary people feel that public services are being ignored.
So European leaders have deployed – to use an Ursula von der Leyen saying – all means possible. Except that those means were never enough to meet Ukraine’s needs.
Ukraine will lose the war against Russia because European leaders decided they could not bear the financial, human and political cost of direct war. That they encouraged war to continue for so long reflects the essential liberalism of Europe, that Ukraine was a prized project in the bid to create another liberal democracy on the periphery of Europe as a counterpoint to nationalist Russia. And that helps to explain why ordinary, often working-class, citizens are turning against liberalism.
Put simply, even though European governments have avoided a direct war with Russia, they haven’t been able to shield their citizens from the consequences of proxy war, nor deliver the strategic defeat that they promised, and this leaves ordinary people poorer, uncertain about their future employment prospects, worried about their children and feeling less safe.
It would be impossible for them not to make a connection with the war in Ukraine because that is the topic their leaders seem to talk about most when travelling abroad to grand summit meetings that never seem to resolve the world’s problems.
Indeed, Annalena Baerbock, while foreign minister, said in 2022, ‘if I give the promise to the people in Ukraine, “we stand with you, as long as you need us,” then I want to deliver. No matter what my German voters think.’
She was roundly criticised by parties like AfD at the time who were accused of a disinformation campaign. But her words were on the record. And the message that sent to ordinary Germans was that the Federal government cares about Ukrainian people more than you, which was a politically suicidal thing to say.
In this day of high-speed media, ordinary people can see what is going on.
Even though national priorities have placed some limited guardrails on liberal foreign policy hegemony, specifically the temptation to get sucked into a general war across Europe – that foreign policy consensus has nonetheless still funded a dreadful war in Ukraine for four-and-a-half years which is held aloft as more important than domestic concerns despite the severe consequences for ordinary German people.
Ordinary people are not stupid and can make the connection between their condition of life and the need to keep funnelling money and weapons into a war that shows no end in sight, which their leaders refuse to bring to a close.
In terms of the feeling of being poorer and less secure about the future, Europe has chosen economic warfare instead of actual warfare, and this has backfired. In the process, sanctions have rendered European industry uncompetitive through the closing off of cheap sources of energy. Europe has also closed off access to a consumer market of 143 million people in Russia – Europe was Russia’s biggest trade partner before the Ukraine crisis began – because we can’t stand to trade with those Russians.
German unemployment is now at its highest level in well over a decade. Germany was Russia’s biggest trading partner before the Ukraine crisis started.
Let’s be clear, cutting off supplies of Russian energy doesn’t benefit the people of Ukraine; that country is energy dependent too and also, by the way, bankrupt, which means that European capitals have to subsidize its expensive energy costs as well as its own.
It doesn’t hurt Russia, which has diverted its energy supply to Asia.
It only hurts the economies of Europe and, in doing so, the cost of living and job security of ordinary European citizens.
Meanwhile, ordinary people see the threat of future war with Russia dangled before them in the mainstream press which conjures up all sorts of fake news stories on a near-daily basis about Russia’s plan to invade and conquer Europe.
While all this is happening, people can see that the rest of the world – particularly in Asia – is powering ahead.
Outside of West Asia and the Middle East they see a part of the world relatively free of conflict where economic growth is lifting the living standards of millions each day.So ordinary people in Europe are starting to ask ‘why are we losing out?’
And the answer that increasing numbers keep coming back to is the war in Ukraine.
Europe has chosen economic stagnation, unemployment, falling living standards and the fear of war as a price to pay to weaken Russia, even though Russia has managed the shock of conflict and war far better, has a bigger industry, plentiful supplies of energy and access to the largest market in the world, in Asia.
More and more people in Europe are starting to see that their liberal governments do not have the interest of their citizens at heart.
And liberal governments have no way out of the Ukraine war. In fact, they are terrified of the war ending.
Liberalism’s Ukraine War Trap
European government have found themselves caught in a Ukraine War Trap in which they face electoral obliteration whether they end the Ukraine war or if they continue it.
What is devastating for liberal political leaders is that they have no way out of the cycle of electoral suicide they have put themselves in.
If they continue the war, they will get devastated in the polls.
If they end the war, they will also get devastated in the polls.
Firstly, what will happen if they continue the war?
Energy.
