nuclear-news

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

“Drop Out of Nuclear Dump Plan” Message to Nuclear Waste Services “Drop In”

  By mariannewildart, https://mariannewildart.wordpress.com/2024/09/30/drop-out-of-nuclear-dump-plan-message-to-nuclear-waste-services-drop-in/—

“Drop Out of Nuclear Dump Plan” was the message from campaigners at the Nuclear Waste Services “Drop In” at the Beacon Portal, Whitehaven on Saturday 28th September.

The Plan

Should Nuclear Waste Services plan in Cumbria be taken to conclusion a giant mine as deep as Scafell is high at 1000m and larger than the City of Westminster at 25km square would be excavated under the Irish Sea in order to bury the UK’s high level nuclear wastes in the hope that it would stay buried. The above ground area of a Geological Disposal Faciity (GDF) at 1km square, would be nearly as big as Hyde Park in London and would sit alongside the National Park boundary on the Lake DIstrict coast.  Lakes Against Nuclear Dump (LAND) a Radiation Free Lakeland campaign chatted with members of the public on Saturday outside Nuclear Waste Services event.  LAND were thanked by members of the public for showing resistance to the plan for a deep nuclear dump or Geologicial Disposal Facility under the Lake District’s coast.

Irish Sea Geology a Giant Heat Sink?

Lakes Against Nuclear Dump LAND campaigner Marianne Birkby said “no other industry would have the sheer brass neck to plan to use the geology of the supposedly protected Irish Sea as a gigantic heat sink for their ever increasing wastes.  No other industry produces heat generating nuclear wastes .  The reason the infamous leaks at the once state of the art Magnox silos at Sellafield are impossible to find and stop is precisely because the silos are buried 6 metres underground.”  Campaigners asked how long it would take the heat from buried high level nuclear wastes to reach the Irish Sea bed.  Nuclear Waste Services staff replied that they would “find out”  It is clear that alongside the radiological impacts the industry cannot point to any research on the short or long term impacts of thermal heating of the deep geology and ocean specifically of the Irish Sea from a Geological Disposal Facility. 

Earthquakes and Plutonium 

Campaigners asked about the earthquake risks of deep mining so close to the plutonium stockpiles at Sellafield and were told that “the government is working on a plan for the plutonium so it won’t be a problem at the time mining begins”. LAND Campaigners say that the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority’s “preferred” option is to use plutonium as MOX fuel . MOX  (mixed oxide) fuel contains a tiny amount of plutonium blended with uranium.

 The net result is the production of ever more plutonium for “reuse as fuel in reactors followed by disposal (of unusable plutonium) in a GDF.”  Much more land would be required for MOX fabrication facilities.   The NDA say “The policy position recognises that not all the inventory could be reused; therefore, any strategy will also require the development of approaches to immobilise plutonium for storage pending disposal.”  Nuclear Waste Services assurance to the public at the “drop in” that the plutonium problem “will not exist when mining begins” is clearly at odds with reality.  LAND say “burning MOX fuel would increase the nuclear sprawl at Sellafield and would increase, not decrease the plutonium stockpiles.  Instead of reducing the “exceptional circumstances” of a severe accident at Sellafield the nuclear  industry and government seem hell bent on increasing the likelihood of severe accident with proposing earthquake inducing mining to bury high level nuclear wastes while at the same time proposing increasing the plutonium mess at Sellafield.”     

Orange Harbour a Visual Reminder of Fragile Area

The continuing acid mine pollution pouring into Whitehaven Harbour for two years with no end in sight  is a terrible visual reminder that deep mining in this fragile area of West Cumbria should be banned and that is say campaigners without the area containing the world’s largest stockpiles of plutonium. 

Most Dangerous Experiment Since Splitting the Atom

Lakes Against Nuclear Dump say  The potential disastrous impacts of the plan could be on planetary scale but a future “test of public support” is limited to those who are now benefitting from £millions for every year the manufactured “Community Partnership” with Nuclear Waste Services continues along the “Journey to GDF” aka Nuclear Dump Under the Lake District Coast

References:…………………………………………….

October 3, 2024 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, UK, wastes | Leave a comment

Sullivan: US Will Ensure Iran Faces ‘Severe Consequences’ for Attacking Israel

 October 2, 2024 , By Dave DeCamp / Antiwar.com

US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said on Tuesday that the US would work with Israel to ensure Iran faces “severe consequences” for launching a missile attack on Israel, which came in response to recent Israeli escalations.

“There will be severe consequences for this attack, and we will work with Israel to make that the case,” Sullivan told reporters at the White House.

President Biden said the US was in “active discussions” with Israel on what the response would be. “The United States is fully, fully, fully supportive of Israel,” he said.

Media reports say Iran fired at least 180 missiles at Israel. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said the attack was launched in retaliation for the Israeli assassination of Hamas political chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, the killing of Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah, and Abbas Nilforoushan, an IRGC commander who was killed alongside Nasrallah.

The IRCG has claimed that 90% of the missiles hit their targets, while Israel claimed most were intercepted. Videos have surfaced that show Iranian missiles making an impact on Israeli military sites. So far, there’s been no word on Israeli deaths, but a Palestinian in the Israeli-occupied West Bank was killed when shrapnel from an intercepted missile fell on Jericho.

The US said that it helped Israel intercept some of the Iranian missiles and portrayed the defense as a success. Sullivan said the Iranian attack “appears to have been defeated and ineffective.”

…………………………………………Iran has signaled that it’s done attacking Israel but warned there would be a “crushing response” if Israel hits back. Israeli officials have made clear that they plan to respond.

“There will be consequences,” said Israeli military spokesman Daniel Hagari. “Our defensive and offensive capabilities are at the highest levels of readiness. Our operational plans are ready. We will respond wherever, whenever, and however we choose, in accordance with the directive of the government of Israel.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Iran will “pay” for the attack. “This evening, Iran made a big mistake — and it will pay for it,” he said at a security cabinet meeting. “The regime in Tehran does not understand our determination to defend ourselves and to exact a price from our enemies.”  https://scheerpost.com/2024/10/02/sullivan-us-will-ensure-iran-faces-severe-consequences-for-attacking-israel/

October 3, 2024 Posted by | Iran, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Russia revisits nuclear doctrine to allow attacks on non-nuclear states in response to Western weapons in Ukraine.

By Heloise Vyas,  https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-26/russia-revises-nuclear-weapons-laws-warning-united-states/104398414

In short:

Vladimir Putin has unveiled changes to conditions surrounding Russia’s use of nuclear weapons which he says will be put into effect if there was “reliable information” about a large-scale enemy attack.

The updated doctrine includes a widening of the threats under which Russia would consider a nuclear strike, including retaliating against conventional weapons.

What’s next?

Russia’s warning to the West comes amid deliberations on Ukraine’s use of Western long-range missiles. The US has not directly responded to the threat.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has broadened the remit of his nuclear doctrine to fend off Western-supported attacks in the Ukraine war, threatening to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-armed nations even if not attacked by them.

During a meeting with Russia’s Security Council on Wednesday, local time, he outlined three key changes to the Kremlin’s official nuclear doctrine — signed in 2020 — as a response to ongoing deliberations in the United States and Britain about permitting Ukraine to fire long-range missiles into Russian territory.

Mr Putin said under the lowered threshold, Russia could deploy nuclear bombs even if it was struck with conventional weapons, and that Moscow would consider any assault on it supported by a nuclear power to be a “joint attack”. 

Russia reserved the right to also use nuclear weapons if it or ally Belarus were the subject of aggression, including by conventional weapons, he added.

The 71-year-old, who is the primary decision-maker on Russia’s vast nuclear arsenal, said he wanted to underscore one key change in particular.

“It is proposed that aggression against Russia by any non-nuclear state, but with the participation or support of a nuclear state, be considered as their joint attack on the Russian Federation,” Mr Putin said in his opening remarks to the council.

He said the new rules would be effectuated if Russia detected a large-scale launch of enemy missiles, aircraft or drones was coming its way: “The conditions for Russia’s transition to the use of nuclear weapons are also clearly fixed.”

Mr Putin said the clarifications were carefully calibrated and commensurate with the modern military threats facing Russia — confirmation that the nuclear doctrine was changing.

The implications

Russia’s warning to the West comes amid Ukrainian pleas to fire long-range weapons (many already in its possession) into Russia, including British Storm Shadows and American ATACMS ballistic missiles.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy argues these will help hit vital military depots with precision, but the US has trodden carefully, fearing such a move would escalate the war and pit NATO in direct conflict with Russia. 

Russia has previously provoked war with NATO, accusing the US and European nations of de facto participation in the conflict, but has not come as far as spelling out changes to the use of its nuclear arsenal. Earlier this month it said it was considering updating the doctrine.

With Ukraine losing key towns to gradually advancing Russian forces in the country’s east, the war is entering what Russian officials say is the most dangerous phase to date.

Western aid for Kyiv has remained steady, with the US pledging a further $375 million in aid on Thursday, although it is unclear what bearing Mr Putin’s nuclear threat will have on considerations of long-range weapon restrictions. 

Many view Russia brandishing its nuclear sabre as little more than a bluff, but some analysts say it is “because of and not in spite of” the fact that Moscow has repeatedly held its nuclear arsenals over Western heads that leaders should take these threats seriously.

Russia’s current published nuclear doctrine, set out in a 2020 decree by Mr Putin, says it may use nuclear weapons in case of a nuclear attack by an enemy or a conventional attack that threatens the existence of the state.

The innovations outlined include a widening of the threats under which Russia would consider a nuclear strike, the inclusion of ally Belarus under the nuclear umbrella, and the idea that a rival nuclear power supporting a conventional strike on Russia would also be considered to be attacking it.

Nuclear-armed states that could be drawn into this include France, the United Kingdom, Israel and most crucially the US, which along with Russia controls 90 per cent of the world’s nuclear warheads. 

China, Pakistan, India, and North Korea possess the remainder, but neither has actively been involved in the Ukraine war. A further 32 states also either host nuclear weapons or endorse their use.

Ukraine is neither a nuclear state, nor a part of NATO, but is backed by the alliance.

How has Russia’s threat been received?

Mr Zelenskyy has urged the West to disregard Russia’s so-called “red lines”, and some Western allies have also urged the US to do just that.

“Russia no longer has any instruments to intimidate the world apart from nuclear blackmail,” Andrey Yermak, Mr Zelenskyy’s chief of staff, said in response to the Russian president’s Wednesday remarks. 

“These instruments will not work.”

Mr Putin, who casts the West as a decadent aggressor, and US President Joe Biden, who casts Russia as a corrupt autocracy and Mr Putin as a killer, have both warned that a direct Russia-NATO confrontation could escalate into World War III. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has also warned of the risk of nuclear war.

In his comments to Russia’s Security Council, a type of modern-day politburo of Mr Putin’s most powerful officials including influential hawks, he said work on amendments to changing the doctrine had been going on for the past year.

“The nuclear triad remains the most important guarantee of ensuring the security of our state and citizens, an instrument for maintaining strategic parity and balance of power in the world,” he said.

Russia, he said, would consider using nuclear weapons “upon receiving reliable information about the massive launch of aerospace attack vehicles and their crossing of our state border, meaning strategic or tactical aircraft, cruise missiles, drones, hypersonic and other aircraft”.

No explicit laws restraining nuclear weapons use

Casualties from a nuclear war between Russia and the US could reach tens of millions, with even a single bomb having the capacity to wipe out about 580,000 people, according to estimates from the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons. 

US-Russian arms control agreements also classify “tactical” nuclear weapons, which are presented as having smaller yield, and are intended for battlefield use as opposed to strategic weapons fired across vast distances.

But even these smaller warheads are hugely destructive and comparable in strength with the two atomic bombs dropped by the US in Japan during World War Two which killed about 210,000 people.

In 2022, Washington was so concerned about the possible use of tactical nuclear weapons by Russia that it warned Mr Putin about the consequences of using them, according to Central Intelligence Agency director Bill Burns.

The two-and-a-half-year Ukraine war has triggered the gravest confrontation between Russia and the West since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis — considered to be the closest the two Cold War superpowers came to intentional nuclear war.

Internationally, little power exists to prevent nuclear powers invoking the use of their arsenals.

The UN’s Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons does formally push for nuclear disarmament and outlaws the development, testing, production, acquisition, possession and stockpiling of nuclear weapons but neither Russia nor the US is a part of it.

The Netherlands is also the only NATO member participating in the treaty.

October 2, 2024 Posted by | Russia, weapons and war | Leave a comment

DOE Plutonium Pit Plan Found To Violate Environmental Law

By Daniel Wilson (September 30, 2024,) — A South Carolina federal judge on Monday backed antinuclear groups’ challenge to a U. S. Department of Energy plan to boost production of plutonium cores used in nuclear weapons, saying the DOE hadn’t properly considered the potential environmental impact of the plan. . . …….. (Subscribers only) more https://www.law360.com/articles/1884130/doe-plutonium-pit-plan-found-to-violate-environmental-law

October 2, 2024 Posted by | Legal, USA | Leave a comment

US government provides $1.52 billion loan to resurrect Michigan nuclear plant

US closes $1.52 billion loan to resurrect Michigan nuclear plant, By Timothy Gardner October 1, 2024

WASHINGTON, Sept 30 (Reuters) – The U.S. on Monday said it closed a $1.52 billion loan to resurrect Holtec’s Palisades nuclear plant in Michigan, and a senior Biden administration official said it could take two years to reopen the plant, which is longer than the company predicted.

President Joe Biden’s administration has called for a tripling of U.S. nuclear power capacity as U.S. power demand surges and worries about climate change mount.

The push could include the potential reopening of some commercial reactors that have been shut for decommissioning, including one at Three Mile Island, site of the worst nuclear accident in U.S. history. Restarting shut nuclear plants is a complicated and expensive process never before accomplished in the country.

