Nukewatch

Working for a nuclear-free future since 1979

by Leave a Comment

Senator Calls Nuclear Fallout an Act of War

Nukewatch Quarterly Spring 2022
By John LaForge

Rhode Island U.S. Senator Jack Reed, the Democratic chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, reportedly said on March 23 that if Putin used a nuclear against Ukraine “there would be consequences,” adding that radioactive fallout from such a detonation could drift across nearby NATO countries and be considered an attack on NATO. (New York Times, March 23, 2022)

Senator Reed’s warning partly explains why nuclear weapons must not be detonated for any reason. Radioactive fallout from nuclear bomb test explosions is notorious for traveling long distances on the wind — sometimes around the world — and has indiscriminately contaminated far-off countries of the Northern and Southern Hemispheres.

Bikini Lagoon, bombed by the United States July 1, 1946.

The fallout from nuclear weapons blasts has been scrutinized extensively by military analysts, who have known about its deadliness for decades.

In his 2017 book The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner, whistle-blower Daniel Ellsberg of The Pentagon Papers fame, reports that he and other nuclear war theorists in the Pentagon had estimated in the 1960s that “we would kill every European, a hundred million Europeans, without a single U.S. or Soviet warhead landing on West Europe” [emphasis added].

“Just from the fallout of the attacks we were planning on Russia and East Europe. One hundred million.…”, Ellsberg wrote. The estimate illustrates the self-destructive consequences of nuclear weapons detonations, and the fact that military officers planning war with nuclear weapons have known for decades that they are devastating boomerangs that cannot be used without destroying the people and the territories being defended.

by Leave a Comment

IAEA Says Missile Hit Radioactive Waste Area in Kyiv

Nukewatch Quarterly Spring 2022
By John LaForge

The State Nuclear Regulatory Inspectorate of Ukraine (SNRIU) informed the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) February 27 that missiles hit the site of a radioactive waste disposal facility in Kyiv over night, and “there were no reports of damage to the building or any indications of a radioactive release,” IAEA’s Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi said in a statement.

The IAEA’s alert then noted that “SNRIU said it expects to soon receive the results of on-site radioactive monitoring.”

The carefully worded report is deceptively telling. It first declared that there are “no indications” and “no reports” of a radioactive release. But this reassurance was given before any data from radiation monitors had been reviewed, making the statement simultaneously true, and completely meaningless.

Bob Alvarez, a former senior advisor and deputy assistant secretary in the Energy Department, and a long-time critic of nuclear reactor operations, reported, “Given that war is raging at or near the Chernobyl reactor site, more than 21,000 waste nuclear fuel assemblies are currently held in a pool inside of a crumbling building. Several waste fuel assemblies are bent, broken, and cracked. Efforts to remove and place the waste fuel into dry storage have stopped. [An additional] 4,000 cubic meters of high-level waste, resulting from the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, are stored in shallow, “engineered trenches” that may also be vulnerable to bombing and artillery fire. The loss of water and destruction of the waste fuel pool storage building, or the destruction of any of the trenches holding high level waste, could result in a catastrophic release.”

The Kyiv radioactive waste incident came a day after Ukraine’s SNRIU reported that a similar disposal facility near the north-eastern city of Kharkiv had been damaged, but again “without any reports of a radioactive release.”

Director General Grossi said, “These two incidents highlight the very real risk that facilities with radioactive material will suffer damage during the conflict, with potentially severe consequences for human health and the environment.”

https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/pressreleases/update-5-iaea-director-general-statement-on-situation-in-ukraine

https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/pressreleases/update-4-iaea-director-general-statement-on-situation-in-ukraine

by Leave a Comment

Reactors in War Zones

Nukewatch Quarterly Spring 2022
By John LaForge

In June 2019, we reported on “Project Dilithium,” a U.S. Army proposal to build small, portable nuclear reactors that could be hauled to remote military outposts to provide electricity. The Army said the reactors could reduce the number of diesel tanker caravans, could shorten military supply lines, and could eliminate some easy targets. Popular Mechanics and the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists warned at the time that putting a reactor in a warzone exchanges one easy target for another, one that risks catastrophic health and environmental damage from core meltdowns. With Russia’s military invasion of Ukraine threatening its 15 nuclear reactors, we trust the U.S. Army will scrap its plans for battlefield units.

