Nukewatch

Working for a nuclear-free future since 1979

  • Issues
    • Direct Action
    • Environmental Justice
    • Nuclear Power
      • Chernobyl
      • Fukushima
    • Nuclear Weapons
    • On The Bright Side
    • Radiation Exposure
    • Radioactive Waste
    • Renewable Energy
    • Uranium Mining
    • US Bombs Out of Germany
  • Quarterly Newsletter
    • Quarterly Newsletter
    • Newsletter Archives
  • Resources
    • Nuclear Heartland Book
    • Fact Sheets
    • Reports, Studies & Publications
      • The New Nuclear Weapons: $1.74 Trillion for H-bomb Profiteers and Fake Cleanups
      • Nuclear Power: Dead In the Water It Poisoned
      • Thorium Fuel’s Advantages as Mythical as Thor
      • Greenpeace on Fukushima 2016
      • Drinking Water at Risk: Toxic Military Wastes Haunt Lake Superior
    • Nukewatch in the News
    • Links
    • Videos
  • About
    • About Nukewatch
    • Contact Us
  • Get Involved
    • Action Alerts!
    • Calendar
  • Donate

July 24, 2022 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Deterrencelessness: Nuclear Threats Neither Credible Nor Viable

US plans to produce about 500 new tactical nuclear bombs - experts - ВПК.name

The United States intends to produce at least 500 of these new B61-12 thermonuclear gravity bombs, many of which are scheduled to be deploy at air bases in Belgium, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, and Turkey.
by John LaForge
Nukewatch Quarterly Fall 2022
LA Progressive, July 26, 2020

Threatening to make attacks with nuclear weapons is known as “deterrence” when the United States does it, but it’s called madness, blackmail, or “terrorism” if Russia, China, or North Korea does.

U.S. Air Force thermonuclear weapons, about 100-to-150 of them known as B61s, are stationed at two NATO bases in Italy, and at one NATO base each in Belgium, The Netherlands, Germany, and Turkey. These 170-kiloton H-bombs — 11 times the force of the Hiroshima bomb — are always described euphemistically as “theater” nuclear weapons, defensive ones that are a “deterrent” to aggression.

Of course, Russian aggression in Ukraine has shown nuclear “deterrence” to be an expensive, destabilizing, terroristic fraud. That our high, holy, sacrosanct, and unquestionable arsenal of “deterrence” did not deter Russia on February 24, 2022 is dreadfully, painfully, catastrophically obvious. Yet the nakedness of the deterrent-less Emperor has hardly been acknowledged.

In the ghastly maw of ongoing war in Ukraine, the needless provocation of stationing U.S. thermonuclear B61 H-bombs at six NATO base’s facing Russia could hardly be more frightening. Then, as if to scream “fire” in the crowded auditorium, NATO’s ministers on June 30 issued their latest “Strategic Concept,” a public relations version of the alliance’s ongoing threat to wage indiscriminate, uncontrollable, and poisonous mass destruction using U.S., French and British nuclear warheads.

The Strategic Concept’s soothing, cotton candy version of NATO’s open embrace of nuclear terrorism is this: “NATO will take all necessary steps to ensure the credibility, effectiveness, safety and security of the nuclear deterrent mission.”

At the moment however, the B61 hydrogen bombs stationed at Germany’s Büchel air base cannot credibly be a part of the “mission” since they can’t be attached to Germany’s Tornado fighter jets. This is because the base’s runway is being rebuilt. Until 2026, Büchel’s 33rd Fighter-Bomber Wing of Tornado jets are based at the nearby Nörvenich air base.

For Kathrin Vogler, a Left Party member of the German Parliament in 2021, this is a chance to denuclearize Germany. The politician told the daily paper Rhein-Zeitung last year that “From June 2022 to February 2026, flight operations at Büchel Air Base will be largely discontinued and transferred to the Nörvenich military airfield…. This was confirmed to us by the German government in our minor inquiry. As far as we know, the 20 or so nuclear bombs stored at Büchel will remain there.”

“This means that German nuclear sharing will effectively not take place for four years from 2022,” Volger told the paper.

“This exposes the argumentation of the German government, which repeatedly claims that nuclear sharing is an important part of NATO’s deterrence strategy. In fact, maintaining it and thus also the Büchel nuclear weapons site is pure symbolic politics, albeit with high risks for the population. Therefore: The suspension of nuclear sharing must become a phase-out, [and] now would be a good opportunity to do so,” Volger said last year.

Proven useless, nuclear weapons can now be discarded

The June 30 NATO “concept” says, “The fundamental purpose of NATO’s nuclear capability is to preserve peace, prevent coercion and deter aggression.”

