Eva Bartlett: “Israel was born of violence”

The Trump plan will absolutely no bring peace to Gaza. We’ve already seen how Israel immediately violated the so-called ceasefire on a daily basis over the past month. Israel addition ally has not allowed in the needed amount of humanitarian aid and did not agree to fully withdraw from Gaza. It’s goals of full occupation of all Palestinian land, and beyond, have not changed.
Mohsen Abdelmoumen: You are a very courageous and committed journalist who has always supported the Palestinian cause. The world needs just voices like yours. What can you tell us about your long stays in Gaza and the occupied West Bank?
Eva Bartlett: I went to the West Bank in 2007 to witness with my own eyes how Palestinians the daily tragedies, injustices and realities of Palestinians’ lives under occupation. Over the course of 8 months, I was witness to some of the ugliest aspects of life under Israeli rule: brutal attacks by armed illegal Jewish colonists and by Israeli soldiers on Palestinian children, women, elderly; the widespread humiliating military checkpoints cutting through Palestinian land and making movement nearly impossible; raids and weeks-long lock-downs on Palestinian towns and cities, in which the Israeli army ransacks and destroys homes and usually abducts one or more member of the family, including children. There are currently over 400 Palestinian children in Zionist prisons.
I detailed this in an overview of my time there, which included: witnessing land being stolen and quickly annexed by the illegal Jewish colonists; coming under attack multiple times by the illegal colonists; documenting the aftermath of Israeli army invasions into cities and towns, as well as the terror of being there during the invasions; documenting non-violent Palestinian protesters being attacked by very violent Israeli soldiers, systematically targeted with of live ammunition, rubber-coated metal bullets, and volleys of tear gas.
During my time in the West Bank I was detained at a protest against a Jewish-only highway in the West Bank; arrested by the Israelis at a road-block removal action, held handcuffed & shackled for two days in an Israeli prison in one of their illegal colonies; and later was finally deported and banned from returning to occupied Palestine.
However, in 2008, I joined the Free Gaza movement in sailing from Cyprus to Gaza, where I stayed for the next 1.5 years, returning again in 2011 for another 1.5 years between the period of mid 2011 to March 2013.
During this time, Israel committed two major wars on Gaza: in December 2008/January 2009, for 3 weeks, and in November 2012.
In the first, I rode in Palestinian Red Crescent ambulances, both in hopes of deterring Israeli attacks against the medics and also to document the injured and martyred civilians killed by Israeli bombing or sniping.
As a consequence, I witnessed and took testimony on some of Israel’s worst war crimes at the time: its use of White Phosphorous against civilians; its holding civilians hostages without food or medicine; Israeli sniper fire of medics I accompanied and of our ambulance, during “ceasefire hours”; Israeli soldiers’ deliberate sniping to kill Palestinian children, including an infant; the forced exodus of Palestinians from their homes to schools which were then bombed by the Israeli army; the deliberate precision drone striking of civilians, including a child during “ceasefire” hours; the wanton destruction of homes and the racist hate graffiti left behind in homes occupied by the Israeli army.
A dear medic I had accompanied during one terrifying evening in the was killed from by a dart bomb fired at his ambulance the next day.
During 2012 Israeli war on Gaza, I reported from Deir al-Balah, central Gaza, seeing more of Israel’s deliberate murder of civilians, especially children.
Lesser discussed is Israel’s top-down policy of shooting on farmers and fishers (fishers subject to shelling and heavy-powered water cannon attacks), maiming, killing or abducting them, intentionally depriving them of access to land and sea. This exasperated the already dire effects of the strangling siege (full lockdown) of Gaza Israel imposed around 2007, banning almost all basic items needed to exist, including medicines, fertilizers, cooking gas, even diapers and seeds.
The illegal and immoral siege on Gaza was made worse by the lack of electricity (In 2006, Zionist warplanes bombed Gaza’s sole power plant, which then provided roughly half of the Strip’s energy needs) causing power outages varying from 14-18 hours per day, on average.
The electricity shortage dangerously impacted the health, sanitation, water, education, and industrial sectors. Hospital life-support equipment, operation rooms, ICUs, dialysis machines, refrigerators for plasma and medicines, and even simple hygienic laundering services were all affected.
From my experiences in the Strip, including meetings with the different water, sanitation, health and agriculture officials, I learned that the current 80% dependence on food aid could be reversed, unemployment rates lowered, and a decent quality of life possible if, and only if, the blockade was lifted, exports and freedom of movement allowed, and Israeli attacks on farmers and fishers halted.
All of this and more are detailed in my 2014 overview of life in the Gaza Strip.
I provide all these details to counter the cl aims that the violence we’ve seen Israel commit during the past two years is a result of the Hamas actions in October 2023. Israel was born of violence and its violence has never been about “self-defense” but rather a means of ethnic cleansing and occupation.
The Zionist entity of Israel is currently committing genocide against the Palestinian people. Why in your opinion does it enjoy total impunity? And how do you explain the unconditional support of the United States and the West for this criminal and genocidal entity?
The impunity Israel enjoys—in spite of the countless crimes it has committed against Palestinians since inception (and prior), as well as committing crimes against Syria, Lebanon and elsewhere—is because Israel has always been a colonial outpost in West Asia, serving the agendas of its Western founders and backers, primarily the UK and US.
If any of the US’ enemies—especially Russia, China, or Iran—committed a minute fraction of the crimes Israel daily commits, the international laws and institutions which ignore Israel’s crimes suddenly apply. They exist not to provide any justice, but as more tools of the West.
Do you think that the Trump plan conceived by Jared Kushner, Ron Dermer, and Steve Witkof will bring peace to Gaza?
The Trump plan will absolutely no bring peace to Gaza. We’ve already seen how Israel immediately violated the so-called ceasefire on a daily basis over the past month. Israel addition ally has not allowed in the needed amount of humanitarian aid and did not agree to fully withdraw from Gaza. It’s goals of full occupation of all Palestinian land, and beyond, have not changed.

You know Syria very well, having lived there for a long time. How do you explain that a notorious terrorist leader serving the Americans and Israelis became president of Syria?
“…………The overthrow of Syria’s elected president, Bashar al-Assad, and installing of one of the worst al-Qaeda terrorists, Abu Mohammad al- Joolani—now rebranded as Ahmed al-Sharaa—was a combination of betrayal from elements of high ranking members of the Syrian army and leadership, betraying Assad and the Syrian people……………….”
You have been living in Russia and have covered Russia’s special operation in Donbass. In your opinion, what are Western countries seeking to achieve in their war against Russia? Where are their limits? Don’t you think there is a risk of nuclear conflict?
I’ve been covering Ukraine’s war on the Donbass since 2019 when I first visited. In 2021, I moved to Russia. Throughout 2022, I spent much of that year in the Donbass. It was a very bloody year of Donbass residents under Ukrainian fire, especially in completely civilian, non-military, districts, including the very center of Donetsk.
If you followed Ukraine’s war on the Donbass prior to 2022, you could even see some Western media coverage of it, and Western media coverage of the rise of “the far right” (Nazis) in Ukraine following the Maidan coup in 2014.
However, as they with Syria, Western media serves to whitewash Ukraine’s crimes and vilify Russia.
The West is using Ukraine as a means of trying to weaken Russia, which is why the West orchestrated the coup in Ukraine. NATO had decades ago pledged it would not expand eastward toward Russia but continued to do exactly that, including via Ukraine.
No one in their right mind believes Ukraine, or Ukraine & the collective West, will win in a war against Russia. Yet, the West continues to back Ukraine.
As for the limits of those countries continuing to push war with Russia, it’s difficult to say what or if they have limits. What is abundantly clear is that their alleged concern for Ukraine and Ukrainians is meaningless. Otherwise they would not have orchestrated the series of events which brought us to today.
Most honest analysts have noted Russia’s considerable restraint since commencing its Special Military Operation in 2022. Yet, Russia has also made clear it will not tolerate nuclear provocations and that it will end very badly for all should the West try.
You also know Venezuela very well. We saw the Nobel Prize awarded to far-right activist Corina Machado. Don’t you think there is once again a risk of a coup against President Maduro?
The US regime’s actions around Venezuela since Trump declared a war against supposed “narco terrorists” (which is extremely ironic given the US’ history of drug running), has been to bomb and extrajudicially assassinate at least 21 people, most Venezuelans, without evidence or trial.
Fast forward to the present, on October 31 The Trump Administration reportedly gave the green light for the imminent bombing of military targets in Venezuela, with strikes possible within hours or days.
The US is also accused of plotting a false flag attack on US naval ships to incriminate Venezuela, as another pretext for US belligerence against the country.
Rec all that in 2019, the US orchestrated power outages (sabotage) in Venezuela in an attempt to create chaos and public dissatisfaction against President Maduro. I was there at the time and everywhere I went I saw massive support for Maduro and against US intervention. Since then, the support has only grown, the people ready to defend their country.
Interview realized by Mohsen Abdelmoumen
Who is Eva Bartlett?
