Why Nuclear Energy Is Critical For Russia

Why Nuclear Energy Is Critical For Russia

16-07-18 07:09:00,

Authored by Vanand Meliksetian via Oilprice.com,

As the world’s largest natural gas and oil producer and exporter, Russia plays an important role in setting the global geopolitical agenda. The recent agreement with OPEC is evidence of Moscow’s ability to set prices. However, in another field of energy production Russia captures an even more dominant position: nuclear technology.

The Russian nuclear industry is one of the oldest and most mature in the world. After the end of the Second World War and the start of the Cold War, nuclear technology was not only essential for security purposes as a deterrent towards the competing power bloc, but also as a sign of prestige. The first nuclear power plant connected to the grid was opened in 1954 in the USSR. Global nuclear power plant construction in later years was dominated by three countries: France, the U.S., and the Soviet Union.

The demise of communism and the end of the Cold War significantly reduced the development of nuclear technology by the Soviet Union’s successor: the Russian Federation. In 2007 President Putin signed a decree in which a government owned holding company was created to solidify the domestic civil nuclear technology sector. The downward spiral steadily reclined and has turned out to be a resounding success.

The order book of Russia’s state owned Rosatom has steadily increased to $300 billiondollars in recent years. Currently, 34 reactors in 12 countries are under construction while several other states have shown interest. The order book adds up to a global market share of 60% of all nuclear power plants planned or under construction.

(Click to enlarge)

China also hosts an ambitious civil nuclear power sector where the largest number of reactors in a single country is under construction. Beijing’s export-oriented nuclear power technology development, renders risks for Rosatom in the long term. However, despite significant progress made by Chinese developers, Russian reactors remain popular in the Asian country – as illustrated by the recent approval of another four reactors during a state ceremony in Beijing.

Russian civil nuclear technology appeals to a host of customers due to attractive agreements.

 » Lees verder

Russia’s Nuclear Doctrine Is Being Distorted Once Again

Russia’s Nuclear Doctrine Is Being Distorted Once Again

27-06-18 08:09:00,

Authored by Vladimir Kozin via Oriental Review,

On June 13, 2018, the Washington Post published an original piece by Paul Sonne that describes America’s potential use of the low-yield nuclear warheads that are to be installed on the future US B-61-12 nuclear bombs, as well as on the ballistic missiles carried by the Trident II submarines in the form of W76-2 warheads, in accordance with Washington’s 2018 nuclear doctrine.

The article claims that the introduction of low-yield warheads and the idea of their potential use is being justified by the Pentagon as necessary due to the fact that Russia is allegedly prepared to use similar warheads against NATO countries, based on that nation’s current nuclear doctrine and because a purported strategy of “escalate to de-escalate” has apparently been “approved” by Moscow.

It should be kept in mind that the Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation, which has sections covering the potential use of nuclear weapons, says nothing about the power of the nuclear weapons that might be utilized, nor is there any mention of warheads with either high or “low” yields in TNT equivalents. Those sections of the official doctrine do not even categorize Russian nuclear weapons into strategic vs. tactical varieties.

Only one term is specified in Russia’s military and strategic posture: “nuclear weapons.” And only two circumstances are listed as a basis for their potential use: the first — only in response to the use of nuclear or other weapons of mass destruction against the Russian Federation and/or its allies; and the second — in the event of aggression against Russia that employs conventional weapons to the point that “the very existence of the state is threatened.” In other words, only reciprocal actions are permitted in either case.

Nor does the Russian nuclear doctrine list the countries or alliances against which nuclear weapons can be used.

It seems odd that the US still does not understand the basic tenets of Russia’s nuclear posture. And it must be said that this is not the first time that Western analysts have taken such an unprofessional approach. This has become especially glaring in the run-up to the next NATO summit,

 » Lees verder

US Nuclear Policy Review; The World Is Our Enemy | New Eastern Outlook

US Nuclear Policy Review; The World Is Our Enemy | New Eastern Outlook

08-02-18 06:20:00,

USW45345234

The world is our enemy and we reserve the right to destroy part or all of it at our discretion. That is the essence of the United States Nuclear Policy Review that was recently released; a document of a criminal enterprise bent on world domination that describes how the use of new and “more flexible” nuclear weapons will achieve that domination.

The key to their intentions is contained in a statement on page 22 of the document where they state:

“To help preserve deterrence and the assurance of allies and partners, the United States has never adopted a “no first use” policy and, given the contemporary threat environment, such a policy is not justified today. It remains the policy of the United States to retain some ambiguity regarding the precise circumstances that might lead to a U.S. nuclear response.”

In other words, they are saying:

“we will keep you guessing as to when and against whom we will use them. We will maintain our role as the greatest state terrorist by keeping the nuclear Damocles sword over the heads of the people of the world constantly to ensure that the world acts in our interest.”

The American nuclear sword they are crafting will be sharpened with smaller, more battlefield usable nuclear weapons on land, sea and air. But whereas until now nuclear weapons were considered a separate category of weapons whose use means the deaths of tens or hundreds of millions of people, considered both immoral and illegal under international law, they are now considered by the Americans as a type of conventional weapon, a part of their conventional weapons systems. This raises the risk that their use will increase from a possibility to a certainty for they threaten to use them against any situation that in their view requires it even if it is a conventional war scenario. So, if the Americans stage a Russian attack on the Baltic states and claims its forces are too weak to stop the attack then they will use nuclear weapons on their real targets for which the staged attack was the pretext. Millions will die.

The nuclear sword continues to hang most dangerously over the peoples of Russia,

 » Lees verder

“The Doomsday Forum”: Senior Military, Nuclear Weapons Officials Convene… America’s “$1 Trillion Nuclear Weapons Plan”. Take out Russia, Iran and North Korea? | Global Research – Centre for Research on Globalization

“The Doomsday Forum”: Senior Military, Nuclear Weapons Officials Convene… America’s “$1 Trillion Nuclear Weapons Plan”. Take out Russia, Iran and North Korea? | Global Research – Centre for Research on Globalization

23-01-18 10:06:00,

Author’s Note

This article was first published on July 8, 2016

America’s pre-emptive nuclear doctrine was firmly entrenched prior to Donald Trump’s accession to the White House. The use of nukes against North Korea has been on the drawing-board of the Pentagon for more than half a century. 

In June 2016 under the Obama administration, top military brass together with the CEOs of the weapons industry debated the deployment of nuclear weapons against Russia, China, Iran and North Korea.

The event was intended to sensitize senior decision makers. The focus was on building a consensus (within the Armed Forces, the science labs, the nuclear industry, etc) in favor of pre-emptive nuclear war 

It was a form of “internal propaganda” intended for senior decision makers (Top Officials) within the military as well as the weapons industry. The emphasis was on “building peace” and “global security” through the “pre-emptive” deployment of nukes (Air, Land and Sea) against four designated “rogue” countries, which allegedly are threatening the Western World. 

One of keynote speakers at the Doomsday Forum, USAF Chief of Staff for Nuclear Integration, Gen. Robin Rand, is presently involved under the helm of Secretary of Defense General Mattis in coordinating the deployment of strike capabilities to East Asia. Gen. Robin Rand heads the Air Force’s nuclear forces and bombers. His responsibility consists in “moving ahead with plans to deploy its most advanced weapons to the [East Asian] region…” Recent reports confirm an unfolding consensus within the military establishment:

“Military leaders regularly, and since the change of administration, have listed China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, and ISIS as the major areas of concern for the future. From a security standpoint, tensions with North Korea continue to escalate, with reverberations throughout the region. In response to Pyongyang’s nuclear missile program, … the U.S. sped up the deployment of THAAD anti-missile interceptors to South Korea. This may reassure Seoul, and to a lesser extent Tokyo, but it has incensed Beijing.” Defense One, March 17, 2017

The DPRK is a a buffer state, a “stepping stone”. The unspoken truth is that the THAAD missiles stationed in South Korea are not intended for the DPRK,

 » Lees verder