USA’s Fukushima At The Sixth Seal (Revelation 6)

Recent series of Indian Point shutdowns worst in years

Ernie Garcia, elgarcia@lohud.com

BUCHANAN — Four unplanned reactor shutdowns over a two-month period at Indian Point are the most setbacks the nuclear power plant has experienced in years.

A review of unplanned shutdowns from January 2012 to the present showed this year’s events happened within a short time frame, between May 7 and July 8, in contrast with events from other years that were more spread out, according to data released by Indian Point.

So many mishaps at the Entergy-owned plant haven’t occurred since 2009, when one of two units at the Buchanan site experienced a similar series, said plant spokesman Jerry Nappi.

Besides a May 9 transformer failure that spilled some 3,000 gallons of oil into the Hudson River, this year’s shutdowns were prompted by a May 7 steam leak, a July 8 pump motor failure and a June 15 switch yard breaker failure offsite in a Consolidated Edison substation.

If a nuclear plant has more than three unplanned shutdowns in a nine-month period, its performance indicator could be changed by the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which results in additional oversight. That’s what happened with Entergy’s Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station in Plymouth, Mass., after four unplanned shutdowns in 2013.

So far, Entergy said there doesn’t appear to be a pattern to the Indian Point shutdowns.

“You do want to look at these events holistically to see if there is something in common, but you also look individually to see what the causes were,” Nappi said. “A plant shutdown in and of itself is not a safety issue.”

One of the four recent Buchanan shutdowns triggered a special inspection by the NRC and calls to close the nuclear plant by environmental groups and elected officials. Gov. Andrew Cuomo has said in the past Indian Point should close, but his office did not respond to a request for comment about whether the recent shutdowns have prompted any state scrutiny.

The NRC is expected to release a quarterly report on Indian Point this month that will address the transformer failure and, by year’s end, is planning an inspection of the transformer and an analysis of transformer issues since 2007.

Besides its transformer-related inquiries, the other three shutdowns have not raised “any immediate safety concerns or crossed any thresholds that would result in additional NRC oversight,” agency spokesman Neil Sheehan wrote in an email.

The unplanned shutdowns at Indian Point and Pilgrim in Massachusetts were mostly preventable, said Paul Blanch, a former Indian Point employee with 45 years of nuclear power experience.

“For this to happen this frequently indicates a deeper problem,” he said. “I believe it’s management oversight in the maintenance of these plants.”

Nappi said the transformer that failed May 9 and caused a fire and oil spill into the Hudson was regularly monitored. Investigators determined the failure was due to faulty insulation.

“The transformer inspection and reviews were in accordance with our standards and industry expectations, yet there was no indication the transformer was going to fail,” Nappi said.

The NRC conducted a separate, but related special inspection into the May 9 incident that focused on a half-inch of water that collected in an electrical switchgear room floor. Inspectors determined a fire suppression system’s valve failed to close properly.

Inspectors noted in their report that Entergy knew about that problem since April 2011 and replaced the valve but didn’t discover the actual cause — a dysfunctional switch — until after the fire.

Indian Point’s Unit 3 was down 19 days May through July, with the transformer failure accounting for 16 days. The shutdowns didn’t cause the public any supply problems because New York’s grid can import electricity from other states and New York has an energy plan to maintain reliability, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

The nuclear energy industry judges a power plant on how continuously it produces energy, which is called a capacity factor.

There were 100 nuclear plants in the United States in 2014, a record year in terms of efficiency. In January, the Nuclear Energy Institute announced the U.S. average capacity factor was 91.9 percent.

Indian Point has an above-average efficiency rate. The plant’s Unit 2 and 3 reactors were each online more than 99 percent of the time during their most recent two-year operating cycles. They are currently in the middle of other cycles.

UK Soon to Join Babylon the Great (Daniel 7)

Iran To Exceed Uranium Enrichment Limits. Should U.K. Leave Nuclear Deal?

Iran confirms it will breach the nuclear deal by speeding up enrichment of uranium. NPR’s Steve Inskeep talks to Karen Pierce, the U.K.’s ambassador to the U.N., about how the deal will be affected.

STEVE INSKEEP, HOST: 

What do Europeans do now that Iran has begun going beyond the limits of a nuclear deal, or says that it will? Iran has been enriching uranium, an activity that is allowed but sharply limited under that agreement from 2015. Today is the day when Iran said it would go beyond the amount of enriched uranium it’s allowed to have on hand. Remember. This is a deal the United States withdrew from but that other world powers and Iran would like to keep. The U.K. is still in the deal, and we’ve called the U.K. ambassador to the United Nations, Karen Pierce, who’s on the line from New York.

Ambassador, good morning.

KAREN PIERCE: Good morning.

INSKEEP: Do you regard Iran as going out of compliance with the deal today?

PIERCE: I haven’t seen anything from New York that suggests that that has actually happened. But of course, that’s what Iran said it would do today, 27 June. But the next step, in any case, would be for the International Atomic Energy Authority to confirm what, if anything, Iran has actually done.

INSKEEP: Well, let’s suppose they go beyond that limit. Then we’ve got to figure out what to think of it. It seems obvious that means they’re out of compliance with the deal. They’re not following the deal. But Iran’s United Nations ambassador told us on this program the other day, wait a minute. Actually, there’s a provision that allows us to start going out of compliance exceeding the limits in this way if other signatories to the deal are not keeping up their end of the bargain. And you’re not. Do you agree that Europe is not keeping its end of the bargain here to provide economic benefit to Iran?

PIERCE: No, Europe is trying very hard to stand up its end of the deal. I won’t disguise from you, it’s difficult because of the U.N. sanctions. And we said in the Security Council yesterday that we regretted the fact that the deal couldn’t be implemented in full. But the Europeans have set up a special purpose vehicle to get humanitarian and other supplies to Iran. And we believe very firmly Iran should stay in the deal. There’s still enough in the deal, and it’s important for global nonproliferation, as well, that the deal is upheld and that Iran doesn’t get a nuclear weapon.

INSKEEP: Would you explain this special purpose vehicle, Ambassador? You’ve got some kind of bank or institution that’s going to try to sell stuff to Iran without running afoul of U.S. sanctions? Is that right?

PIERCE: It’s more a vehicle that money goes into and goods can be supplied under it. It’s not intended to contravene U.S. sanctions. On the contrary, it’s intended to provide a line for vital supplies to Iran. But I just want, if I may, Steve, to go back to this point about compliance.

INSKEEP: Sure.

PIERCE: The Iranians often make the argument that because X has done something, they’re entitled to also not do something that they ought to do under the deal. And we don’t accept that argument. But the deal itself did envisage a circumstance in which Iran might fall out of compliance. And there are mechanisms in the deal itself whereby the participants get together and try to figure out a way to bring Iran back into compliance. So it’s not the end of the story even if Iran has breached. But obviously, that would be a very worrying development.

INSKEEP: So you’re saying that there are provisions that would be like mediation or going to court, and you could press Iran to go back within compliance if, in fact, they go out today. Is that right?

PIERCE: There’s similar provisions to that. They’re not actually going to court.

INSKEEP: Sure.

PIERCE: It’s more about the deal’s participants working this out themselves. But as I say, it was certainly envisaged that one day, we might face this situation. And there are dispute resolution mechanisms within the deal itself that would enable us to get together, discuss with Iran, try to work out how to bring her back into compliance.

INSKEEP: As you know very well, Ambassador, the United States keeps adding more sanctions on Iran and tightening oil and other sanctions on Iran. And their goal – well, we could argue about the goal, but it’s certainly to undermine this deal in every way possible. Do you think this deal is still survivable, that it’s sustainable?

PIERCE: Well, I won’t disguise from you the fact that it is tricky to keep the deal going in the circumstances you describe. Nevertheless, we remain committed to it. The other participants, who include Russia, China, France and Germany, as well as Iran, remain committed to it. It’s vital for European but also regional security. And it’s a really important commitment to help global nonproliferation. So we want to do everything we can to keep the deal intact.

That’s not to say we don’t agree with the American administration about Iran’s behavior in the region, in Syria, in Lebanon, in Yemen and also in the Gulf. But for Europeans, those are two separate things and easier to tackle the second if Iran is in the nuclear deal.

INSKEEP: Karen Pierce, U.K. ambassador to the U.N., thanks.

PIERCE: Thank you.

Copyright © 2019 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Trump the Biggest Loser

Trump’s Lose-Lose Iran Strategy

As the Trump administration spins its wheels over Iran, the world is reminded of why the Obama administration and the Europeans went to such lengths to develop a new approach to dealing with the country. By resuscitating a failed strategy, Trump and his advisers are risking yet another catastrophic war in the Middle East.

Raghuram G. RajanJun 28, 2019

BERLIN – One can only guess what US President Donald Trump hopes to achieve in Iran. Does he have designs on a “better” nuclear treaty than the 2015 deal from which he withdrew the United States? Are he and his advisers assuming that if they pile up enough demands, the regime will be forced to submit, or even abdicate? Or are they setting the stage for an attempt at regime change through military force?

In all likelihood, they themselves have no idea. That may be just as well, because none of the above is going to happen.

To be sure, Trump’s withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA, as the 2015 nuclear deal is officially known) fulfilled one of his key campaign promises. The problem is that neither he nor his advisers seem to have considered what would come next.

One of the few constants of Trump’s approach to policymaking is its focus on winning the approval of his core bloc of supporters. Given that he also campaigned against America’s foreign entanglements, it is safe to assume that these voters do not want the US to launch another war in the Middle East. A military conflagration with Iran would result in even more casualties, and prove to be even less winnable, than the US-led wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

For his part, Trump most likely wants to avoid war while still maximizing the pressure on the Iranian regime. The problem is that in the political environment of the Persian Gulf, the line between these two options is not particularly clear. Past experience shows that maximum pressure often creates the conditions for military confrontation.

Trump, unlike his hawkish national security adviser, John Bolton, claims that violent regime change is not one of the objectives of his Iran policy. Yet he is acting exactly as if the neoconservatives who led former US President George W. Bush into Iraq are still calling the shots.

This situation is all the more dangerous considering that US policymakers’ room to maneuver in the Middle East has shrunk significantly since 2003. Iran’s strategic position today is much stronger than it was then, precisely because the Iraq war toppled its foremost regional rival. And far from being isolated in the event of a military escalation, Iran would receive material and diplomatic support from both Russia and China.

At least since the fall of the Shah in 1979, Western policy toward Iran has been based on illusions. The West, led by the US, has long relied on economic sanctions to force the Iranian regime to alter its policies and behavior. But this approach, along with America’s many other mistakes in the region, has actually strengthened Iran. The country’s military forces or proxies now extend across Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon – all the way to the Mediterranean and Israel’s northern border. And though the Iranian economy is bending under the weight of sanctions, it isn’t breaking. And the security apparatus is showing no cracks whatsoever.

In response to Trump’s decision to renege on the JCPOA and re-impose sanctions, Iran has threatened to restart enrichment of weapons-grade uranium. Should the regime acquire nuclear weapons, the likelihood of an immediate war or nuclear arms race in the region – and the threat to Europe’s security – would be substantial.

Preventing such an outcome is precisely why the Europeans initiated nuclear negotiations with Iran in the early 2000s, following the US invasion of Iraq. But not until the arrival of US President Barack Obama did the overall Western strategy change. Now that Trump is reversing so much of the progress made during the Obama years, it is clear that Europe alone is too weak to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

It is worth remembering that in addition to its nonproliferation objectives, the JCPOA was also designed to reintegrate Iran into the international community. Like the Europeans, the Obama administration recognized that isolating Iran had not worked, and that another war in the region was not an option. By reversing course, Trump has sealed off the only viable path forward.

Iran has been a distinct political and cultural entity for more than 2,000 years; it isn’t going anywhere. The only question is what role this ancient, proud civilization should play in the region and the wider world. Without a satisfactory answer to that question, the entire Middle East will remain unstable, and the risk of a war extending well beyond the region will continue to increase.

Since the US began its partial withdrawal from the Middle East under Obama, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Israel have been fighting for regional domination. And, because the JCPOA raised the prospect of a US rapprochement with Iran, it did not alleviate the tension between these longstanding rivals. In the meantime, Iran has enhanced its position and extended its regional presence through the Syrian civil war and other conflicts. With the Saudis and Israelis already on tenterhooks, a restoration of the Iranian nuclear-weapons program would put the region on the cusp of a major war.

Significant diplomatic efforts will be needed to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, and to formulate a constructive regional and international role for the Islamic Republic. But even then, stabilization of the region must come from within; the experiences of the past century have proven that.

By withdrawing from the JCPOA for no good reason, Trump has wandered into the Iranian maze. Soon, he could come to a fork where he will have to choose between losing face and launching a military confrontation. Either way, he will disappoint his loyal fans and make the Middle East – and the world – a far more dangerous place.

Diplomacy is Gone for this World as We Know It

Iran says new US sanctions mean diplomatic path closed ‘forever’

President Donald Trump on Monday imposed sanctions on Iran’s supreme leader

bloomberg

Iran said the path to a diplomatic solution with the US had closed after the Trump administration imposed sanctions against its supreme leader and other top officials, ramping up tensions further in the Middle East.

President Donald Trump on Monday imposed sanctions on Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and eight senior military commanders, a provocative step aimed at increasing pressure on the Islamic Republic. The penalties would deny Khamenei and his office access to financial resources.

Iran’s Nefarious Nuclear Program (Daniel 8:4)

Nuclear Weapons and Iran’s Uranium Enrichment Program: 4 Questions Answered

Iran’s work on uranium enrichment has proceeded in fits and starts, but now experts generally believe that if it exits the nuclear deal, it could make enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon.

Editor’s note: Iranian leaders have threatened to withdraw from a 2015 agreement that limits their nation’s nuclear activities. Under the deal, the United States and five other world powers lifted economic sanctions they had imposed to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. But President Trump removed the U.S. from the deal in 2018 and reimposed sanctions.

Miles Pomper, a senior fellow at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, explains one of the key activities that the Iran deal covers – uranium enrichment – and why it is central to both peaceful nuclear energy programs and building nuclear weapons.

1. What is uranium enrichment?

Uranium can fuel nuclear power plants and nuclear bombs because some of its isotopes, or atomic forms, are fissile: Their atoms can be easily split to release energy.

Freshly mined uranium contains more than 99% of an isotope called uranium 238, which is not fissile, plus a tiny fraction of uranium 235, which is fissile. Enrichment is an industrial process to increase the proportion of U-235. It’s usually done by passing uranium gas through devices called centrifuges, which rotate at high speeds. This process sifts out U-235, which is lighter than U-238.

Commercial nuclear power plants run on low-enriched uranium fuel, which contains 3-5% U-235. Further processing can produce highly enriched uranium, which contains more than 20% U-235.

2. How is enriching uranium connected to making nuclear weapons?

The same technology is used to enrich uranium for either nuclear power or nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons typically contain uranium enriched to 80% U-235 or more, which is known as weapon-grade uranium.

Nuclear weapons can also can be powered with plutonium, but Iran would need to irradiate uranium fuel in its Arak nuclear reactor and build an additional facility to separate plutonium from the spent fuel to take that route. Currently its uranium work poses a more immediate risk.

Both nuclear power and nuclear weapons rely on nuclear chain reactions to release energy, but in different ways. A commercial nuclear power plant uses low-enriched uranium fuel and various design elements to generate a slow nuclear chain reaction that produces a constant stream of energy. In a nuclear weapon, specially designed high explosives cram together enough weapon-grade uranium or plutonium to produce an extremely fast chain reaction that generates an explosion.

Producing a nuclear weapon involves more than making highly enriched uranium or plutonium, but experts generally view this as the most time-consuming step. It’s also the stage that is most visible to outsiders, so it is an important indicator of a country’s progress.

3. How good is Iran at enriching uranium?

Iran’s work on uranium enrichment has proceeded in fits and starts, but now experts generally believe that if it exits the nuclear deal, it could make enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon.

These efforts began in the late 1980s, while Iran was engaged in a bloody war with Iraq. The first centrifuges and designs were provided by Abdul Qadeer Khan, a Pakistani nuclear scientist who ran a black market network for nuclear technologies from the 1970s through the early 2000s. These machines were poor-quality, frequently secondhand models and often broke down. And the United States and Israel reportedly carried out espionage operations, including cyberattacks, to further disable Iran’s enrichment ability.

Iran continues to have technical problems in producing more advanced centrifuges. Nonetheless, it improved their performance sufficiently in the years leading up to the 2015 deal that observers widely believe Iran could produce enough material for a nuclear weapons program. The 2015 agreement deal set limits on Iran’s research and development activities to limit further progress, but Iran is already testing the legal boundaries of these restrictions.

4. How does the Iran deal limit Iran’s activities?

The agreement limits how much uranium Iran can enrich and to what level. It also specifies how much enriched uranium Iran can stockpile, how many and what types of centrifuges it can use, and what kinds of research and development activities it can conduct.

All of these limits are designed to prevent Iranian scientists from amassing enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon – roughly 10 to 30 kilograms (22 to 65 pounds), depending on the device’s design and the bomb-makers’ sophistication and experience – in under a year. That delay is seen as long enough to give the international community time to respond if Iran decided to go nuclear.

The agreement also restricts Iran’s plutonium separation research, and requires it to accept International Atomic Energy Agencyinspections to ensure that it is not using peaceful nuclear activities as a cover to produce weapons.

If Iran does not exit the agreement, restrictions on its enrichment activities are scheduled to start easing in 2026 and largely end in 2031, although international monitoring will continue after that.

This article by Miles A. Pomper first appearedin 2019 in The Conversation via Creative Commons License

Image: Reuters

Saudi Arabia’s Nuclear Ambitions (Daniel 7)

Alarm bells: Saudi Arabia’s nuclear ambitions cast shadow over the region

Analysts fear Riyadh is seeking to develop the technical capabilities that would allow it to quickly pursue nuclear weapons

In sharp contrast to Iran, its revolutionary identity and revisionist tendencies, Saudi Arabia has traditionally been a proponent of the prevailing order and status-quo balance of power in the Middle East.

This seems to be changing under Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, who continues to receive extraordinary support from US President Donald Trump’s administration. 

Whether it is an attempt to revise the status quo in favour of Riyadh, or prevent it from being revised by others, Saudi Arabia’s nuclear and missile programmes are bound to have significant regional implications. 

US approved transfer of nuclear expertise to Riyadh after Khashoggi’s murder.

Earlier this month, Tim Kaine, Democratic senator from Virginia, revealed that the Trump administration had approved the transfer of nuclear know-how to Saudi Arabia seven times, including twice after the murder of Saudi critic Jamal Khashoggi in early October 2018. 

One of the transfers was authorised on 18 October, only 16 days after Khashoggi, a Washington Post columnist, was brutally eliminated inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, according to the US senator.

„The Trump administration is seeking to negotiate a nuclear cooperation agreement that would allow Saudi Arabia to use US technology for energy purposes, but not nuclear weapons,“ Nicholas L Miller, professor of government at Dartmouth College, told Middle East Eye. 

„There is a concern in the administration that if the Saudis don’t choose the United States as their supplier, they will turn to South Korea, Russia, or China, who tend to have weaker nonproliferation controls in their agreements,“ said Miller, the author of, Stopping the Bomb: The Sources and Effectiveness of US Nonproliferation Policy.

Yet Trump’s transactional and profit-centred approach to foreign policy-making – which arguably prompted his landmark 20 November statement of almost unqualified support for the Saudi leadership amid the Khashoggi fallout – and the secrecy with which US nuclear technology transfers to Riyadh are taking place, have raised doubts about the US resolve, or even ability, to keep possible Saudi nuclear ambitions in check. 

Trump’s ’secret‘ approval

In late March, the Reuters news agency disclosed the Trump administration’s „secret“ approval of licences for six US firms to sell atomic power technology to Riyadh. 

Simultaneously, the Saudis are seeking to develop a ballistic missile programme of their own, apparently with Chinese assistance. 

In November 2018, satellite imagery taken by the US company Planet Labs showed what appeared to be rocket engine tests for ballistic missiles capable of carrying nuclear weapons at a military base near the town of al-Dawadmi, about 230km west of Riyadh. 

Saudi Arabia is gradually diversifying its alliances by fostering closer ties with Russia and China

Several months later, in an exclusive report published on 5 June, CNN cited US intelligence sources as claiming that Riyadh had significantly advanced the missile programme with the help of China. 

Interestingly, the discovery infuriated Democratic lawmakers as the White House had „deliberately“ refrained from sharing its knowledge of the high-stakes development with key members of Congress until they found out about it „outside of regular US government channels“.

„Saudi Arabia’s development of ballistic missiles goes against long-standing US policy of opposing missile proliferation in the region,“ said Miller.

„But the Trump administration has so far been relatively quiet about its response.

„There seems to be a pattern in this administration of looking the other way at provocative Saudi behaviour due to the laser-like focus on Iran.“

‚Reckless leadership in Riyadh‘

Combined with bin Salman’s warnings that the kingdom would pursue atomic weapons if its chief nemesis Iran did, these concurrent and mostly clandestine missile and nuclear activities are sounding alarm bells in certain capitals in the region, not least Tehran.

„A nuclear Saudi Arabia means nuclear proliferation in the most unstable and volatile region of the world,“ Ali Bakeer, a Turkey-based political analyst told MEE. 

„Given the reckless leadership in Riyadh, this is an alarming development for small states in the Gulf in particular, which might either seek a nuclear umbrella from great powers or consider constructing parallel deterrence capabilities of their own if they could afford it.“

UAE nuclear plant: Qatar asks IAEA to intervene in construction, says report

Notably, before imposing an all-out diplomatic and economic boycott on Qatar in June 2017, Saudi Arabia, according to US officials, was devising a military plan to invade the small nation and seize its North Dome gas field.

It is the world’s largest gas field, and adjacent to the Iranian South Pars field. The capture would have made Riyadh the second-biggest exporter of liquefied natural gas in the world overnight.

The harshest reactions have, however, come from Tehran. 

In his Persian New Year address on 21 March, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei threatened that if the Saudis build a nuclear capability with US assistance, „it will fall into the hands of Islamic combatants in the not-so-distant era“. 

This seems to suggest that Tehran might bolster support for Yemen’s Houthi rebels if tensions and hostilities escalate or Riyadh adopts a game-changing policy to tilt the regional balance of power in its favour. 

Shortly afterwards, Ali Shamkhani, Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, warned that the Islamic Republic might be forced to modify its defence posture and national security strategy in response to „suspicious nuclear projects“ in the region. 

„New threats like this will force us to revise our strategy based on the nature and geography of such threats, and predict the requirements of our country and armed forces,“ he said.

Inspection regime no longer adequate

While Saudi Arabia, a signatory of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), is nearing completion of its first atomic reactor in the King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology near Riyadh, it has so far resisted calls by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IEA) to implement proportionate safeguards and an inspection regime that would preclude possible deviation towards weaponisation.  

„Saudi Arabia is currently subject to less intrusive monitoring by international inspectors because Riyadh concluded what is known as a small quantities protocol with the agency,“ Kelsey Davenport, director of Nonproliferation Policy at Arms Control Association, told MEE.

Saudi Arabia … has threatened to pursue nuclear weapons in the past

– Kelsey Davenport, Arms Control Association

„The small quantities protocol was designed to simplify safeguards for states with minimal or no nuclear material, but it is no longer adequate for Saudi Arabia’s expanding nuclear programme.“

Tytti Erasto, a researcher with the Nuclear Disarmament Programme of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, concurs. 

„In theory, Saudis abide by the IAEA Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement [CSA] but in practice, it is not applied,“ he told MEE. 

„This is because the so-called small quantities protocol [SQP] – which exempts Riyadh from inspections – has been applied in the Saudi case, based on the assumption that its nuclear activities are minimal. 

„However, this is changing due to Saudi Arabia’s plans to expand its nuclear programme. 

„In light of this, as well as repeated statements giving rise to proliferation concerns – for example regarding the Saudi intention to match any Iranian nuclear capability – the application of SQP is increasingly questionable, and there’s an urgent need to put CSA verification standards into action.“

Rapid population growth

Rapid Saudi population growth, from 20 million in 2000 to 34 million in 2019, and the consequent increase in demand for energy consumption, understandably make civilian nuclear power an attractive option to meet domestic needs. 

EXCLUSIVE: US-Saudi nuclear deal will face rough ride in Congress

Energy demand in the kingdom is growing by eight to ten percent per year, which it is estimated requires a boost of 80 gigawatts in energy generation by 2040. 

With that in mind, the Saudis established the King Abdullah City for Atomic and Renewable Energy (KA-CARE) in April 2010 to reduce reliance on fossil energy and produce desalinated water in the long haul. 

Almost five years later, in January 2015, Riyadh announced an updated target of 17 gigawatts of nuclear power that would account for 15 percent of the demand.

Yet „Saudi Arabia is reluctant to forswear fissile material production, has yet to agree to more intrusive international monitoring and verification mechanisms, has threatened to pursue nuclear weapons in the past, and is building up its ballistic missile programme,“ said Davenport.

„Given these factors, there are legitimate reasons to be concerned that Saudi Arabia is seeking to develop the technical capabilities that would allow Riyadh to quickly pursue nuclear weapons if the political decision were made to do so.“ 

‚Nuclear hedging‘

Indignant at the Western backlash over the Khashoggi murder, bin Salman has already started putting Saudi Arabia’s strategic eggs, so to speak, in more than just the West’s basket.

The kingdom is gradually diversifying its alliances by fostering closer ties with Russia and China. 

In fact, the crown prince seems to be taking advantage of the threat of cooperation with rival powers to further long-term Saudi interests as he sees fit. 

This does not bode well for the prospects of nonproliferation in the Middle East.

A crucial measure to prevent Saudi Arabia from „nuclear hedging,“ according to Davenport, is for „all states“ to make future nuclear and missile cooperation with Riyadh „conditional“ on its implementation of strident IAEA safeguards – such as those required by the „Model Additional Protocol to the Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement“ in the words of Erasto – and verifiable abstinence from weaponisation-oriented activities.  

„States must also make clear to Saudi Arabia that the international community will not tolerate any deviation from a peaceful nuclear programme, including rhetorical threats to pursue nuclear weapons, and that any such actions will trigger consequences, such as sanctions,“ said Davenport.

History Warns New York Is The Sixth Seal (Revelation 6:12)

New York Earthquake 1884

Friday, 18 March 2011 – 9:23pm IST | Place: NEW YORK | Agency: ANI

If the past is any indication, New York can be hit by an earthquake, claims John Armbruster, a seismologist at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory.

If the past is any indication, New York can be hit by an earthquake, claims John Armbruster, a seismologist at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory.Based on historical precedent, Armbruster says the New York City metro area is susceptible to an earthquake of at least a magnitude of 5.0 once a century.According to the New York Daily News, Lynn Skyes, lead author of a recent study by seismologists at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory adds that a magnitude-6 quake hits the area about every 670 years, and magnitude-7 every 3,400 years.A 5.2-magnitude quake shook New York City in 1737 and another of the same severity hit in 1884.

Tremors were felt from Maine to Virginia.

There are several fault lines in the metro area, including one along Manhattan’s 125th St. – which may have generated two small tremors in 1981 and may have been the source of the major 1737 earthquake, says Armbruster.

There’s another fault line on Dyckman St and one in Dobbs Ferry in nearby Westchester County.

“The problem here comes from many subtle faults,” explained Skyes after the study was published.

He adds: “We now see there is earthquake activity on them. Each one is small, but when you add them up, they are probably more dangerous than we thought.”

“Considering population density and the condition of the region’s infrastructure and building stock, it is clear that even a moderate earthquake would have considerable consequences in terms of public safety and economic impact,” says the New York City Area Consortium for Earthquake Loss Mitigation on its website.

Armbruster says a 5.0-magnitude earthquake today likely would result in casualties and hundreds of millions of dollars in damage.

“I would expect some people to be killed,” he notes.

The scope and scale of damage would multiply exponentially with each additional tick on the Richter scale.

Palestinians Protest the US From Outside the Temple Walls (Revelation 11)

The Latest: Bahrain FM gives interview to Israeli TV channel

The Associated Press June 26, 2019 02:04 PM

A trash trolly decorated with a photo of U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during a demonstration organized by the Islamic militant group Hamas against a U.S.-sponsored Middle East economic workshop in Bahrain, in front of the United Nations headquarters in Beirut, Lebanon, Tuesday, June 25, 2019. The Trump administration is plowing ahead with a $50 billion economic proposal to aid the Palestinians and hopes it’ll drive a much-anticipated but unseen Mideast peace plan. The two—day workshop is to begin Tuesday, where the Trump administration’s Mideast peace team hopes to drum up regional support and secure financial pledges from Arab and Israeli stakeholders. Bilal Hussein AP Photo

The Latest on developments surrounding a U.S.-hosted conference in Bahrain about Washington’s economic plan for the Palestinians (all times local):

9 p.m.

Bahrain’s foreign minister has given an unprecedented interview to an Israeli television channel, calling for open communication with the Jewish state.

Khalid bin Ahmed Al Khalifa spoke to Israel’s Channel 13 on the sidelines of the Trump administration’s Mideast peace conference in Manama.

Al Khalifa says that „Israel is part of this heritage of this whole region, historically. So, the Jewish people have a place amongst us.“

The Bahraini foreign minister voices support for Israeli strikes against Iranian targets in neighboring Syria, saying „every country has a right to defend itself.“ He called Iran a „major threat to the stability and the security of the region,“ and said Iran’s support for militant groups have hindered Arab-Israeli peace efforts.

__

2:40 p.m.

Thousands of Palestinians are rallying outside a U.N. compound in the Gaza Strip to protest the White House-led Mideast peace conference in Bahrain.

The demonstrators gathered Wednesday, raising a black coffin that read „Bahrain conference to hell,“ and signs that said „We are not trading our rights for money.“

Palestinians burned effigies of President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The protesters called out Trump’s son-in-law, chanting „Kushner, Palestine is not for sale.“

The U.S. president’s senior adviser Jared Kushner is spearheading the $50 billion U.S. economic plan for the Palestinians. The proposal, which omits key political aspects, has been met with scorn by Palestinians and their leaders.

The protest, orchestrated by multiple Palestinian factions, including Gaza’s militant Hamas rulers, passed peacefully.

A smaller demonstration took place in Khan Younis, southern Gaza.

___

2:35 p.m.

Lebanon’s Prime Minister Saad Hariri says his government is opposed to the Trump administration’s Mideast plan.

State-run National News Agency quoted Hariri on Wednesday saying his comments came during a parliament session.

Hariri added he was against the naturalization of Palestinian refugees in the country.

Lebanese officials have blasted the Trump administration’s $50 billion investment proposal that comes as part of a Middle East peace plan.

The 10-year plan calls for projects worth $6.3 billion for Palestinians in Lebanon, as well as $27.5 billion in the West Bank and Gaza, $9.1 billion in Egypt and $7.4 billion in Jordan.

The large sums for Jordan and Lebanon, countries with substantial Palestinian refugee populations, were an apparent attempt to have them absorbed into these nations.

___

1:40 p.m.

The Palestinian Liberation Organization has reiterated its rejection of the $50 billion U.S. economic plan for the Palestinians, saying that the proposal’s lack of political vision guarantees its failure.

The PLO Executive Committee released its statement Wednesday, as the White House-led Mideast peace conference was underway in Bahrain.

The statement says the Trump administration wants to sell a „mirage of economic prosperity“ which will only perpetuate the Palestinians‘ „captivity.“

It accused the White House of using the workshop as cover for Israel’s efforts to achieve normal relations with Arab states and grow its settlements in the occupied West Bank.

The statement said that peace could not be achieved without ending „Israeli occupation and economic domination.“

___

9:55 a.m.

The sultanate of Oman has announced it will open an embassy in the West Bank, in the city of Ramallah. The announcement comes as Bahrain hosts a summit on a U.S. Mideast peace plan by the Trump administration, focusing on the Palestinian economy.

A tweet from the Omani Foreign Ministry on Wednesday announced the embassy plans. The ministry says the decision comes „in continuation of the sultanate’s support for the Palestinian people.“

Oman, on the eastern edge of the Arabian Peninsula, runs its own foreign policy, often at odds with its Gulf Arab neighbors, such as maintaining close ties to Iran.

Sultan Qaboos bin Said also hosted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu last October — the first visit by an Israeli leader in over 20 years. In 1996, Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres visited Oman.

___

9:20 a.m.

The heads of international financial institutions and global investors are addressing a conference intended to boost a $50 billion U.S. economic plan for the Palestinians.

Despite widespread doubts about the proposal, which has been rejected by the Palestinians, the chiefs of the IMF and World Bank will offer suggestions for making the plan a success.

Also speaking Wednesday to the „Peace to Prosperity“ workshop in Bahrain are former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, the head of the international football federation FIFA and the lone Palestinian on the agenda, a West Bank businessman who is viewed with deep suspicion by many fellow Palestinians.

The plan’s architect, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, will make a return appearance and the two-day conference will close with an address by Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin.

Pompeo’s Islamic Ignorance

Pompeo’s Islamic Ignorance

Pompeo says remains hopeful Pakistan will crack down on Islamist militants — Reuters

MUMBAI (Reuters) — U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said during a trip to India on Wednesday that he remained hopeful that neighboring Pakistan would chose the “right course” in cracking down on Islamist fundamentalists.

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo speaks during a news conference with Indian Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar at the Foreign Ministry in New Delhi, India, June 26, 2019. Jacquelyn Martin/Pool via REUTERS

The United States and Britain have long urged Pakistan to deal with militant groups. India alleges that Pakistan, its arch-enemy, had a hand in a suicide bombing that nearly sparked a full-blown conflict earlier this month.

Pakistan has consistently denied playing any role.

In an interview with broadcaster India Today, Pompeo said he had discussed Pakistan in his meetings in New Delhi on Wednesday.

“I think this administration has been very clear to Pakistan our expectation. They cannot be supporting terror, whether that is cross-border terror between Afghanistan or Pakistan or whether it’s terror that emanates from Pakistan and comes to this country,” Pompeo said.

He said the Trump administration had taken the threat from Pakistan “far more seriously” than the administration of former president Barack Obama.

“We still have a lot of work to do. But as a diplomat I always remain hopeful that Pakistan will choose the right course. I think for the Pakistani people it is the best outcome,” Pompeo added.

India claimed a diplomatic victory in May when a U.N. Security Council committee blacklisted the head of the Pakistan-based militant group Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), Masood Azhar.

His group claimed responsibility for a February suicide bombing that killed at least 40 Indian paramilitary police in the Indian-controlled part of the disputed Kashmir region, an attack that brought the nuclear-armed neighbors close to war.

Pakistan maintains that the insurgency in the disputed region is being fought by Muslim separatists from India’s side of Kashmir.

Pompeo said Azhar’s case had been discussed, but he declined to be drawn into specifics on other individuals.

“Suffice to say we know precisely who these bad actors are,” Pompeo said.

Writing by Alexandra Ulmer; Editing by Catherine Evans

The Russian Horn Extends to Europe (Daniel 7)

Russia threatens military response to any NATO action over nuclear-ready missile

David Reid

Published Wed, Jun 26 2019 5:57 AM EDT

Moscow has said it will take „countervailing military measures“ should NATO fulfil any threat related to Russia’s nuclear-ready cruise missile system.

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said Tuesday that Russia must dismantle the short-range system, or the alliance will be forced to respond, adding that NATO-member defense ministers would now look at next steps „in the event that Russia does not comply.“

No detail is yet known over what NATO might do although Stoltenberg said the alliance would not engage in any arms race.

According to the Kremlin-owned news agency TASS, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told reporters Wednesday that NATO’s comments „reek of propaganda“ and were falsely attempting to portray NATO’s threat as a „military and political response to Russia’s actions.“

The translation of Ryabkov, provided by TASS, added that Russia would respond to any military action from the 29-nation alliance.

„When these threats begin to materialize into real action, we will have to take countervailing military measures,“ he said.

Earlier this year, the U.S. said it would quit a decades-old missile treaty with Russia if the latter failed to destroy the missile, labeled the SSC-8 by NATO.

Russia’s short and medium range missiles are viewed as a particular threat to neighboring countries as they can be quickly launched, leaving the target country or region with almost no response time.

The 1987 INF Treaty between the U.S. and Russia sought to eliminate nuclear and conventional missiles, as well as their launchers, with short ranges (310–620 miles) and intermediate ranges (620–3,420 miles).

NATO has said Russia’s SSC-8 violates those terms and that Moscow has been deploying the system at locations which threatens countries across Europe.

Russia has been given until the end of August to just five weeks to scrap the system and save the treaty.

The upcoming asymmetric warfare against Iran

Iran’s Retaliation May Target U.S. Allies World Over, Says Security Chief

Radio Farda

Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council Ali Shamkhani has warned that Iran’s retaliatory actions against U.S. will target America’s allies in the region, and around the world.

He also warned that U.S. sanctions imposed on the Islamic Republic’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, could lead to the mobilization of people across the globe who “are in love with the Islamic Revolution.”

Based on the formal jargon of the Islamic Republic, Shamkhani has also referred to Ayatollah Khamenei as the leader of the „Muslim World,“ claiming, „The Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic enjoys widespread influence all over the region.“

In an op-ed article for the Iranian government’s official news agency (IRNA), Shamkhani has also claimed that many Muslims around the world believe in the Islamic Republic as their only real source of support.

Shamkhani, former Minister of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps, IRGC, (1988-’89), and Minister of Defense (1997-2005) has accused Western powers of making a strategic mistake by threatening the Islamic Republic. „Threatening Iran is equal to attacking the ideals and identity of millions of revolutionary Muslims across the world,“ the 63-year-old IRGC Rear Admiral has argued, warning Western countries that their approach could lead to the collapse of the new world order.

Meanwhile, Shamkhani has criticized Western countries of not understanding the „spiritual influence“ factor; again trying to reinforce the idea that Khamenei is regarded as a leader beyond Iran’s borders

In the meantime, on Wednesday June 26, President Hassan Rouhani once again criticized Washington’s decision to sanction Ayatollah Khamenei. There are no sanctions left to impose. Rouhani also echoed Shamkhani’s line about Khamenei’s religious status, telling his cabinet, „With its recent sanctions, the United States proved that it could not understand religious issues.“

Rouhani, who presides over the Supreme National Security Council asserted, „The President of the United States is not familiar with the beliefs of Muslims and spiritual leaders; his claims are baseless, and this action made the reality clear for our people.“

Ayatollah Khamenei is one of many Shiite religious leaders and Shiites are a minority among Muslims. The vast majority are Sunnis who do not regard the Iranian strongman as a spiritual guide. Nevertheless, the Islamic Republic perpetual ideological mantra is to claim that Khamenei is the leader of the Muslim world.

Shamkhani’s op-ed published by IRNA was the third one of its kind circulated in recent days.

The IRGC Rear Admiral has concluded his article by recommending Khamenei’s memoirs, „The Pains that Changed into Gains“ published last March as further reading.

Lebanese Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah unveiled the Arabic version of the book during a ceremony held in Beirut in early February to celebrate the 40th anniversary of Iran’s Islamic Revolution.

The Iranian Nuclear Horn Speeds Up (Daniel 8:4)

Iran will speed up enriching of uranium after deadline to Europe ends on Thursday: IRIB – Reuters

GENEVA (Reuters) – Iran will speed up enrichment of uranium after a deadline given to European countries to prevent this ends on Thursday, the spokesman for Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization said on Wednesday, according to the IRIB news agency.

“The deadline of the Atomic Energy Organization for passing the production of enriched uranium from the 300 kilogram border will end tomorrow,” the organization’s spokesman Behrouz Kamalvandi said. “With the end of this deadline, the speed of enrichment will speed up.”

The Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council said on Tuesday that the Islamic Republic will take new steps to reduce its commitments under its nuclear deal with world powers on July 7.

Reporting By Babak Dehghanpisheh; Editing by Toby Chopra