Eva Karene Bartlett is an American Canadian independent journalist who lives in Russia since 2021. She has an extensive experience in Syria (1.5 years & 15 visits from 2014-2021) and in the Gaza Strip, where she lived a cumulative three years (from late 2008 to early 2013), as well as 8 months in the West Bank.
She has also reported from the Donbass (since 2019, during 1/2 of 2022) and Venezuela.
In Gaza, she documented the 2008/9 and 2012 Israeli war crimes and attacks on Gaza while riding in ambulances and reporting from hospitals.
In 2017, she was short-listed for the prestigious Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism. The award rightly was given to the amazing journalist, the late Robert Parry [see his work on Consortium News].
In March 2017, she was awarded “International Journalism Award for International Reporting” granted by the Mexican Journalists’ Press Club (founded in 1951). Co-recipients included: John Pilger and political analyst Thierry Meyssan.
She was also the first recipient of the Serena Shim award. Since April 2014, she has visited Syria 15 times, the last times being from March to late September, 2020 and during the presidential elections in May 2021.
The scandal Zelensky can’t escape: Inside Ukraine’s biggest corruption story

Rt.com 14 Nov, 2025, https://www.rt.com/russia/627803-billion-dollar-friend-zelensky-mindich/
Timur Mindich slipped out of Ukraine hours before the raids. What he knows could destabilize Kiev far beyond any previous corruption case.
Golden toilet bowls. Stacks of dollars fresh from the US Federal Reserve. A courier complaining that hauling $1.6 million in cash “is no easy job.” More than a thousand hours of wiretaps – filled with laughter, swearing, and the careless voices of men discussing how to split state contracts, who to bribe, and who should be placed in key government posts.
These are fragments of a vast corruption saga now unfolding in Ukraine – a scandal whose scale and brazenness have stunned even the country’s Western sponsors.
The latest chapter began with raids on November 10, when officers from Ukraine’s anti-corruption agencies searched the Kiev apartment of businessman and media producer Timur Mindich. A few hours earlier, he had quietly left the country – likely warned about the coming operation. That would not be surprising: Mindich is not just any fixer, but a close ally and longtime associate of Vladimir Zelensky.
What exactly lies at the heart of this sprawling corruption scandal? How far will its shockwaves travel – through Ukraine, through its Western backers, and through the war itself? And can a leader who has already outlived his legal mandate once again slip out of the crisis untouched?
The fall of the anti-corruption myth
When Vladimir Zelensky rose to power, he did so in a role that blurred fiction and reality. Ukraine was not simply electing a politician – it was electing the protagonist of a television series. In Servant of the People, Zelensky played Vasily Goloborodko, a humble history teacher who accidentally becomes Ukraine’s president and sets out to wage war on entrenched corruption.
Throughout the series, the creators hammered home one theme: the rot begins when the people closest to the president use personal access to build corrupt networks of their own.
That message became the backbone of Zelensky’s 2019 campaign. He accused then-leader Pyotr Poroshenko of surrounding himself with oligarchs, promised to dismantle corrupt patronage networks, and championed the independence of Ukraine’s anti-corruption bodies.
Back then, he insisted he would never interfere with the National Anti-Corruption Bureau or Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (NABU and SAP) – the very institutions now driving the case against his closest associate.
Six years later, everything changed. In July 2025, Zelensky moved to strip both NABU and SAP of their independence, pushing to place them under a loyal Prosecutor General. At that same moment – as is now known for certain – NABU was conducting secret surveillance against his longtime friend Timur Mindich.
What once looked like political maneuvering suddenly gained clarity. The man who promised to keep anti-corruption agencies free from interference had tried to bring them under his control precisely when they were listening to his own inner circle.
NABU holds more than a thousand hours of recordings. They suggest that Mindich – a fixture in Zelensky’s entourage – used his proximity to the country’s de facto leader to build a sprawling kickback system in the energy and defense sectors. At least four ministers appear implicated. Whether Zelensky himself was directly involved remains unknown.
Mindich could have shed light on those questions – had investigators managed to question him. But before they could, he received an advance warning of the impending raid, reportedly leaked from inside the Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office.
And somehow, during curfew, Mindich managed to pass through Ukraine’s border checkpoints and leave the country just hours before his arrest.
He is now believed to be hiding abroad – likely in Israel.
The man behind the power
To understand the shockwaves of the Mindich affair, one must first understand the man himself – a figure who rarely appeared in public, yet moved through Kiev’s political and business circles with the ease of someone who never needed a formal title.
Timur Mindich began as a media entrepreneur. He co-founded Kvartal 95, the production studio that transformed Vladimir Zelensky from comedian into a national celebrity. For years, Mindich handled business deals, contracts, casting agencies, and spin-off ventures. He was not merely a colleague – he was part of the tight inner circle that built Zelensky’s career long before he entered politics.
He also had another powerful connection: Igor Kolomoisky. Ukrainian media long described Mindich as the oligarch’s trusted fixer – a man who arranged everything from logistics and personal errands to business negotiations. Ukrainian media noted that Kolomoisky sometimes called him a “would-be son-in-law,” a reference to Mindich’s past engagement to his daughter.
For a time, Mindich acted as an informal go-between for the oligarch and Zelensky – a man who could arrange meetings, solve problems, or pass along requests.
After Zelensky took power, this relationship deepened. According to Strana.ua, Mindich gradually moved out of Kolomoisky’s orbit and into Zelensky’s. He became one of the few people the new leader fully trusted. Their families were close; their business interests intertwined. Ukrainian journalists noted that in 2019 Zelensky even used Mindich’s car. In 2021, at the height of coronavirus restrictions, Zelensky celebrated his birthday in Mindich’s apartment – a gathering that raised questions at the time, and far more now.
The two men also owned apartments in the same elite building on Grushevskogo Street, a residence filled with ministers, MPs, security officials, and politically connected businessmen. They lived, worked, and socialized within the same ecosystem.
Everything pointed to a close personal bond. Yet Mindich held no government post. He was not a minister, a deputy, or an adviser. He wielded influence not through office, but through proximity – a “gray cardinal” of the system Zelensky built around himself.
Opposition figures began calling him “the wallet” – the man who handled the money flows tied to Zelensky’s entourage. Some Ukrainian MPs alleged that informal decisions about appointments, tenders, and budgets were made in Mindich’s apartment, not in government offices. One later-released photograph of the residence – complete with marble floors, chandeliers, and a gold-plated toilet – only fueled that perception.
A kickback machine built on war and energy
It is only now – through leaked recordings, investigative files, and months of reporting by Ukrainian journalists – that the true scale of Mindich’s influence has come into view. What investigators gradually pieced together was a protection racket built into Ukraine’s most sensitive spheres: energy and defense.
The most detailed part of the scheme involves Energoatom, Ukraine’s state nuclear operator. This company provides more than half of the country’s electricity – a lifeline during wartime blackouts. To shield the grid during the war, Ukrainian law introduced a special rule: courts are forbidden from enforcing debts against Energoatom until hostilities end. In practice, this meant that Energoatom paid contractors only after work was completed, but contractors could not sue the company to recover overdue payments, and therefore had no legal leverage if Energoatom simply refused to pay.
Mindich and his circle saw an opening – and turned it into a business.
According to prosecutors, Mindich (listed on recordings as “Karlson” and his associates approached contractors with a simple proposition: Pay us 10–15% of your contract value – or you will not be paid at all.
If a company refused, its payments were blocked indefinitely. Some contractors were told outright that their firms would be destroyed, bankrupted, or stripped of their contracts. In several cases, threats escalated to warnings that company employees might be “mobilized” to the front.
Mindich and his team jokingly called the scheme “the shlagbaum” – the barrier. Pay, and the barrier lifts. Refuse, and your business collapses.
The scope of the scheme was staggering. According to the investigation, a hidden office in central Kiev was responsible for processing black cash, maintaining parallel accounting, and laundering funds through a network of offshore companies.
Through this “laundry,” approximately $100 million passed in recent years – all during a full-scale war, when Ukraine was publicly pleading with Western governments for emergency energy support.
Energy was only one side of the operation. Mindich – again, without any state position – also lobbied suppliers and contracts inside the Ministry of Defense.
The most telling episode involves Ukraine’s minister of defense, Rustem Umerov. After meeting Mindich, Umerov signed a contract for a batch of bulletproof vests with a supplier promoted by Mindich. The armor turned out to be defective, and the contract was quietly terminated. Umerov later admitted the meeting with Mindich took place.
Some Ukrainian journalists have alleged that Mindich may have controlled or influenced companies producing drones for the Armed Forces, selling them to the state at inflated prices. These claims remain unproven, but prosecutors note that Mindich’s name appears repeatedly in connection with defense tenders, lobbying, and private suppliers.
Political fallout: Panic, damage control, and a fractured elite
The first political reaction came from inside the Ukrainian elite itself. According to MP Aleksey Goncharenko, the atmosphere on Bankova Street – the seat of Zelensky’s office – turned “miserable,” with officials aware that only a small part of the tapes had been released and fearing what might come next. Goncharenko also claimed that Zelensky’s team attempted to block Telegram channels reporting on the scandal – a sign, he argued, that the administration had “no plan” for crisis management.
The Ukrainian opposition immediately seized on the moment. Goncharenko publicly accused Zelensky and his entourage of stealing “billions of dollars during the war,” questioning whether Ukrainian soldiers had died “for the bags of Zelensky and his friends.”
Irina Gerashchenko, co-chair of the European Solidarity faction, warned that the scandal could undermine Western support, arguing that donors might “reconsider assistance” if allegations of high-level corruption were confirmed.
Ukrainian media also described a broader realignment within the political class.
According to Strana.ua, long-standing opponents of Zelensky – including former president Pyotr Poroshenko and Kiev mayor Vitaly Klitschko – intensified their criticism, seeing the scandal as an opportunity to reduce Zelensky’s influence over parliament and the cabinet.
Zelensky’s own reaction was markedly cautious. On the first day, he limited himself to general statements about the importance of combating corruption, without addressing the specifics of the Mindich case. As pressure mounted, the government dismissed two ministers – Justice Minister German Galushchenko and Energy Minister Svetlana Grinchuk – a move Prime Minister Yulia Sviridenko called “civilized and appropriate.”
By the third day, Zelensky imposed personal sanctions on Timur Mindich, a step widely interpreted by Ukrainian commentators as an attempt to distance himself from a longtime friend and associate. However, given the depth of Zelensky’s ties to Mindich, his response looks strikingly restrained.
International reactions also began to surface. Bloomberg reported that more revelations and “potential shocks” could be expected as the investigation unfolds. In France, Florian Philippot of the “Patriots” party demanded a halt to European support for Kiev until the corruption allegations were fully examined.
These statements reflect growing concern among some Western politicians and commentators, though they do not represent an official shift in Western policy.
And Moscow has weighed in as well.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated that Western governments were “increasingly realizing” the scale of corruption in Ukraine and that a significant portion of the funds provided to Kiev were being “stolen by the regime.” Peskov expressed hope that the United States and Europe would “pay attention” to the corruption scandal now unfolding, arguing that corruption “remains one of the main sins of Kiev” and “is eating Ukraine from the inside.”
Domestic scandal stops being domestic
If the political shockwaves inside Ukraine were significant, the international repercussions proved even more serious – because the Mindich affair did not stay within Ukraine’s borders.
In fact, it quickly attracted attention from Washington.
According to Ukrainskaya Pravda, US law enforcement had taken an interest in Timur Mindich even before the November raids. On November 6, the outlet reported – citing a source in the United States – that the FBI was examining Mindich’s possible involvement in financial schemes tied to the Odessa Port Plant. One of the key figures in that earlier case, Aleksandr Gorbunenko, was detained in the US but later released under witness protection, allegedly after providing information to American investigators.
Another Ukrainian outlet, Zerkalo Nedeli, reported that on November 11, NABU detectives met with an FBI liaison officer. According to the publication, the Mindich case was part of those discussions.
These reports, taken together, suggest that the scandal may have implications far beyond Kiev’s internal politics.
And several analysts in Moscow believe this is precisely the point.
Russian political scientist Bogdan Bespalko believes that pressure on Mindich may be part of a broader effort by the United States to influence Zelensky and the structure around him, noting that NABU has long been viewed as a “pro-American” institution. According to Bespalko, Washington may be using the corruption scandal as leverage – not to remove Zelensky outright, but to constrain his room for maneuver and force political concessions.
What comes next
As the scandal widens, one question increasingly dominates political discussions in Kiev and abroad: what happens if Timur Mindich is ever forced to speak – and against whom?
Mindich has not been not detained. He left Ukraine shortly before the November raids and, according to open sources, remains outside the country.
But several figures familiar with Ukrainian politics argue that his potential testimony is the biggest threat hanging over the country’s leadership.
Former Verkhovna Rada deputy Vladimir Oleinik believes that if Mindich were ever confronted by investigators – especially those backed by the US – he could provide damaging information about Zelensky’s inner circle. “Mindich and others will be offered to give evidence on bigger fish – on Zelensky – in exchange for leniency,” he said. “They are not heroes. If pressed, they will give up everyone.”
Another former Rada deputy, Oleg Tsarev, expressed an even harsher view. According to him, the danger comes not from Mindich’s legal status, but from the sheer volume of information he allegedly possesses.
“Mindich was Zelensky’s closest confidant. He knows everything,” Tsarev said. “If interrogated seriously, he will talk – and he will talk fast.”
In Tsarev’s assessment, Mindich is aware of how the financial flows around Bankova worked, how influence was distributed, and how members of Zelensky’s entourage allegedly enriched themselves during the war.
Experts who share this view argue that Mindich could, in theory, map out the entire informal system of kickbacks and leverage that shaped Kiev’s wartime governance.
Oleinik adds that many of those implicated in the case initially believed Zelensky would shield them.
For now, however, Mindich remains abroad – and beyond the immediate reach of Ukrainian law enforcement. Whether he eventually cooperates with investigators in Kiev, with NABU, or with US authorities remains an open question.
But one conclusion is becoming hard to ignore: if Mindich ever decides to talk, the political consequences for Kiev could dwarf anything seen so far.
Coalition of the unlikely: How Australia and China could save the planet.

Cooperation between Australia and China could send a useful message to the Trump regime and other countries around the world about both the possibility of developing alternatives to failing American leadership and the institutional order it did so much to create.
By Mark Beeson | 17 November 2025, https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/coalition-of-the-unlikely-how-australia-and-china-could-save-the-planet,20387
If we are to survive, unprecedented levels of cooperation are needed, no matter how unlikely. Mark Beeson writes.
GLOBAL GOVERNANCE is failing. Nothing highlights this reality more dramatically than our collective inability to address the degradation of the natural environment adequately. Addressing an unprecedented problem of this magnitude and complexity would be difficult at the best of times. Plainly, these are not the best of times.
Even if climate change could be dealt with in isolation, it would still present a formidable challenge. But when it is part of a polycrisis of intersecting issues with the capacity to reinforce other more immediate, politically sensitive economic, social and strategic problems, then the prospects for effective cooperative action become more remote.
Indeed, the polycrisis makes it increasingly difficult to know quite which of the many threats to international order and individual well-being we ought to focus on. The “we” in this case is usually taken to be the “international community”, which has always been difficult to define, generally more of an aspiration than a reality, frequently more noteworthy for its absence than its effectiveness.
Nation-states, by contrast, can still act, even if we don’t always like what they do. The quintessential case in point now, of course, is the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump. Because it is by any measure still the most powerful country in the world, what America does necessarily affects everyone. This is why its actions on climate change – withdrawing from the Paris Agreement, gutting the Environmental Protection Authority, encouraging fossil fuel companies – matter so much.
But nation-states can also be forces for good and not just for those people who live within the borders of countries in the affluent global North. On the contrary, states that oversee a reduction in CO2 emissions are not only helping themselves, but they are also helping their neighbours and setting a useful example of “good international citizenship”.
When global governance is failing and being actively undermined by the Trump regime, it is even more important that other countries try to fill the void, even if this means cooperating with the unlikeliest of partners. Australia and China really could offer a different approach to climate change mitigation while simultaneously defusing tensions in the Indo-Pacific and demonstrating that resistance to the Trump agenda really is possible.
Friends with benefits
In the long term, if there still is one, environmental breakdown remains the most unambiguous threat to our collective future, especially in Australia, the world’s driest continent. And yet Australia’s strategic and political elites remain consumed by the military threat China supposedly poses, rather than the immediate, life-threatening impact of simultaneous droughts, fires and floods.
One of the only positives of the climate crisis is that it presents a common threat that really ought to generate a common cause. Some countries are no doubt more responsible for the problem and more capable of responding effectively, so they really ought to overcome the logic of first-mover disadvantage. No doubt, some other country will take over Australian coal markets, but someone has to demonstrate that change is possible.
China is possibly at even greater risk from the impact of climate catastrophes because of water shortages and, paradoxically enough, rising sea levels that will eventually threaten massive urban centres like Guangzhou and Shanghai. While there is much to admire about the decrease in poverty in the People’s Republic, it has come at an appalling cost to the natural environment. China also has powerful reasons to change its ways.
Unfortunately, Chinese policymakers, like Australia’s and their counterparts everywhere else, are consumed with more traditional threats to national strategic and economic security. This may be understandable enough in a world turned upside down by an unpredictable administration bent on creating a new international order that puts America first and trashes the environment in the process.
But in the absence of accustomed forms of leadership from the U.S. and the international community, for that matter, states must look to do what they can where they can, even if this means thinking the unthinkable and working with notional foes. China and Australia really do have a common cause when it comes to the environment and they could and should act on it.
