Since President Truman’s decision to detonate two atomic bombs over Japan in a show of U.S. military strength vis-à-vis the Soviets to deter them from retaliating against the Anglo-Saxons at the end of World War 2, numerous initiatives have been undertaken to dissuade Washington from replicating similar crimes. Whereas the USSR acquired its own bomb opening the door to proliferation, neutral States advocated in favour of a nuclear-free world. The international treaties in force consecrate the strategic edge gained by the big powers while depriving the smaller ones of nuclear weapons. These are exploited politically to condemn - rightly or wrongly - insubordinate States (Iran, North Korea) and to protect friendly nations (Israel, India-Pakistan). In the context of the U.S. economic crisis, Obama attempted to reopen denuclearization negotiations. However, vast regions of the planet have already been contaminated, either for having served as nuclear testing grounds or as a combat theater where depleted uranium was used.
The Pentagon has decided to install medium-range nuclear missiles in Europe, which would turn this territory into a battle-field in case of a war between the two Great Powers. It’s no surprise that NATO and the European Union have approved the suicide of the European nations.
The member States of the European Union have unanimously aligned themselves with the military strategy of their American big brother. They have accepted that their own territory may transform itself into a nuclear battleground in the case of conflict between the United States and Russia.
What was the reaction to the warning by Russian President Putin when he said that the world underestimates the peril of of nuclear war, and that this tendency is increasing?
The commentary in the La Repubblica is significant, speaking of his “highly alarming tone”. The almost absolute silence of the whole Parliamentarian arc is also eloquent. As if Italy had nothing to do with the race to stock up nuclear weapons which, warned Putin in his end-of-year Press conference, could lead to the (...)
I belong to a generation shaped by the debate on intermediate range nuclear forces in Europe during the 1970s and 80s. The destructive power of SS20, Pershing and cruise missiles were of profound concern for publics and politicians alike. These weapons were specifically designed for the near-instant destruction of the European continent, and threatened the lives of millions of people.
The whole continent – indeed the whole world – breathed a sigh of relief when the INF Treaty was signed in (...)
After US President Donald Trump’s public statements about Washington’s intention to withdraw from the INF Treaty unilaterally, politicians, diplomats, and other related experts, as well as the entire world community have been focused on this matter. The world is increasingly aware of the risks and threats this rash decision could entail not only for regional but also for global international security and stability as a whole.
At this briefing, we primarily would like to provide (...)
The war in Syria has shown that when it comes to conventional weapons, the US Armed Forces are no longer the top dog. Russia is now in control. Moscow has brought a new resource onto the war pitch: the most recent generation of hypersonic nuclear carriers. This introduction should see Russia getting ahead of the United States in nuclear warfare. Unwilling to lag behind and seeking to make up lost ground, the Pentagon intends to profit - in as much as time remains for it to do so— from its quantitative superiority, to impose its choices on Russia and China.
On 25 October 2018, the First Committee of the UN General Assembly, tasked with disarmament and international security, rejected the Russian draft resolution on the INF Treaty (the Treaty on Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces).
25 Nato Member States voted against examining the Russian draft. This was because it had been filed on 18 October outside the prescribed time limit.
31 States voted in favour of examining the resolution. Such states reason that the Russian draft responds to the US (...)
Over 30 years ago, President Ronald Reagan and I signed in Washington the United States-Soviet Treaty on the elimination of intermediate- and shorter-range missiles. For the first time in history, two classes of nuclear weapons were to be eliminated and destroyed.
This was a first step. It was followed in 1991 by the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, which the Soviet Union signed with President George H.W. Bush, our agreement on radical cuts in tactical nuclear arms, and the New Start (...)
The announcement that "Trump breaks the historic nuclear treaty with Moscow" - the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) - was no surprise. Now, however, it is official. To understand the scope of this act, we should review the historical context from which the INF Treaty was born.
The president of the United States, Ronald Reagan, and the president of the USSR, Mikhail Gorbachev, signed the INF in Washington, on Dec. 8, 1987, after having agreed on it the year before at the (...)
As we might have expected, the de facto abandon of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF Treaty) – concluded between Washington and Moscow at the end of the Cold War – has now rebooted the competition. Except that this time, it’s even more complicated, since the United States violated the Treaty first, while they were already violating the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Meanwhile, Russia has discreetly forged ahead with its technological progress while pretending to allow the problem to drag on.
IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano
The Agency implements safeguards in accordance with its rights and obligations deriving from the Comprehensive Safeguards Agreements and the Additional Protocols concluded between the Agency and States, relevant IAEA Board of Governors and UN Security Council decisions and resolutions, and based on the Agency’s established safeguards practices. It should be noted that under the existing verification framework the Agency sends inspectors to sites and (...)
A meeting of the Joint Commission of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) took place in Vienna on 25 May 2018 upon the request of the Islamic Republic of Iran in order to review the implications of the withdrawal of the United States from the JCPOA and discuss the way forward to ensure the continued implementation of the deal in all its aspects.
Under the terms of the JCPOA, the Joint Commission is responsible for overseeing the implementation of the nuclear deal.
The Joint (...)
The new B61-12 nuclear bomb - which the US is preparing to send to Italy, Germany, Belgium, Holland and probably other European countries - is now in its final stages of development.
This was announced by General Jack Weinstein, deputy chief of staff of the U.S. Air Force, responsible for nuclear operations, speaking on May 1 at a symposium of the Air Force Association in Washington, in front of a select audience of senior officers and military industry executives.
"The program is doing (...)
Meeting with teachers, on the event of Teachers’ week, this morning (Wednesday), Ayatollah Khamenei stated: “Last night, you heard the US president make some shallow and lewd remarks. There were several lies within his speech. He threatened the Iranian government and people. I answer him, as a representative of the Iranian population: “Donald Trump, you cannot lift one finger against us.”
You know that the nuclear issue was just an excuse!” He further reminded his audience: “When the nuclear (...)
The European Union (EU) deeply regrets the announcement by US President Trump to withdraw from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
The JCPOA, unanimously endorsed by UN Security Council Resolution 2231, is a key element of the global nuclear non-proliferation architecture and is crucial for the security of the region.
As long as Iran continues to implement its nuclear related commitments, as it has been doing so far and has been confirmed by the International Atomic Energy (...)
We are deeply disappointed by US President Donald Trump’s decision to unilaterally give up commitments to implement the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action on Iran’s nuclear programme (JCPOA) and to reinstate the US sanctions on Iran.
The JCPOA is a key multilateral agreement approved by the 2015 UNSC Resolution 2231. The Action Plan does not belong to the United States alone but is a domain of the entire international community, which has repeatedly reaffirmed its interest in the (...)
Speaking in a televised address to the people on the JCPOA, President Hassan Rouhani said: “As verified by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Iran has lived up to all its commitments and tonight, it was revealed who the unfaithful is”.
He continued: “Today, we saw what we were reiterating from 40 years ago, and that is Iran is a country that lives up to its commitments and the United States is a country that has never done so”.
“In the past 40 years or even before that, history (...)
It is with regret and concern that we, the Leaders of France, Germany and the United Kingdom take note of President Trump’s decision to withdraw the United States of America from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.
Together, we emphasise our continuing commitment to the JCPoA. This agreement remains important for our shared security. We recall that the JCPoA was unanimously endorsed by the UN Security Council in resolution 2231. This resolution remains the binding international legal (...)
MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF STATE
THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY
THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
THE SECRETARY OF ENERGY
THE SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY
THE ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF OF STAFF
THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
THE UNITED STATES PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE TO THE UNITED NATIONS
THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE
THE DIRECTOR OF THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
THE ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT FOR NATIONAL SECURITY AFFAIRS
My fellow Americans: Today, I want to update the world on our efforts to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.
The Iranian regime is the leading state sponsor of terror. It exports dangerous missiles, fuels conflicts across the Middle East, and supports terrorist proxies and militias such as Hezbollah, Hamas, the Taliban, and al Qaeda.
Over the years, Iran and its proxies have bombed American embassies and military installations, murdered hundreds of American servicemembers, and (...)
The Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China:
Confirm their unwavering support for the comprehensive and effective implementation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) as endorsed by the UNSC Resolution 2231 (2015);
Recognize that the sustainable implementation of the JCPOA proved to be a significant contribution in strengthening global nuclear non-proliferation architecture as well as international security as a whole;
Persuaded that the conclusion of the (...)
The President Putin’s speech on the State of the Nation , dedicated to domestic and international issues, aroused little political-media interest and some ironic remarks in Italy. Yet it should be listened to with great attention.
Avoiding diplomatic roundabout expressions, Putin lays his cards on the table. He denounces the fact that in the past 15 years the United States fueled the nuclear arms race, trying to acquire a strategic advantage over Russia.
This is confirmed by the (...)
A criminal investigation for corruption brought against the former President Lee Myung-bak (see photo), charged with corruption, has brought to light the existence of a secret military pact between South Korea and the United Arab Emirates.
Under this pact, concluded in the period 2009 – 2011 (which was during the presidential mandate (2008 to 2013) of Lee Myung Bak) South Korea undertook to defend the United Arab Emirates if a war broke out; an undertaking which it has only, to date, agreed (...)
The plan was announced three years ago, during the Obama administration, when Pentagon officials declared: "In front of Russian aggression, the United States is considering the deployment of ground-based missiles in Europe" .
Now, with the Trump administration, the plan is officially confirmed. In the 2018 fiscal year the Congress of the United States authorized the financing of "a program of research and development of a ground-based mobile Cruise missile". It is a nuclear missile (...)
During the election period the Italian Government remains in charge only for the «handling of current affairs». Nevertheless it is about to take on other binding commitments in NATO on behalf of Italy.
These commitments will be officialized in the North Atlantic Council, taking place in Brussels on February14-15 at a defense ministers’ level. (Roberta Pinotti for Italy).
The agenda has not yet been communicated. But it is already written in the «National Defense Strategy 2018», that the US (...)
Ican, the latest recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, is wrong to think that the Italian MPs of the government majority had been committed to convince their Nato partners to give up nuclear weapons. The fact of the matter is that the commitments the Nato member states make are purely formal: it is the atomic bombs that form the basis for their security.
“Nato has traditionally been flexible for the wishes of its members, and open to opt-outs from specific policy areas, such as nuclear (...)
Why are nuclear weapons proliferated? The example of North Korea, by Jacques Sapir / Russia and the Great Revolution, 1917-2017, by Peter Bachmaier / US – Preserve the country’s unity, by Jim Jatras / Develop public service human-based. Example of resistance: no breakdown of SBB sales offices in the country, by Marianne Wüthrich / Germany: The electorate induced a political quake, by Rainer Schopf / Elections to the German Bundestag: symptoms of a split society, by Karl Müller / “iigfädlet” – Eastern Switzerland’s textile history. Exhibitions and events until 29 October 2017, by Brigitte von Bergen.
Nato has rejected nuclear disarmament and the Italian Parliament has effectively ratified this decision. The Italian Parliament did so by resorting to a fairy tale of a transatlantic alliance where each member has an equal say. This story-telling is divorced from reality as in 2011, Nato did not simply overreach the terms of a UN resolution when it attacked Libya to secure a regime change, it also violated its own statutes by failing to convene the North Atlantic Council to obtain the go-ahead. The conclusion has to be that the idea that this Council could pre-empt the Alliance transforming into an imperialist venture is a deceit known by all its members.
Not a single nuclear power has agreed to sign the new Treaty banning nuclear weapons. We all appreciate that unilateral disarmament would be a genuine concern for such states. However, Nato, which violates the NPT (the treaty aiming at containing the proliferation of nuclear arms) every day, has gone much further. Last week, it issued a declaration stating (para 7) that atomic bombs are a factor contributing to peace; and there is no way it would contemplate relinquishing these arms, if other states retained them. Furthermore, the wording of the final paragraph is a pre-emptive strike, aimed at destroying the potential of the new Treaty from slipping into the class of treaties that create norms for inter-state relations.
"Before our eyes"