Even if Donald Trump ends his damaging war in Iran, Europe will remain locked into high energy prices. Indeed, an end to the Iran war will simply accentuate the difference between Europe, stuck in an era of uncompetitive high energy costs, and the rest of the world, which will start to benefit from a gradual normalisation of energy prices……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. https://thepeacemonger.substack.com/p/they-cant-stop-the-war-they-cant?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=3221990&post_id=214714777&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
U.S.-Saudi Nuclear Deal Clears Vienna Hurdle As Congress Review Continues

Congressional Democrats have pushed back hard, joined by some Republicans, arguing the deal opens the door to a wider enrichment race across the Middle East. The White House, meanwhile, has tied the agreement to Saudi Arabia eventually joining the Abraham Accords and normalizing relations with Israel, a step Riyadh has so far declined to take without progress toward Palestinian statehood.
Oil Price, By Michael Kern – Sep 08, 2026,
- IAEA chief Rafael Grossi says Saudi Arabia won’t sign the Additional Protocol but will accept oversight powers over enrichment, conversion and reprocessing that closely mirror it.
- The underlying US-Saudi 123 agreement, signed July 22, opens a path to domestic uranium enrichment after a two-year study, a break from the UAE’s enrichment-free ‘gold standard.’
- Congress is 90 days into reviewing the deal, with Democrats and nonproliferation groups pushing back and two side letters still classified.
A planned nuclear cooperation deal between the United States and Saudi Arabia won’t include the toughest inspection regime the U.N.’s atomic watchdog has to offer, but it’s going to come close on the activities that matter most.
That’s the picture International Atomic Energy Agency chief Rafael Grossi laid out Monday in Vienna, speaking to reporters during the agency’s September Board of Governors meeting. Riyadh isn’t signing the IAEA’s Additional Protocol, the tool that lets inspectors show up unannounced at sites a country hasn’t even declared. But Grossi said Saudi Arabia is preparing to grant the agency verification and monitoring authority over its most sensitive nuclear activities, uranium enrichment, the conversion step that precedes it, and reprocessing, that functions almost the same way……………………………………………
Under the terms reported at signing, Washington and Riyadh have two years to study whether domestic enrichment makes commercial sense. Any enrichment plant built afterward would go up under a “black box” model, run by U.S. companies inside Saudi Arabia so the underlying technology never actually changes hands. It’s a sharp departure from Washington’s 2009 pact with the United Arab Emirates, the deal nonproliferation advocates still call the gold standard, under which Abu Dhabi permanently gave up enrichment and reprocessing altogether.
Congress Gets Its Say
The administration sent the agreement to Congress in late August, starting a 90-day review clock under the Atomic Energy Act. Lawmakers can let it take effect by doing nothing, or pass a joint resolution of disapproval to kill it, though that would need to survive a presidential veto. Two side letters attached to the deal remain classified, according to the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, which also notes that of the 51 countries with active 123 agreements, only Argentina and Brazil currently lack the Additional Protocol. Saudi Arabia would be the third.
Congressional Democrats have pushed back hard, joined by some Republicans, arguing the deal opens the door to a wider enrichment race across the Middle East. The White House, meanwhile, has tied the agreement to Saudi Arabia eventually joining the Abraham Accords and normalizing relations with Israel, a step Riyadh has so far declined to take without progress toward Palestinian statehood.
The Backdrop
For Riyadh, the deal is also part of a broader push under Vision 2030 to build out nuclear power alongside renewables and diversify an economy still tied to oil exports, with U.S. firms like Westinghouse positioned to compete for reactor contracts worth billions. The talks are unfolding against last year’s war between Israel and Iran, which has hardened Gulf calculations around nuclear deterrence. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has said publicly the kingdom would pursue a weapon of its own if Iran ever built one. Iran, for its part, operated under the Additional Protocol from 2016 to 2021 under the nuclear deal that collapsed after the U.S. withdrew in 2018, a history nonproliferation groups keep pointing to as they push for tougher terms on Riyadh.
For now, the deal sits in a kind of holding pattern. Congress’s review runs deep into the fall. The bilateral safeguards text is still being finalized in Vienna. And whether the arrangement Grossi described Monday ends up satisfying skeptics on Capitol Hill, or just gives them a new set of details to pick apart, is still an open question.
-
Archives
- September 2026 (184)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (375)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