Yes, this does all sound a bit unlikely. But if we are to survive in anything like a civilised state, unprecedented levels of cooperation would seem to be an inescapable part of limiting the damage our current policies have inflicted on the environment. In this context, Australia and China really could lead the way by simply agreeing to implement coordinated domestic actions designed to set a good example and address a critical global problem.
Leading by example
As two of the biggest consumers and producers of coal, Australia and China could make an outsize contribution to a global problem that would almost certainly win near universal praise, not to say disbelief. In short, China could agree not to build any more coal-fired power stations and Australia could commit to not opening any more new mines and rapidly moving to close down existing ones.
This would be a challenge for both countries, no doubt, but if we are ever going to address the climate challenge seriously, this is the sort of action that will be needed. There are no easy or painless solutions. But voluntarily abandoning the use of one of the most polluting fossil fuels is a potentially feasible and effective gesture that would make a difference. After all, China is a world leader in the development and use of green energy already, so the transition would be difficult but doable.
Australia has a shameful record of exporting carbon emissions and could live without the coal industry, which produces most of them, altogether. Coal extraction doesn’t employ many people and Australia is a rich enough country to compensate those affected by the loss of what are awful jobs in a dirty industry. If Australia can find $368 billion for submarines that will likely never arrive, to counter an entirely notional threat from China, it ought to be able to find a couple of billion to deal with a real one.
No doubt there would be significant pushback from coal industry lobbyists and politicians who think their future depends on being “realistic”, even if it means wrecking the planet. And yet it is possible, even likely, that such actions on the part of Australia and China would be very well received by regional neighbours, who would directly benefit from their actions and who might also be encouraged to consider meaningful cooperative actions themselves.
Given the failure of regional organisations like ASEAN to tackle these issues, normative pressure could be useful.
China might even get a significant boost to its soft power and regional reputation. President Xi Jinping frequently talks about the need to develop an “ecological civilisation”. Moving away from coal and collaborating with an unlikely partner for the collective good would be an opportunity to demonstrate China’s commitment to this idea, and to offer some badly needed environmental leadership.
If that’s not an example of what Xi calls win-win diplomacy, it’s hard to know what is.
A sustainable world order?
In the absence of what U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders calls a “revolution” in American foreign policy, multilateralism may well be in terminal decline. Indeed, it is an open question whether interstate cooperation will survive another four years of Trumpism, especially when the United Nations faces a funding crisis and politics in the European Union is moving in a similarly populist and authoritarian direction.
Cooperation between Australia and China could send a useful message to the Trump regime and other countries around the world about both the possibility of developing alternatives to failing American leadership and the institutional order it did so much to create. American hegemony was frequently self-serving, violent and seemingly indifferent to its impact on the global South, but we may miss it when it’s gone.
If multilateralism is likely to be less effective for the foreseeable future, perhaps minilateralism or even bilateralism can provide an alternative pathway to cooperation. Narrowly conceived notional strategic threats could be usefully “decoupled” from the economic and environmental varieties. In such circumstances, geography may be a better guide to prospective partners than sacrosanct notions about supposed friends and enemies.
Someone somewhere has to show leadership on climate change and restore hope that at least one problem, arguably the biggest one we collectively face, is being taken seriously. There really isn’t any choice other than to contemplate unprecedented actions for an unprecedented problem. Australia and China may not save the world, but they could make things a bit less awful and inject some much-needed creativity and hope into international politics.
Mark Beeson is an adjunct professor at the University of Technology Sydney and Griffith University. He was previously Professor of International Politics at the University of Western Australia.
Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Is Set to Visit Washington. Here’s What to Expect Out of His Meeting with Trump.

the country has continued to push for a civilian nuclear program as the high energy demand of new AI data centers prompts a global revival in nuclear power. Riyadh has long expressed interest in developing its own nuclear program
The Chicago Council on Global Affairs, Analysis, by Rachel Bronson, November 13, 2025
Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s meeting with US President Donald Trump comes during a period of relatively strong and stable ties between Saudi Arabia and the United States. How much he can leverage those ties will be on full display.
Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) will make an official working visit to the White House on Tuesday, November 18. It will be his first trip to Washington since March 2018.
The period between his two visits has been bumpy. MBS seeks to solidify and extend a recent positive period, building on a strong personal relationship with US President Donald Trump, deep commercial ties between members of each country’s leadership, and Trump’s successful trip to the Kingdom in May. The connection between the two countries and the two men will prove critical this visit, as they will confront a wide-ranging agenda requiring considerable attention and diplomatic finesse.
There will be no shortage of topics for the two leaders to discuss during the meeting. New commercial and defense ties are likely to receive significant attention, particularly in the realms of artificial intelligence and growing regional data centers. Trickier for the two sides will be managing bigger ticket items—such as the purchase of F-35s and the development of nuclear power. Larger regional questions loom large about Saudi Arabia’s relationship with Israel, Turkey, and Qatar that will shape the future of Gaza, the West Bank, Syria, and beyond.
What’s on the agenda?
Key priority areas for the Saudis include broadening and deepening commercial ties, particularly in the realm of artificial intelligence, data technology, energy, and defense.
State visits usually result in announcements of new agreements or memoranda of understanding, and this trip will likely prove no different. But such trips can also highlight where sides remain further apart. Human rights, a perennial stumbling block in US-Saudi relations, are unlikely to receive significant attention.
The Saudis have been working assiduously to lower expectations that they will join the Abraham Accords—a stated goal of the Trump administration that would require normalizing relations with Israel—until the White House articulates a clearer vision for the future of Gaza and the West Bank. The two sides will thus need to work through how much is possible without attaining this loftier goal.
What is behind the visit?
When MBS last arrived in Washington to meet with Trump, he had only recently assumed his role as crown prince, supplanting his uncle, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef. He was not yet halfway through a controversial 15-month purge of business leaders, officials, and members of the royal family that would eventually solidify his rule.
Just seven months after his March 2018 visit, MBS was implicated in the grotesque and brazen assassination of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, a murder that brought international opprobrium. The growing humanitarian disaster in Yemen resulting from intense Saudi armed intervention was further galvanizing public outcry in the United States and abroad. Although the Trump administration tried to downplay both crises, Congress and the American public remained cautious of US-Saudi ties.
In September 2019, as the conflict in Yemen escalated, Iranian missiles and drones successfully targeted Abqaiq and Khurais, two major Saudi oil facilities, taking out 50 percent of Saudi oil production for about two weeks. Although the Trump administration responded by bolstering America’s military troop presence in the Kingdom and reimposing select sanctions on Iran, Riyadh wanted a more visible show of force. Washington’s perceived tepid response left many in Riyadh openly questioning US commitment to the desert kingdom.
The following September, just four months before leaving office, the Trump administration heralded in the Abraham Accords between Israel, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan. Saudi Arabia remained on the sidelines…………………..
The return of the Trump administration in January 2025 provided an opportunity to reset and strengthen relations more generally. In May, building on strong commercial ties forged between Trump administration associates and their Saudi counterparts during the Biden years, Trump traveled to Gulf states including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar, ushering in a raft of new defense and technology deals, particularly in the areas of data center technologies and artificial intelligence…………………………………………………………………………..
What does Saudi Arabia hope to get out of it?
…………..The focus of the announcements will most likely center on a robust AI future that is emerging in the Gulf in particular. Saudi Arabia has made investing in data centers and digital infrastructure a key aspect of its “Saudi Vision 2030” economic development plan and is investing $21 billion in data centers alone. ……….
……… the country has continued to push for a civilian nuclear program as the high energy demand of new AI data centers prompts a global revival in nuclear power. Riyadh has long expressed interest in developing its own nuclear program, which the Biden administration entertained as a sweetener to Saudi-Israeli normalization.
………………………During Trump’s May trip to the region, US Secretary of Energy Chris Wright signed a memorandum of understanding with Saudi Arabia’s energy minister on civil nuclear energy, including safety, security, and nonproliferation programs; vocational training and workforce development; US Generation III+ advanced large reactor technologies and small modular reactors; uranium exploration, mining, and milling; and safe and secure nuclear waste disposal. ……………….
What could happen?
In addition to energy and data infrastructure, the two sides will likely continue to deepen their defense relationship. During the May trip, the White House announced $142 billion in arms sales, and related weapons packages are now making their way through the Pentagon, including a Saudi request for F-35s—one of the world’s most advanced aircrafts. During the Biden administration, the F-35s were tied to Saudi-Israeli normalization. As with nuclear power, it is not clear whether such tethering will continue.
Another key topic to watch is how the two leaders define their overall defense relationship. Saudi Arabia has long sought a defense treaty with the United States that would elevate the country among other US partners in the Gulf. Without full recognition of Israel—and given the current polarization in US politics—Riyadh is unlikely to be able to muster the two-thirds US Senate vote required for official ally status. Still, the Saudis likely want to upgrade their existing relationship……………………………..