Now in the context of Russia’s war in Ukraine, two Massachusetts Institute of Technology professors, Kate Brown and Susan Solomon, have penned a powerful warning against nuclear power in the Washington Post. The piece — “One thing nuclear power plants weren’t built to survive: War”—  is excerpted below for space reasons.

“Military strategists commonly target the enemy’s electrical grid. That’s a problem when combat is in a nuclearized country like Ukraine. … The world is watching the first war in a nuclearized country — and combat has already reached active reactors.

“Even without a direct hit on a reactor, we are learning of the fragility of nuclear power [reactors]. … it is vulnerable not only to terrorism but to war.

“As power was cut to the Chernobyl [complex in March], nuclear engineers explained the importance of the electricity grid — even for plants that have been out of operation for decades. Chernobyl’s molten radioactive lava self-heats inside the belly of the blown reactor. Without ventilation, which requires electricity, hot air forms condensation that rains down inside the building, corroding and damaging equipment.

“Chernobyl’s [waste] fuel is another danger. Left to its own devices, it can heat up to 1,000 degrees Celsius. At high temperatures, the zirconium sleeves covering the fuel can ignite. After the Chernobyl accident in 1986, Soviet liquidators hastily built huge basins to store highly radioactive [waste] fuel rods. Water pumped into the basins cools the fuel and blocks radioactive gamma rays that emanate from the irradiated uranium. Now 20,000 fuel rods are stored in Chernobyl basins designed for 17,000.

“Even more troubling is the fact that the 15 active nuclear power reactors in Ukraine are still operating or were shut down only recently. They are chock-full of extremely radioactive, hot nuclear fuel, both inside the reactors and in cooling ponds. As nuclear materials expert Claire Corkhill explained to the BBC, if electricity is cut to those plants as it was to Chernobyl, we could face a meltdown of multiple reactors similar to the catastrophe at Fukushima.”

by Leave a Comment

Reducing Tensions, Building Trust, De-escalating

German warplanes routinely practice attacking Russia using US hydrogen bombs, like this new B61 model 12, set to replace the B61s now in Germany, Italy, Belgium, The Netherlands and Turkey.

By John LaForge

The United States could immediately take direct actions that would de-escalate the over-arching nuclear threat that haunts Russia’s war of aggression in Ukraine. A few such actions would demonstrate good will and indicate a real intention to reduce tensions in the crisis which seems every day to grow more dangerous.

 

1. U.S. hydrogen bombs stationed in Europe could be withdrawn and their planned replacement cancelled.

The United States and Germany are formal states parties to the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Articles I and II of the NPT flatly prohibit the transfer of nuclear weapons from one states party to another. Any fourth grader can understand that the NATO practice of “nuclear sharing” with Germany, Italy, Belgium, The Netherlands, and Turkey — which together have over 100 U.S. nuclear weapons — is an open violation of the clear, unambiguous, unequivocal and binding prohibitions of the NPT.

The United States stations an estimated 20 of its B61-3 and B61-4 thermonuclear gravity bombs at the German Air Force Base Büchel, 80 miles southeast of Cologne. These B61 H-bombs at Büchel are identified as “intermediate-yield strategic and tactical thermonuclear” bombs, and “the primary thermonuclear gravity bomb in the U.S.” according to the NuclearWeaponArchive.org.

Calling these weapons “intermediate” or “tactical” is shocking disinformation. The maximum yield of the B61-3 is 170 kilotons, and the maximum B61-4 yield is 50 kilotons, as reported by the Bulletin of the atomic Scientists. These H-bombs respectively produce over 11 times and 3 times the explosive blast, mass fire, and radiation of the 15-kiloton Hiroshima bomb that killed 140,000 people. (For background, see Lynn Eden’s “Whole World on Fire,” or Howard Zinn’s “The Bomb.”

The effects of detonating B61-3 or B61-4 bombs would inevitably be catastrophic mass destruction involving disproportionate, indiscriminate and long-lasting devastation. Plans to replace the current B61 with a new “model 12” could be cancelled now, and constitute a real ratcheting down of tensions in Europe.

2. The U.S. can discontinue its nuclear attack courses underway at Ramstein Air Base in Germany.

The U.S. studies and plans nuclear weapon attacks at classrooms of its Defense Nuclear Weapons School (DNWS), and the one branch school outside the U.S. is at Ramstein in Germany, the largest U.S. military base outside the country, headquarters of the U.S. Air Forces in Europe, and NATO Allied Air Command. Outlines of nuclear attack coursework can be read on the DNWS website, which boldly declares the school: “is responsible for delivering, sustaining and supporting air-delivered nuclear weapon systems for our warfighters …every day.”

One class outlined on the DNWS website is for “Theater Nuclear Operations,” described as “a 4.5-day course that provides training for planners, support staff, targeteers, and staff nuclear planners for joint operations and targeting. The course provides an overview of nuclear weapon design, capabilities, and effects as well as U.S. nuclear policy, and joint nuclear doctrine…. Objectives: … Understand the U.S. nuclear planning and execution process…; Understand the targeting effects of nuclear weapon employment….”

Dispensing with this nuclear attack planning school would reduce tensions and help eliminate Russia’s dread of the U.S./NATO nuclear posture.

3. NATO can suspend its provocative military exercises.

Attacks with U.S. nuclear weapons in Europe are regularly simulated or “rehearsed,” as is often reported. Recent headlines noted: “German Air Force training for nuclear war as part of NATO” (Kazakh Telegraph Agency 2020), “Secret nuclear weapons exercise ‘Steadfast Noon” (German Armed Forces Journal 2019), “NATO nuclear weapons exercise unusually open” (2017), and “NATO nuclear weapons exercise Steadfast Noon in Büchel” (2015).

Giant NATO war games routinely zero in on Russia. In 2018, there was “Trident Juncture” with 50,000 troops in Norway, and “Atlantic Resolve” was conducted in Eastern Europe. In 2016, some 16,000 troops gathered in Norway for “Cold Response,” and in “Anaconda 2016” another 31,000 troops from 24 countries were again in motion across Poland, Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia. In 2015, there was “Atlantic Resolve,” “Dragoon Ride,” and “Spring Storm,” all conducted across Poland, Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia. In 2014, the routine “Cold Response” game in Norway involved 16,000 troops, and “Atlantic Resolve” took place in Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia and Poland.

Beyond the annual “Steadfast Noon” simulations, complex, multinational NATO exercises in Eastern European countries just recently ballooned in number. In 2019, there was a single big exercise called “Atlantic Resolve.” In 2020 there were five. In 2021 the number leaped to eleven, and NATO that year made plans for a total of 95 exercises. Individual NATO states had plans for another 220 of their own war games. Nothing justifies Putin’s naked aggression, but the marked increase in NATO war practices would even make the Dali Lama defensive.

4. The U.S. and NATO could end their nuclear weapon “first-use” policy.

The public policy of readiness to initiate attack with nuclear weapons — not as a deterrent against being attacked with nuclear weapons, but its exact opposite — is at the heart of both U.S. and NATO “nuclear posture.” This perpetual threat to start nuclear attacks during a conventional conflict, especially in the context of routine NATO nuclear war exercises, is unnecessarily destabilizing and reckless. In view of the enormously overwhelming power of U.S. and NATO conventional military forces, the nuclear option is grossly redundant and militarily useless.

After he retired, Paul Nitze, a former Navy Secretary and personal advisor to President Ron Reagan, wrote “A Threat Mostly to Ourselves” where he observed: “In view of the fact that we can achieve our objectives with conventional weapons, there is no purpose to be gained through the use of our nuclear arsenal.”

Now that the U.S. public as a whole has been transformed into one big anti-war group, it should recognize that it can influence our own government but not Russia’s. Our demands for negotiation, cease-fire, de-escalation and a peace agreement need to be directed in a way that has some chance of success. ###

Published at CounterPunch, APRIL 29, 2022

by 1 Comment

Russia Can Get In Line: Investigate U.S. Atrocities First

On April 23, 1999, the U.S. rocketed the central state broadcasting corporation 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.

 

By John LaForge

Before the International Criminal Court confronts the criminal outrages currently being committed by Putin’s forces in Ukraine, there are scores of alleged U.S. war crimes to be investigated.

Nukewatch, CounterPunch and World Beyond War published part of this list of headlines (below) ten years ago, but in view of relentless ongoing U.S. wars and the outpouring of legitimate, agonized of grief for civilian victims of Russia’s illegal war, an updated compilation is in order.

The U.S. military has a long record of apparent atrocities during its attacks and its unprovoked wars of aggression or occupation in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Pakistan, Yugoslavia and elsewhere. Like Russia in Ukraine today, the crimes include bombing hospitals, desecrating corpses, attacks on civilians and civilian objects, attacking allied troops, torturing and executing prisoners, and using banned cluster bombs.

But unlike todays’ wall-to-wall news coverage of Russia’s onslaught, the U.S. media mostly withdrew from reporting on U.S. military occupations and still chooses not to present many photos or film of alleged U.S. crimes. Like news censorship inside Russia, our media’s blind eye helps maintain U.S. public support for its wars-of-choice, so protests have been raised mostly by victims, survivors, human rights groups, anti-war coalitions, and international law advocates.

The most notorious and well-documented U.S. crimes have involved its torture of prisoners. “It is indisputable that the United States engaged in the practice of torture,” concluded the nonpartisan 11-member panel of the Constitution Project in 2013. The group’s 577-page report found that President George W. Bush and others bore ultimate responsibility for it.[1]

While bombing Libya in March 2011, U.S. forces refused to aid a group of 72 migrants adrift in the Mediterranean. Only nine people on board survived. The refusal was condemned as criminal by the Council of Europe, the continent’s human rights watchdog.[2]

On Feb. 12, 2010, in an atrocity kept secret until March 13, 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.[3]

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.[4]

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.[5]

On April 23, 1999, the U.S. rocketed the central state broadcasting corporation 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.[6]

In spite of international treaty law banning cluster bombs, the Unites States has used them widely its wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and the former Yugoslavia.[7]

The headlines below highlight U.S. conduct in the world, and provide an outline for prosecutors in The Hague to begin investigations.

Headlines allege U.S. war crime spree

 “How the U.S. Hid an Airstrike That Killed Dozens of Civilians in Syria,” New York Times, Nov. 13, 2019

“U.S. Drone Kills 30 Civilians, Afghans ay, Target Was ISIS,” New York Times, Sept. 20, 2019

“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, April 25, 2019

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

“U.S. Airstrikes Said to Kill at Least 0 Afghan Civilians,” New York Times, Feb. 11, 2019

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

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

“Report: 3,301 civilians killed in US-led strikes in Syria since 2014,” Duluth News Tribune, Sept. 24, 2018

“Study: US killed 500 civilians,” Minneapolis StarTribune, June 3, 2018 (“Pentagon may be grossly undercounting.”)

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

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

“‘Killed, Shovel in Hand’: Afghan Farmers are the Latest Victims of a Chaotic War,” New York Times, March 19, 2018

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

“US 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 US-led strikes on Isis surge under Trump administration” (“Airwars, a UK-based watchdog group, estimates the civilian death toll from coalition airstrikes at over 3,800.”), The Guardian, June 6, 2017

“11 Afghans Killed in US Airstrike,” New York Times, Aug. 31, 2017

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

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

“Civilian deaths a windfall for militants’ propaganda,” AP/Minneapolis StarTribune, April 2, 2017

“US Airstrike ‘Probably Had a Role’ in Mosul Civilian Deaths, Commander Concedes,” New York Times, March 29, 2017

“US strike reportedly killed 30 Syrians,” New York Times & Minneapolis StarTribune, March 23, 2017

“US military says fight with Taliban killed 33 civilians,” Minneapolis StarTribune, Jan. 13, 2017

“US-led strikes in Iraq, Syria have killed at least 188 civilians, military says,” Duluth NewsTribune, Jan. 3, 2017

“US admits its airstrikes likely killed Afghan civilians.” Washington Post & Minneapolis StarTribune, Nov. 6, 2016

“US Drones Hit Civilians, U.N. Says,” New York Times, Sept. 30, 2016

“Residents Say US Strike Killed Civilians” (killed at least 15 civilians), Wall Street Journal, Sept. 29, 2016

“Pentagon: Errors led to hospital strike,” (“which killed 42 people”), New York Time & Minneapolis StarTribune, May 1, 2016

“A Moral Debt for Bombing a Hospital” (“killing 42 innocent people”), editorial, New York Times, April 30, 2016

“Airstrike on Afghan hospital stirs fury,” New York Times, & Minneapolis StarTribune; and “19 die in apparent US airstrike on Afghan hospital,” Los Angeles Times, Oct. 4, 2015

“Afghanistan Says NATO Airstrike in East Killed Civilians,” New York Times, April 16, 2014

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

“US marine pleads guilty to urinating on corpse of Taliban fighter in Afghanistan,” The Guardian, Jan. 16, 2013

“US troops posed with body parts of Afghan bombers,” Los Angeles Times, April 18, 2012

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

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

“NATO Admits Airstrike Killed 8 Young Afghans, but Contends They Were Armed,” New York Times, Feb. 16, 2012

“Informer Misled NATO in Airstrike That Killed 8 Civilians, Afghans Say” (“seven shepherd boys under 14”), New York Times, Feb. 10, 2012

“One of the U.S. Marines who was caught on video urinating on the corpses of suspected Taliban fighters [in July 2011] has said that he’s not sorry for what he did and he’d do it again.” –ABC News
“Video [of Marines urinating on dead fighters] Inflames a Delicate Moment for US in Afghanistan,” New York Times, Jan. 12, 2012

“Commission alleges US detainee abuse,” Minneapolis StarTribune, Jan. 8, 2012

“Six Children Are Killed by NATO Airstrike in Afghanistan,” New York Times, Nov. 25, 2011

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

“US Drone Strike Kills Brother of a Taliban Commander,” New York Times, Oct. 28, 2011

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

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

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

“NATO Strikes Libyan State TV Transmitters,” New York Times, July 31, 2011

“NATO admits raid probably killed nine in Tripoli,” St. Paul Pioneer Press, June 20, 2011

“US Expands Its Drone War to Take On Somali Militants,” New York Times, July 2, 2011

“NATO airstrike blamed in 14 civilian deaths,” St. Paul Pioneer Press, May 30, 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

“Yemen: 2 Killed in Missile Strike,” AP, May 5, 2011

“NATO Accused of Going Too Far With Libya Strikes,” New York Times, May 2, 2011

“Disposal of Bin Laden’s remains violated Islamic principles, clerics say,” AP, May 2, 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 NATO Troops Killed 8 Civilians in Raid,” New York Times, Aug. 24, 2010

“‘A dozen or more’ Afghan civilians were killed during a nighttime raid Aug. 5, 2010 in eastern Afghanistan, NATO’s officers said.” Chicago Tribune, Aug. 6, 2010

“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,” Washington Post, April 14, 2007

See you in court.

Notes:

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

[2] “NATO Failed to Aid a Boat of Migrants Off Libya Last Year, Rights Group Says,” New York Times, March 30, 2012

[3] Times of London, Mar. 13, 2010; & “US Admits Role in February Killing of Afghan Women,” New York Times, April 4, 2010

[4] “NATO Strikes Kill Pakistani Forces, Raising Tensions,” New York Times, Nov. 27, 2011

[5] The Guardian, “NATO bombed Chinese deliberately: Nato hit embassy on purpose,” Oct 16, 1999, https://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/oct/17/balkans

[6] Amnesty Int’l, “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. 40

[7] Human Rights Watch, “US Using Cluster munitions in Iraq,” April 1, 2003, https://www.hrw.org/news/2003/04/01/us-using-cluster-munitions-iraq#; The Lancet, “Pressure groups condemn US use of cluster bombs in Afghanistan”, Nov. 3, 2001,

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(01)06627-2.pdf; UN International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, “Cluster bombs were used by NATO forces during the bombing campaign,” https://www.icty.org/en/press/final-report-prosecutor-committee-established-review-nato-bombing-campaign-against-federal

 

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