nuclear-news

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

Iran Suspends U.S. Talks as Israel Kills 8 More in Lebanon & Expands Occupation

SCHEERPOST, June 2, 2026

Israeli drones have killed at least eight people in Lebanon despite an announcement Monday by U.S. President Donald Trump that both Israel and Hezbollah had agreed to stop fighting. Trump’s intervention came as Israel threatened new strikes on the southern suburbs of Beirut, leading Iran to suspend indirect negotiations with the U.S. to protest Israel’s expanding military offensive in Lebanon. Since March 2, Israel has killed more than 3,400 people in Lebanon while seizing large swaths of the country and displacing about one-fifth of the population.

Lebanon is “a weak state, it doesn’t have a lot of leverage, and a lot of people are concerned,” says Associated Press reporter Kareem Chehayeb in Beirut. “They sort of feel beholden to the regional and global powers on their fate.”

Transcript

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: We begin today’s show in Lebanon, where Israeli drones have killed at least eight people despite President Trump’s claim that Israel and Hezbollah have agreed that, quote, “all shooting will stop.” Trump made the claim as Iran said it’s suspending indirect negotiations with the U.S. to protest Israel’s expanding military offensive in Lebanon. Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi wrote online, “The ceasefire between Iran and the US is unequivocally a ceasefire on all fronts, including in Lebanon. Its violation on one front is a violation of the ceasefire on all fronts. The US and Israel are responsible for the consequences of any violation,” he said.

Since March 2nd, Israel has killed more than 3,400 people in Lebanon while seizing large swaths of southern Lebanon, including the medieval Beaufort Castle.

On Monday, President Trump spoke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by phone after Israel threatened new attacks on Beirut. Axios is reporting, during the expletive-laden call, Trump told Netanyahu, quote, “You’re f’ing crazy. You’d be in prison if it weren’t for me. I’m saving your ass. Everybody hates you now. Everybody hates Israel because of this,” Axios reported Trump saying to Netanyahu.

After the call, Trump wrote online, quote, “I had a very productive call with Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu, ​of Israel, and there will be no Troops going to Beirut, and ​any Troops that are on their way, have already been turned back,” he said.

In Beirut, displaced Lebanese residents decried Israel’s ongoing attacks……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. https://scheerpost.com/2026/06/02/iran-suspends-u-s-talks-as-israel-kills-8-more-in-lebanon-expands-occupation/

June 5, 2026 Posted by | MIDDLE EAST, politics international | Leave a comment

European countries split on Macron’s nuclear deterrence offer

Questions remain over how it would complement the US nuclear umbrella

DefenceCharles Cohen/Pietro Guastamacchia, Euractiv, 5 June26, https://www.euractiv.com/news/macrons-advanced-nuclear-deterrence-gains-supporters-but-questions-remains/

France’s offer to extend its nuclear deterrence has so far seduced nine European countries, but the benefits the scheme would provide on top of the US nuclear umbrella remain unclear to others. 

Last week, Norway, which has long believed its security was best ensured through ⁠close alignment with Washington, announced it would join France’s ‘forward deterrence’ initiative, joining eight other countries: Germany, the Netherlands, Greece, Belgium, Poland, Sweden, Denmark and the United Kingdom. 

This shift sends a very strong signal to both European allies and Washington, Etienne Marcuz, a senior analyst on strategic armaments at the Foundation for Strategic Research, told Euractiv, adding that it could encourage other countries in the region to follow suit.   

Eastern flank  

Neighbouring Finland, which shares a 1,340-km border with Russia, is also assessing whether to take part in the initiative, Defence Minister Antti Häkkänen said last week.  

“The 2022 invasion (of Ukraine by Russia) generated a sense of vulnerability, particularly in terms of being potentially susceptible to nuclear coercion. Now Finland considers nuclear deterrence legitimate,” Matti Pesu, a senior research fellow at the Finnish Institute of International Affairs, said. 

The Baltic countries have been particularly exposed to Russia’s hybrid attacks, with Ukrainian drones veering off course by electronic warfare crashing into their territory. Such incidents have prompted the collapse of the Latvian government. So far, the three countries have not publicly expressed interest in taking up France’s offer.

According to Marcuz, if all Nordic countries joined, this would provide new corridors from which to hit Russia, especially through the Arctic. 

“An entire part of the Russian flank would be vulnerable,” he said.  

But such decisions could take time, amid reports that Washington is debating extending its deployment of nuclear weapons in Europe to Poland and the Baltic states. 

“The US is putting pressure on Europeans, so they don’t distance themselves from their nuclear dependency,” Marcuz noted. “The fundamental lever of US influence in Europe is the nuclear weapon,” he added.  

Macron’s deterrence is not a nuclear umbrella

Emmanuel Macron unveiled the concept of ‘forward deterrence’ last March during a long-awaited revision of France’s nuclear doctrine. 

“It enables French nuclear deterrence to deploy French forces abroad, either in peacetime for strategic signalling or in wartime to disperse and to be able to spread out across the European space,” Marcuz said.  

“There is no explicit security guarantee,” he added, one of the key differences with American deterrence in Europe.  

Instead, the French president said in his Ile Longue speech that the territories of partner countries would have an “affirmed bond” with France’s deterrence.  

For Marcuz, the term is strategically ambiguous so as to avoid clearly laying out France’s ambitions to adversaries, in this case, Russia.  

Macron said he would open deterrence exercises to European allies and deploy the country’s strategic forces, including the air force, across Europe. France runs quarterly nuclear exercises involving its air-based nuclear deterrence, carried by a fleet of Rafale fighter jets. The last such exercise was held on Monday.

Partner countries could take part in the drills, playing the role of an adversary, Marcuz noted.  

 Italy’s doubts 

Rome, which has the EU’s third-biggest army, is notably absent from the list. Italian bases host US tactical nuclear bombs – the B61 models.  

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has long enjoyed a privileged relationship with US President Donald Trump. But Rome’s refusal to authorise the use of its bases for the war in Iran has drawn Washington’s ire. 

Still, Italy is so far standing strongly behind the American deterrent.  

“This government, like others in the past, will do everything it can to maintain the best possible relations with its US ally,” Alessandro Politi, director of the NATO Defence College Foundation, said.  

Additionally, the French doctrine could expose partner countries to security risks, Politi argued, if French nuclear-armed Rafales were to fly through their airspace.  

“Such planes are easily vulnerable, and the last guarantee of France’s response capability is four nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines, which means, on average, about one or two on patrol during the year. Frankly, that’s a bit meagre.” 

Several countries currently host American nuclear weapons, Politi said, adding these are framed within the context of the NATO alliance.  

But Paris and Rome have already collaborated in the field of nuclear deterrence. Italy was the first foreign country to participate in a French nuclear exercise by providing refuelling assets in 2022.  

This sets a precedent and so “Italy’s non-participation therefore seems to be more closely tied to political reasons related to the less-than-idyllic relations between Macron and Meloni,” Antonio Missiroli, former NATO assistant secretary general, said.  