As of February 24, 2022, NATO’s nuclear weapons arsenal’s “fundamental purpose” has been utterly delegitimized, politically pulverized, and militarily reduced to ashes. The alliance’s nuclear arsenal can finally be removed without any loss of face, much less any loss of security.

NATO’s latest “concept” accidentally acknowledges the uselessness of retaining nuclear weapons in its recognition that, “The strategic nuclear forces of the Alliance, particularly those of the United States, are the supreme guarantee of the security of the Alliance.”

This is the terrible farce of nuclearism. If nuclear weapon threats guaranteed any security at all, none of the tens of billions of Euro-dollars’ worth of military training, weapons, mercenaries, cyber warfare, or intelligence assistance that NATO partners and Russia are now pouring into Ukraine would be necessary.

Nuclear-armed alliances are a thing of the past which must be and now can be abolished. Under the auspices of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, along with the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons, international law provides a pathway, training wheels, guide rails and a motorcade — courtesy of the great majority of the world’s governments — to a world where conflict and even wars don’t endanger whole civilizations and the biological integrity of life on earth.

 

 

Filed Under: B61 Bombs in Europe, Military Spending, Nuclear Weapons, US Bombs Out of Germany, War, Weekly Column

July 17, 2022 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

“No One is Paying Attention to Your Protests”

On the 77th anniversary of the first atomic bomb test and the 43rd anniversary of the catastrophic Church Rock, New Mexico uranium mine waste spill, four US citizens  (Susan Crane, Dennis DuVall, John LaForge, Brian Terrell) attempted to blockade the main gate at nuclear weapons base Buchel in west-central Germany.

BÜCHEL, Germany

This pointed insult was shouted without a trace of irony through a chain-link fence toward a group of nuclear weapons opponents last Tuesday by a military guard equipped with binoculars and wearing a camera strapped around his neck.

The protest group was at the perimeter of Büchel Air Force Base in west-central Germany on July 12, the 205th anniversary of the birth of Henry David Thoreau — the naturalist and theorist of conscientious defiance of illegitimate authority.

It’s safe to say no one was paying much attention to Thoreau either when he went to jail in July 1846 rather than pay poll taxes that were going to support the expansion of slavery into the western United States and President James Polk’s war on Mexico. It was only later that attention was paid, as Thoreau’s essay “On Resistance to Civil Government” would become a world literary classic regarding principled individual refusal to obey orders in violation of one’s personal integrity. After the Concord, Mass. constable demanded he pay his back taxes, Thoreau explained, “I cannot for an instant recognize … as my government [that] which is the slave’s government also.”

None of the anti-war activists went to jail last Tuesday for picnicking near the Büchel NATO base, but a colleague, Frits ter Kuile, of the Amsterdam Catholic Worker, had just begun a 30-day sentence in Germany’s Wittlich prison, for refusing to pay fines imposed for protests at the same base. Frits is the first non-German citizen jailed in the 26-year-long campaign of civil resistance at the controversial site, where 15-to-20 U.S. hydrogen bombs, known as B61s, are stationed. The old-fashioned, 170-kiloton gravity bombs are called “theatre” nuclear weapons war planners although the terrorism and provocation they produce in Moscow, 1,500 miles east, are anything but theatrical. The Hiroshima bomb that turned 140,000 people to powder and ash was ten times smaller an explosive, 15 kilotons.

German Air Force Tornado fighter jets regularly rehearse nuclear weapons attacks on Russia using weighted replicas of these U.S. nuclear weapons. The exercises, 95 of them in 2021 alone, have names like Cold Response, Defender-Europe 21, Anaconda, Locked Shields, Dragon Ride, Atlantic Resolve, Steadfast Noon, and Iron Wolf. Many of the military practices take place in the former Soviet Bloc countries Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland. Why Russia, invaded from the West three times in the last century, would be alarmed at these overt demonstrations of aggressive hostility is never considered by our gung-ho commercial media.

Another nuclear weapons resister, Ria Makien, a Quaker from the state of North Rhine-Westphalia, recently finished a 30-day sentence in a women’s prison for a similar action at the base. Ria’s protest and jail-going has been noticed, as her example of radical nonviolence in opposition to suicidal weapons is recognized across Germany.

Objections to the stationing and threatening posture of U.S. nuclear weapons in Germany (and four other European partners) are based on legal principles and simple common sense which stands aghast at NATO’s eastern expansion and nuclear war games. The 1970 Nonproliferation Treaty prohibits the United States, Germany, and other states parties from transferring nuclear weapons to or receiving them from another NPT state. This makes NATO’s quaintly named “nuclear sharing” an ongoing criminal violation of binding international law. The destabilizing deployments, rehearsals, and threatened use of the U.S. B61s — rationalized in NATO’s newly issued “Strategic Concept” — cannot be distinguished from Russia’s recent nuclear threat-mongering, except in terms of nuance. “NATO’s … posture is based on an appropriate mix of nuclear … capabilities”, the Concept states.

“NATO’s nuclear deterrence posture relies on the United States’ nuclear weapons forward-deployed in Europe ….” And “NATO will … ensure the credibility … of the nuclear deterrent mission.”

NATO’s cold-blooded “strategic” preparation for meaningless, genocidal atomic violence is cosmetically presented in defensive, sanctimonious, antiseptic language depicting hydrogen bombs as reasonable, measured, protective security blankets. This is a childishly naïve mindset that the wargamers promote but do not share.

Realists like Vicki Elson of NuclearBan.US, who spoke June 21 at a Washington, DC press conference promoting their abolition, described them honestly: they are “climate wrecking, indiscriminate weapons of mass extinction that don’t keep us secure but exacerbate the plunge toward environmental collapse, even without war.” At least Elson is paying attention.

–This column  appeared at CounterPunch July 15, 16, 17, 2022

 

Filed Under: B61 Bombs in Europe, Direct Action, Environment, Nuclear Weapons, Photo Gallery, US Bombs Out of Germany, War, Weekly Column

June 21, 2022 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Get in Line: Investigate U.S. Atrocities First

Nukewatch Quarterly Summer 2022
By John LaForge

The global outpouring of legitimate, agonized grief for civilian victims of Russia’s illegal war on Ukraine has brought countless calls for war crimes charges against the perpetrators. Before Russia’s criminal outrages are taken to the International Criminal Court, there are scores of alleged U.S. atrocities that must be investigated.

The U.S. military has a long record of apparently criminal conduct committed during its military assaults and unprovoked wars of aggression or occupation in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Pakistan, Yugoslavia, Somalia, and elsewhere. Like Russia in Ukraine, U.S. crimes include bombing hospitals, desecrating corpses, torturing and executing prisoners, using banned cluster bombs, and willfully attacking civilians and civilian objects.

A still from a video of smiling U.S. Marines urinating on dead Taliban fighters, from Jan. 16, 2013. Staff Sgt. Edward Deptola admitted multiple charges at a court martial, including desecrating remains. Reuters photo.

But unlike today’s wall-to-wall news coverage of Russia’s every move in Ukraine, the U.S. media mostly withdrew from and stopped reporting on U.S. military occupations as the wars dragged on, and generally chose not to present many photos or film of either U.S. war dead or alleged U.S. crimes. Like news censorship inside Russia, the U.S. media’s blind eye helped maintain public support for U.S. wars-of-choice. Generalized calls to “support our troops” overwhelmed most reports of unlawful, excessive, or criminal acts by officers or soldiers. Eddie Gallagher, the Navy SEAL platoon chief who was convicted of posing for a photo with the corpse of the 17-year-old detainee who other SEALs testified Gallagher had stabbed to death, was freed from his sentence by Donald Trump.

Some of the most notorious and well-documented U.S. war crimes have involved torturing prisoners. “It is indisputable that the United States engaged in the practice of torture,” concluded a panel of experts for the Constitution Project in 2013. The group’s 577-page report found that President George W. Bush and other administration officials bore responsibility for the crimes. (“U.S. Practiced Torture After 9/11, Nonpartisan Review Concludes,” New York Times, April 16, 2013)

Hardly less criminal, on Feb. 12, 2010, in an atrocity kept secret for a month, U.S. Special Forces in Afghanistan killed a teenage girl, a pregnant mother of 10, a pregnant mother of six, a police officer, and his brother, and were accused of trying to cover up the killings by digging bullets out of the victims’ bodies, washing the wounds with alcohol, and lying to superior officers. (“U.S. Admits Role in February Killing of Afghan Women,” New York Times, Apr. 4, 2010)

U.S. jets bombed and rocketed an allied Pakistani military base for two hours Nov. 26, 2011, killing 26 members of a force called the Frontier Corps and wounding dozens more. (“NATO Strikes Kill Pakistani Forces, Raising Tensions,” New York Times, Nov. 27, 2011.)

During the war in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, U.S. pilots deliberately bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade May 7, 1999, using five GPS-guided bombs. President Bill Clinton, CIA Director George Tenet, and Defense Secretary William Cohen all claimed it was a mistake. (“NATO bombed Chinese deliberately; NATO hit embassy on purpose,” Guardian Oct. 16, 1999).

On April 23, 1999, the U.S. rocketed the central state broadcasting offices in Belgrade, destroying the building, killing 16 civilian employees, and wounding 16. Human rights groups around the world said the attack was a war crime.[1]

The United States used cluster bombs widely in its wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and the former Yugoslavia, according to reports by Human Rights Watch, The Lancet, and the UN International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.[2] In one case, U.S.-led NATO forces attacked the main hospital complex in Nis, Serbia with cluster bombs May 7, 1999, killing three outside the hospital, three on the operating table, and nine at an adjoining market. (“Serbs Say 15 are Killed at Hospital and Market,” New York Times, May 8, 1999)

Even the pro-war editorial board of the New York Times, while boasting “This page has been supportive of the war in Afghanistan since it began,” acknowledged on Feb. 4, 2019, that, “Tens of thousands of Afghan civilians have been killed, maimed and traumatized. Millions of people are internally displaced or are refugees in Iran and Pakistan.”

“These things happen in war,” Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said casually referring to the now infamous “methodical” execution-style massacre of 24 men, women, and children in Haditha, Iraq, Nov. 19, 2006. Yes, the murder of innocents occurs in war, inevitably, every time, without exception, which is why anti-war activists are so keen to prevent it, condemn it, and to end it once it’s been started.

As the late Yale psychiatrist and author Robert Lifton has shown, all wars are “atrocity producing situations,” and the series of headlines that follows, edited for space, illustrates arguably criminal U.S. military conduct in recent wars and can provide prosecutors in The Hague a basis for launching investigations.

Headlines sketch U.S. war crime spree

“How the U.S. Hid an Airstrike That Killed Dozens of Civilians in Syria,” New York Times, Nov. 13, 2021

“Lethal U.S. Airstrike on Afghan Drug Labs is Disputed: Bombs Killed Civilian Workers, not Taliban, a UN Report Says,” New York Times, Oct. 10, 2019

“U.S. Drone Kills 30 Civilians, Afghans Say; Target Was ISIS,” New York Times, Sep. 20, 2019, p. A6

“U.S. Airstrikes and Raids Killed 120 Civilians in 2018, Pentagon Says,” New York Times, May 3, 2019

“U.S. and Afghan Forces Killed More Civilians in Early 2019 than Taliban did, U.N. Finds,” New York Times, Apr. 25, 2019

“Claiming Atrocities by Leader, SEALS Were Told to ‘Let It Go’,” New York Times, Apr. 24, 2019, p. A1

“For Afghan Civilians, 2018 Was the Deadliest in a Decade” (“Among the dead last year were 927 children”), New York Times, Feb. 25, 2019

“U.S. Airstrikes Said to Kill at Least 10 Afghan Civilians,” New York Times, Feb. 11, 2019

“U.S. Airstrikes and Raids Killed 120 Civilians in 2018,” Pentagon Says, New York Times, May 3, 2019

“American Airstrikes Kill Civilians, Including Children, Afghans Charge,” New York Times, Jan. 26, 2019

“Civilians Killed in U.S.-Afghan Operation,” New York Times, Nov. 29, 2018

“Decorated Navy SEAL Is Accused of War Crimes in Iraq,” New York Times, Nov. 15, 2018

“Report: 3,301 Civilians Killed in U.S.-led Strikes in Syria Since 2014,” Duluth NewsTribune, Sep. 24, 2018
“Study: U.S. Killed 500 Civilians,” (“Pentagon may be grossly undercounting”), Minneapolis StarTribune, June 3, 2018

“More Afghan Civilians are Victims of Targeted Attacks, U.N. Says,” New York Times, Feb. 16, 2018

“Afghan Pedophiles Get Pass from U.S. Military, Report Says,” New York Times, January 24, 2018

“American Airstrikes in Afghanistan Stir Debate Over Who Was Killed,” New York Times, Nov. 11, 2017

“U.S. Airstrikes Kill at Least 13 Civilians,” Minneapolis StarTribune, Nov. 5, 2017

“Airstrike Kills at Least 25 at Street Market in Yemen,” New York Times, Nov. 2, 2017

“Civilian Deaths From U.S.-led Strikes on ISIS Surge Under Trump Administration” (“over 3,800”), Guardian, June 6, 2017

“3 Children Among Dead in a Raid in Somalia,” New York Times, Aug. 26, 2017

“Afghans Say U.S. Strike Hit Civilians,” New York Times, Aug. 12, 2017

“Civilian Deaths a Windfall for Militants’ Propaganda,” AP/Minneapolis StarTribune, Apr. 2, 2017

“U.S. Strike Reportedly Killed 30 Syrians,” New York Times & Minneapolis StarTribune, March 23, 2017

“U.S. Military Says Fight with Taliban Killed 33 Civilians,” Minneapolis StarTribune, Jan. 13, 2017

“U.S.-led Strikes in Iraq, Syria Have Killed at Least 188 Civilians, Military Says,” Duluth NewsTribune, Jan. 3, 2017

“U.S. Admits its Airstrikes Likely Killed Afghan Civilians,” Minneapolis StarTribune, Nov. 6, 2016

“U.S. Drones Hit Civilians, UN Says,” New York Times, Sep. 30, 2016

“Residents Say U.S. Strike Killed Civilians,” Wall Street Journal, Sep. 29, 2016

“Pentagon: Errors Led to Hospital Strike,” (“which killed 42 people”), Minneapolis StarTribune, May 1, 2016

“Airstrike on Afghan Hospital Stirs Fury,” Minneapolis StarTribune; & “19 Die in Apparent U.S. Airstrike on Afghan Hospital,” Los Angeles Times, Oct. 4, 2015

“U.S. Practiced Torture After 9/11, Nonpartisan Review Concludes,” New York Times, Apr. 16, 2013

“U.S. Marine Pleads Guilty to Urinating on Corpse of Taliban Fighter in Afghanistan,” Guardian, Jan. 16, 2013

“U.S. Troops Posed with Body Parts of Afghan Bombers,” Los Angeles Times, Apr. 18, 2012

“Drones at Issue… Raids Disrupt Militants, but Civilian Deaths Stir Outrage,” New York Times, Mar. 18, 2012

“G.I. Kills 16 Afghans, Including 9 Children in Attacks on Homes,” New York Times, Mar. 12, 2012

“Commission Alleges U.S. Detainee Abuse,” Minneapolis StarTribune, Jan. 8, 2012

“American Soldier Is Convicted of Killing Afghan Civilians for Sport,” New York Times, Nov. 11, 2011

“G.I. Killed Afghan Journalist, NATO Says,” New York Times, Sep. 9, 2011

“Cable Implicates Americans in Deaths of Iraqi Civilians,” New York Times, Sep. 2, 2011

“Civilians Die in a Raid by Americans and Iraqis,” New York Times, Aug. 7, 2011

“Libya Effort Is Called Violation of War Act,” New York Times, May 26, 2011

“Raid on Wrong House Kills Afghan Girl, 12,” New York Times, May 12, 2011

“Photos of Atrocities Seen as Threat to Afghan Relations,” St. Paul Pioneer Press, March 22, 2011

“Missiles Kill 26 in Pakistan” (“most of them civilians”), New York Times, March 18, 2011

“Afghans Say Attack Killed 52 Civilians; NATO Differs,” New York Times, July 27, 2010

“Afghans Die in Bombing, as Toll Rises for Civilians,” New York Times, May 3, 2010

“Marines Used ‘Excessive Force’ in Afghan Civilian Deaths,” New York Times, Apr. 14, 2007

“Sergeant Tells of Plot to Kill Iraqi Detainees,” New York Times, July 28, 2006, p. A8

“U.S.-led Raid Kills Nine at House,” Omaha World Herald, June 13, 2006

“The Bombing Killed at Least 35 Civilians…” when U.S. warplanes struck the village of Tolokan, Aghanistan, New York Times, June 11, 2006

“Murtha Says Probe Has Found Marines Killed Innocent Civilians,” Omaha World Herald, May 19, 2006

***

On Sep. 16, 2004, a BBC correspondent questioned U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan about the unprovoked U.S. bombardment and invasion of Iraq asking, “It was illegal?” Annan answered, “Yes. I have indicated it is not in conformity with the U.N. Charter. From our point of view and from the Charter point of view, it was illegal.” Likewise, Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah said March 28, 2007, “In the beloved Iraq, the bloodshed is continuing under an illegal foreign occupation….”

The 1946 Nuremberg Judgment comes to mind, especially as it was drafted by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson and enforced by U.S.-led allies: “The charges in the indictment that the defendants planned and waged aggressive wars are charges of the utmost gravity. War is essentially an evil thing. Its consequences are not confined to the belligerent states alone, but affect the whole world.”
_______________
[1] Amnesty International, “NATO/Federal Republic of Yugoslavia: ‘Collateral damage’ or Unlawful Killings? Violations of the Laws of War by NATO During Operation Allied Force,” June 6, 2000, p. 44.

[2] Human Rights Watch, “U.S. Using Cluster Munitions in Iraq,” Apr. 1, 2003; The Lancet, “Pressure Groups Condemn U.S. Use of Cluster Bombs in Afghanistan”, Nov. 3, 2001; UN International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, “Final Report to the Prosecutor by the Committee Established to Review the NATO Bombing Campaign Against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia,” (undated), paragraph 27.

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter, Uncategorized, War

June 21, 2022 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

U.S. Still Buying Russian Uranium in Spite of War on Ukraine

Nukewatch Quarterly Summer 2022
By Bob Mayberry

 

Uranium Pellets, wikimedia.org

 

It’s ironic to contemplate, devastating to realize, that while the U.S. has banned Russian oil, coal, and gas imports, we continue to buy uranium for our nuclear reactors from Moscow. How much are we spending on reactor fuel? Estimates differ wildly. Senator John Barrasso, R-Wyo., claims the U.S. is “underwriting Putin’s war machine” to the tune of $100 million a month. But Sen. Barrasso has reason to exaggerate since uranium mining revenues in his state might increase following a ban on Russian imports.

The Washington Post reported that International Trade Commission figures for 2016 show the U.S. spending just over $1 billion on Russian uranium, but that figure shrank to $568 million in 2020. However, even those figures aren’t certain. Post reporter Glenn Kessler located a Senate Energy Committee webpage showing sales to the U.S. from Rosatom, Russia’s state-owned nuclear power company, totaled $784 million in 2020.

Clearly the U.S. is spending between five hundred million and a billion dollars annually on Russian uranium. Interestingly, Rosatom was founded by Vladimir Putin in 2007. And, according to The Verge, it now produces 20% of the world’s reactor fuel.

According to Reuters, the U.S. relies on Russia, and its allies Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, for roughly half of the uranium used to fuel our 93 reactors. Those units are responsible for nearly 20% of U.S. electricity. The Biden administration exempted uranium from the bans on Russian imports in part to keep electricity prices low.

Meanwhile, Sen. Barrasso and others are lobbying to add uranium to the Russian import ban, while simultaneously trying to kick-start uranium mining in states like Wyoming, Utah, Texas and Arizona, where large reserves are found. Uranium mining was largely abandoned in the U.S. due to the dangers of radioactive pollution. Thousands of abandoned uranium mines on the Navajo Reservation in Arizona have led to high levels of radioactive metals in the bodies of the women living on the reservation, according to a recent report from the University of New Mexico’s Navajo Birth Cohort Study.

While Sen. Barrasso and others call for renewed uranium mining, Native Americans demand long-overdue cleanup of abandoned mines, mills, and mountains of tailings scattered across the western U.S. that continue to emit dangerous radiation and contaminate water on Indigenous lands.

Transitioning to renewable energy would avoid uranium imports and cut toxic and radioactive pollution.

—Bob Mayberry is a retired English and Theatre Professor at Cal State University-Channel Islands.

Calma, Justine, “The US Can’t Seem to Quit Russian Uranium,” The Verge, 31 March 2022; Daniel, Will, “The U.S. is Miles Away from True Energy Independence, and It’s Not Because of Oil,” Fortune, 29 March 2022; Kessler, Glenn, “Does Russia Sell Nearly $1 Billion in Uranium to the U.S. a Year?,” Washington Post, 20 April 2022;  Navajo Birth Cohort Study, University of New Mexico College of Pharmacy

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter, Uncategorized, Uranium Mining, War

June 21, 2022 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Ukraine in the Age of Self-Delusion

The U.S. & Russia, faded relics of the Cold War, unable to accept their terminal decline, launch futile & self-defeating wars to reclaim their lost imperial power.

Nukewatch Quarterly  Summer 2022
By Chris Hedges

 

Blinded by what Barbara Tuchman calls “the bellicose frivolity of senile empires,” we are marching ominously towards war with Russia. How else might we explain Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin’s public declaration that the U.S. goal is to “weaken Russia” and Joe Biden’s request for another $33 billion in “emergency” military and economic aid (half of what Russia spent on its military in 2021) for Ukraine?

The same cabal of generals and politicians that drained the state of trillions of dollars in the debacles in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Somalia and learned nothing from the nightmare of Vietnam, revel in the illusion of their omnipotence. They have no interest in a diplomatic solution. There are billions in profits to be made in arms sales. There is political posturing to be done. There are generals itching to pull the trigger. Why have all these high-priced and technologically advanced weapons systems if you can’t use them? Why not show the world this time around that the U.S. still dominates the globe?

The masters of war require an enemy. When an enemy cannot be found, as George Orwell understood in Nineteen Eighty-Four, an enemy is manufactured. That enemy can become an ally overnight. We allied ourselves with Iran in the Middle East to fight the Taliban and later the Caliphate, before instantly reinstating Iran as the incarnation of evil. The enemy is not about logic or geopolitical necessity. It is about stoking the fear and hatred that fuel perpetual war.

In 1989, I covered the revolutions that toppled the communist dictatorships in Central and Eastern Europe. President Mikhail Gorbachev, like his successor Boris Yeltsin and like Vladimir Putin in the early stages of his rule, hoped to integrate Russia into the western alliance. But the war industry places profits before national defense. It needed an antagonistic Russia to push the expansion of NATO beyond the borders of a unified Germany in violation of a promise made to Moscow. There were billions of dollars to be made from a Russian enemy, as there are billions more to be made from the proxy war in Ukraine. There would be no “peace dividend” at the end of the Cold War. The war industry was determined to continue to bleed the U.S. dry and amass its obscene profits. They provoked and antagonized Russia until Russia filled its preordained role.

The humiliating withdrawal from Afghanistan and two decades of military disasters in the Middle East have magically been atoned for in Ukraine, although we have yet to place any troops on Ukrainian soil. We have taken ownership of the Ukrainians, as we did with the mujahideen we funded to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan.

“For the first time in decades, an American president is showing that he, and only he, can lead the free world,” wrote George Packer, one of the most ardent cheerleaders for the invasion of Iraq, in The Atlantic.

“NATO has been revitalized, the United States has reclaimed a mantle of leadership that some feared had vanished in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the European Union has found a unity and purpose that eluded it for most of its existence,” The New York Times crowed.

Gen. Mark A. Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, The New York Times wrote, carries around a map of Ukraine, marked with tactical details. “With aides, he drills down for details about the location and combat readiness of specific Russian ground units and ship movements,” the paper noted.

Former NATO commander Richard Shirreff told BBC Radio 4’s “Today” program the West should prepare to fight Russia.

“The worst case is war with Russia,” he said. “By gearing itself up for the worst case, it is most likely to deter Putin because ultimately Putin respects strength.”

War is a drug. It cripples your body. It fogs your brain. It reduces you to poverty. But each new hit sends you back to the euphoric heights where you began.

More weapons mean more fighting. More fighting means more death and destruction. More death and destruction mean more antagonization of Moscow. More antagonization of Moscow means we circle closer and closer to open warfare with Russia. Following Ukraine’s strikes on Russian military and energy facilities, Moscow threatened to attack incoming NATO weapons shipments. Reeling from sanctions, Moscow halted gas supplies to two European countries. It warned that the risk of a nuclear war is very “real” and that any direct foreign intervention in Ukraine would provoke a “lightning fast” response. As Finland and Sweden prepare to join NATO, Russia has called further expansion of NATO another dangerous act of provocation, which of course it is. There is mounting pressure for a no-fly zone, a move that would trigger direct confrontation between Russia and NATO, as would a Russian attack on a NATO arms convoy in a Ukrainian neighbor country. Putin’s revanchism is matched by our own.

“Defanged” Russia’s Floundering Invasion

The disorganization, ineptitude, and low morale of the Russian army’s conscripts, along with the repeated intelligence failures by the Russian high command — apparently convinced Russia would roll over Ukraine in a few days — exposes the lie that Russia is a global menace. Russia’s forty-mile long convoy of stalled tanks and trucks, broken down and out of fuel, on the muddy road to Kyiv was not an image of cutting-edge military prowess. Russia has been unable to overwhelm a poorly equipped and numerically inferior force in Ukraine, many of whose troops have little or no military training. Russia poses no threat to the NATO alliance or the United States, barring a nuclear attack.

“The Russian bear has effectively defanged itself,” historian Andrew Bacevich writes in The Nation. “Most embarrassingly for American policy-makers, the failure of Putin’s ‘special operation’ exposes the overall Russian ‘threat’ as essentially fraudulent.”

But this is not a truth the war makers impart to the public. Russia must be inflated to become a global menace, despite nine weeks of humiliating military failures. A Russian monster is the raison d’être for increased military spending and the further projection of American power abroad, especially against China. Militarists need a mortal enemy. That enemy may be a chimera, but it will always be led by the new Hitler. The new Hitler was once Saddam Hussein. Today it is Vladimir Putin. Tomorrow it will be Xi Jinping. You can’t drain and impoverish the nation to feed an insatiable military machine unless you make its people afraid, even of phantoms.

The war in Ukraine is intimately linked to the real existential crisis we face — the climate crisis. The latest UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report warns that greenhouse gas emissions must peak by 2025, and be nearly halved this decade, to thwart global catastrophe. UN Secretary General António Guterres characterized the report as “an atlas of human suffering and a damning indictment of failed climate leadership.” Triggered by war in Ukraine, soaring energy prices have pushed the U.S. and other countries to call on domestic oil producers to increase fossil fuel extraction and exacerbate the climate crisis. Oil and gas lobbyists are demanding the Biden administration lift prohibitions on offshore drilling and on federal lands.

Black and brown people, who suffered in the brutal wars in Yemen, Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan, and Syria, without the western support and sympathy shown white Ukrainians, will again be targeted. The Indian subcontinent is currently plagued with temperatures as high as 116.6 degrees Fahrenheit, power outages of 10-to-14 hours a day, and dying fields of crops. An estimated 143 million people will be displaced over the next thirty years, nearly all from Africa, South Asia and Latin America, the IPCC writes.

These endless conflicts will inevitably militarize our response to the climate breakdown. Absent measures and resources to halt the rise in global temperatures, curtail our reliance on fossil fuels, foster a plant-based diet, and curb profligate consumption, nations will increasingly use their militaries to hoard diminishing natural resources, including food and water. Russia and Ukraine account for 30 percent of all wheat traded on world markets. Since the invasion, the price of wheat has gone up by between 50 and 65 percent in commodities exchanges. This is a hint of what is to come.

The Ukraine war is part of a world order where the rule of law has been jettisoned for aggressive, preemptive war, a criminal act of aggression. These wars bring with them black sites, kidnapping, torture, targeted assassinations, censorship, and arbitrary detention. Rogue private contractors, along with covert intelligence paramilitary units, carry out off-the-book war crimes. Russia’s Wagner Group (the name Wagner is supposedly the call sign of its founder and commander, an ex-GRU officer called Dmitry Utkin, who reportedly has Waffen-SS insignia tattooed on his collarbones) or the U.S. mercenary group Academi, founded by the Christian Right leader Erik Prince, function as little more than death squads.

War is a spectacular form of social control. It secures a blind, unquestioning mass consent propped up by what Pankaj Mishra calls an “infotainment media” that “works up citizens into a state of paranoid patriotism,” while “a service class of intellectuals talks up the American Revolution and the international liberal order.”

In The London Review of Books, Mishra wrote:

Humiliation in Iraq and Afghanistan, and at home by Trump, demoralised the exporters of democracy and capitalism. But Putin’s atrocities in Ukraine have now given them an opportunity to make [the U.S.] seem great again. The Russian bear has long guaranteed, more reliably than ‘Islamofascism’ or China, income, and identity to many in the military-industrial and intellectual-industrial complex. An aging centrist establishment — battered by the far right, harangued by post-Occupy and post-BLM young leftists, frustrated by legislative stalemate in Washington — seems suddenly galvanised by the prospect of defining themselves through a new cold war.

This world of fantasy is sustained by myths — the myth that the people of Afghanistan and Iraq would welcome us as liberators, that Ukraine is not a real nation, that Ukrainians see themselves as pan-Russians, that all that stands between Iraqis, Afghans, Syrians, Somalis, Yemenis and Libyans and ourselves are terrorists, that all that stands between Putin and Ukrainians are neo-Nazis and their supporters in the West.

Those that challenge these fantasies, whether in Russia or the U.S., are attacked, marginalized, and censored. Few notice. The dream is more appealing than reality. Step-by-step these blinded, bloodied cyclops of war stumble forward leaving mounds of corpses in their wake. ###

— Chris Hedges is the former Middle East bureau chief of the New York Times, a Pulitzer Prize winner, and a columnist at ScheerPost where this first appeared. He is the author of several books, including American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America.

–Scheer Post via Popular Resistance, May 2, 2022;

 

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter, War

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • …
  • 32
  • Next Page »

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Subscribe

Donate

Categories

  • B61 Bombs in Europe
  • Chernobyl
  • Counterfeit Reactor Parts
  • Depleted Uranium
  • Direct Action
  • Environment
  • Environmental Justice
  • Fukushima
  • Lake Superior Barrels
  • Military Spending
  • Newsletter Archives
  • North Korea
  • Nuclear Power
  • Nuclear Weapons
  • Office News
  • On The Bright Side
  • Photo Gallery
  • Protect the Water Close Xcel's Monticello Reactor
  • Quarterly Newsletter
  • Radiation Exposure
  • Radioactive Waste
  • Renewable Energy
  • Social Issues
  • Sulfide Mining
  • Through the Prism of Nonviolence
  • Uncategorized
  • Uranium Mining
  • US Bombs Out of Germany
  • War
  • Weekly Column

Contact Us

(715) 472-4185
nukewatch1@lakeland.ws

Address:
740A Round Lake Road
Luck, Wisconsin 54853
USA

Donate To Nukewatch

News & Information on Nuclear Weapons,
Power, Waste & Nonviolent Resistance

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

© 2026 · Nukewatch