Tag: nuclear power

Iran Rejects ‘Unacceptable’ US Demand To Dismantle Nuclear Sites

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has thrown cold water on the possibility of dismantling its nuclear facilities, which Tehran maintains are only for peaceful domestic energy purposes.

But top US officials have called for just that. Starting earlier this month Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that Iran has to ‘walk away’ from uranium enrichment and long-range missile development, while Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff just days ago went further, asserting that Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities “have to be dismantled” for Washington to trust that it does not want nuclear arms.

Pezeshkian in the fresh comments blasted the demand as “unacceptable” and framed it as a matter of national sovereignty and independent development.

“The discussion that has been raised about dismantling Iran’s entire nuclear facilities is unacceptable to us,” the Iranian president said, adding that “Iran will not give up its peaceful nuclear rights.“

Still, the country’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi acknowledged Sunday that negotiations with the United States in Oman had become “much more serious and frank” – which suggests positive momentum toward restoring a deal or at least an understanding on which to build a working relationship with Washington.

Araqchi in the comments given to Iran’s state-run IRIB TV characterized “forward-moving” talks with the US over an array of complex nuclear-related issues.

This is despite last Thursday’s provocative comments given to Breitbart wherein bluntly stated, “They cannot have centrifuges. They have to downblend all of their fuel that they have there and send it to a far-away place.”

Keep reading

Iran Offers More Nuclear Transparency In Exchange For Lifting Sanctions

Iran says that ready to make its nuclear program more transparent at a moment it is preparing to send representatives for a third round of talks with the United States, set for April 26.

Iranian government spokeswoman Fatemeh Mohajerani said Tuesday that Tehran in return for this greater transparency wants US-led sanctions lifted.

“We will try to create more transparency and more trust [in the nuclear program] in exchange for lifting sanctions. In other words, in exchange for lifting sanctions — I emphasize, in a way that is effective and has a [positive] effect on people’s lives — Iran is ready to create more trust in its nuclear program and more transparency,” Mohajerani told reporters.

Mohajerani made clear that Tehran is ready to reach “good agreement” with the United States on nuclear issue. “We are confident that reaching a good agreement in a short time while respecting our national interests is realistic,” she said, calling the prior two rounds “good” amid a “constructive” atmosphere.

The day prior to these optimistic remarks, Iran’s Foreign Ministry warned that Israel was seeking to “undermine” the ongoing nuclear talks with Washington, amid reports in Israeli media that leaders are mulling a ‘limited’ attack on the Islamic Republic.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said Monday that a “kind of coalition is forming… to undermine and disrupt the diplomatic process” and that the “Zionist regime is at the center of this effort.”

Alluding to reports from last week of an internal US administration split on Iran, Baghaei further warned that hawks in the US are also involved in the effort to sabotage the talks. “Alongside it are a series of warmongering currents in the United States and figures from different factions,” he said.

Keep reading

Israel still eyeing a limited attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities

Israel has not ruled out an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities in the coming months despite President Donald Trump telling Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the U.S. was for now unwilling to support such a move, according to an Israeli official and two other people familiar with the matter.

Israeli officials have vowed to prevent Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapon and Netanyahu has insisted that any negotiation with Iran must lead to the complete dismantling of its nuclear program.

U.S. and Iranian negotiators are set for a second round of preliminary nuclear talks in Rome on Saturday.

Over the past months, Israel has proposed to the Trump administration a series of options to attack Iran’s facilities, including some with late spring and summer timelines, the sources said. The plans include a mix of airstrikes and commando operations that vary in severity and could set back Tehran’s ability to weaponize its nuclear program by just months or a year or more, the sources said.

The New York Times reported on Wednesday that Trump told Netanyahu in a White House meeting earlier this month that Washington wanted to prioritize diplomatic talks with Tehran and that he was unwilling to support a strike on the country’s nuclear facilities in the short term.

But Israeli officials now believe that their military could instead launch a limited strike on Iran that would require less U.S. support. Such an attack would be significantly smaller than those Israel initially proposed.

It is unclear if or when Israel would move forward with such a strike, especially with talks on a nuclear deal getting started. Such a move would likely alienate Trump and could risk broader U.S. support for Israel.

Keep reading

Israel considers ‘limited strike’ on Iran – Reuters

Israel is considering a “limited strike” on Iran’s nuclear facilities in the coming months, despite Washington’s refusal to support military action, Reuters reported on Saturday, citing sources familiar with the matter. The deliberations come as the second round of US-Iran negotiations have concluded in Rome, with expert-level talks expected to continue on April 26 in Oman.

According to Reuters, Israeli officials are weighing a “limited strike” that would require minimal US support – unlike the larger and prolonged bombing campaign previously under consideration.

West Jerusalem reportedly presented Washington with several strike options, “including some with late spring and summer timelines.” A senior Israeli official told the outlet that no final decision had been made.

On Wednesday, The New York Times reported that US President Donald Trump had rejected an Israeli proposal for “extensive” strikes, opting instead to pursue diplomacy.

“I’m not in a rush to do it, because I think that Iran has a chance to have a great country and to live happily without death, and I’d like to see that. That’s my first option,” Trump told reporters on Thursday.

Keep reading

Witkoff indicates US seeks to cap Iran uranium enrichment, not dismantle nuclear program

US special envoy to the Mideast Steve Witkoff appeared to use a key component of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal signed during the Obama administration as a reference point for the ongoing talks with Tehran, in comments that seemed to indicate the US is looking to limit rather than dismantle Tehran’s nuclear program.

The deal, which US President Donald Trump abandoned in 2018 and has long criticized, barred Iran from enriching its uranium beyond 3.67 percent as part of a framework intended to prevent the Islamic Republic from obtaining a weapon.

“The president means what he says, which is: Iran cannot have a bomb,” Witkoff told Fox News in a Monday interview, elaborating that the ongoing “conversation” with Iran would be about enrichment and weaponization, with the imperative to verify any agreed commitments.

“Iran “do[es] not need to enrich past 3.67%. In some circumstances, they’re at 60%, in other circumstances 20%. That cannot be,” he said. “You do not need to run — as they claim — a civil nuclear program where you’re enriching past 3.67%.”

Enriching uranium from 60% to the 90% needed for a weapon is a relatively short technical step.

Keep reading

Russia Warns Against US Strikes On Iran Nuclear Sites: ‘Catastrophic & Illegal’

The Russian Foreign Ministry warned on Thursday that US threats of attack against Iran are “unacceptable” and could result in a “catastrophe”.

“The use of military force by Iran’s opponents in the context of the settlement is illegal and unacceptable. Threats from outside to bomb Iran’s nuclear infrastructure facilities will inevitably lead to an irreversible global catastrophe. These threats are simply unacceptable,” Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said. 

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov also told Life magazine that the “consequences of this, especially if there are strikes on the nuclear infrastructure, could be catastrophic for the entire region.”

Russia and the US have recently held talks on ending the war in Ukraine. Ryabkov said these talks have not resulted in a breakthrough. 

Regarding tension between Tehran and Washington, Ryabkov said Russia “condemns US threats.” The Russian Foreign Ministry comes after US President Donald Trump renewed his threat to attack Iranian nuclear facilities. 

“If they don’t make a deal, there will be bombing. But there’s a chance that if they don’t make a deal, that I will do secondary tariffs on them like I did four years ago,” the president said on Sunday. Iran issued a formal complaint to the UN Security Council and said it would respond to any threat.

Trump had sent a letter to Iranian leadership in early March, threatening an attack if Tehran did not come to the negotiating table. Iranian officials said they would not negotiate under threats and economic sanctions, which Trump has imposed with full force as part of his “maximum pressure” policy. 

This week, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Tehran has officially responded to Trump’s letter signaling a willingness for indirect talks, which the US is reportedly considering. 

However, Washington is simultaneously beefing up its forces in the region in preparation for a potential attack. This follows several reports over the past two months that Israel is planning to strike at the Iranian nuclear program. 

Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Majid Takht Ravachi held talks on the nuclear issue with Ryabkov on Wednesday. 

“The sides stressed the illegality and inadmissibility of the use of military force by Iran’s opponents to resolve disagreements and the unacceptability of threats from the outside to bomb Iran’s nuclear energy infrastructure, as this will inevitably lead to large-scale and irreversible radiological and humanitarian consequences for the entire Middle East region and the world as a whole,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said. 

Keep reading

Ukraine has secret nuclear doomsday plan, according to former Zelensky adviser

Ukraine has a secret last-ditch “scorched earth” plan to render its entire territory uninhabitable in the event of a Russian victory in the war – and perhaps the rest of Europe with it.

This is according to Oleksiy Arestovych, a former adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

In an interview with a Ukrainian journalist that he gave last month, Arestovych claimed that Ukraine’s current head of military intelligence, Kirill Budanov, has floated a plan to blow up all of Ukraine’s nuclear power plants, and possibly some of Russia’s as well, if all other defensive measures fail.

Ukraine currently operates four nuclear power plants with a total of 15 reactors. One of them, the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Station, is the largest plant in Europe and has been under Russian occupation since March 2022. Russia, for its part, has 37 reactors divided among 11 power plants.

If all or even some of these reactors were attacked and destroyed simultaneously, the destructive impact would be beyond calculation. The Chernobyl nuclear accident that occurred in Ukraine in 1986, and which remains the worst disaster involving nuclear energy in history, killed dozens and led to long-term health problems for thousands of others. It also led to the evacuation of tens of thousands of people and rendered the surrounding area permanently uninhabitable, spreading radioactivity over a large area and even into Western Europe.

Keep reading

Recycling Power: Rethinking Nuclear Waste

The oral arguments before the Supreme Court earlier this month is a reminder that our nation has a 66-year-old nuclear energy problem – and there is a ready and available solution in recycling used nuclear fuel. 

The Problem

Nuclear energy produces nearly 20% of our electricity. The fuel used to run our reactor fleet loses its intensity over time. That used, but not yet depleted, fuel is called Used Nuclear Fuel (“UNF”). There are 90,000 metric tons of UNF currently stored at reactor sites across 39 states in America, including approximately 4,000 metric tons in my home State of Texas.

In 1982, the federal government was made responsible by an act of Congress for removal and disposal of UNF from reactor sites, and has collected over $20 billion from reactor owners to pay for disposal of UNF. To date, the government has not removed any significant quantity of UNF from any site anywhere in America, including Texas, nor is there a current plan to do so.

As Secretary of Energy under President Trump’s first term, it became clear that any plan to move tonnage of UNF required some practical consent of the receiving state and local community, even if legal consent was not required by the 1982 Act.  

The consequence of not solving this problem results in a financial loss to America and leaves the UNF at the numerous reactor sites across America. There have been private efforts to establish UNF interim storage facilities in West Texas and New Mexico. Though there has been some local acceptance of an interim storage facility in Texas or New Mexico, there has also been significant opposition. Resistance to those private interim storage proposals led to the NRC v. Texas case currently before the Supreme Court.

Keep reading

NAT SEC ARCHIVE: Concerned About Nuclear Weapons, JFK Pushed for Inspection of Israel Nuclear Facilities

President John F Kennedy worried that Israel’s nuclear program was a potentially serious proliferation risk and insisted that Israel permit periodic inspections to mitigate the danger, according to declassified documents published today by the National Security Archive, Nuclear Proliferation International History Project, and the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies.  Kennedy pressured the government of Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion to prevent a military nuclear program, particularly after stage-managed tours of the Dimona facility for U.S. government scientists in 1961 and 1962 raised suspicions within U.S. intelligence that Israel might be concealing its underlying nuclear aims.  Kennedy’s long-run objective, documents show, was to broaden and institutionalize inspections of Dimona by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

On 30 May 1961, Kennedy met Ben-Gurion in Manhattan to discuss the bilateral relationship and Middle East issues. However, a central (and indeed the first) issue in their meeting was the Israeli nuclear program, about which President Kennedy was most concerned.   According to a draft record of their discussion, which has never been cited, and is published here for the first time, Ben-Gurion spoke “rapidly and in a low voice” and “some words were missed.”  He emphasized the peaceful, economic development-oriented nature of the Israeli nuclear project. Nevertheless the note taker, Assistant Secretary of State Philips Talbot, believed that he heard Ben-Gurion mention a “pilot” plant to process plutonium for “atomic power” and also say that “there is no intention to develop weapons capacity now.” Ben-Gurion tacitly acknowledged that the Dimona reactor had a military potential, or so Talbot believed he had heard.  The final U.S. version of the memcon retained the sentence about plutonium but did not include the language about a “pilot” plant and  “weapons capacity.”

Keep reading

NSA Waltz Demands Iran Give Up Entire Nuclear Program, Including Civilian Enrichment

While continuing to closely tie the recent US attacks on the Houthis in Yemen to Iran, National Security Adviser Mike Waltz confirmed that the Trump Administration is demanding “full dismantlement” of Iran’s nuclear program, including its capacity to enrich uranium for civilian use.

Waltz made the comments on CBS’ Face the Nation, and when asked what full dismantlement meant and to clarify the distinction between it and the verification deal the US had with Iran before President Trump pulled out of it in 2018, he made it clear this is far broader, covering everything, including enrichment, “weaponization,” and strategic missile programs.

Iran’s enrichment program, which is under IAEA monitoring, has no military component in the first place. Enrichment was purely for making fuel rods for the Bushehr nuclear power plant along Iran’s coast and for making somewhat higher enriched fuel for its medical isotope reactor. Iran has a long history of having a substantial nuclear medicine program, and supplied its own isotopes for that.

The long-abandoned nuclear deal was meant to give Iran a design to produce isotopes without 20% enriched uranium through a heavy-water reactor. Like most of the promises to Iran under the deal this was never honored, and Iran is left with the old research reactor. Higher levels of enrichment were also done to try to encourage new negotiations, though Iran promised the IAEA that they would not go above 60% levels, and weapons-grade uranium is a minimum of 90%.

Waltz’ new demand is not that Iran goes back down to 20% or anything, it’s to stop enrichment entirely. It’s unclear in the context if Iran is even allowed to keep it’s power plant, though without the ability to enrich uranium to make their own fuel, it would be effectively useless in fairly short order.

Beyond that, Waltz demanded Iran scrap its “weaponization” program, which will be a challenge because Iran does not have one, and US intelligence assessments have repeatedly said Iran hasn’t decided to try to make such a weapon though such assessments never seem to inform the content of US demands.

He also demanded Iran get rid of its entire strategic missile program, which sense they haven’t even attempted to create nuclear warheads would exclusively impact conventional weapons in Iran’s arsenal. Though presented as something to do with nuclear dismantlement, it is effectively unrelated in the case of these missiles.

Keep reading