“Palisades is a climate comeback story,” Ali Zaidi, the White House climate adviser, told reporters in a call, adding that nuclear power supports high-paying union jobs

The $1.52 billion in financing from the Department of Energy’s Loan Programs Office, was accompanied by funding for nonprofit electric cooperatives to purchase power from Palisades. Deputy U.S. Energy Secretary Xochitl Torres Small announced more than $1.3 billion in public funding to power cooperatives Wolverine and Hoosier Energy.

Nuclear reactors generate virtually emissions-free power, which is valued as electricity demand soars for the first time in decades on growth in artificial intelligence, electric vehicles and cryptocurrencies. Nuclear critics, however, point out that the U.S. has not agreed on a permanent place to bury radioactive nuclear waste.

Palisades still needs licensing from regulators and the senior U.S. official said that means it could take “a couple of years to turn back on”. Holtec has estimated a comeback in the fourth quarter next year…………….

O’Brien has said Holtec does not expect delays or additional costs.  https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-closes-152-billion-loan-resurrect-michigan-nuclear-plant-2024-09-30/

October 2, 2024 Posted by | business and costs, politics, USA | Leave a comment

Russia’s Nuclear Doctrine Change Is More Cautious Than It May Appear

What’s new in the proposed update is the suggestion that a non-nuclear state could be the primary aggressor without being formally allied with a nuclear-armed state. ……………….

This shift in the doctrine seems to be crafted with the current geopolitical situation in mind, particularly Russia’s framing of the Ukraine conflict and its relationship with the United States and its allies.….

Long-Range Strikes May Not Be a Silver Bullet…………

By Maxim Trudolyubov on September 27, 2024,  https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/russias-nuclear-doctrine-change-more-cautious-it-may-appear

In a recent discussion on Russia’s nuclear doctrine, President Vladimir Putin announced an expansion of the categories of states and military alliances that would fall under Russia’s nuclear deterrence policy. “Aggression against Russia by any non-nuclear state, with the participation or support of a nuclear state, will be treated as a joint attack on the Russian Federation,” Putin stated during the public segment of a recent meeting of Russia’s Security Council.

While the official document, titled “Basic Principles of State Policy of the Russian Federation on Nuclear Deterrence,” has yet to be updated, experts suggest that the timing of this announcement serves as a clear warning to Ukraine. Currently, Ukraine is seeking approval from the United States to use Western long-range missiles against targets deeper within Russian territory.

Putin’s wording is explicit: the “non-nuclear state” in question is Ukraine, while the “nuclear state” providing support or participating in an attack is primarily the United States, though this could also extend to the United Kingdom and France.

U.S. officials believe such strikes could lead to a significant escalation, potentially drawing NATO into direct confrontation with Russia. Moscow has consistently warned Western countries that any attacks on its territory would be seen as acts of war. This cautious stance by the United States has led to public frustration among some American allies in Europe. 

Both France and Britain have indicated a willingness to approve such strikes for Ukraine, but they are waiting for Washington’s decision as a benchmark. The UK and France produce and supply their own missiles, but they use guiding technology developed by the United States. “It would be really good to stop the delays. And I think that the restrictions on the use of weapons should be lifted,” said Mette Frederiksen, prime minister of Denmark, in an interview with Bloomberg. 

What the New Language Actually Means

Pavel Podvig, a senior researcher on weapons of mass destruction at the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research, notes that Russia’s current nuclear doctrine does not clearly distinguish between aggression from nuclear-armed and non-nuclear states. Instead, any aggression that “threatens the existence of the state” could potentially provoke a nuclear response.

At first glance, the proposed change does not sound like a tectonic shift. Since 1995, Russia has pledged not to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-armed states unless they act “in association or alliance with a nuclear-weapon state.” The Russian authorities at the time operated on an assumption that any such situation would involve a nuclear-armed state as the primary aggressor, with non-nuclear states in a supporting role.

What’s new in the proposed update is the suggestion that a non-nuclear state could be the primary aggressor without being formally allied with a nuclear-armed state. The language implies that a non-nuclear state’s aggression could be seen as part of a broader campaign involving a nuclear-armed state, thereby justifying a nuclear response. This shift in the doctrine seems to be crafted with the current geopolitical situation in mind, particularly Russia’s framing of the Ukraine conflict and its relationship with the United States and its allies.

“The new language suggests that a non-nuclear weapon state might be an aggressor,” Podvig says. “Apparently, the idea behind the change is to say that this ‘association’ would make the nuclear weapons state that provides this support an aggressor too. It’s the ‘joint attack’ language.”

During the Security Council meeting Putin also said that Russia could resort to nuclear weapons on receiving “reliable information” indicating a large-scale aerial attack involving aircraft, missiles, and drones. Additionally, Moscow would treat an attack on its ally Belarus as an attack on Russia itself, potentially responding with nuclear force to defend Belarus.

On closer examination, Putin’s remarks reflect a more cautious approach than may initially seem. While the rhetoric implies a potential broadening of scenarios in which Russia might consider nuclear deterrence, it does not represent a fundamental departure from the country’s long-standing policies. However, the language remains vague: it fails to define what constitutes an “association” or clarify precisely against whom a nuclear strike might be directed. 

Long-Range Strikes May Not Be a Silver Bullet

There are doubts within the policy and expert communities about whether long-range strikes on Russian territory would be a decisive factor in the war. To achieve a significant breakthrough, Ukraine would need to coordinate large-scale ground maneuvers in tandem with these strikes—something its forces have yet to demonstrate. “In its summer 2023 offensive, the Ukrainian military showed no ability to coordinate forces on anything like the scale needed for a decisive breakthrough. Longer-range weapons would make this coordination even more complicated,” writes Stephen Biddle, professor of international and public affairs at Columbia University, in a piece for Foreign Affairs. 

Biddle highlights the limitations and challenges of deep strikes in the current context. Such strikes are costly and require precision guidance, which can quickly lose effectiveness as the opposing side adapts.

The historical record on longer-range strikes is not encouraging, notes Biddle. Historically, even large-scale strategic bombing campaigns, including strikes aimed at German and Japanese cities during World War II and North-Korean cities during the Korean War, have not succeeded in breaking the resolve of the targeted country. Additionally, the military benefits of diverting Russian efforts into air defense or disrupting weapons production would require an extensive, sustained campaign that Ukraine is not currently equipped to carry out.

All Eyes on U.S. Voters

The wait for a decision on allowing Ukraine to carry out long-range strikes on Russian territory is closely tied to the outcome of the U.S. presidential election. The two candidates have contrasting views on the Russo-Ukrainian war, which makes the future U.S. stance uncertain. One candidate may push for greater support for Ukraine, potentially approving the use of advanced Western missiles for strikes deeper into Russia, while the other could advocate a more cautious approach, prioritizing de-escalation or negotiations.

This political uncertainty leaves European allies, Ukrainian policymakers, and even Moscow in a holding pattern. For now, decision-makers are watching the United States closely, understanding that the future of support for Ukraine’s military capabilities—and the overall direction of the war—will largely hinge on the results of the upcoming election.

October 2, 2024 Posted by | politics international, Russia | Leave a comment

Netanyahu: Israel Is Fighting a War on Seven Fronts

  

The Israeli leader called the UN General Assembly a ‘Swamp of Antisemitic Bile’

by Kyle Anzalone September 27, 2024,  https://news.antiwar.com/2024/09/27/netanyahu-israel-is-fighting-a-war-on-seven-fronts/#gsc.tab=0

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu slammed the UN during his remarks at the 79th General Assembly summit on Friday. He called the body a swamp of antisemitism while saying Israel needed to defend itself on seven fronts.

The Israeli leader’s speech was contentious. Before Netanyahu took to the podium, Pakistani Prime Minister Muhammad Shehbaz Sharif blasted Israel for waging a genocide in Gaza and creating a war with Lebanon. As Netanyahu began his address, a large portion of the UN General Assembly body walked out.

During his remarks, Netanyahu referred to the UN General Assembly as a “swamp of antisemitic bile.” He went on to slam the International Criminal Court (ICC) for considering charging him with war crimes, adding the true war criminals are in Iran and its allied nations.

During his address, Netanyahu presented two maps, one titled “the blessing” and the other “the curse.”  The Israeli leader said Tel Aviv is still seeking a normalization agreement with Saudi Arabia. He claimed that if Riyadh established official ties with Israel, the world would receive a “blessing,” but Iran represented a “curse” to the region.

The Israeli leader explained “the blessing” was establishing a “landbridge” from India to Israel. The blessing requires Saudi Arabia to enter the Abraham Accords and normalize ties with Israel. Netanyahu claimed that would have happened, but the October 7 Hamas attack prevented the deal.

In the map titled “the curse,” five countries were represented in black: Iran, Iraq, Syria, Yemen and Lebanon. The Israeli leader claimed that Tehran was working to eliminate Tel Aviv using its allies in the region. Netanyahu presented the conflict as a battle between forces of civilization against barbarism.

When discussing Gaza, Netanyahu said “Hamas must go.” He added that any end to the war that would see Hamas remain in power in Gaza is equivalent to allowing the Nazis to rebuild Germany after World War II.

As with Hamas, Netanyahu also said Israel would continue to wage war against Hezbollah until all its objectives were met. Over the past week, Tel Aviv has significantly ramped up its military operations in southern Lebanon, killing over 700 in the past week.

Kyle Anzalone is the opinion editor of Antiwar.com, news editor of the Libertarian Institute, and co-host of Conflicts of Interest.

October 2, 2024 Posted by | Israel, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Question for the candidates: Will the United States sign and ratify the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons?

By Alicia Sanders-Zakre | September 20, 2024 Alicia Sanders-Zakre is the Policy and Research Coordinator at the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons.  https://thebulletin.org/2024/09/will-the-united-states-sign-and-ratify-the-treaty-on-the-prohibition-of-nuclear-weapons/?fbclid=IwY2xjawFoiE5leHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHXWHz4dPKx6qA6gXNV_3JCT1LqSA4SpW4InKnv6GP0M0A5RzBvtaJMfokw_aem_nT8dnPTOYgkrNFm4kOHKTA

Before the 2016 US presidential election, Princeton physicist Zia Mian wrote an essay asking then-candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in the Bulletin whether they would be ready to start talks to ban nuclear weapons. Eight years and two presidents later, both the Trump and Biden administrations have rebuffed the 2017 UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) and chosen instead to persist with current US policies to maintain and upgrade nuclear weapons—despite a legal obligation to disarm, public support for the TPNW, and the existential threat to humanity of adherence to the debated theory of nuclear deterrence.

The TPNW is the first international treaty banning all nuclear weapons activities, including nuclear use and threat of use, testing, stationing, and development. The treaty’s Article 4 provides a verifiable pathway for nuclear-armed states to join and disarm. And Articles 6 and 7 create the first international regime to provide assistance and remediation to people and environments harmed by nuclear weapons use and testing; an effort led by countries that have been bombarded by Soviet and British nuclear detonations. This treaty currently has 93 signatory states and 70 states parties from every region of the world.

The United States—like other nuclear-armed countries—has chosen to undermine and dismiss this good faith effort by nearly half the world’s governments, including US allies, to rid the world of nuclear weapons. In 2020, the Trump administration even urged states to withdraw their instruments of ratification. Meanwhile, the United States has failed to implement the obligation it undertook more than half a century ago under Article VI of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) to pursue nuclear disarmament and instead spent $51.5 billion in 2023 alone to upgrade its nuclear arsenal. The continued investment of nuclear powers in maintaining and rebuilding their nuclear arsenals, while paying mere lip service to disarmament, is a source of contention within the NPT and undermines the nuclear non-proliferation regime.

Foreign policy goals aside, US presidential candidates should adhere to democratic principles and align their policies with public opinion and support for the treaty among local governments to join the TPNW: According to a 2022 study, 65 percent of the US population supports joining the TPNW. Cities and towns across the country—from Washington, D.C. to Los Angeles to Yellow Springs, Ohio—have adopted local resolutions calling on their government to join, alongside five US states. Members of the US Congress, as well as local and state politicians, have also called on the United States to join the ban treaty.

Support for the TPNW is based on a clear-eyed assessment of the risks that nuclear weapons pose as long as they exist—and an understanding of the naiveté of relying on the rationality of statemen like Russian President Vladimir Putin, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, or former US president Donald Trump to decide the fate of humanity.

Scholars have shown that the reason humanity has escaped nuclear annihilation since the dawn of the nuclear age may have more to do with sheer luck than with any successful strategy.

No one will want to be around when luck runs out.

We know all too well what that would look like and the incapacity of humanitarian organizations to respond. A new report by the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons documents in gut-wrenching detail the harm that nuclear weapons have done to children and the threat they continue to pose to them, including those bombed by the United States in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Some of those children survived and now give testimony to—and remind leaders of—the urgent need to abolish these weapons. This report adds to the robust body of literature on the devastating humanitarian and environmental consequences of nuclear weapons.

Under both Republican and Democratic administrations, the United States and the world have continued to face the threat of accidental or intentional nuclear annihilation, a threat that has continued to grow in recent years. It is time to chart a new course and to eliminate nuclear weapons, which is the only fail-safe way to eliminate the threat of their use.

Presidential candidates Kamala Harris and Donald Trump should be asked: If elected President, will you sign and submit to the Senate for ratification the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons?

October 2, 2024 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

Governments urged to ‘stop gambling with humanity’s future’ and eliminate nuclear weapons

26 September 2024 

World leaders, senior government officials and civil society representatives joined forces at UN Headquarters on Thursday to reaffirm commitment to nuclear disarmament as a global priority. 

The High-Level Meeting was held to commemorate the International Day for the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons, observed annually on 26 September. 

“There should be no place for these devices of death in our world,” said UN Secretary-General António Guterres.   

Nuclear ‘spectre’ looming 

He warned, however, that “not since the worst days of the Cold War has the spectre of nuclear weapons cast such a dark shadow.” 

He said that “nuclear sabre-rattling has reached a fever pitch” and there have been threats to use a nuclear weapon, highlighting fears of a new arms race.   

Meanwhile, decades-old norms established against the use, spread and testing of nuclear weapons are being eroded. 

Learn from the past 

Mr. Guterres said the first-hand experience of the hibakusha – the survivors of the atomic bombing of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 – “stand as clear reminders of where the nuclear path ends”.

“And yet, nearly 80 years later, nuclear-weapon States continue to roll the dice, resisting disarmament measures and believing that, somehow, our luck will never run out,” he said.

 Stop gambling with our future 

He appealed for these countries to “stop gambling with humanity’s future”, starting with honouring their commitments and meeting their disarmament obligations. 

 “Until nuclear weapons are eliminated, these States should commit to never use them under any circumstances. And they must demonstrate the utmost transparency in all matters related to nuclear weapons,” he said. 

Appeal to Russia and USA 

The Secretary-General also called on Russia and the United States “to return to the process of nuclear arms reductions, with other nuclear-weapon States following in due course.” 

As “disarmament and non-proliferation are two sides of the same coin,” countries must pursue both as a matter of urgency, he added. 

He recalled that the recently concluded Summit of the Future resulted in new international commitment to revitalize the global disarmament regime and to bring the world closer to the goal of total elimination of nuclear weapons, which the vast majority of UN Member States support. 

 “The time has come to take steps to ensure that a nuclear weapon is never used again,” he said. 

‘Nuclear catastrophe’ risk mounting: General Assembly President 

UN General Assembly President Philémon Yang lamented the current era of heightened nuclear risks. 

“We are also observing a growing nexus between nuclear weapons and domains such as outer and cyber space, and technologies such as artificial intelligence, which are multiplying the danger of a nuclear catastrophe,” he said. ……………………………………………………………………..

 Warnings going unheard: Marshall Islands President 

The President of the Marshall Islands, Heidi Heine, spoke about her country’s experience, history and current challenges with nuclear exposure. ………………………………………………………………

Non-Aligned Movement demands urgent action

 Ugandan Foreign Minister Jeje Odongo Abubakhar spoke on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), which has its roots in the Cold War era.

NAM’s 121 members remain deeply concerned over the slow progress towards nuclear disarmament and the failure of nuclear weapons holders to eliminate their arsenals. 

“We reaffirm the need for the nuclear-weapon States, which bear the primary responsibility for nuclear disarmament, to take urgent and concrete actions aimed at achieving this goal,” he said. 

Nuclear weapons have ‘no constructive value’: Libya

The Acting Foreign Minister of Libya, Eltaher Salem Elbaour, reminded participants that his country decided to relinquish its nuclear weapons programme in 2003.

Implement existing commitments: US official ………………………………………….more https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/09/1154951

October 2, 2024 Posted by | weapons and war | Leave a comment

Hurricane Helene Floods Closed Duke Nuclear Plant in Florida

Ari Natter, Bloomberg News, 30 Sept 24

  • Plant closed since 2013 soaked by 12-foot storm surge
  • Wastewater overflowing, but major leakage seen as unlikely

Floodwaters from Hurricane Helene have swamped a retired Duke Energy Corp. nuclear power plant, according to a filing with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, though an escape of contaminated fuel appears unlikely.

The Crystal River plant, which has been shuttered since 2013, experienced a storm surge of as much as 12 feet, according to the filing, which was posted online.

“The whole site was flooded, including buildings, sumps, and lift stations. Industrial Wastewater Pond #5 was observed overflowing to the ground due to the surge,” according to the report, which was filed Friday, the day after Helene roared … ………. (Subscribers only)

 https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/hurricane-helene-floods-closed-duke-nuclear-plant-in-florida-1

October 2, 2024 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Lawmakers to Investigate Faulty Sub, Carrier Welding at Newport News Shipbuilding

USNI News, Sam LaGrone, September 27, 2024

THE PENTAGON – The House Armed Services Committee is investigating substandard welding on submarines and aircraft carriers at Newport News Shipbuilding, the committee announced on Friday.

Following a Thursday report in USNI News, lawmakers are now looking into how shipbuilders at the Virginia yard had violated proper welding procedures on work that made it into current in-service submarines. The flawed work was found by quality assurance teams at Newport News Shipbuilding, which has led to a wider investigation into welding quality that’s prompted a notification to the Department of Justice, USNI News reported.

“It is deeply concerning to learn that faulty welds may have been knowingly made to U.S. Navy submarines and aircraft carriers. The House Armed Services Committee is investigating how this occurred. The safety of our sailors is our top concern, and we need to immediately understand any risks associated with the faulty work,” reads the statement from HASC chair Rep Mike Rogers (R-Ala.), ranking member Rep Adam Smith (D-Wash.) and House Armed Services seapower and projection forces subcommittee leaders Rep. Trent Kelly (R-Miss.) and Rep. Joe Courtney (D-Conn.).
“The Department of Defense needs to immediately provide our committee with answers and a plan for how they will protect U.S. Navy vessels against tampering. Absolute transparency with Congress is essential.”

The Congressional query comes as the Navy and shipbuilder HII are gauging the scope of the ships that were affected overall. The number of in-service Virginia-class submarines that have been affected are in the “low single digits” and an ongoing analysis of under-construction Virginia, Columbia-class submarines and Ford-class aircraft carriers could stretch into October, a defense official told USNI News on Friday.

Earlier this year, quality assurance teams at Newport News discovered the sub-standard welds and reported the violations in procedure to both the Navy and the Department of Justice, according to a Friday statement on LinkedIn by Newport News president Jennifer Boykin.

“We recently discovered that the quality of certain welds on submarines and aircraft carriers under construction here at NNS do not meet our high-quality standards. Most concerning is that some of the welds in question were made by welders who knowingly violated weld procedures.” she wrote.
“We immediately put together a team made up of both internal and independent engineering and quality subject matter experts to determine the root causes, bound the issue and put in place immediate short-term corrective actions as we work through longer-term solutions.”

Boykin went on to say HII notified both the Navy and the Department of Justice on the sub-standard work………………………………………………………………………………………….

Neither HII nor the Navy have said when the initial faulty work was discovered.

While the assessment of the overall welds on the ships under construction could extend into next month, the Navy and HII now have the tedious task of reinspecting the welds and determining solutions.

Twice in the 2000s, the Navy mounted separate investigations into suspicious welds into then Northrop Grumman-managed Newport News Shipbuilding. In 2007, the Navy found welders used the wrong filler material in non-nuclear pipping on Virginia submarines. In 2009, the Navy had to reinspect the welds on nine submarines and four aircraft carriers after a shipyard inspector admitted to falsifying inspection reports, according to The Virginian Pilot.

The inspections can involve analyzing welds that are difficult to reach throughout a submarine or aircraft carrier. The subsequent weld checks after the 2009 investigation took years, USNI News understands.  https://news.usni.org/2024/09/27/lawmakers-announce-investigation-into-faulty-submarine-carrier-welding-at-newport-news-shipbuilding-ships-affected-in-low-single-digits-officials-say

October 2, 2024 Posted by | safety, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

New NATO member Finland to place command center near Russian border

 https://www.rt.com/news/604782-finland-new-nato-command/ 30 Sept 24

Finland will host the bloc’s HQ for Northern Europe in Mikkeli, less than 200km from the frontier.

Finland will host a new NATO command base responsible for operations in Northern Europe in the city of Mikkeli, less than 200km from the Russian border, Helsinki announced on Friday.

Finland formally joined the US-led military bloc along with Sweden following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. Moscow has argued that the two nations compromised their own security by becoming part of what it perceives as a hostile organization that serves US geopolitical interests, while sacrificing their credibility as possible neutral mediators.

The new Multi Corps Land Component Command (MCLCC) will be under the authority of NATO’s Joint Force Command (JFC) in Norfolk, Virginia. Initially, it will comprise only a few dozen service members, Defense Minister Antti Hakkanen told journalists.

“NATO recognizes Finland’s expertise and trusts our ability to contribute to the defense of the northern region,” he said.

The bloc approved the creation of the new command center during its leaders’ summit in July. Helsinki allocated some €8.5 million ($9.5 million) in 2024 for the creation of the MCLCC.

The commander of the Finnish Defense Forces, General Janne Jaakkola, has said that placing the new NATO structure in close proximity to the headquarters of the Finnish Army “fosters cooperation between the national and the Allies’ forces, creating obvious synergy benefits.”

Hakkanen, also said he would soon announce where a new multinational force that Finland intends to host will be based. According to the state broadcaster Yle, Helsinki will choose between Rovaniemi and Sodankyla. The former is the capital of the northern region of Finnish Lapland, while the latter is a municipality located in the same province but closer to the Russian border.

NATO intensified its military buildup in Europe in 2014, following the US-backed armed coup in Kiev, claiming that it was preparing to respond to possible Russian aggression. The military bloc has significantly expanded its presence in Europe, breaking assurances given to Moscow to secure Russia’s support for the reunification of Germany in 1990.

October 2, 2024 Posted by | Finland, weapons and war | Leave a comment

China’s Newest Nuclear Submarine Sank, Setting Back Its Military Modernization

Pierside accident came as Beijing attempts to expand its navy

WSJ, By Michael R. Gordon, Sept. 26, 2024 

WASHINGTON—China’s newest nuclear-powered attack submarine sank in the spring, a major setback for one of the country’s priority weapons programs, U.S. officials said.

The episode, which Chinese authorities scrambled to cover up and hasn’t previously been disclosed, occurred at a shipyard near Wuhan in late May or early June.

It comes as China has been pushing to expand its navy, including its fleet of nuclear-powered submarines. 

The Pentagon has cast China as its principal long-term “pacing challenge,” and U.S. officials say that Beijing has been using political and military pressure to try to coerce Taiwan, a separately governed island that Beijing claims as part of its territory.

China says its goal in building a world-class military is to deter aggression and safeguard its overseas interests. A spokesman for the Chinese embassy didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment…………………………………………………………….. more https://www.wsj.com/world/china/chinas-newest-nuclear-submarine-sank-setting-back-its-military-modernization-785b4d37?st=pMigx5&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

October 2, 2024 Posted by | incidents | Leave a comment

Week to 30 September- countering the nuclear-military-industrial-political spin.

Some bits of good news.    

– Women Wage Peace .   Countries’ climate obligations could be legally defined at top UN court in December.Vertical Greening Brings Nature to Urban ‘Heat Islands’ Quickly and Easily.

TOP STORIES. How civilisation could end – an all-too-possible nuclear scenario. 

The Israeli nuclear risk no one is talking about.

Cold War II: US Congress passes 25 anti-China laws in 1 week, funds propaganda campaign. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tix5L5qDaNw

Ukraine’s Zelensky arriving in US….to pitch WWIII. 

The Madness of Antony Blinken.  Antony Blinken LIED?! State Dept Caught WITHHOLDING Humanitarian Aid From Gaza https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hb30Sn6WR-s

Nuclear finance will rely on consumers’ stomach for risk. ALSO AT …… https://nuclear-news.net/2024/09/27/2-a-nuclear-finance-will-rely-on-consumers-stomach-for-risk/

From the archives.   Questions still remain on the suspicious death of nuclear worker Karen SilkwoodWeek to 30 September.

Climate. Green campaigners lambast UN climate summit hosts for clinging to fossil fuels .

Noel’s notes. Hurricane Helene : when global heating collides with our dependence on digital systems. I would rather have tough-guy macho men, than slimy sweet-talk hypocrites.

  ***************************************

AUSTRALIA.

Defence Minister Marles, with all pretension, flogging a dead seahorse. 

Nuclear Concerns – Hiroshima, Maralinga and Dutton’s Australia. 

Climate Change Authority head Matt Kean contradicts Peter Dutton’s claim on nuclear and renewables working together. 

Australians are installing batteries at a record rate, as rooftop solar heads for major new milestone. Renewable and Energy storage jobs will soon overtake those in coal and gas. 

More Australian news headlines at https://antinuclear.net/2024/09/24/australian-nuclear-news-headlines-23-30-september/

***************************************

NUCLEAR ITEMS

ATROCITIES. Israel’s Tally of War Crimes in Lebanon Increases in Wake of Exploding Pagers.

CLIMATE.
Hurricane Helene Floods Closed Duke Nuclear Plant in Florida.

ECONOMICS. Nuclear fuel costs soar as conversion and enrichment bottleneck strains supply.

US company eliminated from race to build Britain’s first mini-nuclear. ALSO AT https://nuclear-news.net/2024/09/29/2-b1-us-company-eliminated-from-race-to-build-britains-first-mini-nuclear-plant/ Why NuScale Power Stock Dropped Today.

EDUCATION. “Peaceful” and war-making nuclear industries get together in tertiary education.

ENERGY. Microsoft’s Three Mile Island deal: How big tech is snatching up nuclear power. US nuclear plants won’t power up Big Tech’s AI ambitions right away.


ENVIRONMENT. Charities call for greater transparency over Sizewell C.

ETHICS and RELIGION
Cardinal Parolin: ‘World threatened by irreversible nuclear destruction’.

EVENTS. Sleepwalking into War? IPAN Conference 2024 –– October 4-6 in Perth,Australia or attend online The Independent and Peaceful Australia Network.

HUMAN RIGHTS. Assange to Testify at Council of Europe.

MEDIA. Losing The Narrative War: Israel Illegally Raids and Shuts Down Al Jazeera’s West Bank Bureau. Going From “The Civilian Buildings Are Hamas” To “The Civilian Buildings Are Hezbollah“. The Looming Catastrophe in the Middle East (w/ Gideon Levy) | The Chris Hedges Report.

PLUTONIUM. Japan and 11 other countries call for early start of fissile material ban talks.

POLITICS. A push for compensation for U.S. nuclear testing fallout resumes on Capitol Hill. . Mistaking Militarism for Statecraft, Empire for Democracy and Debt for Prosperity.

Nuclear Weapons and the U.S. Presidential Elections.

Weatherwatch: UK Labour’s stance on nuclear power is worryingly familiar. Scottish National Party blasts Labour for ‘frittering away’ money on nuclear plant instead of winter fuel payment.

POLITICS INTERNATIONAL and DIPLOMACY.

SAFETY.

SECRETS and LIES

Blinken Lied To Congress About Israeli War Crimes Because He Knows He’ll Get Away With It. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYEBm0eKuo0 

  Karen Silkwood and Kerr-McGee: A Reinvestigation.

SPACE. EXPLORATION, WEAPONS. NASA’s uncrewed Artemis mission highlights radiation risk to astronauts.

Woomera Manual: International Law Meets Military Space Activities.

WASTES. Despite vastly different social and political contexts, Finland, Germany and France are all grappling with the question of safe nuclear waste disposal.

Spent nuclear fuel shipped to Japan’s 1st interim storage facility in Aomori.

New developments at Sellafield for endless storage of ever-increasing amounts of highly radioactive spent nuclear fuel.

WAR and CONFLICT. After destroying Ukraine and Gaza, Biden seeks a destroyed nation trifecta in Lebanon.

The Illusion of a Solution: Killing Hassan Nasrallah. Netanyahu: Israel Is Fighting a War on Seven Fronts . Israel: ‘Escalate to De-escalate’.

Putin outlines new rules for Russian use of vast nuclear arsenal. Ukraine army attacks nuclear plant substation: Russia.

Ambassadors called upon to refrain from military action involving nuclear plants. Wars, Propaganda Wars and Funding Them.

WEAPONS and WEAPONS SALES. US Gives Israel $8.7 Billion in Military Aid for Operations in Gaza and Lebanon. War Forever, Everywhere, War Doesn’t End When It “Ends“.

Japan’s new Prime Minister calls for deployment of US nuclear weapons.

October 1, 2024 Posted by | Christina's notes | Leave a comment

Pentagon “goes to school” -William Hartung, The Battle for the Soul of American Science

“……………………………………………. Hartung, a Pentagon expert, has focused on this strange reality of ours: no matter how many wars the United States loses, it only pours yet more taxpayer dollars into the Pentagon budget and into the coffers of those giant weapons-making companies of the military-industrial-congressional complex. 

September 29, 2024, Tomgram

………………………………………………… Yet, after all these years, what couldn’t be more striking today is that, in the same spirit as those older pieces, Hartung focuses (as he so often has) on a different aspect entirely of the Pentagon’s distinctly over-funded world, one that, amid all the news coverage in this country, gets little or no attention: how the Pentagon, as he puts it, “goes to school” to enlist American science in the battle to create yet more horrific weaponry. 

Pentagon expert William Hartung first wandered into TomDispatch in March 2008, less than seven years after this country’s Global War(s) on Terror were launched, full-scale disasters that were already costing the American taxpayer a fortune and a half — or perhaps, given the subject, all too literally an arm and a leg. As he wrote then, “How much, for instance, does one week of George Bush’s wars cost? Glad you asked. If we consider the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan together — which we might as well do, since we and our children and grandchildren will be paying for them together into the distant future — a conservative, single-week estimate comes to $3.5 billion. Remember, that’s per week! By contrast, the whole international community spends less than $400 million per year on the International Atomic Energy Agency, the primary institution for monitoring and preventing the spread of nuclear weapons; that’s less than one day’s worth of war costs.”

Only $650 million or so of that weekly sum, he estimated, was “spent on people.” So, he wondered, “where does the other nearly $3 billion go?” The answer he offered then: “It goes for goods and services, from tanks and fighter planes to fuel and food. Most of this money ends up in the hands of private companies like Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and the former Halliburton subsidiary, Kellogg, Brown and Root.” And knowing about that expense of $3.5 billion a week “and counting” on America’s wars, he added sarcastically, “Doesn’t that make you feel safer?”

Ever since then, Hartung, a Pentagon expert, has focused on this strange reality of ours: no matter how many wars the United States loses, it only pours yet more taxpayer dollars into the Pentagon budget and into the coffers of those giant weapons-making companies of the military-industrial-congressional complex. Even the titles of a few of his pieces over the years catch the grim spirit of his all-too-striking analysis: “There’s No Business Like the Arms Business, Weapons ‘R’ Us (But You’d Never Know It)” (July 2016); “The Urge to Splurge, Why Is It So Hard to Reduce the Pentagon Budget?” (October 2016); “The American Way of War Is a Budget-Breaker, Never Has a Society Spent More for Less” (May 2017); “Merger Mania, The Military-Industrial Complex on Steroids” (July 2019); “America Dominant Again (in Arms Sales), And Again… and Again… And Again” (May 2021); “Fueling the Warfare State, America’s $1.4 Trillion ‘National Security’ Budget Makes Us Ever Less Safe” (July 2022); “Spending Unlimited, The Pentagon’s Budget Follies Come at a High Price” (March 2024).

And of course, that’s just a small dip into the pieces he’s written for TomDispatch. Yet, after all these years, what couldn’t be more striking today is that, in the same spirit as those older pieces, Hartung focuses (as he so often has) on a different aspect entirely of the Pentagon’s distinctly over-funded world, one that, amid all the news coverage in this country, gets little or no attention: how the Pentagon, as he puts it, “goes to school” to enlist American science in the battle to create yet more horrific weaponry. And so it goes, again and again and again. Tom

The Pentagon Goes to School. The Battle for the Soul of American Science. Bringing the Militarization of University Research Back to Earth

By William D. Hartung

The divestment campaigns launched last spring by students protesting Israel’s mass slaughter in Gaza brought the issue of the militarization of American higher education back into the spotlight.

Of course, financial ties between the Pentagon and American universities are nothing new. As Stuart Leslie has pointed out in his seminal book on the topic, The Cold War and American Science, “In the decade following World War II, the Department of Defense (DOD) became the biggest patron of American science.” Admittedly, as civilian institutions like the National Institutes of Health grew larger, the Pentagon’s share of federal research and development did decline, but it still remained a source of billions of dollars in funding for university research.

And now, Pentagon-funded research is once again on the rise, driven by the DOD’s recent focus on developing new technologies like weapons driven by artificial intelligence (AI). Combine that with an intensifying drive to recruit engineering graduates and the forging of partnerships between professors and weapons firms and you have a situation in which many talented technical types could spend their entire careers serving the needs of the warfare state. The only way to head off such a Brave New World would be greater public pushback against the military conquest (so to speak) of America’s research and security agendas, in part through resistance by scientists and engineers whose skills are so essential to building the next generation of high-tech weaponry.

The Pentagon Goes to School

Yes, the Pentagon’s funding of universities is indeed rising once again and it goes well beyond the usual suspects like MIT or Johns Hopkins University. In 2022, the most recent year for which full data is available, 14 universities received at least — and brace yourself for this — $100 million in Pentagon funding, from Johns Hopkins’s astonishing $1.4 billion (no, that is not a typo!) to Colorado State’s impressive $100 million. And here’s a surprise: two of the universities with the most extensive connections to our weaponry of the future are in Texas: the University of Texas at Austin (UT-Austin) and Texas A&M.

In 2020, Texas Governor Greg Abbott and former Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy appeared onstage at a UT-Austin ceremony to commemorate the creation of a robotics lab there, part of a new partnership between the Army Futures Command and the school. “This is ground zero for us in our research for the weapons systems we’re going to develop for decades to come,” said McCarthy.

Not to be outdone, Texas A&M is quietly becoming the Pentagon’s base for research on hypersonics — weapons expected to travel five times the speed of sound. Equipped with a kilometer-long tunnel for testing hypersonic missiles, that school’s University Consortium for Applied Hypersonics is explicitly dedicated to outpacing America’s global rivals in the development of that next generation military technology. Texas A&M is also part of the team that runs the Los Alamos National Laboratory, the (in)famous New Mexico facility where the first nuclear weapons were developed and tested as part of the Manhattan Project under the direction of Robert Oppenheimer.

Other major players include Carnegie Mellon University, a center for Army research on the applications of AI, and Stanford University, which serves as a feeder to California’s Silicon Valley firms of all types. That school also runs the Technology Transfer for Defense (TT4D) Program aimed at transitioning academic technologies from the lab to the marketplace and exploring the potential military applications of emerging technology products.

In addition, the Pentagon is working aggressively to bring new universities into the fold. In January 2023, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin announced the creation of a defense-funded research center at Howard University, the first of its kind at a historically black college.

Given the campus Gaza demonstrations of last spring, perhaps you also won’t be surprised to learn that the recent surge in Pentagon spending faces increasing criticism from students and faculty alike. Targets of protest include the Lavender program, which has used AI to multiply the number of targets the Israeli armed forces can hit in a given time frame. But beyond focusing on companies enabling Israel’s war effort, current activists are also looking at the broader role of their universities in the all-American war system.

For example, at Indiana University research on ties to companies fueling the killings in Gaza grew into a study of the larger role of universities in supporting the military system as a whole. Student activists found that the most important connection involved that university’s ties to the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane Division, whose mission is “to provide acquisition, engineering… and technical support for sensors, electronics, electronic warfare, and special warfare weapons.” In response, student activists have launched a “Keep Crane Off Campus” campaign.

A Science of Death or for Life?

Graduating science and engineering students increasingly face a moral dilemma about whether they want to put their skills to work developing instruments of death. Journalist Indigo Olivier captured that conflict in a series of interviews with graduating engineering students. She quotes one at the University of West Florida who strongly opposes doing weapons work this way: “When it comes to engineering, we do have a responsibility… ​Every tool can be a weapon… I don’t really feel like I need to be putting my gifts to make more bombs.”

By contrast, Cameron Davis, a 2021 computer engineering graduate from Georgia Tech, told Olivier about the dilemma faced by so many graduating engineers: ​“A lot of people that I talk to aren’t 100% comfortable working on defense contracts, working on things that are basically going to kill people.” But he went on to say that the high pay at weapons firms ​“drives a lot of your moral disagreements with defense away.”

The choice faced by today’s science and engineering graduates is nothing new. The use of science for military ends has a long history in the United States. But there have also been numerous examples of scientists who resisted dangerous or seemingly unworkable military schemes……………………………………………………………………………………………

Scientists have also played a leading role in pressing for nuclear arms control and disarmament, founding organizations like the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (1945), the Federation of American Scientists (1945), the global Pugwash movement (1957), the Council for a Livable World (1962), and the Union of Concerned Scientists (1969). To this day, all of them continue to work to curb the threat of a nuclear war that could destroy this planet as a livable place for humanity.

A central figure in this movement was Joseph Rotblat, the only scientist to resign from the Manhattan Project over moral qualms about the potential impact of the atomic bomb. In 1957, he helped organize the founding meeting of the Pugwash Conference, an international organization devoted to the control and ultimate elimination of nuclear weapons. In some respects Pugwash was a forerunner of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), which successfully pressed for the U.N. Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, which entered into force in January 2021.

Enabling Endless War and Widespread Torture

The social sciences also have a long, conflicted history of ties to the Pentagon and the military services. Two prominent examples from earlier in this century were the Pentagon’s Human Terrain Program (HTS) and the role of psychologists in crafting torture programs associated with the Global War on Terror, launched after the 9/11 attacks with the invasion of Afghanistan.

………………………………………………An even more controversial use of social scientists in the service of the war machine was the role of psychologists as advisors to the CIA’s torture programs at Abu Ghraib in Iraq, the Guantánamo Bay detention center in Cuba, and other of that agency’s “black sites.” ……………………………………………………………

 today, resistance to the militarization of science has extended to the growing use of artificial intelligence and other emerging military technologies. For example, in 2018, there was a huge protest movement at Google when employees learned that the company was working on Project Maven, a communications network designed to enable more accurate drone strikes. More than 4,000 Google scientists and engineers signed a letter to company leadership calling for them to steer clear of military work, dozens resigned over the issue, and the protests had a distinct effect on the company. That year, Google announced that it would not renew its Project Maven contract, and pledged that it “will not design or deploy AI” for weapons.

Unfortunately, the lure of military funding was simply too strong. Just a few years after those Project Maven protests, Google again began doing work for the Pentagon,…………………………………….

The Future of American Science

……………………………………………………………………The stakes are particularly high now, given the ongoing rush to develop AI-driven weaponry and other emerging technologies that pose the risk of everything from unintended slaughter due to system malfunctions to making war more likely, given the (at least theoretical) ability to limit casualties for the attacking side. In short, turning back the flood of funding for military research and weaponry from the Pentagon and key venture capital firms will be a difficult undertaking. After all, AI is already performing a wide range of military and civilian tasks. Banning it altogether may no longer be a realistic goal, but putting guardrails around its military use might still be.

Such efforts are, in fact, already underway. The International Committee for Robot Arms Control (ICRAC) has called for an international dialogue on “the pressing dangers that these systems pose to peace and international security and to civilians.”………………………………….

The Future of Life Institute has underscored the severity of the risk, noting that “more than half of AI experts believe there is a one in ten chance this technology will cause our extinction.”

Instead of listening almost exclusively to happy talk about the military value of AI by individuals and organizations that stand to profit from its adoption, isn’t it time to begin paying attention to the skeptics, while holding back on the deployment of emerging military technologies until there is a national conversation about what they can and can’t accomplish, with scientists playing a central role in bringing the debate back to earth?

https://tomdispatch.com/the-pentagon-goes-to-school/

October 1, 2024 Posted by | Education, USA | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »