Cardinal Parolin: ‘World threatened by irreversible nuclear destruction’
The Vatican Secretary of State reiterates the moral imperative of the total elimination of nuclear weapons and reaffirms the Holy See’s condemnation of the use or threat of use of such weapons.
By Lisa Zengarini, https://www.vaticannews.va/en/vatican-city/news/2024-09/parolin-world-threatened-by-irreversible-nuclear-destruction.html
“The only way to avoid a nuclear war is the total elimination of nuclear weapons.” Cardinal Pietro Parolin strongly reaffirmed this point in a statement he addressed on 26 September at a High-Level UN Meeting in New York commemorating the International Day for the Total Elimination of Nuclear Weapons.
Wars and arms race dangerously increasing risk of nuclear conflict
The Vatican Secretary of State grounded his speech on the current state of global affairs and the relentless arms race which is dramatically increasing the risk of nuclear conflict. He, again, decried that States are strengthening their nucleararsenals with resources that, as Pope Francis has emphasized several times, “could be more effectively used to address pressing development needs.”
This trend he said “underscores a troubling reliance by nuclear-weapons States on nuclear deterrence, rather than on fulfilling their obligation under Article VI of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).”
Nuclear deterrence does’t work
Echoing Pope Francis’ tireless appeals on this crucial issue, Cardinal Parolin insisted on the need to “go beyond nuclear deterrence” thus reiterating the Holy See’s call on all States to accede to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW).
States, he added, must also renew their commitment to other disarmament measures, such as the revitalization of bilateral arms control processes, the entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and the opening of negotiations on fissile material and negative security assurance treaties.
Holy See committed to building bridges of trust to free world from nuclear weapons
Concluding, Cardinal Parolin reaffirmed that the goal of a world free of nuclear weapons can only be achieved through discussions based on mutual trust. For its part, he said, the Holy See will continue to build bridges of dialogue with every State, “with the aim of safeguarding the common good rather than individual interests.”
South Australia sets spectacular new records for wind, solar and negative demand
Giles Parkinson, Sep 30, 2024, https://reneweconomy.com.au/south-australia-sets-spectacular-new-records-for-wind-solar-and-negative-demand/
Records continue to tumble across Australia’s main grids as the spring weather boosts the output of wind and solar and mild weather moderates demand, but none are as spectacular as those being set in South Australia.
The state’s unique end-of-the-line grid already leads the country, and arguably the globe, in the integration of variable wind and solar, with an average of more than 70 per cent of its demand over the last year and a world-first target of 100 per cent net renewables by 2027.
On Sunday, at 9.35 am, the state set a new milestone, setting a new record share of wind and solar (as a percentage of state electricity demand) of 150.7 per cent, beating a record set on Christmas Day last year, when – for obvious reasons – there was little electricity demand.
As Geoff Eldridge, from GPE NEMLog, notes, this means that the rooftop PV, along with large scale wind and solar farms, were generating 50.7 per cent more power than the state’s total electricity demand at the time.
The scale of excess output was further crystallised later in the day with a new minimum record for instantaneous residual demand, which hit minus 927 megawatts at 12.35pm.
Eldridge says residual demand is what’s left for other generators to supply after wind and solar have met a share of the demand. A negative residual demand means wind and solar were producing more electricity than SA needed, resulting in excess renewable generation which can be managed by exporting and battery charging. The remainder is curtailed.
Of the surplus 927 MW, the state was exporting 685 MW to Victoria, while another 163 MW was being soaked up by the state’s growing fleet of battery storage projects, and 730 MW of output was curtailed. Prices at the time were minus $47/MWh, a good opportunity for batteries to charge.
A further 84 MW was being produced by a couple of gas generators – not because their power output was needed, but because the state, at least for the moment, relies on them for essential grid services such as system strength and fault current.
That will be reduced considerably when the new link to NSW is completed in a few years, and it will allow the state to both export more, and import more when needs be.
“Balancing the system with such high renewable penetration is challenging but necessary as the energy transition progresses,” Eldridge says. “Managing excess generation through exports, storage, and curtailment is critical to keeping the grid stable and efficient.”
It wasn’t the only record to fall over the weekend. In Queensland, the country’s most coal dependent state in terms of annual share of demand and generation, large scale solar hit a record share of 34 per cent, and coal output – in megawatt terms – hit a record low of 2,882 MW.
The Queensland coal fleet capacity is more than 8,000 MW, so that is about as low as it can run until more units are closed down.
In Victoria on Saturday, just before the AFL grand final, rooftop solar also hit a new record output of 3,164 MW – although it did not push operational demand down low enough for the market operator to enact Minimum System Load protocols and possibly switch off some rooftop solar panels to maintain grid stability.
It had flagged a potential MSL event on Friday but cancelled it in the morning. Those events will likely occur at other times in spring and over the summer holidays, although the market operator is now working on new rules for big batteries to avoid a potentially unpopular and unwieldy solar switch off.
Chinese nuclear-powered attack submarine sank earlier this year, says senior US defence official
ABC News, 27 Sept 24
In short:
China’s newest nuclear-powered attack submarine sank earlier this year, according to a senior US defence official.
A series of satellite images from Planet Labs from June appear to show cranes at the Wuchang shipyard, where the submarine would have been docked.
What’s next?
China’s submarine force is expected to grow to 65 by 2025 and 80 by 2035, the US Department of Defense has said.
A senior US defence official has said that China’s newest nuclear-powered attack submarine sank earlier this year, marking a potential embarrassment for Beijing as it seeks to expand its military capabilities.
China already has the largest navy in the world, with over 370 ships, and it has embarked on production of a new generation of nuclear-armed submarines.
The US defence official, speaking on condition of anonymity on Thursday, local time, said China’s new first-in-class nuclear-powered attack submarine sank alongside a pier sometime between May and June.
A Chinese embassy spokesperson in Washington said they had no information to provide.
“In addition to the obvious questions about training standards and equipment quality, the incident raises deeper questions about the PLA’s internal accountability and oversight of China’s defence industry — which has long been plagued by corruption,” the official said, using an acronym for the People’s Liberation Army.
“It’s not surprising that the PLA Navy would try to conceal the sinking,” the official added………………………………………………. more https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-27/one-of-china-submarine-sank-says-us-defence-official/104406362
Questions still remain on the suspicious death of nuclear worker Karen Silkwood
Karen Gay Silkwood (February 19, 1946 – November 13, 1974) was an American chemical technician and labor union activist known for raising concerns about corporate practices related to health and safety of workers in a nuclear facility. Following her mysterious death, which received extensive coverage, her estate filed a lawsuit against chemical company Kerr-McGee, which was eventually settled for $1.38 million. Silkwood was portrayed by Meryl Streep in Mike Nichols‘ 1983 Academy Award-nominated film Silkwood.
She worked at the Kerr-McGee Cimarron Fuel Fabrication Site plant near Crescent, Oklahoma, United States. Silkwood’s job was making plutonium pellets for nuclear reactor fuel rods. This plant experienced theft of plutonium by workers during this era. She joined the union and became an activist on behalf of issues of health and safety at the plant as a member of the union’s negotiating team, the first woman to have that position at Kerr-McGee. In the summer of 1974, she testified to the Atomic Energy Commission about her concerns.
For three days in November, she was found to have plutonium contamination on her person and in her home. That month, while driving to meet with David Burnham, a New York Times journalist, and Steve Wodka, an official of her union’s national office, she died in a car crash under unclear circumstances.
Her family sued Kerr-McGee on behalf of her estate. In what was the longest trial up until then in Oklahoma history, the jury found Kerr-McGee liable for the plutonium contamination of Silkwood, and awarded substantial damages. These were reduced on appeal, but the case reached the United States Supreme Court in 1979, which upheld the damages verdict. Before another trial took place, Kerr-McGee settled with the estate out of court for US $1.38 million, while not admitting liability. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_Silkwood
Questions Still Remain In Suspicious Death Of Karen Silkwood
TODAY. Hurricane Helene : when global heating collides with our dependence on digital systems
It’s going to happen more often – extreme weather events paralysing our digital systems. We had a taste of this with the global digital outage in July.
When digital fails – analogue radio still works, and real money – coins and paper cash still work.
From Thursday, 26 September Millions were without electricity as Hurricane Helene lashed parts of Florida, Georgia , Tennessee, and North Carolina. Many people in Florida were left stranded, without shelter and awaiting rescue, and without communication, even after the hurricane had swept through.
Helene then soaked the Carolinas and Tennessee with torrential rains, sending creeks and rivers over their banks and straining dams. Western North Carolina was isolated because of landslides and flooding that closed the Interstate 40 and other roads. Additional heavy rains are likely across portions of the Central Appalachians,
At least 88 people died, and hundreds, perhaps thousands, have been made homeless. Business, education, all organisations and services are disrupted.
If there’s one thing that Americans are good at, it’s helping each other out in times of crisis. And there have been so much on-the ground help from neighbours, and heroic rescues.
But to add to the suffering, is the dreadful loneliness of people in need, but cut off from all communication – no TV, no Internet, no email, no mobile phone, – electricity being cut off, and mobile phone towers downed.
By Sunday, more than 2.1 million customers remained without electricity across several states. Apart from those desperate cases of need, there would be so many situations, even where businesses, shops were safe – but could not function, because of digital systems not working.
It’s not surprising that the tech squillionaires have been rather silent about this, because they like their technology to be in charge of everything
After all – people are so resilient – with repairs swinging into action, and everything digital will be back in function – soon. All can use their apps, their mobile phones, their credit cards
Until next time.
How civilisation could end – an all-too-possible nuclear scenario
By Richard Broinowski, Sep 30, 2024, https://johnmenadue.com/how-civilisation-could-end-an-all-too-possible-nuclear-scenario/
On 12 September, Vladimir Putin threatened retaliation, not excluding nuclear, against NATO countries if Washington allows Ukraine to attack targets inside Russia with US missiles. President Joe Biden backed off – for the moment. But the doomsday clock of the Atomic Scientists now stands at 90 seconds to midnight, the closest it has ever been to signalling Armageddon.
In a chillingly relevant book Nuclear War – A Scenario, (Transworld Publishers 2024), New York Times journalist Annie Jacobsen predicts what could occur. Interviews with nearly 40 US authorities, all having held positions in the US Nuclear Command and Control structure, add authority to her narrative.
Jacobsen names North Korea as the ignition point of a nuclear war. Without warning, Kim Jong-un launches a Hwasong-17 ICBM at Washington. Within four minutes, it is identified and tracked in Washington. But contrary to repeated public assurances that an ICBM can be intercepted, it is almost impossible to do so after the initial boost phase.
There is massive confusion in Washington between protocol and speed of action. While a national security adviser tries unsuccessfully to get a North Korean official on the phone, the president, in the White House dining room, is hustled by his security detail to a bunker under the West Wing. After several panicked relocations, and only after he has authorised nuclear retaliation against Pyongyang, he ends up bleeding and broken in a field somewhere in Maryland after the electronics on his fleeing helicopter, Marine One, are fried by a massive electro-magnetic pulse from a nuclear device detonated on a North Korean geo-stationary satellite hovering over the US.
Meanwhile, the North Korean ICBM hits the Pentagon. The explosion creates soft X-ray light with a very short wavelength, superheating the air to millions of degrees, instantly carbonising most of Washington’s inhabitants. In the aftermath, just as in Hiroshima 79 years earlier, decomposing bodies soon choke Washington waterways and any hospital that still functions after the atomic blast is completely overwhelmed by burned supplicants seeking relief or merciful death.
Kim follows up with a second nuclear strike – on the existing nuclear power plant at Diablo Canyon on the Californian coast between Los Angeles and San Francisco. The strike melts down fuel rods in the twin 1100MW pressurised water reactors, rendering a vast area of California uninhabitable for the foreseeable future.
Things get rapidly out of control. Under America’s highly classified Operational Plan, 1,770 US nuclear weapons are cleared for launch, including single hydrogen bombs on land-based Minutemen missiles buried in silos around the US mid-west, multiple-headed sea-launched ballistic missiles aboard Ohio-class “boomer” submarines under the Pacific, and on piloted B-52 and B-2 bombers, the third leg of America’s nuclear triad.
A disproportionately extravagant nuclear salvo (use ‘em or lose ‘em) aimed at North Korea must fly over eastern Russia before entering Korean air space. It is mistakenly assumed by Moscow to be targeting Russia. In the absence of any urgent correcting phone call from Washington (which has ceased to exist), Russia launches its own onslaught against the US, as well as against NATO bases in Europe known to keep US nuclear weapons and delivery systems on standby. Too late for a pre-emptive strike, US commanders in military bases strung around the US mid-west give nuclear launching codes to commanding officers at all US nuclear bases including submarines, to strike hundreds of designated targets in Russia.
The dreadful situation worsens as China, seeing nuclear death and destruction engulf cities near its border with North Korea, launches its own nuclear weapons on the United States.
Jacobsen doesn’t spare us the details of what happens after the bombing stops. Across the northern hemisphere everything burns unchecked – cities, towns, suburbs, villages, roads and forests. Black powdery soot blocks the sun, first across the northern hemisphere, then the south. As predicted as early as October 1983 by Carl Sagan, one of the world’s most respected scientists, nuclear winter steps in. Crops can’t grow without sun. Nor can life. Mass extinction of humans and animals from radiation, and then starvation, follows.
Sagan’s theory was initially scorned as Soviet propaganda, but as computers developed, his theory gained validity, then acceptance. Sixty-six million years ago, an asteroid struck Earth and 70% of all species perished. Jacobsen correctly says that nuclear war would cause many of the same phenomena.
Where Jacobsen can be questioned, however, is on her assumptions that Kim Jong-un would ignite the war. Why he would do such a reckless and foolish thing, she claims she simply “doesn’t know”. But she apparently doesn’t remember how in 1945 the United States, without seeking any opinion from Koreans, divided Korea at the 38th parallel to stop the Soviet Union occupying the whole peninsula; and how General Curtis LeMay saturation bombed North Korea during the Korean War as revenge for Chinese troops comprehensively defeating panicking American forces and forcing them back across the 38th parallel in 1950. So the animus is there.
But Kim Jong-un is neither mad nor stupid. Why would he court certain nuclear destruction of his small country by the United States? A much more likely ignition point is currently unfurling in the Middle East, where Israel seems to be bent on provoking a war with Iran, into which US forces would inevitably be drawn with uncertain, but highly dangerous consequences.
Hurricane Helene Floods Closed Duke Nuclear Plant in Florida
By Ari Natter, September 28, 2024 , https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/investing/2024/09/28/hurricane-helene-floods-retired-duke-nuclear-plant-in-florida/
(Bloomberg) — 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 ashore.
“We are still in the process of obtaining access and assessing the damage, but due to the nature of this event we anticipate difficulty with estimating the total discharge amount of wastewater, and impacts are unknown at this time,” the report said.
The used nuclear fuel at the site remains secure, Duke Energy said in a statement Sunday. “All radioactive material has been segmented and permanently packaged in shielded containers impervious to the effects of extreme weather,” the company said.
The facility, just south of Cedar Key, is still in the process of being dismantled. It’s likely that the spent fuel, which is kept onsite in dry storage, is safe, Edwin Lyman, a nuclear specialist with the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in an email before Duke Energy commented.
“There is probably still quite a bit of low-level radioactive waste awaiting shipment, and it’s likely the site wastewater has low levels of radioactive contamination,” Lyman said in an email. “Although anything is possible, based on the Fukushima experience, if the storage area were immersed in water for a short period of time, there is unlikely to be significant damage or leakage from the canisters.”
The site also flooded in 2023 after Hurricane Idalia made landfall, according to a report in Newsweek, that said spent fuel was scheduled to remain on site until 2037.
–With assistance from Tony Czuczka.
Australian Defence Minister Marles, with all pretension, flogging a dead seahorse
By Paul Keating, Sep 28, 2024, https://johnmenadue.com/marles-with-all-pretention-flogging-a-dead-seahorse/
Richard Marles and his mate, the US defence secretary, are beginning to wilt under the weight of sustained comment in Australia critical of the AUKUS arrangement.
Marles, unable to sustain a cogent argument himself, has his US friend propping him up in London to throw a 10,000-mile punch at me – and as usual, failing to materially respond to legitimate and particular criticisms made of the AUKUS arrangement.
The US Defence Secretary, Lloyd Austin, claims AUKUS would not compromise Australia’s ability to decide its own sovereign defence issues, a claim made earlier by Richard Marles and the prime minister.
But this would only be true until the prime minister and Marles got their phone call from the president, seeking to mobilise Australian military assets – wherein, both would click their heels in alacrity and agreement. The rest of us would read about it in some self-serving media statement afterwards. As my colleague, Gareth Evans, recently put it, “it defies credibility that Washington will ever go ahead with the sale of Virginias to us in the absence of an understanding that they will join the US in any fight in which it chooses to engage anywhere in our region, particularly over Taiwan”.
In London, Marles claimed that the logic behind AUKUS matched my policy as prime minister, in committing to the Collins class submarine program. This is completely untrue.
The Collins class submarine, at 3,400 tonnes, was designed specifically for the defence of Australia – in the shallow waters off the Australian continental shelf.
The US Virginia class boats at 10,000 tonnes, are attack submarines designed to stay and stand on far away station, in this case, principally to wait and sink Chinese nuclear weapon submarines as they exit the Chinese coast.
At 10,000 tonnes, the Virginias are too large for the shallow waters of the Australian coast – their facility is not in the defence of Australia, rather, it is to use their distance and stand-off capability to sink Chinese submarines. They are attack-class boats.
When Marles wilfully says “AUKUS matches the Collins class logic” during the Keating government years, he knows that statement to be utterly untrue. Factually untrue. The Collins is and was a “defensive” submarine – designed to keep an enemy off the Australian coast. It was never designed to operate as far away as China or to sit and lie in wait for submarine conquests.
And as Evans also recently made clear, eight Virginia class boats delivered in the 2040s-50s would only ever see two submarines at sea at any one time. Yet Marles argues that just two boats of this kind in the vast oceans surrounding us, materially alters our defensive capability and the military judgment of an enemy. This is argument unbecoming of any defence minister.
As I said at the National Press Club two years ago, two submarines aimed at China would be akin to throwing toothpicks at a mountain. That remains the position.
The fact is, the Albanese Government, through this program and the ambitious basing of American military forces on Australian soil, is doing nothing other than abrogating Australia’s sovereign right to command its own continent and its military forces.
Marles says “there has been demonstrable support for AUKUS within the Labor Party”. This may be true at some factionally, highly-managed national conference — like the last one — but it is utterly untrue of the Labor Party’s membership at large – which he knows.
The membership abhors AUKUS and everything that smacks of national sublimation. It does not expect these policies from a Labor Government.
Public scrutiny of UK-US nuclear pact is essential
“Rather than working together to get rid of their nuclear weapons, the UK and US are collaborating on further advancing their respective nuclear arsenals” – Carol Turner
The Agreement facilitates the development of Britain’s nuclear weapon technology and supports building the Trident replacement. This is in direct contradiction to Britain’s legal obligation under the NPT and CTBT to the disarm.
Vice Chair of CND, Carol Turner, writes on the UK-US Mutual Defence Agreement, and what it spells for the so-called independence of Britain’s foreign policy. 29 Sept 24
One of the Prime Minister’s first foreign policy initiatives after taking office in July was an amendment to the Agreement for Cooperation on the Uses of Atomic Energy for Mutual Defence Purposes. Never heard of it? That could be just what Labour is hoping for.
The Mutual Defence Agreement (MDA) is a bilateral nuclear pact between the USA and Britain. The United States provides the UK with nuclear technology and know-how in exchange for access to British intelligence facilities. Since it was first signed in secret in 1958, the MDA has been brought before parliament for approval every 10 years. This has been a formal process, with no vote and negligible scrutiny.
After the MDA is signed by the end of this year, not even the formality of approval will be required in future. Defence Secretary John Healey laid an amendment to the MDA before parliament on 25 July – three weeks after Labour took office, just five days before the summer recess – which removes all mentions of renewal. When the pact is signed this year, it becomes permanent. No parliamentary debate and no change in the law is needed for this. As CND General Secretary Kate Hudon observes ‘this spells farewell to even the smallest notion of parliamentary responsibility’ for Britain’s foreign policy.
What’s on offer for Britain and the US
The agreement enables both countries to exchange classified information allowing them to develop their respective nuclear weapon systems. The MDA is essential to the replacement of Britain’s Trident nuclear weapons system. The current UK warhead is a copy of the US warhead; some components are bought from the US. Inevitably, the United States leverage over Britain’s foreign and security policy will to be enhanced by the MDA amendment.
In an explanatory memorandum to parliament which accompanied the proposed changes to the agreement, Healey explained the MDA ‘provides the necessary requirements for the control and transmission of submarine nuclear propulsion technology, atomic information and material between the UK and US, and the transfer of non-nuclear components to the UK’.
Healey neglects to point out that control and transmission of Trident nuclear weapons is indispensable to Britain’s ability to use them. Being able to deliver a nuclear bomb to its target, is every bit as essential as the nuclear warhead itself. As Richard Norton Taylor rightly points out, the MDA ‘gives the lie to persistent claims by the Ministry of Defence that Britain’s submarine-launched nuclear arsenal is operationally independent’.
In exchange for this, Britain provides the US with intelligence facilities. The Menwith Hill listening post in Yorkshire makes signals intelligence available to the US from across the northern hemisphere, intercepting both military and commercial electronic communications. Fylingdales radar station, also in Yorkshire, is one of three bases that comprise the USA’s Ballistic Missile Early Warning System. Information from these bases initiates a nuclear response from the US or Britain to a perceived threat.
Agreement breaches Britain’s international obligations
Healey’s memorandum claims the MDA ‘is consistent with the UK’s obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and commitments under the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty’. It does not provide for ‘the transfer of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, or control over such weapons or explosive devices’.
The Agreement facilitates the development of Britain’s nuclear weapon technology and supports building the Trident replacement. This is in direct contradiction to Britain’s legal obligation under the NPT and CTBT to the disarm. The NPT states that countries should undertake ‘to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to… nuclear disarmament’. Rather than working together to get rid of their nuclear weapons, the UK and US are collaborating on further advancing their respective nuclear arsenals.
A 2004 legal advice paper from Rabinder Singh QC and Professor Christine Chinkin concluded it is ‘strongly arguable that the renewal of the Mutual Defence Agreement is in breach of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty’. This is because it implies ‘continuation and indeed enhancement of the nuclear programme, not progress towards its discontinuation’.
What parliament can do
When the MDA was first introduced, parliament was powerless to oppose renewal. However, the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act of 2010, now provides an opportunity for parliament to oppose ratification. The House of Commons could block the MDA indefinitely if MPs so decided.
The government is not obliged to hold a debate or vote, however, the onus is on MPs. Before the MDA was renewed in 2014, Jeremy Corbyn MP tabled Early Day Motion 153 calling for a debate. It was supported by LibDem, SNP, Plaid Cymru, and Green, as well as Labour MPs.
The need for an open and transparent debate is crucial this year, before the Agreement becomes permanent. At the very least, Labour should be made to answer why they are they are contravening their legal obligation to work towards disarmament and instead renewing an agreement designed to maintain US and UK nuclear weapons production capabilities.
and why MPs should do it
The world is moving closer to war in Europe between nuclear armed antagonists. Extending the Mutual Defence Agreement indefinitely:
- is a further step in perpetuating Britain’s nuclear arsenal
- encourages nuclear proliferation, and
- makes Britain a key target in the event of war.
This change to the MDA should not be allowed to pass unnoticed. It’s time that MPs challenged the Agreement for Cooperation on the Uses of Atomic Energy for Mutual Defence Purposes.
Nuclear Weapons and the U.S. Presidential Elections
by beyondnuclearinternational, https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2024/09/29/nuclear-weapons-and-the-u-s-presidential-elections/
Whoever becomes the next US president, we’ll need to redouble our efforts for nuclear abolition, writes Jackie Cabasso
Nuclear weapons policy is not an issue in the presidential election. In fact, U.S. foreign policy, with the exception of some controversy over ongoing U.S. arms provisions to Israel, is barely an issue. Even though nuclear weapons are in the media more than they have been for many years—due mainly to the Russian government’s nuclear threats, and to some extent, North Korea’s, there is basically no public discussion or political debate about nuclear weapons in the United States.
The political situation in the U.S. is more volatile and uncertain than at any time in my life. Predicting who is going to be elected president in November is impossible. In the short weeks since President Biden withdrew from the campaign and threw his support behind his vice president Kamala Harris, there has been an extraordinary outpouring of enthusiasm for her campaign, especially among young people and people of color, and a massive surge of financial support from a wide range of constituencies. But at this point, the outcome of the presidential election is too close to call.
What I can say is that U.S. national security policy has been remarkably consistent in the post-World War II and post-Cold War eras. “Deterrence” – the threatened use of nuclear weapons – has been reaffirmed as the “cornerstone” of U.S. national security policy by every president, Republican or Democrat, since 1945, when President Harry Truman, a Democrat, oversaw the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
If Kamala Harris is elected in 2024, we can expect more of the same. As confirmed in an August 20, 2024, New York Times story that attracted some notice, an initiative is quietly underway by the Biden administration to beef up the U.S. nuclear arsenal. As reported by the Times, in March, President Biden approved a highly classified “Nuclear Employment Guidance” plan that seeks to prepare the United States for possible coordinated nuclear challenges from China, Russia and North Korea. This comes as the Pentagon believes China’s nuclear arsenal will rival the size and diversity of the U.S.’ and Russia’s over the next decade.
This plan was hinted at by Vipin Narang, a top Department of Defense nuclear policy official, who recently stated that, while current modernization plans — estimated to cost at least $350 billion over the next two decades — are “necessary,” they “may well be insufficient” to meet current and future threats. According to Narang, in the face of growing threats from Russia, China and North Korea, “We have begun exploring options to increase future launcher capacity or additional deployed warheads on the land, sea and air legs that could offer national leadership increased flexibility, if desired, and executed.”
According to the head of the National Nuclear Security Administration, Jill Hruby, the U.S. is launching a new nuclear arms race to catch up with and outsmart Russia and China. “We now have seven systems that should be developed and put into production by the mid-2030s. This program is not only a major modernization of all three components of the nuclear triad, but also adds new deterrence capabilities that do not currently exist,” she said.
Donald Trump’s likely nuclear policy is spelled out in a manifesto by Project 2025, a coalition of far-right groups led by the Heritage Foundation. Its 900-page book, “Mandate for Leadership,” is a blueprint for the most dramatic takeover and transformation of U.S. democracy in history and is widely seen as the playbook for a possible second Trump administration.
Trump himself, and a number of Republican members of Congress, have attempted to distance themselves from Project 2025, in some cases, claiming they haven’t even heard of it. This is not plausible. Speaking at a 2022 Heritage Foundation event, Donald Trump declared, “[T]his is a great group. And they’re going to lay the groundwork and detail plans for exactly what our movement will do and what your movement will do when the American people give us a colossal mandate to save America and that’s coming.”
Project 2025 proposes that a second Trump administration prioritize nuclear weapons programs over other security programs, accelerate the development and production of all nuclear weapons programs, increase funding for the development and production of new and modernized nuclear warheads, and prepare to test new nuclear weapons.
Separately, Robert O’Brien, an ex-adviser to former President Trump, has written that in order to counter China and Russia’s continued investments in their nuclear arsenals, the U.S. should resume nuclear testing.
While she did not mention nuclear weapons in her presidential nomination acceptance speech, Kamala Harris chillingly pledged, “As Commander-in-Chief, I will ensure America always has the strongest, most lethal fighting force in the world.” A Harris administration would undoubtedly be far more progressive on domestic issues, but whoever wins the U.S. presidency, our redoubled efforts to press for nuclear abolition will remain an urgent necessity.
Japan’s new Prime Minister calls for deployment of US nuclear weapons
MILITARNYI 29 Sept 24
Japan’s new Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba considers it necessary to discuss the prospect of deploying US nuclear weapons.
The deployment of nuclear weapons in the Asia-Pacific region should be discussed during the revision of the agreement on the status of the US contingent in Japan.
He also called for the creation of the country’s own nuclear arsenal to strengthen national security. According to Mr. Ishiba, the absence of a collective self-defense system similar to that of NATO in Asia creates a risk of new military conflicts in the region.
In particular, he expressed concern about China’s growing military activity around the Japanese islands…………………………….
The Asian version of NATO should specifically consider the joint use of nuclear weapons with the United States or the introduction of nuclear weapons into the region.
Officially, Shigeru Ishiba will become the new Prime Minister of Japan on October 1 after being approved by the parliament.
Since the 1990s, the politician has been actively involved in defense issues. He has consistently advocated for expanding the use of the Japan Self-Defense Forces and revising the pacifist provisions of the postwar Constitution………………..
In September, it was reported that the United States expressed an interest in deploying its MRC Typhon medium-range missile system with Tomahawk missiles to Japan…………………………….. more https://mil.in.ua/en/news/japan-s-new-prime-minister-calls-for-deployment-of-us-nuclear-weapons/
Ukraine army attacks nuclear plant substation: Russia
Canberra Times, September 30 2024
The management of the Russian-held Zaporizhzhia nuclear power station says Ukrainian forces have launched a new attack on a nearby electricity substation, destroying a transformer.
The Zaporizhzhia station, Europe’s largest with six reactors, was seized by Russian forces in the early days of Russia’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine.
Each side regularly accuses the other of attacking or plotting to attack the plant.
The plant’s management, writing on Telegram, said an artillery strike had hit the transformer at the “Raduga” substation in the town of Enerhodar in southeastern Ukraine.
It described the incident as “yet another terrorist act aimed at destabilising the situation in the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant’s satellite city”.
Also posted was a photograph showing smoke billowing from the top of a building.
It said power supplies to Enerhodar had not been interrupted.
The plant’s management accused the Ukrainian military on September 20 of attacking a second substation in Enerhodar.
The following day, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andriy Sybiha accused Russia of planning strikes on Ukrainian nuclear facilities before the winter.
He provided no detailed explanation.
Power lines to the Zaporizhzia plant have been cut on several occasions, increasing the chance of a blackout that could cause a nuclear accident.
The United Nations nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, has stationed monitors permanently at the plant and urged both sides to refrain from all attacks on it…………………………………………………………………………………. https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/8777883/ukraine-army-attacks-nuclear-plant-substation-russia/
Charities call for greater transparency over Sizewell C
Bird Guides, 29 Sept 24
Suffolk Wildlife Trust and the RSPB have called for greater transparency from Sizewell C in relation to its wildlife compensation schemes.
Earlier this month, developers of the nuclear power station announced a new partnership with the nature-restoration movement WildEast to promote the return of land to nature across the region.
In announcing the partnership, Sizewell C flagged up how it had pledged to return a large part of the land to nature during the construction of the new power station.
Not doing enough
Its involvement in leading on a wildlife habitat scheme at Wild Aldhurst NR in Leiston was mentioned, along with plans for wetland habitat creation at three nature reserves at Benhall, Halesworth and Pakenham.
Planning consent obligations mean that the developers of the new power station, situated just to the south of the RSPB’s flagship Minsmere reserve, must offset damage caused by the construction by creating new areas for nature.
However, in a joint statement with the RSPB, Suffolk Wildlife Trust – which has long held concerns – spoke of its “real disappointment” that Sizewell C had included the work at the three nature reserves, which is part of its legal duty to compensate for the impacts of the power station’s construction on wildlife.
Misrepresented
The charities said the projects were a “minimum requirement,” but were being “misrepresented” as examples of the developers going the extra mile for nature.
A spokesperson for the trust said: “People have a right to expect far better transparency from Sizewell C when it comes to its wildlife compensation. Sizewell C must do better to be clear about the compensation they are required to deliver by law, versus what is truly ‘additional’ for nature.”………………………………………… https://www.birdguides.com/news/charities-call-for-greater-transparency-over-sizewell-c/
The Illusion of a Solution: Killing Hassan Nasrallah
Australian Independent Media, September 29, 2024, by: Dr Binoy Kampmark,
The ongoing Israeli operation against Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed militia group so dominant in Lebanon, is following a standard pattern. Ignore base causes. Ignore context. Target leaders, and target personnel. See matters in conventional terms of civilisational warrior against barbarian despot. Israel, the valiant and bold, fighting the forces of darkness.
The entire blood woven tapestry of the Middle East offers uncomfortable explanations. The region has seen false political boundaries sketched and pronounced by foreign powers, fictional countries proclaimed, and entities brought into being on the pure interests of powers in Europe. These empires produced shoddy cartography in the name of the nation state and plundering self-interest, leaving aside the complexities of ethnic belonging and tribal dispositions. Tragically, such cartographic fictions tended to keep company with crime, dispossession, displacement, ethnic cleansing and enthusiastic hatreds.
……………………………………………………… The Israeli strategy in this latest phase was made all too apparent by the number of military commanders and high-ranking operatives in Hezbollah the IDF has targeted. Added to this the pager-walkie talkie killings as a prelude to a likely ground invasion of Lebanon, it was clear that Hezbollah’s leader, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, figured as an exemplary target.
……………………..Israeli officials have been prematurely thrilled. Like deluded scientists obsessed with eliminating a symptom, they ignore the disease with habitual obsession. “Most of the senior leaders of Hezbollah have been eliminated,” claimed a triumphant Israeli military spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Nadav Shoshani.
Defence Minister Yoav Gallant called the measure “the most significant strike since the founding of the State of Israel.” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated with simplicity that killing Nasrallah was necessary to “changing the balance of power in the region for years to come” and enable displaced Israelis to return to their homes in the north.
Various reports swallowed the Israeli narrative…………………………………………………………………………………..
Ibrahim Al-Marashi of California State University, San Marcos, summarises the efforts of Israel’s high-profile killing strategy as shortsighted feats of miscalculation. “History shows every single Israeli assassination of a high-profile political or military operator, even after being initially hailed as a game-changing victory, eventually led to the killed leader being replaced by someone more determined, adept and hawkish.” Another Nasrallah is bound to be in tow, with several others in incubation. https://theaimn.com/the-illusion-of-a-solution-killing-hassan-nasrallah/
After destroying Ukraine and Gaza, Biden seeks a destroyed nation trifecta in Lebanon
Walt Zlotow, West Suburban Peace Coalition, Glen Ellyn IL, 29 Sept 24
One might surmise that with 2 failed nations on his presidential resume, Joe Biden would cease nation destroying during his last 4 months in office.
But no, he has plunged pell-mell into full support of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s pager terrorist attack on Lebanese civilians and a massive bombing campaign also mainly killing civilians there.
Of course Biden pays lip service to peace, requesting Netanyahu immediately implement a 21 day ceasefire in his Lebanon bombing campaign. But Netanyahu essentially told Biden to go straight to Hell with his emphatic rejection.
“The report about a ceasefire is incorrect. This is an American-French proposal that the Prime Minister has not even responded to. The report about the purported directive to ease up on the fighting in the north is the opposite of the truth. The Prime Minister has directed the IDF to continue fighting with full force, according to the plan that was presented to him. The fighting in Gaza will also continue until all the objectives of the war have been achieved.”
But while once again trashing Biden’s latest peace proposal, Netanyahu was gobbling up another $8.7 billion in US military assistance to continue his devastating bombing of Lebanon along with his near total destruction of Gaza as a habitable land. Biden trotted out his Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin to defend US nation destroying with this doublespeak: “We’ve been committed from the very beginning to help Israel, provide the things that are necessary for them to be able to protect their sovereign territory and that hasn’t changed and won’t change in the future.”
Israel’s ‘sovereign territory’? Apparently Joe Biden believes Israeli sovereign territory includes all of Gaza, the West Bank and possibly even southern Lebanon as well.
The most plausible explanation of Israel’s self-destructive warfare in Gaza and Lebanon is expand the war to Iran which could draw in the US. Without direct US participation, Israel will fail to achieve any of its multi war objectives. If that occurs, President Biden may move beyond destroying 3 countries by adding Iran to his ignominious failed state hit list.
Say it ain’t so, Joe.
1 This Month
23-25 October – on Zoom – World BEYOND War’s annual global conferenc
Shut down the radiation-damaged Heysham nuclear reactors now
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
-
Archives
- October 2026 (199)
- September 2026 (339)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
