By John LaForge

The only winners in the war in Ukraine are weapons manufacturers. This is according to William Hartung and Julia Gledhill for the Quincy Institute in April, Paula Reisdorf writing for CorpWatch in May, Shlomo Ben-Ami for Project Syndicate in September, and Jeremy Scahill for the Intercept in December. The numbers prove it.

Between February and April this year, Hartung and Gledhill note, the US committed to giving approximately $2.6 billion in military aid to Ukraine, bringing the Biden administration spending to more than $3.2 billion and rising, according to Pentagon reports (“How Pentagon Contractors Are Cashing in on the Ukraine Crisis”).

“Weapons companies were already receiving a massive amount of money from the US government before the war in Ukraine began — some $768 billion in 2021. In [May], the US Congress approved a $40 billion spending package for the Ukraine war, with a big chunk going to arms companies,” Reisdorf wrote (“Weapons Makers Profit Handsomely off Ukraine War”). That chunk amounted to $10 billion, with the lion’s share going to Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Boeing, General Dynamics, and Northrop Grumman, according to Scahill’s piece, “The War Caucus Always Wins.”

BAE Corp. makes the M-777 howitzer. Lockheed Martin and Raytheon make Javelin anti-tank missiles; Raytheon makes Stinger anti-aircraft missiles. Northrop Grumman produces the RQ-4 Global Hawk aircraft which is making surveillance flights over Ukraine.

Scahill reports that some of the latest contracts include: $1.2 billion to Raytheon to produce six National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems in support of the efforts in Ukraine; $431 million for Lockheed to produce M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket System launchers to replenish those sent to Kyiv; and a separate $521 million for Lockheed to replace Guided Multiple Launch Rocket Systems going to Ukraine.

Reisdorf reports that by May Northrop Grumman’s stocks were up by about 16 percent, and shares of Lockheed Martin and Raytheon Technologies had increased by 28 and 20 percent respectively by March.

The Wall St. Journal updated the profiteering news November 24, noting that Lockheed shares are up 36 percent since the start of the year, General Dynamics’ are up 22 percent, and Raytheon jumped 12 percent.

Kristen Bayes, a spokesperson for the Campaign Against the Arms Trade in London told Sky News the transfer of weapons to Ukraine is “not problem-free,” and warned, “You might think you’re handing over weapons to people you know and like, but then they get sold on to people you don’t.” Even US Defense Sec. Lloyd Austin, has “acknowledged that some weapons given to Ukraine have also been ending up in the hands of Russians,” Bayes said.

By John LaForge

Is it possible that all the press about the highly elevated the risk of nuclear weapons being detonated in Ukraine is a lot of smoke? US political and military leaders have downplayed the risk of nuclear attacks in Ukraine many times.

The United States, Russia, France, China, and the United Kingdom possess most of the world’s nuclear weapons. Last January 3rd, these five states jointly declared, “We affirm that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.”

Consequently the five governments should be racing to sign and ratify the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons and to redirect the hundreds of billions of dollars being spent on nuclearism after defunding their vast nuclear weapons infrastructures.

Instead, most are spending enormous sums on expanding their nuclear arsenals, and publicly announcing plans for the “first use” of the devices under certain conditions. The spending and strategies flatly contradict their public pledge that nuclear weapons can’t win anything and must never be used.

Yet it is possible that the military and political authorities in control of nuclear weapons know they must not explode them. It could be that nuclear attack planners understand that the effects of such detonations boomerang and bite back, poisoning and killing their own forces, contaminating the sought-after territories and that of neutral states.

The White House, the Pentagon and other experts have repeatedly assured the world they don’t think nuclear attacks are likely.

November 30:“Why Zelensky thinks Putin won’t use nukes on Ukraine” (Axios)

November 2: “US sees no indications Russia readying nuclear weapons, White House says.” (Reuters)

October 24: “No indication Russia has decided to use nuclear weapon in Ukraine, says senior US official.” (The Guardian & Financial Times)

October 9: “White House Sees No Indication Russia Is Preparing Nuclear Attack After Biden’s ‘Armageddon’ Warning.” (Forbes)
October 9: “…the White House emphasized on Friday that the United States has seen no signs that Russia is gearing up to use nuclear weapons.” (New York Times)

October 9: “Pentagon spokesperson tamps down concerns over nuclear ‘Armageddon.’” (The Guardian)

October 7: “Pentagon: No sign Putin is planning to use nukes after Biden’s ‘Armageddon’ comment.” (Politico)

Sept. 30: “US has not seen acts indicating Russia contemplating nuclear attack.” (Reuters)

Sept. 28:“US believes it’s unlikely Putin will use a nuclear weapon but threat has ‘elevated.’” (CNN)

Sept. 24: “The US says Russia isn’t preparing to use nuclear weapons, yet.” (New York Times)

Sept. 16: “I don’t see Putin using nuclear weapons” [says] British military strategist Sir Lawrence Freedman. (Euromaidan Press)

When asked about it on October 28, 2022 before the Valdai Discussion Club in Moscow, even Russian President Vladimir Putin himself made clear that it’s useless to detonate nuclear weapons in Ukraine. Putin answered, “There is no point in that, neither political, nor military.”

The truly terrifying threat from nuclear weapons in the Ukraine war is the risk of an accidental or unintentional detonation. Nearby nuclear weapons are in the hands of Russia, France, Britain, and the United States, which deploy them on submarines, bombers, fighter jets and in “nuclear sharing” with NATO members Germany, Holland, Belgium, Italy, and Turkey — which station US B61 H-bombs at six separate bases. Computer glitches, false alarms, mistakes identifying shooters (as happened November 15 when Ukraine blamed Russia in error for a blast caused by one its own air-defense missiles striking Poland), or panicked commanders misreading communications, could all lead to catastrophe; a good reason to demand universal denuclearization.

The other truly consequential nuclear threats in Ukraine stem from the country’s 15 operational nuclear power reactors, those sitting-duck time bombs in this first-ever reactors-in-a-war zone conflict. These radiation grenades with their pins ready to be pulled should spark global anti-nuclear militancy — as did the Chernobyl reactor catastrophe in the same place 36 years ago.

— A version of this opinion ran at Counterpunch.org on November 21, and at L.A. Progressive December 2, 2022

By John LaForge

According to a recent news release from “ResearchandMarkets.com,” worldwide sales of nuclear bombs and missiles is a growth market expanding by leaps and bounds. The report, “Nuclear Bombs and Missiles Market,” claims the field was worth $72.64 billion in 2020, and will reach $126.34 billion by 2030, “growing at a compound annual growth rate of 5.4%.” While the United States “dominated the global nuclear bombs and missiles market share in 2020,” this year the Asia-Pacific dominates, followed by Europe, North America and Latin America, Middle East and Africa. The report reads like the profiteers’ version of recent research by Don’t Bank on the Bomb, a project of PAX in The Netherlands that tracks nuclear weapons funding.
Sounding upbeat, the report says donations to “think tanks” from the weapons industry result in white papers about the urgent need for new weapons. It describes the corruption without irony: “Think tanks are research and analytical bodies that demonstrate future needs and reasons to have nuclear arsenals. … Twelve think tanks across the globe have disclosed funding of [$]5.5 million to [$]10.2 million in 2020 from corporate giants who are manufacturing nuclear weapons.” The cynicism extends to the current war in Ukraine, as the report shamelessly says: “Factors such as the rise in geopolitical conflicts … are expected to support the nuclear bombs and missiles market growth.” “Key market players” named in the document are familiar: Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, Boeing, Airbus, and BAE. — PR Newswire, News from Research and Markets, Sept. 20, 2022

Economic Times, Sept. 12, 2022