What we are likely to hear less about during this trip is human rights, which have been on the US-Saudi agenda for decades.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………. The future of Gaza and the West Bank will likely prove the trickiest shoal to navigate. The Saudis want to ensure a strong influence in leading Gaza reconstruction given that they are expected to foot a large portion of the bill. ……………………………………. https://globalaffairs.org/commentary/analysis/saudi-arabias-crown-prince-visit-washington-trump-what-to-expect?utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Trump%20s%20radiation%20exposure%20rule%3A%20%20catastrophic%20%20for%20women%20and%20girls&utm_campaign=20251117%20Monday%20Newsletter
US Launches a Series of Airstrikes in Somalia, Civilians Reported Killed
Most of the strikes targeted al-Shabaab in southern Somalia while one targeted the ISIS affiliate in Somalia’s Puntland region
by Dave DeCamp | November 16, 2025, https://news.antiwar.com/2025/11/16/us-launches-a-series-of-airstrikes-in-somalia-civilians-reported-killed/
The US has launched at least five more airstrikes in Somalia in recent days as the Trump administration continues to bomb the country at a record pace, a heavy US air war that receives virtually no American media coverage.
According to press releases from US Africa Command, the US launched airstrikes targeting al-Shabaab in southern Somalia on November 11, November 13, November 14, and November 15. Unverified reports on social media suggest that another US airstrike was launched in the area on Sunday, November 16. The command also announced one strike on November 10 that targeted the ISIS affiliate in Somalia’s northeastern Puntland region.
All of the strikes against al-Shabaab were launched to the northeast of the port city of Kismayo. According to al-Shabaab’s news agency, Shahada News Agency, a US and Somali government attack on the town of Jamame on Saturday killed 12 civilians, including eight children, three women, and an elderly man.
The Shahada News Agency published photos of dead and wounded children that it claimed were killed in the attack, which it said involved airstrikes and artillery strikes on a civilian area. Baidoa Online, a Somali media outlet, also reported civilian casualties in a suspected US airstrike in Jamame, saying 10 were killed, including eight children.
“Witnesses say homes and businesses were destroyed during the strikes. The US military usually targets suspected Al-Shabaab positions in the region, but previous operations have occasionally resulted in civilian casualties,” Baidoa said in a post on X. Other posts suggest the strike may have occurred on Sunday, not Saturday as reported by al-Shabaab’s news agency.
AFRICOM offered no details about its airstrike on Saturday besides saying it was launched 55 kilometers to the northeast of Kismayo, which puts it in the vicinity of Jamame. Since earlier this year, AFRICOM has stopped sharing information about casualties in its airstrikes or assessments on civilian harm.
“Specific details about units and assets will not be released to ensure continued operations security,” AFRICOM said in its press release on Sunday that announced US airstrikes in the area on November 14 and November 15.
When asked about the reports of civilian casualties, an AFRICOM spokesman told Antiwar.com, “I haven’t seen that report. AFRICOM takes all allegations of civilian harm seriously and maintains processes to conduct thorough assessments using all available information that may factor into findings.” In previous years, the command has undercounted civilian casualties in its airstrikes in Somalia.
The Somalia National News Agency reported Sunday that the Somali National Army and US-trained Danab commandos conducted operations against al-Shabaab in Jamame, claiming that “heavy losses” were inflicted on the group. The report made no mention of civilian casualties. Hiraan Online, a Somali news site, cited Somali security officials who claimed 56 al-Shabaab fighters were killed and 20 were captured in the operations.
The US-backed Somali Federal Government, which is based in Mogadishu, is known for arresting and restricting journalists who report critically on Somalia’s security forces. Those restrictions, plus al-Shabaab’s restrictions on the use of the internet in the areas it controls, and the lack of US media coverage of the US air war, make it very difficult to ascertain the situation on the ground where the US has been conducting airstrikes.
Based on Antiwar.com’s count, the latest US bombings in Somalia bring the total number of airstrikes in the country this year to 96, according to AFRICOM. President Trump has shattered the annual record for US airstrikes in Somalia, which he previously set at 63 during his first term in 2019. For context, President Biden launched a total of 51 airstrikes in Somalia throughout his four years in office, and President Obama launched 48 over eight years.
Ukraine targeting Russian nuclear power plants amid frontline losses – Rosatom head.

14 Nov, 2025 https://www.rt.com/russia/627793-ukraine-russian-nuclear-plants-attacks/
Kiev’s drones have once again hit the Novovoronezh NPP in Western Russia, Aleksey Likhachev has said.
Ukraine has intensified strikes on Russian nuclear power plants (NPPs) in response to its mounting battlefield losses, Rosatom head Aleksey Likhachev said on Friday.
Likhachev said that earlier this week, Ukrainian drones had once again targeted the Novovoronezh NPP in Western Russia’s Voronezh Region. He relayed that eight of the unmanned aircraft were intercepted and destroyed, but falling debris damaged a power distribution unit, forcing three reactor blocks to temporarily reduce output to below half capacity.
“We are seeing growing aggressiveness from the Kiev regime, directed deliberately against facilities of Russia’s nuclear energy sector,” Likhachev said.
“It is clear that this is a response to the successes and advances of our troops along almost the entire line of contact,” he added, stressing that Russia will provide an “adequate response” to such attacks.
Likhachev made the remarks after meeting with International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Rafael Grossi in Kaliningrad on Friday, where the two discussed the situation at the Zaporozhye NPP and Kiev’s repeated attacks on other Russian nuclear sites.
The safety of the Zaporozhye NPP, Europe’s largest facility of its kind, had been fully ensured during the restoration of its external power supply, according to Likhachev. The plant had relied on backup diesel generators for 30 days after a Ukrainian strike severed its last high-voltage transmission line in September.
The coordination with the IAEA helped Russia “get through a very difficult month from September 23 to October 23,” Rosatom’s CEO told reporters.
Located in Zaporozhye Region, which voted to join Russia in 2022 in a move rejected by Kiev and its Western backers, the facility has repeatedly come under Ukrainian fire, according to Russian officials, who describe the attacks as reckless and highly dangerous. The IAEA maintains observers at the site but has stopped short of assigning blame, a stance Moscow says only encourages further provocations by Kiev.
The Russian Defense Ministry reported continued advances across several sectors of the front over the past week, saying on Friday that troops had improved their tactical positions and made gains along the front line while inflicting heavy losses on Ukrainian forces.
US and Russia ‘actively discussing’ settlement of Ukraine conflict – Moscow

16 Nov, 2025, https://www.rt.com/russia/627862-russia-us-discuss-ukraine-settlement/
The understanding reached at the Alaska summit is still in force, President Putin’s aide Yury Ushakov has said.
Moscow and Washington are continuing their dialogue on resolving the Ukraine conflict in line with the understanding reached during the Alaska meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart Donald Trump in August, Putin’s aide Yury Ushakov has said.
Although the summit failed to yield a breakthrough, Moscow has praised what it called Washington’s willingness to mediate and consider the conflict’s underlying causes.
Russian officials also maintain that continued dialogue creates opportunities for trade and economic cooperation despite the US decision to sanction the oil companies Rosneft and Lukoil last month.
Russia is receiving “many signals” from the US, with the Anchorage meeting still acting as a basis for the talks, Ushakov told journalist Pavel Zarubin on Sunday. “We do believe it is a good way forward,” he said. According to the official, the understandings are still relevant since Washington has never explicitly stated that they are no longer valid.
The presidential aide admitted that the peace process and agreements reached in Alaska do not sit well with Kiev and some of its European backers, adding that it only indicates they want to continue the bloodshed. “The Anchorage [meeting] is only disliked by those who does not want a peaceful resolution [to the Ukraine conflict],” he said.
Bilateral relations between Moscow and Washington sank to an all-time low under former US President Joe Biden, amid the Ukraine conflict, but have shown signs of improvement since Trump’s return to the White House. US and Russian officials have held several rounds of talks this year, including the Alaska summit.
The US and Russia also announced the next planned Trump-Putin summit in Budapest in the fall, but it was then postponed indefinitely. Washington is still determined to continue contacts with Moscow, according to US Vice President J.D. Vance. Earlier in November, he called direct dialogue with Russia part of the “Trump doctrine.”
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov reaffirmed this month that Moscow was ready to resume contacts and rejected media reports claiming otherwise as false.
IDF Kills Two 15-Year-Old Boys in the West Bank, Israeli Settlers Torch Mosque

by Dave DeCamp | November 13, 2025, https://news.antiwar.com/2025/11/13/idf-kills-two-15-year-old-boys-in-the-west-bank-israeli-settlers-torch-mosque/
The Israeli military killed two 15-year-old boys in the Israeli-occupied West Bank on Thursday, according to the Palestinian Authority, as Jewish settlers in the territory continued their attacks on Palestinian communities.
The PA said the two boys, Bilal Bahaa Ali Baaran and Muhammad Mahmud Abu Ayash, were killed “by bullets from the occupation this afternoon, Thursday, near Beit Omar, north of Hebron.”
The Israeli military said that it killed two Palestinians, whom it claimed were on their way to “carry out a terror attack,” but offered no evidence to back up the claim or any other details about the slaying. Earlier this year, the IDF expanded its “open fire” policy in the West Bank, which led to an increase in the killing of civilians.
The Palestinian news agency WAFA reported that three Palestinians, including a 14-year-old, were wounded by Israeli military gunfire in the town of Eizariya, southeast of Jerusalem.
Also on Thursday, Jewish settlers set fire to a mosque in the Palestinian village of Deir Istiya, near Salfit in the northern West Bank. Al Jazeera reported that the settlers sprayed racist, anti-Palestinian graffiti, and photos of the scene show burned Qurans.
There’s been a surge in settler attacks in the West Bank, coinciding with the start of the olive harvesting season, as Palestinian olive farmers are frequently targeted. The UN recorded a total of 266 settler attacks in October, the highest in a single month since it began recording in 2006, according to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA).
“Since 2006, OCHA has documented over 9,600 such attacks. About 1,500 of them took place just this year, roughly 15% of the total,” OCHA said earlier this month.
The surge in violence in the West Bank came after a de-escalation in Gaza as a result of the US-brokered ceasefire deal, which Israel has repeatedly violated by launching attacks and killing more than 240 Palestinians since the truce went into effect, according to numbers from Gaza’s Health Ministry.
The Censored History of Able Archer 83

Archive Publishes “War Scare” Documents Deleted from State Department History
Newly Declassified Documents Focus on Soviet Military’s Fear of U.S. First Strike During Exercise
Washington, D.C., November 14, 2025 https://nsarchive.salsalabs.org/908?wvpId=753e3bf4-ad6a-4702-8e18-2f0d8d5326e6– The State Department quietly deleted important archival records from an official history detailing how a 1983 NATO war game could have led to a catastrophic nuclear exchange, according to new reporting from The Washington Post. This is the first known instance in which the State Department has removed previously declassified and published documents from one of its Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS) volumes, according to the report.
Today, the Archive is publishing copies of the records that were censored by the State Department, along with a selection of the most revealing war scare records. Among them are records revealing that the Soviet military leadership genuinely feared that they were vulnerable to a preemptive nuclear strike from the West during the war scare.
The State Department republished the FRUS volume without the records after the U.S. Court of Appeals in 2024 upheld a CIA decision to deny a 2021 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request from the National Security Archive seeking the declassification of an important retrospective analysis of Able Archer 83 written by U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. Leonard Perroots, who warned that the exercise could have led to “a potentially disastrous situation.”
Asked why 15 pages on Able Archer had been removed from the history without explanation, the State Department told the Post that “[t]he Department was not required to provide public notice.”
National Security Archive director Tom Blanton said that the unprecedented deletion of declassified historical records from the State Department volume on the war scare echoed similar efforts in the Soviet Union where, as author David Remnick writes, the “censors went through the libraries with razor blades and slashed from the bound copies of Novy Mir.”
“Today, in America,” Blanton said, “the censors just have to press delete.”
| READ THE DOCUMENTS THAT THE STATE DEPARTMENT CENSORED |
| THE NATIONAL SECURITY ARCHIVE is an independent non-governmental research institute and library located at The George Washington University in Washington, D.C. The Archive collects and publishes declassified documents acquired through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). A tax-exempt public charity, the Archive receives no U.S. government funding; its budget is supported by publication royalties and donations from foundations and individuals. |
Trump Bets Big on a Nuclear Comeback

critics are not so certain that Westinghouse will be able to deliver on its promises due to the company’s poor track record.
The question now is, just how long will it take to achieve the U.S. nuclear renaissance? ……………………… The projects being funded by tech companies, which focus on the development of SMRs, are not expected to produce power until the next decade, and these are much smaller than conventional reactors.
By Felicity Bradstock , Oil Price- Nov 15, 2025, https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/Trump-Bets-Big-on-a-Nuclear-Comeback.html
- The Trump administration plans to quadruple U.S. nuclear capacity by 2050 and deploy 10 new large reactors by 2030, backed by major public funding and tech-sector investment.
- Westinghouse, Cameco, and international partners like Japan and the U.K. are central to the expansion push, though Westinghouse’s troubled track record raises concerns.
- Long development timelines, high costs, regulatory delays, and a diminished skills base make a rapid nuclear renaissance unlikely despite political momentum.
United States President Donald Trump is putting his money where his mouth is as he doubles down on efforts to accelerate the expansion of the country’s nuclear energy sector. The government will spend billions in public funding to reinvigorate U.S. nuclear power, following decades of underinvestment. Unlike renewable energy, Trump views nuclear power as key to expanding the U.S. electricity generation capacity and recently announced the target of quadrupling nuclear capacity by 2050.
In May, President Trump signed an executive order calling for the U.S. to develop 10 new large nuclear reactors by the end of the decade. In addition, several tech companies, including Alphabet, Amazon, Meta Platforms, and Microsoft, are providing billions in private funding to restart old nuclear plants, upgrade existing ones, and deploy new reactor technology to meet the growing demands from the data centres powering advanced technologies, such as artificial intelligence.
The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DoE) loan office will dedicate significant funds to the nuclear energy industry to support the development of new reactors. This week, the Energy Secretary Chris Wright stated, “We have significant lending authority at the loan programme office… By far the biggest use of those dollars will be for nuclear power plants — to get those first plants built.”
Wright expects the public support for the sector to encourage private actors to invest more heavily in nuclear power in the coming years. “When we leave office three years and three months from now, I want to see hopefully dozens of nuclear plants under construction,” said Wright.
In October, Trump came to an agreement with the owners of Westinghouse – uranium miner Cameco and Brookfield Asset Management – to invest $80 billion to build nuclear plants across the country. Westinghouse plans to construct large nuclear plants to be fitted with its modern AP1000 reactor design, which can power over 750,000 homes, according to the company. Cameco COO Grant Isaac suggested he would look to the DoE’s loans office to fund the development of the Westinghouse reactors.
However, critics are not so certain that Westinghouse will be able to deliver on its promises due to the company’s poor track record. The firm went bankrupt in 2017 after going over budget on large-scale nuclear projects in Georgia and South Carolina. Westinghouse will have to prove its ability to build the AP1000 on time and on budget to attract the investment it requires.
The Trump administration has developed various international partnerships to help develop its nuclear power sector in recent months. In September, Japan committed to investing in the Westinghouse nuclear project. The Asian country also agreed on an investment deal for Hitachi GE Vernova to build small modular reactors (SMRs).
Also in September, the U.S. signed a multibillion-dollar deal with the United Kingdom to expand nuclear power across both countries. The new Atlantic Partnership for Advanced Nuclear Energy is aimed at accelerating the construction of new reactors and providing reliable, low-carbon energy for high-demand sectors, such as data centres.
The question now is, just how long will it take to achieve the U.S. nuclear renaissance? It typically takes a decade or longer to develop a new nuclear power plant, and while adding additional reactors to existing plants can be faster, licensing and approval can take several years. In addition, after decades of stagnation in the sector, developing nuclear reactors in the U.S. can be extremely costly and slow, due to the lack of expertise, compared to rapidly growing nuclear powers, such as China.
In China, developing a new nuclear reactor now takes between five and six years on average, much faster than the decade-long timeline in most Western countries. This is supported by China’s strong regulatory system and tried-and-tested development methods. Meanwhile, in the U.S., just powering up a disused reactor, such as that of Three Mile Island, can take several years to achieve. The projects being funded by tech companies, which focus on the development of SMRs, are not expected to produce power until the next decade, and these are much smaller than conventional reactors.
The Trump administration hopes to speed up the development process through a range of measures. One executive order calls for the nuclear power industry’s safety regulator to approve applications in no more than 18 months. The recent funding announcement from the DoE’s loan office is expected to help overcome the biggest bottleneck – funding. Congress has also kept its tax breaks in place for nuclear development to attract private funding to the sector.
Thanks to greater political support and public financing, the U.S. nuclear energy sector could rapidly expand its power capacity over the coming decades. However, achieving the level of acceleration in nuclear development expected by the Trump administration is highly unlikely due to a range of challenges hindering development, from expertise to cost and manufacturing capacity. So, while a nuclear renaissance is possible, it is unlikely to be seen within the next decade.
‘Gunboat Diplomacy’: U.S. War in Latin America Feared as Hegseth Launches ‘Operation Southern Spear’
SCHEERPOST, November 15, 2025 By DemocracyNow!
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has announced the launch of Operation Southern Spear to target suspected drug traffickers in South America, Central America and the Caribbean. The U.S. now has 15,000 military personnel in the region. Over the past two months the U.S. has blown up at least 20 boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific. “80 people have been killed in what are extrajudicial executions under international law,” says Juan Pappier, Americas deputy director at Human Rights Watch. The Pentagon claims the boats were carrying drugs but officials have acknowledged they don’t know who has been killed.
“Progressives and people of goodwill — of the U.S. and Puerto Rico — it’s time for those of us here to stand up and say that where we will not support any attempt to bring back the old gunboat diplomacy and to invade another Latin American country, and we need to do it soon, because this stuff is moving very quickly,” says Democracy Now!’s Juan González.
Transcript
………………………..AMY GOODMAN: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has announced the launch of Operation Southern Spear to target suspected drug traffickers, he says. In a post on X, Hegseth wrote, quote, “Today, I’m announcing Operation Southern Spear led by Joint Task Force Southern Spear and SOUTHCOM. This mission defends our homeland, removes narcoterrorism from our hemisphere, and secures our homeland from the drugs that are killing our people,” unquote.
The announcement comes as the Pentagon continues to amass warships in the Caribbean. The USS Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier arrived earlier this week. The U.S. now has 15,000 military personnel in the region. It’s the largest buildup in the region in decades, according to the New York Times. Over the past two months, the U.S. has blown up at least 20 boats in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific. The latest strike killed four people on Thursday.
The Pentagon claims the boats were carrying drugs, but officials have acknowledged they don’t know who’s been killed. Critics have denounced the strikes as illegal extrajudicial killings. We begin today’s show with Juan Pappier, the Americas Deputy Director at Human Rights Watch. We welcome you to Democracy Now!, Juan. Begin by talking about Operation Southern Spear and what this means.
JUAN PAPPIER: Amy, thank you for having me. We don’t know what Operation Southern Spear means. The Secretary has not provided details. But we have every reason to be concerned because in the buildup of this announcement, as you mentioned, 80 people have been killed in what are extrajudicial executions under international law…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Yeah, well, Amy, I think with the – especially now, not only with these attacks on boats and these killings, but now with the arrival of an unprecedented military force – we’re talking the largest aircraft carrier in the world, the USS Gerald Ford, has just arrived in the Caribbean with another 5,000 troops and several other battleships accompanying it.
We now have 15,000 U.S. troops in the region, thousands of them based in Puerto Rico. The government has reopened Roosevelt Roads Naval Base, which they had closed, and U.S. planes at the old Ramey Air Force Base in Aguadilla. All of these soldiers are not there to hang out. They’re there to take military action. We have to be clear.
Even though the government hasn’t announced it, it’s clear that this is what’s coming. Our government is embarking on a totally unprovoked military assault and regime change operations in Latin America. The Trump administration has openly accused not one but two Latin-American presidents of drug dealing without any proof, Nicolas Maduro of Venezuela and Gustavo Petro of Colombia and threatened to kill Maduro. This is a bizarre return to the gunboat diplomacy of the early 20th century.
And the big prize being not democracy or not stopping drug trafficking, but grabbing the Venezuelan oil fields, the largest oil reserves in the world. The problem is, this is not the old Latin America that the U.S. could bully at will. The countries at the region are today independent sovereign states………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Yes, it’s a clear continued policy of the United States to control oil production as much as it can as the Trump administration continues on this crazy, bizarre attempt to corner as much oil supply as they can as it continues to deny the existence of climate change or the climate catastrophe we face, https://scheerpost.com/2025/11/15/gunboat-diplomacy-u-s-war-in-latin-america-feared-as-hegseth-launches-operation-southern-spear/
Finally Some Accountability for Georgia’s Costly Nuclear Power Mistake

Vogtle stands as the only new nuclear reactor built in the last 30 years, and its fallout offers a bleak prognosis for any supposed “renaissance” and its supporters in statehouses across the country. We can look back to 2017 when the main contractor, Westinghouse, filed for bankruptcy due to the extreme cost overruns at Vogtle. At that critical moment, the Georgia PSC ignored its own staff, energy experts, and public outcry, choosing to burden ratepayers with the project’s continuation.
By Kim Scott.15 Nov 25 https://nuclearcosts.org/finally-some-accountability-for-georgias-costly-nuclear-power-mistake/
The story of Plant Vogtle’s two new nuclear reactors in Georgia is not a triumph of a “nuclear renaissance”; it’s a cautionary tale written in soaring electric bills and a growing political fallout. The people of Georgia are paying the price, literally, as their utility bills have skyrocketed by over 40% – and now, following last Tuesday’s Public Service Commission election in Georgia, it seems those that allowed this to happen in the first place are starting to feel the pinch as well. It’s about damn time!
Georgia voters delivered a stunning message by unseating two Republican utility commissioners, Tim Echols and Fitz Johnson, who rubber stamped and championed the costly mistakes leading to a 41% increase in Georgians’ electric bills. This election, which saw Democrats Alicia Johnson and Peter Hubbard championing fair rates, affordability and renewable energy, was a clear referendum on Plant Vogtle’s enormous price tag and more importantly, nuclear power as a not so clean future power resource both here in Georgia and elsewhere.
The stunning defeat of utility backed incumbents sends a powerful signal to utility regulators nationwide that consumers will not tolerate being forced to pay for multi-billion-dollar nuclear boondoggles. If they aren’t paying attention, Wall Street sure is, downgrading Southern Co.’s stock immediately following the election, citing the increased risk and the new difficulty the company will face in pushing through further rate hikes to pay for Plant Vogtle and other projects in their pipeline. Georgia customers will pay an additional $36 billion to $43 billion over the 60-80 year lifespan of the two Vogtle reactors compared to cheaper alternatives.
Vogtle stands as the only new nuclear reactor built in the last 30 years, and its fallout offers a bleak prognosis for any supposed “renaissance” and its supporters in statehouses across the country. We can look back to 2017 when the main contractor, Westinghouse, filed for bankruptcy due to the extreme cost overruns at Vogtle. At that critical moment, the Georgia PSC ignored its own staff, energy experts, and public outcry, choosing to burden ratepayers with the project’s continuation.
The consequences of those decisions, subsequent rate increases and soaring electric bills are not abstract—they are impacting the most vulnerable among us and the most overlooked i.e. middle class/working class Georgians. Disconnection rates for the inability to pay have soared by 30% in 2024. For retirees on fixed incomes, the rate increases to pay for Plant Vogtle mean the difference between making ends meet and falling into destitution. This summer, when brutal heat waves descended, vulnerable Georgians had their power shut off, creating life-threatening conditions because they could no longer afford to cool their homes.
The ratepayer backlash in Georgia is also being fueled by the projected massive energy demands of AI data centers, which are forcing utilities like Southern Co. to reckon with costly new generation and transmission projects. Instead of aggressively pushing nuclear power—as evidenced by the Trump administration’s recent $80 billion deal to buy reactors from Westinghouse, the same company bankrupted by Vogtle—we must demand that elected politicians focus on fast and affordable energy solutions like solar and battery energy storage systems.
The painful lesson learned in Georgia is that new nuclear power is simply too expensive and takes too long. The reality is that for half the cost and in less than a quarter of the time, we could have built more than twice the capacity using solar, wind, or battery storage technologies. But corruption won out and Vogtle is here for the foreseeable future. Georgians will be paying for this mistake for decades to come… I’m just glad there’s finally some accountability headed our way.
Kim Scott is Executive Director of Georgia WAND, is a native Georgian, and has a Chemical Engineering degree from Vanderbilt University in Nashville, TN.
Non Government Organisations Warn that Recent Executive Orders Would Harm Public Health, Disproportionately Impacting Women and Children

“Young men like the Reference Man are harmed by radiation, but they’re more resistant to harm than are women and children. Radiation causes cancer in women at twice the rate of adult men, while the same exposure in early childhood, will, across their lifetimes, produce seven times more cancer in young females, and four times more in young males.”
Asheville, North Carolina – November 14, https://www.radiationproject.org/blog/ngos-warn-that-recent-executive-orders-would-harm-public-health-disproportionately-impacting-women-and-children?ss_source=sscampaigns&ss_campaign_id=6917d62bc4477007efdd4b63&ss_email_id=6917db9d43e3de1cada92627&ss_campaign_name=Welcome+to+GRIP%E2%80%99s+NEW+Blog&ss_campaign_sent_date=2025-11-15T01%3A47%3A30Z

Over forty citizen’s sector organizations including the national nonprofit Physicians for Social Responsibility have sent a joint letter to federal officials warning of public health consequences of a series of executive orders by President Trump which direct the NRC to dramatically weaken Standards for Protection Against Radiation in the US federal code. The letter points out sharply disproportionate impacts on women and children from weakening existing radiation exposure standards and calls for strengthening them.
The letter is posted here. It was spearheaded by the nonprofit Generational Radiation Impact Project (GRIP) and sent to US Nuclear Regulatory Commissioners, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Surgeon General Denise Hinton, and other key elected and appointed officials.
Recent Trump executive orders direct the NRC to “reconsider” the linear no-threshold (LNT) model. The joint letter argues that this “would undermine public trust by falsely claiming that the NRC’s radiation risk models lack scientific basis, despite decades of peer-reviewed evidence and international consensus.” The widely accepted LNT model has no limit “below regulatory concern,” i.e. no level below which radiation exposure can be treated as negligible or zero-risk. Where applied, LNT takes account of proportional cancer and health risks of all tiny exposures no matter how small.
Trump executive orders direct the NRC to undertake new rulemaking and “wholesale revision” of existing radiation regulations, which would likely lead to the NRC abandoning LNT and raising allowable exposure limits.
But past NRC opposition to such changes stands to be reversed by the Trump executive orders. If federal radiation regulations were weakened to permit exposures of 10 Rems a year, scientists estimate that over a 70-year lifetime, four out of five people would develop cancer they would not otherwise get.
Today’s joint letter stresses that health damage would not be evenly distributed across the population, but would disproportionately affect women and children, who are biologically more susceptible to ionizing radiation than men. And an article published today in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists cites several lines of evidence “that women and young girls are significantly more vulnerable to radiation harm than men—in some cases by as much as a ten-fold difference” and that “infants are especially vulnerable to radiation harm.”
A July 2025 Idaho National Laboratory report commissioned by the Department of Energy recommended loosening the public radiation standard fivefold to 500 millirems. In 2021 the NRC roundly rejected a petition to raise allowable radiation exposures for all Americans, including children and pregnant women, to 10 Rems a year, 100 times the current limit.
“[NRC] bases its risk assessments on Reference Man, a model that represents a young adult male and fails to reflect the greater impacts to infants, children, and women—pregnant or not,” the joint letter states. “Newer research has shown that external radiation harms children more than adults and female bodies more than male bodies. Research on internal exposures…has not yet been sufficiently analyzed to discover if there are broad age-based or male/female differences in impact…. Existing standards should therefore be strengthened to account for these life-stage and gender disparities…not weakened. Radiation causes infertility, loss of pregnancy, birth complications and defects, as well as solid tumor cancer, leukemia, non-cancer outcomes including cardiovascular disease, increased incidence of autoimmune disease and ongoing new findings.”
In cases where cancer, heart disease, and vascular degradation including stroke are caused by radiation, they are documented at higher rates in women than in men, according to 2024 UNIDIR report Gender and Ionizing Radiation.
The joint letter urges the NRC to “to stand up to the Executive Order’s marching orders to ‘promote’ nuclear power—a mission outside its legal regulatory mandate,” and adopt “stronger, science-based radiation protections….Contemporary research shows that radiation’s impact is far greater on females, children, and fetuses—the most at-risk postnatal group being girls from birth to age five. A truly protective framework would replace Reference Man with a lifecycle model.”
“All US radiation regulations and most radiation risk assessments are based on outcomes for the Reference Man,” said Mary Olson, CEO of GRIP, the organization which spearheaded the joint letter, and co-author of Gender and Ionizing Radiation. “Young men like the Reference Man are harmed by radiation, but they’re more resistant to harm than are women and children. Radiation causes cancer in women at twice the rate of adult men, while the same exposure in early childhood, will, across their lifetimes, produce seven times more cancer in young females, and four times more in young males.”
“We know that exposure to radiation causes disproportionate harm from both cancer and non-cancer related disease outcomes over the course of the lifetime to women and especially to little girls, but radiation is dangerous for everyone,” said Amanda M. Nichols, Ph.D., lead author of Gender and Ionizing Radiation. “[President Trump’s] executive order will allow the industry to relax the current standards for radiological protection, which are already far from adequate. This will have detrimental health consequences for humans and for our shared environments and puts us all at higher risk for negative health consequences. “
“Living near nuclear power facilities doubles the risk of leukemia in children; and radiation is also associated with numerous reproductive harms including infertility, stillbirths and birth defects.,” said Cindy Folkers, Radiation and Health Hazard Specialist with the NGO Beyond Nuclear, a signatory to the joint letter. “Exposing people to more radiation, as this order would do if implemented, would be tantamount to legitimizing their suffering as the price of nuclear expansion.”
Trump stupidly brags about committing war crimes against Iran

Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL, Nov 15, 2025, https://theaimn.net/trump-stupidly-brags-about-committing-war-crimes-against-iran/
Rule 1 for leaders committing war crimes is to refrain from bragging about them. President Trump jettisoned that wise rule regarding his criminal involvement in Israel’s 12 day war on Iran last June.
When Israel attacked, Trump trotted his obedient Secretary of State Marco Rubio who issued this lie to America and world. “Israel had taken unilateral action to defend itself. We are not involved in strikes against Iran and our top priority is protecting American forces in the region. Let me be clear: Iran should not target U.S. interests or personnel.”
Of course Iran had every right to target US interests and personnel since the US knew about and aided Israel’s crazed war that backfired on Israel. How so? Iran was wise to ignore US perfidy to launch a massive rocket attack on Israel that could not be defended against. After 12 days Israel threw in the towel. Israel now knows Iran will never be a genocidal punching bag like the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank.
US involvement was overt and covert. The former included refueling Israeli bombers during the entire 12 day war. The covert consisted of holding fake negotiations with Iran about their nuclear program to lull them into false security that no attack, which the US knew about, was imminent. Just 2 days beforehand Trump scheduled another negotiation and proclaimed “I am committed to a “diplomatic solution” with Iran.”
The US maintained the ‘not involved’ charade for nearly 5 months. Alas, Trump, an inveterate braggart on everything he maliciously touches from business partners, women wishing to be left alone, political enemies among others, just couldn’t contain his glee in assisting Israel’s unprovoked, murderous attack. ”Israel attacked first. That attack was very, very powerful. I was very much in charge of that. When Israel attacked Iran first, that was a great day for Israel because that attack did more damage than the rest of them put together.”
Iran took note of Trump’s confession of international criminality. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi fired off a letter to UN officials demanding the US be held to account for enabling Israel’s attacks on Iran that killed more than 1,000 people. In the letter Araghchi cited Trump’s recent comments about how he was “in charge” of the Israeli attacks. “The Islamic Republic of Iran reserves its full and unimpeachable right to pursue, through all available legal means, the establishment of accountability for the responsible States and individuals and to secure compensation for the damages sustained.”
Araghchi can Faggedaboudit. If the UN and the International Criminal Court can do nothing Trump’s complicity in Israel’s monstrous genocide in Gaza, there is zero chance they will even glance at his war crimes in Iran.
US, South Korea to ‘move forward’ on building nuclear-powered submarines
South Korean President Lee Jae Myung says the US supports Seoul’s bid to secure uranium enrichment and spent nuclear fuel reprocessing capabilities.
By Kevin Doyle and News Agencies 14 Nov 2025, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/11/14/us-south-korea-to-move-forward-on-building-nuclear-powered-submarines
The United States and South Korea have released details of a trade agreement that includes a $150bn Korean investment in the US shipbuilding sector, and both countries agree to “move forward” on building nuclear-powered submarines.
Under the agreement, President Lee Jae Myung said on Friday that South Korea will build nuclear-powered submarines as part of a new partnership with Washington on shipbuilding, artificial intelligence and the nuclear industry.
A fact sheet released by the White House said the US gave approval for Seoul to build nuclear-powered submarines and that South Korea will invest an additional $200bn in US industrial sectors in addition to the $150bn in shipbuilding.
South Korea’s official Yonhap news agency said Seoul’s investment was in return for Washington’s lowering of trade tariffs on Korean goods to 15 percent from 25 percent.
“One of the greatest variables for our economy and security – the bilateral negotiations on trade, tariffs and security – has been finalised,” President Lee said at a news conference on Friday, adding the two countries had agreed to “move forward with building nuclear-powered submarines”.
“The United States has given approval for the ROK [Republic of Korea] to build nuclear-powered attack submarines,” Lee said.
Seoul also secured “support for expanding our authority over uranium enrichment and spent-fuel reprocessing”, he said.
The joint fact sheet outlining the deal said both sides would “collaborate further through a shipbuilding working group” to “increase the number of US commercial ships and combat-ready US military vessels “.
Yonhap also reported that South Korea is seeking to acquire “four or more 5,000-ton conventionally armed, nuclear-powered submarines by the mid-2030s “.
South Korea’s development of nuclear-powered vessels would provide a significant boost to its naval and defence industries, allowing Seoul to join a select group of countries with such technological capabilities, analysts say.
China had already voiced concern over a Washington-Seoul deal on nuclear submarine technology.
Such a partnership “goes beyond a purely commercial partnership, directly touching on the global nonproliferation regime and the stability of the Korean Peninsula and the wider region,” China’s Ambassador in Seoul Dai Bing told reporters on Thursday.
North Korea did not immediately comment on the development, but is likely to respond. Pyongyang has consistently accused Washington and Seoul of building up military forces on the North’s borders in preparation for an invasion one day.
Details remain murky on where the nuclear submarines will be built.
US President Donald Trump said on social media last month that “South Korea will be building its Nuclear Powered Submarine in the Philadelphia Shipyards, right here in the good ol’ U.S.A”.
However, Seoul’s national security adviser Wi Sung-lac said on Friday that “from start to finish, the leaders’ discussion proceeded on the premise that construction would take place in South Korea”.
“So the question of where construction will take place can now be considered settled,” Wi said.
-
Archives
- February 2026 (115)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
-
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