Both the French programme and any future Italian cooperation will depend on the outcome of national elections in the two countries, both scheduled for 2027, he added. 

June 5, 2026 Posted by | EUROPE, politics international | Leave a comment

Why Trump should be indicted

Crispin Hull, June 1, 2026

The details of the 2016 agreement that the Obama Administration and European allies made with Iran show why President Donald Trump should be indicted for the war crime of waging an aggressive war.

That agreement, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action between the nuclear-armed US, UK, France, China, and Russia, and Germany and Iran, which Iran abided by for two years until Trump tore it up, made it impossible for Iran to make a nuclear bomb.

Last week, the US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent denied that the Obama-era agreement ever happened.

“This administration, President Trump, has done something that no other administration was able to do,” he said. “We have gotten the Iranians to talk about their nuclear program and perhaps commit to not having one. That has never happened before. It had been off the table.”

This is utterly untrue. Obama not only got Iranians to talk about their nuclear program but to agree to detailed restrictions on uranium and plutonium enrichment with verifiable inspections that would make construction of a bomb impossible.

In January 2016, under the headline, “The Historic Deal that Will Prevent Iran from Acquiring a Nuclear Weapon”, the White House stated: “On January 16, 2016, the International Atomic Energy Agency verified that Iran has completed the necessary steps under the Iran deal that will ensure Iran’s nuclear program is and remains exclusively peaceful.”

This is the verification of the International Atomic Energy Agency – the independent international body that has been doing nuclear verification since 1957.

Trump and his Cabinet toadies are in complete denial that it ever happened.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said, “Only one president was willing to lay it out on the line and ensure after 47 years that Iran is not capable of having a nuclear weapon.”

Again, not true.

There are a couple of reasons for the denial. One, they work on the basis that anything Obama did must be bad or if good, deny it happened. And, secondly, that if in the past the US had the security of a nuclear-bomb-incapable Iran it would not be possible to argue that Trump’s 2026 attack on Iran was justified as self-defence.

There are only two legally valid reasons to go to war: self-defence and UN authorisation. Trump’s attack on Iran met neither of the criteria. It was the criminal waging of an aggressive war, and he is responsible for all the death and destruction that followed. The International Criminal Court should start an investigation into Trump.

This does not excuse the violence, aggression, and human-rights breaches by the Iranian regime. But they in turn do not excuse illegal Trump’s and the US conduct either. 

Iranian scepticism of US bona fides is, however, justified, given US engineering of the 1953 coup against a democratic Iranian Government; the US arming and empowerment of the Shah of Iran’s 26-year brutal repression, torture and murder; the US’s unapologetic 1988 shooting down of Iran Flight 655 killing 290 innocent people; and the US’s reneging on the 2016 nuclear agreement after Iran had verifiably abided by it for two years.

Yes, international law is difficult or near impossible to enforce, but if both sides in any international conflict resort to right-is-might the consequence is always unnecessary death and destruction. More importantly, if a great number of nations adhere to international law, it isolates and pressures those countries and their leaders who do not. With economic and physical consequences.

At least, European and other democratic allies realised Trump’s Iran illegality and refused to take part. Once burned by US President George W Bush’s illegal invasion of Iraq, twice shy. At least Bush tried to get UN sanction for his invasion. Not Trump.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..And the lessons for Australia? Stick to the rule of law and keep appropriate distance from the US. And the lessons for Australian voters, who on current polls seem set to give One Nation more votes than any other party? Pay attention. Look at history.

Look at Hanson cosying up to Trump and their similarities – joining forces with billionaires; accepting gifts of aircraft in questionable circumstances; and more.

British voters surely wouldn’t vote to leave the EU and trash their economy? US voters surely would not vote for Trump – twice – likely handing over world economic and political leadership to China?

Australians surely would not vote to put One Nation’s Pauline Hanson in the Prime Minister’s Lodge with who knows what consequences.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… https://www.crispinhull.com.au/2026/06/01/why-trump-should-be-indicted/?utm_source=mailpoet&utm_medium=email&utm_source_platform=mailpoet&utm_campaign=crispin-hull-column

June 5, 2026 Posted by | Legal | Leave a comment

Wildfires devastating richer areas but fewer hectares burned globally – study

Ajit Niranjan, June 26, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jun/01/wildfires-devastating-richer-areas-but-fewer-hectares-burned-globally-study

‘Megafires’ in California, Canada, South Korea and Europe in 2025, but changes to farming slowed spread in parts of Africa.

“Devastating” wildfires ripped across the wealthier parts of the world in 2025, a study has found, even as globally, the area ravaged by flames fell.

Catastrophic blazes claimed lives, homes and jobs last year in California, Canada, Europe and South Korea. But the 335m hectares burned was the second-lowest since 2002, the review found, largely owing to the expansion of African farms that have fragmented landscapes and hampered the spread of large savannah fires.

The disasters in 2025 included a Scottish “megafire” that torched more than 100,000 hectares – contributing to the UK breaking its record for burned area – and the Palisades and Eaton fires in Los Angeles, which were among the most destructive in US history.

Record-breaking blazes in Spain and Portugal burned more than half a million hectares, while South Korea had its biggest and deadliest wildfire season on record.

Fires accounted for more than 38% of insured losses from weather disasters in 2025, the study found.

“2025 shows that a ‘quiet’ fire year globally can still be devastating,” said Matthew Jones, a climate scientist at the University of East Anglia and lead author of the study. “We are seeing a growing disconnect between total area burned and real-world impacts.”

Changes in land use mean wildfires burn less of the planet than they have historically done, but global heating is creating conditions allowing them to spread, increasing the danger at what researchers call the wildland-urban interface, where people are most at risk.

Adverse weather, inflamed by carbon pollution, turned some of last year’s fires into explosive infernos.

In southern California and South Korea, the researchers found, high winds and dry vegetation pushed fires through densely populated areas, causing “exceptional mortality, mass evacuations, and major infrastructure losses”. In the Mediterranean, meanwhile, drought and extreme heat drove severe blazes, from Portugal to Turkey.

“These conditions do not cause the fires, but in the event of a fire, we have material that is more flammable than usual – because it is drier – and wind conditions that fan the flames,” said David Garcia, an applied mathematician at the University of Alicante, who was not involved in the study. “This makes large fires more likely to occur.”

An attribution study Garcia co-authored last year found the extreme weather fuelling the flames in Portugal and Spain last year was made 39 times more likely by climate breakdown. “If we continue to warm the planet, large-scale fires will continue to increase,” he said.

The overall reduction in global burned area led to a drop in carbon dioxide emissions to their third-lowest level on record.

In Canada, though, extreme wildfire emissions were recorded for the third year in a row. Since 2023, boreal forests in North America have emitted close to 4bn tonnes of CO2, exceeding the total emissions of the preceding 15-year period.

As well as heating the planet, the pollutants in wildfire smoke lead to huge numbers of people dying from breathing dirty air. The toxic particles spewed by Canadian wildfires in 2023 killed 82,000 people, according to a study published in September, with smoke even choking cities in the US, Europe and Africa.

Adrián Regos, a landscape ecologist at the Biological Mission of Galicia, Spain, who was not involved in the study, said last year’s events illustrated how a relatively small number of extreme fires could dominate the ecological, social and economic consequences of an entire fire season.

“The broader pattern highlighted by this study is consistent with what we are observing across southern Europe: while total burned area may fluctuate from year to year, climate change is increasing the likelihood of extreme fire-weather conditions, and fuel accumulation associated with rural abandonment is making many landscapes more vulnerable to large, fast-moving fires,” he said.

“The challenge is therefore not only reducing the number of fires, but increasing the resilience of landscapes and communities to extreme events.”

June 5, 2026 Posted by | climate change | Leave a comment

Race for rare earths sparks concern about environmental damage 

More than 6,000 people living near a mine in Madagascar are locked in a dispute with
Rio Tinto over alleged environmental damage linked to the extraction of a
rare earth mineral key to modern industries. They have accused the mining
group’s subsidiary QIT Madagascar Minerals of contaminating waterways
with hazardous materials, including uranium, through the extraction of
ilmenite, used in paints, and the rare earth mineral monazite, which
contains the radioactive element.

The long-running dispute highlights the
legal and moral risks facing companies as they intensify efforts to open
rare earth mines, a push that has led to a rush of deals as the west seeks
to loosen China’s grip on the sector. Western nations see dependence on
China for the metals — vital components of magnets that go into electric
vehicles, wind turbines and defence systems — as a national security
threat. Their concerns were heightened when Beijing imposed new export
controls last year.

 FT 31st May 2026,
https://www.ft.com/content/dcc11776-b672-4a0f-a1ed-3e441d2f4c29

June 5, 2026 Posted by | environment, OCEANIA | Leave a comment

Will Trump sideline Israel in order to make a deal with Iran?

Donald Trump reportedly has a deal on the table to suspend fighting and begin negotiations to end the Iran war and the resulting global economic crisis. But Israel and Iran hawks see it as a disaster and are working to undermine it. Who will win out?

Mondoweiss, By Mitchell Plitnick  May 31, 2026 

According to available reports, the purported agreement on a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the United States and Iran to entrench the current ceasefire was ready to be signed and presented to the public, and Trump was going to retire to his “situation room” to confer with his people and announce it. 

If that seemed too good to be true, it turns out it was, at least for the moment. 

Eventually, Trump is going to have to decide whether to accept an MOU that will be harshly attacked by Israel and Iran hawks or resume the fighting. Choosing the former is out of character for the beleaguered president, but resuming the fighting will bury him deeper in this quagmire and will intensify the global economic crisis.

This mistrust is why Iran wants this MOU rather than a comprehensive deal. They want to move slowly, confirming American sincerity with actions, not words, every step of the way.

Trump, on the other hand, is struggling to decide what to do amid conflicting, powerful political pressures. His team has, apparently, negotiated the terms of the MOU, but he is indecisive about implementing it. These are the consequences of a weak, unqualified person in the White House. 

This political quicksand that Trump continues to sink into is another in the long list of reasons why other presidents have refused to let Israel draw them into a war with Iran. Now that Iran has the upper hand, it is dictating the framework of ending the war. 

Trump wanted to end it with a comprehensive deal, a grand bargain. That has been completely thwarted by Iran, which insists on a staged process to confirm American intentions after two surprise attacks. Trump’s absurd idea of expanding the Abraham Accords was a last, desperate attempt to try to come out of this debacle with a win big enough for him to claim that it was all worth it. 

He made that desperate grab because the MOU, although not addressing some of the biggest issues, would include some immediate concessions to Iran that will be viewed by Trump’s allies as significant setbacks.

The concessions that have been rumored—which include funding Iran’s reconstruction, sanctions relief, and releasing frozen Iranian funds, for which he will be accused of “sending pallets of cash” to Iran, just as Trump once accused Barack Obama—are going to be attacked by Iran hawks. But for Trump, the immediate priority is reopening the Strait of Hormuz quickly and doing as much damage control as he can before the congressional elections in November. 

The MOU would, according to the reports, accomplish that. Iran would allow ships to move through the Strait and would start removing impediments, such as mines, from the area, while concurrently, the U.S. would gradually lift its blockade of Iranian ports. The fighting would stop, including in Lebanon, although the specific terms of that and whether Israel would be forced to completely withdraw from southern Lebanon have not been mentioned. Iran would reiterate its long-standing pledge not to create a nuclear weapon. 

Beyond that, the MOU would outline the topics for further talks that would, it is hoped, lead to a permanent peace deal. 60 days would be allotted for those talks, which would include Iran’s nuclear program, a proposed $300 billion reconstruction fund for Iran, a permanent system for managing the Strait, the lifting of sanctions, and the release of frozen Iranian assets. 

Trump unintentionally confirmed much of the rumored content and limitations of the MOU: 

“Iran must agree that they will never have a Nuclear Weapon or Bomb. The Hormuz Strait must be immediately open, no tolls, for unrestricted shipping traffic, in both directions. All water mines (bombs), if any, will be terminated (we have removed, through detonation, numerous such mines with our great underwater mine sweepers. Iran will complete the immediate removal and/or detonation of any mines that are left, which will not be many!). … The enriched material, sometimes referred to as “Nuclear Dust,” … will be unearthed by the United States (which, it is agreed, is the only Country, along with China, with the mechanical capability of doing so!), in close coordination and conjunction with the Islamic Republic of Iran, plus the International Atomic Energy Agency, and DESTROYED. No money will be exchanged, until further notice.”

Though the language is Trumpian, there is much to read into this message, both in its contents and its omissions. 

Trump’s demand about destroying the so-called “nuclear dust” leaves open the option of Iran diluting its highly enriched uranium and agreeing to IAEA inspections going forward. That’s an Iranian proposal, which Trump is trying to own. Doubtless, Iran would be fine with him making that claim for his own political purposes. 

Dilution, however, would not be good enough for Israel or its allies in Washington. Nor are they going to be happy about Trump even mentioning money. His declaration that no money will change hands “until further notice” implies that there will, eventually, be such “further notice” if the process of the MOU is followed. 

It is worth noting that nowhere in any of the talk of either the immediate terms of the MOU or the framework for negotiations going forward that it would imply is there any mention at all of Iran’s missile and drone programs or its support of regional allies, which are often termed “proxies” by the media.

A disaster for Netanyahu and Iran hawks

Israeli reporter Ben Caspit, citing a “senior Israeli political source,” reports that Benjamin Netanyahu faces a political disaster if Trump ends the war. 

“This time, the prime minister’s hands are tied. He is completely paralyzed and knows that he will not be able to do anything, even if the agreement signed between the United States and Iran remains the disaster he now defines it as,” an anonymous Netanyahu associate told Caspit.

That same insider also said that Netanyahu now longs for the days of Joe Biden. It is a classic case of being careful what you wish for……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

The next president, whomever that might be, will have the same opportunity. The terms for a permanent agreement with Iran will be clear: a workable agreement on the Strait, IAEA inspections ensuring Iran doesn’t develop a nuclear weapon, and a path forward that includes a resuscitation of the Iranian economy, and regional agreements to ensure the security of the Gulf states, including Iran. 

In other words, the JCPOA, in all the dimensions Obama envisioned. All we need to get there is the same resolute determination to do the sensible thing that Obama showed when he too froze Israel out of the process so he could do something wise. https://mondoweiss.net/2026/05/will-trump-sideline-israel-is-order-to-make-a-deal-with-iran/

June 5, 2026 Posted by | Iran, Israel, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Canadian nuclear company Bruce Power has launched a CAD1 million (USD722,000)bribery system to win over municipalities.

World Nuclear News, 2 June 2026

Bruce Power has launched a CAD1 million (USD722,000) Regional Municipal Readiness Assessment Fund to support municipalities in the Bruce, Grey, and Huron counties in advancing planning related to the proposed Bruce C Project. The fund is designed to support studies and assessments that help municipalities prepare for the potential opportunities and impacts associated with Bruce C – a proposed new power plant of up to 4.8 GW at the Bruce Power site in Ontario – with individual projects to be completed by the end of 2027.

“Municipal leadership is critical in planning for large-scale infrastructure opportunities,” Pat Dalzell, Bruce Power’s Vice-President, Corporate Affairs and Market Development, said. “This new fund will help to ensure communities are well positioned to capture economic benefits while maintaining the services and quality of life residents depend on.”

brennainlloyd . 3June 26

Bruce Power has launched a CAD1 million (USD722,000) Regional Municipal Readiness Assessment Fund to support municipalities in the Bruce, Grey, and Huron counties in advancing planning related to the proposed Bruce C Project. The fund is designed to support studies and assessments that help municipalities prepare for the potential opportunities and impacts associated with Bruce C – a proposed new power plant of up to 4.8 GW at the Bruce Power site in Ontario – with individual projects to be completed by the end of 2027.

“Municipal leadership is critical in planning for large-scale infrastructure opportunities,” Pat Dalzell, Bruce Power’s Vice-President, Corporate Affairs and Market Development, said. “This new fund will help to ensure communities are well positioned to capture economic benefits while maintaining the services and quality of life residents depend on.”

June 5, 2026 Posted by | business and costs, Canada | Leave a comment

The costs of nuclear wastes from “in service” nuclear submarines.

Richard Marles weasels his way out of this problem

3 June 2026 Noel Wauchope AIM Extra , https://theaimn.net/the-costs-of-nuclear-wastes-from-in-service-nuclear-submarines/

It is a rather nauseating entertainment, watching Australia’s Defence Minister Richard Marles wriggling around to con the public into believing that it will be cheaper for Australia to buy used nuclear submarines, than to buy new ones. I’m not quite sure who invented the new term to replace “used” – but “in service:” is a lovely euphemism, worthy of Marles. Australia’s not buying “used” nuclear submarines – oh no – we’re getting “in service” nuclear submarines.

You gotta admire Richard Marles – he is indeed the master of the weasel word:

“The Deputy Prime Minister and Secretaries welcomed the proposed approach to streamline Australia’s acquisition of Virginia-class submarines (VCS), simplifying supply chain management, operational and maintenance requirements, and maximising cost efficiencies. This approach would enable Australia to acquire three in-service VCS in lieu of a mixture of new and in-service VCS variants.”

“Chasing simplicity is at the heart of why we have pursued this.”

“So firstly, we are paying an amount to the US in terms of its industrial base. That is to create the space for the Virginia-class submarines to be transferred to Australia. But then there is the purchase price in respect of each of the submarines and this will be more cost effective in relation to that and it’ll be significant.”

Work all that out, if you can be bothered.

Anyway, all that doesn’t matter. We know now that (a) these nuclear submarines will be unsuitable for monitoring Australia’s coastline, and really intended for attacking China on behalf of the USA, and (b) will be obsolete by the time we get them, anyway.

But here’s the bit that nobody’s talking about – the “elephant in the ocean.”

Australia is to cop the management of the nuclear wastes in these second hand submarines. Do we know how old they are? Do we know how long before that toxic forever radioactive trash has to buried, or stored in concrete canisters, or what?

And – dare I be so rude as to mention this? What about the costs of disposing of theUSA’s nuclear submarine wastes?

The entire global nuclear establishment is very coy about assessing the real long term or short term costs of nuclear wastes.

France has been working on this since 1991 with its Cigéo project in Bure (Meuse). This project was launched in 1991. Its regulatory process spans decades, with partial commissioning expected by 2050 and a public inquiry in 2026.

On the costs of this project – Wikipedia states:

“Evaluation of the total cost of Cigéo must take into account all the costs of storage over more than 100 years: studies, construction of the first structures (surface buildings, shafts, declines (sloped tunnels)), operation (staff, maintenance, energy…), the gradual construction of underground structures, then their closure, their monitoring etc. Part of these costs/investments will be the salaries of the workforce employed in the digging, construction and storage work, who, according to Andra, will number 1500 to 2000 persons for at least a hundred years.”

The French government has had a bash at estimating these costs:

“A ministerial decree published in France has confirmed the latest cost estimate of the planned Cigéo deep geologic spent nuclear fuel repository at €33.4bn ($39bn) – €37bn including taxes – of which €9.7bn is for initial construction.”

Apart from all the other well-known considerations – safety, danger, terrorism risks, risks of nuclear proliferation, and public opposition, there has been a great reluctance in the nuclear establishment to address the problem of the costs of nuclear wastes.

So Richard Marles can go on, comfortingly bleating about the financial benefits of these second hand nuclear submarines and their second-hand radioactive trash, because as we say in upper class parlance – it’s “just not done” to talk about the financial costs of nuclear wastes.

And now that both Liberal and Labor governments have committed us to taking over American nuclear submarine wastes, will that be the last of it? Are these useless nuclear submarines just the foot in the door for Australia to become the USA’s nuclear waste dump?

June 4, 2026 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, wastes | Leave a comment

Springtime in Kiev. Again.

Kiev’s latest acts of official fascism worship are not a bug but a feature

Tarik Cyril Amar, Jun 01, 2026, https://www.tarikcyrilamar.com/p/springtime-in-kiev-again

As in Mel Brooks dark satire of Western Nazi fetishism, it’s hard to believe one’s eyes while witnessing the latest performance put on by the comedian tyrant of Ukraine. Within the span of a week or so, the regime of president-in-eternity-no-elections-needed Vladimir Zelensky has repatriated and reburied with pomp and circumstance the remains of Andriy Melnyk, a twentieth-century Ukrainian fascist leader as well as Nazi collaborator, and named a contemporary military elite unit “Heroes of the UPA” (that is, of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army of World War Two).

The UPA was, in effect, the military arm of the OUN, the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists. The OUN had two political wings that mattered, one under Andriy Melnyk, the other under Stepan Bandera. They were rivals, but both were fascists.

During the war between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, both OUN wings tried to collaborate with the Nazis. The Nazis, in their arrogance, did not always let them, but the whole OUN was very eager to please. The OUN and the UPA also participated in murderous German violence against Jews, serving as pro-active mass murder auxiliaries. In addition, they conducted a genocidal ethnic cleansing campaign of their own against Poles.

Predictably, the in-your-face obscenity of Kiev’s latest fascism worship moves has provoked Israel as well as Poland. Polish president Nawrocki would like to deprive Zelensky of the high state honors that Warsaw has foolishly bestowed on him and has threatened to curtail Poland’s support for Kiev’s EU ambitions. In Israel, both its official Holocaust remembrance and exploitation agency Yad Vashem and the foreign ministry have taken exception. That is, of course, ironic, since Israel itself engages obsessively in genocide and ethnic cleansing as well as in, literally, every war crime there is. Maybe, in this case, it takes a genocidal fascist to know one.

Official Kiev is in the middle of devastating corruption scandals – but to be fair, when is it not? – and shaken by mortifying revelations about Zelensky personally (surprise, surprise: a raging narcissist on coke and not a democrat but a kleptocrat) from a well-informed insider speaking to one of America’s most influential media outlets. Yet its ruling clique finds time to really rub it in, again, just how much it cannot stop hugging Nazis, dead and alive. Costs in foreign-policy terms? Apparently, no big deal: When the Nazi-loving urge itches really bad, to hell with caution and – very unusually for Kiev – even dissembling.

Some observers speculate that the fascism fetish is being escalated in public again because of the scandals and always plunging popularity of the regime: Zelensky and the rest of his merry gang of war profiteers and proxy war meatgrinder jockeys, such commentators believe, are merely using the Nazi play “out of a position of weakness,” to distract from the extraordinarily, unprecedently fetid swamp into which they have turned Ukraine’s always sleazy politics.

This is a mistake. It is time that even the slowest in the West accept a simple truth about Zelensky, one he is not even hiding (like so many others): He genuinely likes fascists. And, with his extremely cynical manipulation techniques, his vicious persecution of political opposition and any dissent, his abuse of the mass media for propaganda, and his deep contempt for democracy, he has much heartfelt affinity with them, to say the least.

Silly – and, actually, racist – pseudo-arguments, advanced by Western proxy war boosters that Zelensky can’t possibly ally with a violent far right because he is Jewish deserve no serious answer. The current Israeli regime and its policies of war, genocide, supremacy, and ethnic cleansing are fascist. Case closed.

In fact, the Zelensky regime has a longstanding, consistent habit of pandering to, working with, employing at high levels and on a large scale, and honoring the very far right. Some may love to quibble – bored-academic-style – about pedantically precise terms for fine distinctions in one big pile of rottenness. But, in reality, those labeled Neo-Nazis, white supremacists, fascists, ultra-nationalists and so on form a large whole having much more in common than not.

Re-labelling has also served to spread big fat lies: Indeed, in the case of Ukraine there is a long, foul tradition, reaching back far into the frozen depths of the first Cold War, of mendaciously re-packaging Ukrainian World War Two fascists with their own bloody flavor of terror, genocide, and ethnic cleansing. But re-labelling these Ukrainian fascists “integral nationalists” makes about as much sense as calling Idi Amin Dada – once ultraviolent dictator of Uganda and rumored to have sampled a few of his victims – an “integral vegan.”

And so it is in the present, too: Play with words as much as you like, a fact remains a fact: Zelensky’s Ukraine is state with a big fascism problem. In time, its roots reach back to the period between World Wars One and Two, with a massive escalation during the latter. Regionally, it used to be concentrated in western Ukraine and, after the Soviet victory over fascism in 1945, among fugitives in the US, Cananda, and Europe. There, with their brand of ready-to-kill fascist anti-Communism, they served the West in the first Cold War and systematically subverted Ukrainian communities and any institution they could buy their way into, such as Yale, Harvard, and Columbia Universities.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, this self-declared Ukrainian “diaspora” – ironically, a term popularized out of the same Israel-envy that produced an unseemly urge to politically claim a Holocaust of one’s own in the shape of the “Holodomor” (preferably with even bigger victim counts) – re-entered independent Ukraine and “repatriated” its ideology, vitiating Ukraine’s culture and politics with, unfortunately, great success.

In that, long-term sense, Zelensky and his regime’s sympathy for the fascist devil is part of a longer story. Yet Zelensky’s personal contribution is not merely substantial but crucial. First because he has simply gone much farther than any post-independent leader of Ukraine in making fascism part of a deeply sick new normality. And second, because in our world of often imbecilic identity politics, he has, in effect, exploited his Jewishness to promote his normalization of fascism. It is hard to imagine a greater intellectual and moral perversion. But then, this is Zelensky.

June 4, 2026 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Polish politician urges EU veto on Ukraine accession after Zelenskyy’s UPA move

by Daria Dmytriieva. 3 June 26, https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/polish-politician-urges-eu-veto-on-ukraine-accession-after-zelenskyys-upa-move/ar-AA24E3wR?ocid=BingNewsSerp

What move by Zelenskyy sparked backlash in Poland?

Calls are growing in Poland to block Ukraine’s accession to the European Union over a decision by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy regarding the UPA, Krzysztof Bosak, leader of the far-right Confederation party, stated.

According to Bosak, Poland should officially announce that it will block Ukraine’s accession to the EU until Kyiv abandons what Warsaw views as the cult of historical figures considered criminals in Poland. He said the key condition for resuming Ukraine’s European integration process is the full restoration of exhumations of all victims of the Volhynia tragedy.

The politician’s reaction came after Zelenskyy decided to grant the name “Heroes of the UPA” (Ukrainian Insurgent Army) to the Separate Special Operations Center “North” of Ukraine’s Special Operations Forces.

Bosak stressed that Warsaw must move from words to concrete and tougher measures in order to exert real pressure on Kyiv, arguing that Ukraine allegedly views the current position of Polish politicians as weak.

Among additional measures, the far-right leader proposed that the Polish government stop paying for Starlink terminals used by the Ukrainian Armed Forces. He also called for ending joint borrowing schemes with other EU member states to finance assistance for Ukraine.

According to Bosak, the situation in which countries go into debt to provide non-repayable aid to another state while assuming responsibility for repaying those loans is unprecedented in the history of international finance.

As a reminder, on May 26, Zelenskyy signed a decree granting the Separate Special Operations Center “North” the honorary title “named after the Heroes of the UPA.” The decision was made in recognition of the exemplary performance of combat missions by its personnel.

Reacting to the move, Polish President Karol Nawrocki said he would consider stripping Zelenskyy of Poland’s highest state award.

Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry stressed that Kyiv had no intention of offending the Polish people. The ministry emphasized that, for Ukraine, the UPA symbolizes resistance against Moscow’s imperial policies and occupation.

June 4, 2026 Posted by | EUROPE, politics international | Leave a comment

A Call For Life In The Face Of The Drums Of War

Cuban Civil Society, Resumen English. https://scheerpost.com/2026/06/01/a-call-for-life-in-the-face-of-the-drums-of-war/

To the Defenders of Peace and to the Peoples of the World

To leaders of social organizations, human rights defenders, and citizens of the world:

We address you at a time of extreme gravity. The escalation of aggressive rhetoric and threats of military intervention by extremist sectors in the United States against Cuba have ceased to be mere political slogans and have become a real danger that threatens the peace of the region and the lives of millions of human beings.

We turn to the international civil society not to ask for favors, but to appeal to your justice and memory.

Cuba is a small nation that has made solidarity its highest banner. While others export weapons, Cuba has exported life.

For decades, our country has sent medical brigades to the most forgotten corners of the planet, fighting Ebola in Africa, cholera in Haiti, blindness in Latin America, and COVID-19 in more than 40 countries.

We are a people who share what we have, not what we have to spare, driven by the conviction that health is a universal human right.

Is this the nation that deserves to be attacked? Is this the people whose integrity should be threatened with aircraft carriers and missiles?

A military attack on Cuba would not be a “surgical operation” or a “liberation.” It would be a massacre of civilians.

The human cost would be incalculable. Our children, who today attend safe schools, and our elderly, protected by a universal healthcare system, would be the first victims of this barbarity.

A war in the heart of the Caribbean would unleash a humanitarian tragedy that would affect not only our island, but the stability of the entire hemisphere.

History has taught us that bombs have never sown democracy; they have only left behind rubble, orphanhood, and resentment.

Peace is not merely the absence of conflict; it is respect for international law, the sovereignty of peoples, and the United Nations Charter.

We issue an urgent call for global mobilization:

  1. We demand respect for life: We call on civil society leaders to raise their voices in every possible forum to denounce warmongering.
  2. We stand for diplomacy: We urge the international community to press for solutions based on dialogue, mutual respect, and civilized coexistence among states.
  3. Protection of children: We call for the protection of our children’s right to live in peace, free from the trauma of war’s roar over their homes.

Cuba poses no threat to the security of any power. Our only “weapon” has been resistance and international solidarity. Do not allow the hatred of a few to decide the fate of an entire generous people.

World leaders, activists, intellectuals, artists, and people of good will: Stop the aggressor’s hand before it is too late.

Humanity does not need more wars; it needs more doctors, more books, and more bread.

In the name of decency, justice, and life, we ask you to join our cry:

No to war against Cuba! Yes to Peace and Life! Share this on your profile; it is a call for life.

Sincerely,

Henry Omar Pérez, Journalist,  Social Communicator and member of Cuban Civil Society

June 4, 2026 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Congress quietly moves to integrate US and Israeli militaries

In the first step towards shifting aid further into the shadows, the House’s 2027 NDAA would all but fuse the two countries’ armed forces together


Ben Freeman, Responsible Statecraft, Fri, 29 May 2026, https://responsiblestatecraft.org/israel-us-military/

At a time when the American public is expressing unprecedented levels of distrust in the Israeli government, Congress just proposed tying the U.S. to the Israeli military more than ever before.

Buried in the House’s version of the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) released on Tuesday, is section 224, entitled “United States-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative.” The provision would arguably do more to intertwine the U.S. military with the Israeli military than the more than $200 billion (inflation adjusted) in military assistance Israel has received from the U.S. since its founding in 1948.

Section 224 lays the groundwork for bilateral research and development, co-production of weapons, joint ventures, licensing agreements, and seemingly every manner of U.S.-Israeli military-industrial complex cooperation. The U.S. and Israel already work together heavily on missile defense, but this provision would greatly expand coordination to seemingly every area of defense tech, including AI, quantum, autonomous systems, directed energy, cyber, biotech, and many more. It also proposes “network integration” and “data fusion.” In other words, the U.S. military’s data could soon be the Israeli military’s data.

If fully enacted, this proposal would provide a higher level of military-industrial integration than the U.S. has with any other country in the world. To be sure, the U.S. has worked closely with its NATO partners on co-production and shared supply chains, most notably via the Defence Production Action Plan. And, as the number one arms dealer in the world, the U.S. provides weapons to militaries across the globe. But that is mostly a one-way street, with the U.S. providing weapons to foreign buyers who only occasionally make parts for those weapons themselves, as in the case of the F-35’s global supply chain.

Section 224 would be a different beast entirely. It would fuse the U.S. and Israeli defense sectors in multiple areas vital to the battlefields of the future, like autonomous systems and cyber. It would also bring extraordinary Israeli influence to the U.S. beyond what it already has through the Israel lobby and its robust network of social media influencers. It would give the Israeli government the opportunity to greatly expand one of the most powerful levers of influence in U.S. politics: jobs in the U.S. By expanding or starting new co-production facilities like it already has in Mississippi and Arkansas, the Israeli government could boast of providing jobs on U.S. soil, thereby securing allies among members of Congress who represent the districts where those jobs lie.

The result could well be a U.S. political system even more susceptible to the whims of an Israeli government that seemingly has no qualms about drawing the U.S. into military conflicts in the Middle East.

This unprecedented level of U.S.-Israeli military integration stands in stark contrast to the traditional aid model of defense cooperation, in which Israel already stood out as the top recipient of U.S. military assistance. As laid out in a recent Quincy Institute brief, authored by Steven Simon, this shift from an aid model to a military integration model has troubling implications, namely:

The shift will strip away the political and diplomatic oversight mechanisms that make the relationship publicly accountable, moving it from a visible annual aid vote into the opaque machinery of defense acquisition, where oversight is limited and political accountability is minimal. The result would be a defense relationship that is simultaneously deeper and less transparent.

This all comes at a time when the Israeli military has repeatedly used U.S. weapons in strikes that have violated international humanitarian laws in Gaza, and as Israel has repeatedly violated ceasefires (as has the U.S. itself) in the Trump administration’s unnecessary war with Iran.

The enormous gulf between what most Americans want and what the president is doing when it comes to Israel and what Congress is proposing here should not be ignored. Just 30% of respondents to a New York Times/Sienna poll from mid-May believe Trump made “the right decision” to go to war with Iran, with 64% saying it was wrong. An Institute for Global Affairs poll released earlier this week dove even deeper into the American psyche when it comes to arming Israel, finding that “Just 16 percent say the United States should keep supplying Israel with weapons without new restrictions. Thirty-eight percent want to stop supplying weapons entirely, and another 24 percent want weapons conditioned on how they’re used.”


Yet, mainstream leadership in both parties remains largely pro-Israel and continues to shape the base legislative text before amendments and broader congressional debate open it to the full body, as is the case with this NDAA provision.

Though slowly, tides within both parties are shifting as more and more members speak out against the growing divide between Israel’s actions and America’s interests. For example, Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) wrote in The New York Times on Tuesday that, “The Democratic Party has provided reflexive and unconditional support to Israeli governments, even as their actions have increasingly undermined American interests and values.” On the Republican side of the aisle, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Green (R-Ga.) have openly decried the Israel lobby’s corrosive influence — a stance that may have, at least partially, cost both of them their seats in Congress.

What can other members of Congress who are concerned about Israel’s destabilizing actions do right now? Stop the Israeli-U.S. military-industrial merger in its tracks. Lawmakers should reject Section 224 from the NDAA to avoid deep integration with Israel’s military at a time when a growing number of Americans oppose Israel’s actions in the region.

June 4, 2026 Posted by | Israel, politics international, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

N-Fuel Removal from Fukushima No. 2 Reactor Pool Begins

   Tokyo, June 2 (Jiji Press), https://jen.jiji.com/jc/eng?g=eco&k=2026060200277

Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc. on Tuesday began removing nuclear fuel from the spent fuel pool of the No. 2 reactor at its tsunami-stricken Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant in northeastern Japan.
   The work is considered a key step in the decommissioning of the reactors at the plant in Fukushima Prefecture. TEPCO aims to complete the removal of all fuel assemblies from the No. 2 reactor by fiscal 2028.


   The No. 2 reactor’s spent fuel pool currently stores 587 spent fuel assemblies, which are highly radioactive, and 28 unused fuel assemblies, according to TEPCO. The unused fuel is being removed first because it poses a lower risk in the event of an accident.
   Radiation levels at the No. 2 reactor building are still high after the nuclear fuel in the reactor melted down in the March 2011 accident. Radiation on the fifth floor, where the fuel pool is located, measures as high as 3 to 5 millisieverts per hour, making it difficult for workers to stay there for a long time.


   Against this background, a crane for removing fuel assemblies is remotely controlled, and the assemblies are placed one by one in a transport container called a cask inside the pool. The cask will be lifted out of the pool and then lowered onto a trailer from a platform installed next to the building.

June 4, 2026 Posted by | Fukushima continuing | Leave a comment

Species at risk score a reprieve

    by beyondnuclearinternational, https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2026/05/31/species-at-risk-score-a-reprieve/

Canadian court sends radioactive waste dump plan back to the drawing board in a win for wildlife and the Kebaowek First Nation and others who protect them

News from Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, and Sierra Club Canada Kebaowek First Nation, Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County and Area, the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, and Sierra Club Canada Foundation.

Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, and Sierra Club Canada, Kebaowek First Nation, Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County and Area, the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, and Sierra Club Canada Foundation welcome a significant victory following the decision of the Federal Court of Appeal to dismiss Canadian Nuclear Laboratories’ (CNL) appeal regarding the Species at Risk Act permit issued for the proposed Near Surface Disposal Facility (NSDF) at Chalk River. 

The Court upheld the Federal Court’s earlier ruling and ordered Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) to reconsider its decision to grant the permit.

The permit would have authorized CNL to destroy endangered species and their habitats in order to construct a massive radioactive waste disposal facility less than 1.1 kilometres from the Ottawa River (Kichi Sibi), a watershed that provides drinking water to millions of Canadians.

In its decision, the Federal Court of Appeal concluded that ECCC failed to adequately explain how it determined that all reasonable alternatives had been considered and that the best solution had been selected, as required under the Species at Risk Act. 

The Court emphasized that the Minister’s reasons lacked sufficient transparency, intelligibility, and justification, and directed ECCC to conduct a new determination. 

The Court also confirmed that the Federal Court’s interpretation of section 73 of the Species at Risk Act is not binding on ECCC and that the Minister must independently provide a clear and reasonable analysis when reconsidering the permit application. 

Furthermore, the Court found that the public notice issued by ECCC failed to provide a meaningful explanation to Canadians about why endangered species would be harmed in support of the project.

The ruling represents another important legal milestone in the ongoing efforts to protect species at risk, uphold environmental laws, and ensure accountability in decision-making surrounding the proposed NSDF.

“The Federal Court of Appeal has confirmed that Environment Canada must go back and do its job properly. This decision reinforces what we have been saying from the beginning: decisions that threaten endangered species, sensitive ecosystems, and our sacred river must be based on a transparent, rigorous, and lawful process,” said Chief Lance Haymond of Kebaowek First Nation. “Kebaowek remains committed to protecting the Kichi Sibi, defending our responsibilities to future generations, the drinking water of millions of citizens of Quebec and Ontario, and ensuring that Indigenous rights and environmental protections are respected every step of the way.”

The area selected by CNL for the NSDF is home to numerous species protected under the Species at Risk Act, including the Blanding’s Turtle, Little Brown Bat, Northern Myotis, Tri-coloured Bat, Canada Warbler, Golden-winged Warbler, Whip-poor-will, Eastern Wolf, and Black Ash. 

The proposed site consists of mature forests, wetlands, streams, and critical habitat that have remained largely undisturbed for decades. The organizations argue that CNL’s site selection process failed to adequately assess alternative locations that may have posed fewer risks to endangered species and their habitats. The Court’s decision now provides an opportunity for ECCC to conduct a more rigorous and transparent review of the evidence before making a new determination.

“This decision is an important victory for science, transparency, and common sense,” said Ole Hendrickson, spokesperson for Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County and Area. “The Court recognized that the public deserves meaningful explanations when decisions are made that could result in the destruction of endangered species and their habitats. The ecological value of this site is extraordinary, and it deserves careful consideration before irreversible damage is permitted.”

“This ruling confirms that environmental protections under the Species at Risk Act cannot simply be treated as a procedural box to check,” said Dr. Gordon Edwards, President of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility.

“We will continue working to ensure that all reasonable alternatives are fully examined and that the protection of species at risk remains a central consideration. More generally, we will work to ensure that the principle of “justification” is enshrined in Canadian law, as recommended twice by the International Atomic Energy Agency,” Edwards added.

“The Court’s decision reinforces a fundamental principle: Canadians have the right to understand why environmental harm is being authorized and whether less damaging alternatives exist,” said Gretchen Fitzgerald, Executive Director, Sierra Club Canada Foundation. “This case is about accountability, transparency, and ensuring that environmental laws are applied as Parliament intended. Sierra Club Canada Foundation remains committed to supporting efforts that protect biodiversity and uphold the public interest.”

This decision builds upon two important Federal Court rulings related to the proposed NSDF project. In March 2025, the Federal Court ruled that the Species at Risk Act permit issued for the project must be reconsidered because reasonable alternative locations were not properly assessed. 

In a parallel case, the Federal Court also ruled in favour of Kebaowek First Nation regarding the implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and the duty to consult in the NSDF licensing process. That landmark decision is currently before the Federal Court of Appeal and is expected to help clarify how Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) and UNDRIP should be applied in federal regulatory decision-making across Canada.

While the Court has returned the matter to ECCC for redetermination rather than permanently rejecting the permit, the organizations intend to actively participate in the reconsideration process. They will continue to present evidence demonstrating that alternative locations exist and that the proposed Chalk River site is not the best option for protecting species at risk and their habitats.

The organizations also note that CNL may seek leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, although leave applications are granted only in a small number of cases involving issues of national importance. 

Kebaowek First Nation, Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County and Area, the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, and Sierra Club Canada Foundation remain united in their commitment to protecting the Ottawa River watershed, safeguarding endangered species, and ensuring that environmental decision- making respects both ecological integrity and Indigenous rights.

For more information on Kebaowek First Nation’s efforts to halt the NSDF project, visit Stop Nuclear Waste website. For more information on how to support Kebaowek First Nation’s legal efforts, visit Kebaowek First Nation – Raven Trust.

June 4, 2026 Posted by | Canada, Legal | Leave a comment

Cory Doctorow: Hell is other people – so billionaires are using AI to replace them.

The tech elite are pouring billions into dispensing with inconvenient humans. Now governments want the same trick to wish away the migrants their economies desperately need, writes the author and Nerve columnist


Cory Doctorow, Jun 3, 2026, https://www.thenerve.news/p/cory-doctorow-column-ai-inconvenient-humans-billionaires-sam-altman-bezoz-migrants?utm_source=www.thenerve.news&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=tuesday-edition-philippa-perry-on-the-snp-shopping-scandal-maggie-o-farrell-q-a-hotlist&_bhlid=4cd32062ee3b87b8a967b812dc04a58521f29a66

I don’t care who you are, there will always be times when hell is other people. Not because other people are horrible – quite the opposite! Other people are wonderful, but boy are they ever stubborn.

From boardgames to romance, team sports to movement politics, business ideas to construction projects, there’s so much important, enjoyable and essential stuff you can’t do alone. But other people insist on having their own priorities and goals, and they mulishly refuse to organize their lives to suit your priorities.

Our species has put a lot of work into resolving this conundrum. We evolved social structures – laws, teams, governments, families, bureaucracies – to help us coordinate with others to do superhuman things. These structures are imperfect, but they’re better than the alternative: coercion. Persuading others is not without its pitfalls, but compared to forcing others to bend to your will, “persuasion” is the hands-down favourite.

Not for everyone, though. There has always been a group of people who refused to acknowledge that other people have perfectly valid reasons for wanting to pursue their own goals rather than yours. We call most of those people “toddlers” and devote sizable social effort to helping them outgrow this belief.

But there’s another group of people who carry this belief into adulthood. If they’re of regular means, we call those people “bullies”. However, if they’re sufficiently wealthy, we call them “billionaires”.

Just lately though, we’ve come up with a new solution to the problem of hell being other people. Rather than coercing other people into arranging their affairs to suit our needs, we’ve devoted trillions of dollars to replacing people with pliant chatbots, in the hopes that these chatbots can be made so effective that we can just dispense with other people altogether.

No surprise, then, that billionaires were easy targets for AI hustlers, who promised the possibility of a world without people, where an army of “agents” could do the jobs that presently demand the contributions of unreasonable human beings who refuse to acknowledge that your priorities trump theirs.

Jeff Bezos built the world’s most advanced automated warehouses, and the workers in those warehouses are seriously injured at 300% of the national rate. The automation and the injuries aren’t unrelated facts. The inhumane treatment is caused by the automation, because when you commit hundreds of billions to automation capex, you need to work those assets to recoup the investment. In a human/machine collaboration, humans will always be the bottlenecks. To maximize return on automation, you need to drive the human peripherals that serve the machines at the absolute limit of human endurance. Jeff Bezos’s machines don’t just use humans, they use them up.

AI makes no demands, requires no moral consideration, and does not attempt to germinate a culture, a cuisine, or a language in your sacred soil

Mark Zuckerberg would like to replace your on-platform friends with chatbots. Sure, your friends are the reason you’re stuck on his platforms, but your friends are stubborn and thus suboptimal. They unreasonably refuse to leave Facebook with you and follow you to another platform (this is bad for you, but good for Zuck), but they also refuse to organise their social media lives to “maximise your engagement” and thus the number of ads you see (which is bad for Zuck). By replacing your friends with chatbots, Zuck hopes to reinvent social media without the socialising.

It’s not just industry. Politicians presiding over aging, declining nations whose most ardent voters have been convinced that migrants are a threat to their nation (rather than its salvation) face an impossible bind.

Objectively speaking, the only way that a rich country with an aging workforce can remain wealthy and powerful is by wooing working-age people from elsewhere to migrate to that country. Even if every tradwife is kept in a state of continuous gestation courtesy of a fertility-obsessed natalist, there’s still going to be decades during which your wealthy, aging population will need young, skilled people to do all the essential labour. From picking crops, to staffing hospitals, to building homes, to filing lawsuits, to preparing tax returns, your quiverfull child army will be too young to take over for years to come.

For these politicians, AI offers a way out of their double-bind. If migrants can be replaced with AI, then you can satisfy the racist sadism of your most ardent voters without shutting down the country for lack of workers. In feeding the fantasy of a world without people, AI serves the fantasy of a world without migrants. Unlike gastarbeiter, bracero fruit-pickers or Saudi quasi-slaves, AI makes no demands, requires no moral consideration, and does not attempt to germinate a culture, a cuisine, or a language in your sacred soil.

The wealthy have always dreamed of transforming the proletariat into the precariat: desperate workers who do as they’re told. But in the automation story of which AI is the latest chapter (and purportedly the climax), the precariat becomes the unnecessariat: workers who are surplus to requirements and can be vaporised or liquidated or warehoused or simply ignored.

In the fantasy world of total automation, the owners of AI can make the world go around without any of us, which means that we will exist solely at their sufferance, and will therefore have to act like the non-player characters they half-believe we are already, organising everything we do around their priorities.

This is the foundation of Sam Altman’s obsession with a biometrically controlled universal basic income. Altman can’t stop fantasising about a world in which all the productive work is done by his software, and the state’s sole purpose is to supply us – the unnecessariat – with vouchers we can only redeem for services provided by Altman’s robot army. It’s charter schools for everything, with Altman at the top, all wrapped up in a layer of dystopian retinal scanning.

It all makes perfect sense – provided you don’t believe that other people are really, truly real.

This is an edited version of a Cory Doctorow post from pluralistic.net. It is published under a CC BY 4.0 creative commons licence

Cory Doctorow, who was born in Toronto and now lives in Los Angeles and London, is the Nerve’s tech columnist. His most recent book Enshittification is published by Verso

June 3, 2026 Posted by | technology | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »