Radioactive Cloud Over Europe May Have Come From "Nuclear Accident" In Russia Or Kazakhstan

About a month ago, we noted reports from the French nuclear watchdog ISRN that a spike in airborne radioactivity had been detected in the air in Western and Central Europe: "Ruthenium-106 has been detected by several European networks involved in the monitoring of atmospheric radioactive contamination, at levels of a few milliBecquerels per cubic meter of air."

According to IRSN calculations, the very low levels of atmospheric contamination of ruthenium 106 observed by European monitoring networks had no environmental or health consequences but several agencies across Europe were actively seeking answers on the origin of the contamination.

Fast forward to today, and the IRSN now believes they can narrow down the source of the "nuclear accident" to a nuclear facility in Russia or Kazakhstan sometime in the last week of September.  Per the Telegraph:

A cloud of radioactive pollution over Europe in recent weeks indicates that an accident has happened in a nuclear facility in Russia or Kazakhstan in the last week of September, French nuclear safety institute IRSN said on Thursday.

 

The IRSN ruled out an accident in a nuclear reactor, saying it was likely to be in a nuclear fuel treatment site or centre for radioactive medicine. There has been no impact on human health or the environment in Europe, the IRSN said.

 

IRSN, the technical arm of French nuclear regulator ASN, said in a statement it could not pinpoint the location of the release of radioactive material but that based on weather patterns, the most plausible zone lay south of the Ural mountains, between the Urals and the Volga river.

 

This could indicate Russia or possibly Kazakhstan, an IRSN official said.

And while the source of the contamination is yet to come forward, IRSN notes that if an accident of similar magnitude happened in France "it would have required the evacuation or sheltering of people in a radius of a few kilometers around the accident site."

IRSN estimates that the quantity of ruthenium 106 released was major, between 100 and 300 teraBecquerels, and that if an accident of this magnitude had happened in France it would have required the evacuation or sheltering of people in a radius of a few kilometers around the accident site.

 

The ruthenium 106 was probably released in a nuclear fuel treatment site or center for radioactive medicine, Peres said. Because of its short half-life of about a year, ruthenium 106 is used in nuclear medicine.

 

The IRSN ruled out an accident in a nuclear reactor, as that would have led to contamination with other radionuclides too. It also ruled out the crash of a ruthenium-powered satellite as an IAEA investigation has concluded that no ruthenium-containing satellite has fallen back on earth during this period.

 

Measurement from European stations showed high levels of ruthenium 106 in the atmosphere of the majority of European countries, at the beginning of October, with a steady decrease from Oct. 6 onwards.

Despite the concern for residents in close proximity to the "accident," IRSN has again confirmed that the concentrations of ruthenium 106 in the air that have been recorded in Europe were of no consequence for human health and the environment.

Trump Expected To Declare Iran In Breach Of Nuclear Deal

In the months leading up to the November 2016 election, Trump repeatedly referred to Obama"s secretive Iran Nuclear deal as "the worst deal I"ve ever seen negotiated" (here"s just one example).  Of course, for a man who only speaks in absolutes, it"s difficult to know what that meant for the fate of the deal but it didn"t sound positive, nonetheless.

Now, according to the Washington Free Beacon, Trump, over the objections of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Secretary of Defense James Mattis, could declare Iran in breach of Obama"s deal as early as next week and set the stage for Congress to once again impose stiff sanctions on the Islamic Republic. 

The Trump administration is expected to announce next week that it will not formally certify Iran as in compliance with the landmark nuclear agreement, a move that could kill the agreement and set the stage for Congress to reimpose harsh economic sanctions on the Islamic Republic, according to multiple U.S. officials and sources familiar with the situation.

While some senior Trump administration officials—including Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Secretary of Defense James Mattis—are pushing for President Donald Trump to preserve the deal, it has become increasingly clear the president is frustrated with Iran"s continued tests of ballistic missile technology and rogue operations targeting U.S. forces in the region, according to these sources.

Designating Iran as in non-compliance with the deal would loosen restrictions on how the United States can target Tehran and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, or IRGC, which has been the main entity behind Iran"s military operations in Syria and elsewhere in the region. It also would allow the administration to save face in the short-term by not technically walking away from the agreement.

The final nail in the coffin, these sources said, was the recent admission by the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, that it cannot fully assess whether Iran is working on sensitive nuclear explosive technology due to restrictions on inspections and specific sites in the Islamic Republic.

Still, according to the Financial Times, the increasing rhetoric from the White House could be nothing more than an effort to "minimize political embarrassment" while ultimately "maintaining the deal."

Western officials say Mr Trump is frustrated by rules that require him to certify an agreement he framed as the “worst deal ever” every 90 days, in keeping with a 2015 law giving Congress oversight of the agreement.

“He is looking for options that minimise the domestic political embarrassment of ultimately maintaining the deal,” said a western official.

Of course, Tillerson and Mattis are not alone in their opposition to withdrawing from the controversial deal as several other military and intelligence experts argue that some oversight is preferable to none at all.

Retired four-star Gen. Michael Hayden, former head of the National Security Agency, told the Free Beacon that there are always challenges to ensuring Iranian compliance. However, some level of inspections is better than none at all.

"Confirming compliance is always challenging," Hayden said, echoing the thinking of many current and former U.S. officials. "That"s why the intelligence folks always insist on an invasive monitoring regime. That combined with national capabilities should give you reasonable confidence."

"The chairman of the Joint Chiefs said yesterday that Iran was not in material breach of the deal," Hayden noted. "That looks to be true and I would expect the intelligence community to be able to detect significant breaches."

The chief challenge is ensuring Iran is not cheating on the deal by engaging in illicit research activities or other types of nuclear work that are less easy to detect, according to Hayden.

"Cheating around the edges would be a different matter," he said. "Of course, all this would be harder to do if the deal collapsed and the international inspectors were no longer able to perform even their current tasks."

Meanwhile, Senator Ted Cruz, a long-time, vocal opponent of the deal, maintains that Trump has no option but to decertify Iran and allow Congress to enact harsh penalties because of the IAEA"s admission that Iran continues to refuse them access to various military facilities - a clear requirement of the terms of the deal."

"The IAEA"s admission that they are unable to verify a fundamental provision under the nuclear deal—that the Iranians are not engaging in activities or using equipment to develop a nuclear explosive device—is highly alarming. In these circumstances, issuing a compliance certification would be serious mistake," Cruz said.

"If the Iranians are serious about a peaceful program, they need to prove it. Iran"s continued refusal to allow IAEA access to military sites—a clear requirement of the terms of the deal—renders the JCPOA utterly ineffective, and, even worse, a sham that only facilitates Iran"s acquiring nuclear weapons," Cruz said. "This absence of any meaningful verification is yet another reason to vitiate this foolhardy agreement."

Other administration insiders who spoke to the Free Beacon said the president no longer wants to pretend the deal is working.

"The president already knew that continued sanctions relief to Iran was inappropriate and not in our interest given their behavior, which was more than enough to decertify. He said so repeatedly," said one veteran Iran analyst close to the White House and privy to discussions about the matter. "Now there"s this new issue where the IAEA just admitted publicly they"ve been unable to verify entire sections of the deal, which makes the whole thing a no-brainer."

"Decertifying clears a lot of clutter off the table because our guys no longer have to pretend the deal is a good deal," the source said. "They can let it stay in place for a while or try to fix it, all while focusing on the rest of Iran"s aggression."

So what say you...is some oversight better than none at all or is Trump right that the United States is just getting outwitted by a cunning adversary.

China Fears "Vicious Circle" On Korean Peninsula, US Sees "Tipping Point" If Kim Tests H-Bomb Over Pacific

In a considerably more aggressive, and less diplomatic, "story" in China"s government mouthpiece Xinhua, writers warn:

"It is not hard to tell that the situation has become a vicious circle where more missile tests trigger more sanctions, while more sanctions trigger more tests..." urging the double-freeze solution once again, saying that "the parties concerned need to respect each other"s security concerns."

At this moment, the United States and the DPRK, two key actors in the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, should stay calm and exercise restraint, and avoid any provocative action or rhetoric that might further escalate tensions.

Political courage, wisdom and a responsible attitude are required to address the current crisis, instead of provocations or threats.

However, following last night"s less than veiled threat from North Korea that the next escalation will be to test a hydrogen-bomb over the Pacific:

North Korean Foreign Minister Ri Yong Ho suggested leader Kim Jong Un was considering testing “an unprecedented scale hydrogen bomb” over the Pacific in response to U.S. President Donald Trump’s threat at the United Nations to “totally destroy” the country.

Officials across the globe have frantically responded.

The International Atomic Energy Agency has chimed in...

"In the absence of a meaningful commitment by North Korea to return to serious talks aimed at denuclearisation, enhanced pressure remains essential to compel North Korea to change its course."

As Reuters reports that such an atmospheric h-bomb test would be the first globally since China detonated a device in 1980. Tests of nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles are rarer still. The United States’ only test of an operational ballistic missile with a live warhead was fired from submarine far out in the Pacific Ocean in 1962. China was widely condemned for a similar test with a missile that exploded over its Lop Nur test site in the country’s west in 1966. North Korea’s six nuclear tests to date have all been underground, the most recent earlier this month by far its largest.

Experts are gravely concerned...

“We have to assume they *could* do it, but it is exceedingly provocative,” said Vipin Narang, an associate professor of political science at  Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

“To put a live nuclear warhead on a missile that’s only been tested a handful of times, overflying potentially populated centers. If it...doesn’t go exactly as planned....it could be a world changing event.”

If Kim’s threat materializes, it will be a “tipping point” for China, and may prompt many other countries to demand an “end to the regime,” said David Albright, founder of the non-profit Institute for Science and International Security in Washington.

“No one has tested above ground for decades and the radioactive fallout could be terrifying to many,” Albright said.

Japan’s Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga called Pyongyang’s remarks and behavior “completely unacceptable”.

Narang said a test high enough over the ocean would limit the radioactive fallout but risks included damage from an electro-magnetic pulse, something Pyongyang has hinted it might employ on an attack on the United States or its allies.

“If it doesn’t go exactly as planned and the detonation occurs at a lower altitude we could see some EMP-like effects for anything in the area. A lot of dead fish too.”

Additionally, Reuters cites a US official warning that it would be a "game-changer" if North Korea explodes an H-Bomb over the Pacific, but Washington is not giving threat "too much credence."

"Don't Open It" - 9 Mexican States On Alert After Radioactive Material Stolen

In light of the recent spate of emergency drills and nuclear attack
preparedness plans across the United States, it seemed notable that an unknown amount of stolen radioactive material has prompted the head of national emergency services to issue an alert today in nine Mexican states.

A vehicle carrying mobile industrial radiography equipment filled with Iridium-192 was stolen in the city of Tlaquepaque in the state of Jalisco, and as Reuters reports, the alert and search for the stolen material covers the states of Jalisco, Colima, Nayarit, Aguascalientes, Guanajuato, Michoacan San Luis Potosi, Durango and Zacatecas, according to a post on Luis Felipe Puente"s Twitter account.

??Alerta en #Jal, #Col, #Nay, #Ags, #Gto, #Mich, #SLP, #Dgo y #Zac, por fuente radiactiva robada . Si la ves repórtala al 911 y no la abras. pic.twitter.com/Z9L93BG1Bo

— Luis Felipe Puente (@LUISFELIPE_P) April 24, 2017

Puente encouraged people with information about the stolen material to report it but added: "don"t open it."

Somewhat shockingly, theft of radioactive material in Mexico is a somewhat of a common occurrence. Last year a container of radioactive substance used for industrial X-rays was also taken along with a car. Similar occurrences also happened in April 2015 and in July 2014. In December 2013, thieves – apparently unaware of the contents of their heist – stole a vehicle containing medical equipment with highly radioactive cobalt-60, a material that could be used to produce a “dirty bomb,” according to the IAEA, the UN’s nuclear watchdog.