France’s military in Central African Republic: it’s all about uranium

Paris is focusing on the uranium deposits in the Bakouma sub-prefecture of the Mbomou prefecture, in south-eastern CAR.

The primary sources of France’s uranium in southern Algeria and northern Mali and Niger are increasingly threatened ….

escalation of jihadist operations added a sense of urgency to the French quest for the uranium resources

Behind France’s intervention in CAR: Uranium supply security WorldTribune.com By Yossef Bodansky, Senior Editor, Global Information System/Defense & Foreign Affairs 17 Dec 13 Operation Sangaris (a local exotic butterfly) — the French and MISCA (the French acronym for the International Support Mission to the Central African Republic) military intervention in the Central African Republic (CAR) — is escalating.

The French contingent will now be 1,600-troop strong, rather than the 1,200 agreed-upon at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). The African Union’s (AU’s) MISCA force will grow to a total of 6,000 troops from Francophone African states, rather than the original estimate of 3,500 troops.

The hasty deployment of these forces only aggravates an already explosive situation in the country and region, and sparks new fighting where none existed before the international intervention had been announced. Most notably is the sudden resumption of fighting in Bangui, a city and region which had been completely quiet and secure literally until the day before the arrival of the new French forces.

The French-led Operation Sangaris had nothing to do with the oft-declared threat of “seeds of genocide” in the CAR. The French administration of President François Hollande is driven by the French desire for uranium ores.

Paris is focusing on the uranium deposits in the Bakouma sub-prefecture of the Mbomou prefecture, in south-eastern CAR. The Bakouma area phosphates are unique by their high uranium content: the highest in sub-Saharan Africa. Further feasibility studies showed that there are 41-million pounds of U308 with an average grade of 0.27 percent in the Bakouma area. (This is almost 20 times higher than the resources in Trekkopje, Namibia.)

The primary sources of France’s uranium in southern Algeria and northern Mali and Niger are increasingly
threatened by jihadist terrorism and sabotage, the endemic kidnapping of engineers and technicians, the
scaring away of local miners and workers, as well as the destruction of facilities and support infrastructure.
Hence, Hollande’s Paris decided to fully control and develop the alternate resources in the CAR.

The failure of Operation Serval1 (the French-led military intervention in Mali) in early 2013 and the ensuing
escalation of jihadist operations added a sense of urgency to the French quest for the uranium resources
of the CAR…….

the myriad of clashes, largely sparked by localized causes and power struggles, have suddenly been packaged as Christian-versus-Muslim sectarian clashes, when the vast majority of them are not. By mid-December 2013, these clashes already inflicted some 600 fatalities and a couple of thousand wounded. Outside Bangui, the fratricidal fighting remained primarily bitter clashes between predominantly Christian and animist localized militias and armed groups in quest for consolidating localized power at the expense of both traditional new contenders…..http://www.worldtribune.com/2013/12/15/behind-frances-intervention-in-car-uranium-supply-security/

India ramps up nuclear missiles as Australia hastens to sell uranium to India

India, Australia to hold third round of nuclear talks IANS | http://ibnlive.in.com/news/india-australia-to-hold-third-round-of-nuclear-talks/427039-3.html?utm_source=ref_article Oct 07, 2013 New Delhi: India and Australia, under the new dispensation of Prime Minister Tony Abbott, are hoping to hold a third round of talks on nuclear cooperation in December this year, said a top official on Monday. Secretary (East) in the external affairs ministry Ashok K Kantha said Abbott has “made positive comments about the need for expediting, accelerating negotiations between India and Australia on nuclear cooperation”.

“We already have held two rounds of negotiations, and we are hoping to hold a third round of negotiations if possible in December this year. We have not yet firmed up the dates. But I believe there is a strong desire on both sides to try and bring these negotiations to a successful conclusion at an early date,” said Kantha at a briefing in New Delhi.

India test fires nuclear capable missile from Odisha Tribune, By Web Desk October 7, 2013 ODISHA:  India test-fired a nuclear-capable Prithvi-II missile from a test range at Chandipur, Odisha on Monday, Express News reported……The Prithvi II missile was inducted into India’s Strategic Forces Command in 2003 and is the first missile developed by DRDO under India’s IGMDP (Integrated Guided Missile Development Program.

The missile is capable of carrying 500 to 1000 kilograms of warheads according to The Hindu.

On September 14, India successfully test-fired for a nuclear-capable missile that can reach Beijing and much of Europe. http://tribune.com.pk/story/614650/india-test-fires-nuclear-capable-missile-from-odisha/

Depleted uranium and nuclear wastes – easy path to “dirty bombs”

Nuclear Power Dirty Bomb   The Market Oracle, Oct 28, 2013  By: Andrew_McKillop ”……RECYCLE, REUSE AND DEFEND THE ECONOMY Nuclear waste business, as we know, is not business friendly and leads to the very basic reflex of simply dumping a considerable and growing part of the world’s unmanageable nuclear wastes from the current world fleet of around 436 operating civil reactors (depending on how many Japanese reactors are broughtback into service). Proliferation risks are deliberately restricted to only conventional explosive nuclear weapons and their radioactive materials – totally ignoring both Depleted Uranium weapons using “recycled” nuclear wastes, and the potential future Dirty Bomb targets of active and “partly decommissioned” reactors lurking on the horizon. These with almost no possible doubt will be prime targets in coming civil wars and international wars. These nuclear war options are above all cheap, and of course very dirty.

Since the 1991 Gulf War 1 against Iraq, the war against Afghanistan starting in 2001, and the second war against Iraq of 2003 at least 2500 tons of Depleted Uranium weapons have been used by the US, UK and France in these “delightfully far away” over the horizon wars against lesser races and nations. Depleted Uranium ordnance, to date has caused a conservatively estimated 10 000 cancer deaths, and as many as 50 000 still-living cancer victims in Iraq and Afghanistan.

This has easily calculated economic consequences. When this concerns free market white democrat middle class consumers, the same types of cancers are costed at roughly $ 40 000 for a cancer death and $ 25 000-per-year for surviving cancer sufferers.

The “cute idea” of recycling nuclear wastes as DU ordnance has a cosy market-friendly smell, to some, but the economic damage that these filthy weapons generate smells a lot worse. Those who profit from misery and death will finally pay. The same weapons can be turned around and used on them……… http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article42864.html

In South Australia, the drive for nuclear industry to supply US nuclear weapons fuel

The issue isn’t nuclear power.  The issue is processing uranium for nuclear power that then can be used for defence 

You have to understand this in terms of  in terms of Adelaide, -it’s a military industrial intelligence complex 

Simons is connected to the University College of London  but basically he’s a front man for business interests,    We can clearly question what he is doing given the fact that he’s getting funding from indirect corporate sources.

AUDIO: https://radio.adelaide.edu.au/nuclear-power-in-south-australia-a-golden-age/   Nuclear Power in South Australia – a golden age? Radio Adelaide 23 Aug 13     Chris Komorek spoke with Dr David Palmer from Flinders University to explore the changing landscape. Produced by Ian Newton. TRANSCRIPT by Christina Macpherson 

Chris Komorek  As the uranium debate heats up, so does the destroyed reactor in Fukushima, Japan.The International Energy Policy Institute at the University College London’s Adelaide campus is advocating a ramped up nuclear industry here in South Australia. We’re joined by Dr David Palmer from Flinders University.

 Q. What level of support is there in industry and science for an expanded nuclear industry in South Australia?

 Dr David Palmer First of all you have to put this in context  The interviews you’ve had on Radio Adelaide over the last 2 days have really been interesting. Helen Caldicott’s question about  what motivates these people. She couldn’t quite get her head around that

  I think that actually Prof Simons has answered that. However did not give his real answer on your program

Just to put it in context. Just a few minutes ago, Japan Times released a new story that is quite shocking.It’s Fukushima again –  Their top story of the day “Rate of radioactive flow to Pacific  alarming”. Fukushima No1 leaks estimated at 30 trillion becquerels  since May 2011. What this means is that the rate of release estimated since May 2011 is 100 times more than what TEPCO has been saying.

The other thing is – This is just Fukushima

The Japan Times headline story that ran previously is about the coming earthquake that will hit Tokyo. They estimate that 10,000 people will die from that earthquake which will probably hit under Yokohama.  7 million people will be homeless. Roughly 1.2 $billion will be lost in terms of damage.

There is a nuclear power plant called Homolka halfway between Mt Fuji and Tokyo and that’s right on the coast. That will probably be hit as well. You’re talking about a nuclear disaster South of Tokyo They also think this earthquake could hit at any moment. it’s 90 years overdue.- Mt Fuji potentially could erupt. It’s interesting that Prof S said nothing about the extreme dangers  now hitting Japan almost daily.

Q. I will ask you again. What level of support is there in industry and science for an expanded nuclear  industry in South Australia?

Dr Palmer: In South Australia it’s interesting  and here we get into the argument by  Prof Simons.  There’s a  certain sector of corporate world in Australia, but particularly in our area, that is very supportive of this. You have to look at the rationale that Simons gave in his talk when speaking with the Liberal Opposition Minister. What he said is: Governments throughout the world are trying to balance the trilemma of providing their nations with – and this is his argument for nuclear energy . It’s not about climate change No. 1. It’s about:

1 securing energy supply

2 maintaining economic growth

3 impact on climate change and reducing carbon emissions

So the Issue is security of energy supply If you look at who is supporting this initiative  it’s BHP  Billiton that would probably like to get Olympic Dam operation  going again, once the Coalition gets in to the federal government. It’s all of these  defence contractors up in Edinburgh area, and also the submarine corporation. Simons is one of the main  proponents of a  nuclear powered submarine being built here in Adelaide

The  door will then be open for Adelaide will then be a port for nuclear powered naval  vessels.

Q. Would Australia be going against the world trend if we went down the path of nuclear power? 

Dr Palmer: No, because The issue isn’t nuclear power.  The issue is processing uranium for nuclear power that then can be used for defence That is the key thing. It’s not about somehow cheap energy.  It’s about securing energy supply.  Simons himself said SA has about 30+% of world’s uranium  This is one of the most strategic places in the world for those involved in military operations. Now they’re ramping this up so they have  an entire industrial complex

 You have to understand this in terms of  in terms of Adelaide, -it’s a military industrial intelligence complex Simons is connected to the University College of London  but basically he’s a front man for business interests, that’s just my opinion. We can clearly question what he is doing given the fact that he’s getting funding from indirect corporate sources.

The reality is that Universities play a major part in assisting business in defence contracts. That’s really what it’s about. it’s not just about cheap energy or climate change

Q. If Australia increases exports, and begins enrichment could we see Australia  become an international depository for depleted uranium?

Dr Palmer. Yes I think that  that’s already happening.  That’s my guess. I don’t have the proof of that.

It’s not just about building nuclear power plants and making the world  a better place. What Simons says basically is that you have a choice  nuclear power or coal.  Caldicott was absolutely right, by saying that’s ridiculous  We have all of these other non carbon based energy sources. In fact  a very substantial part of SA’s power is now wind derived

You have to look at other reasons for this .   The other thing is If you look at – Why would someone from London from University College be in Adelaide?  and the fact is that in terms of defence operations we look at military strategy  generally , The US UK and Australia are key players in the US defence operations. The other side is China Essentially this is part of this repositioning in terms of US and its allies military strategy  That’s what it’s really about It’ security in energy supply.

It’s not about nuclear weapons. It’s about nuclear powered sources for military uses, and secondarily to deal with economic growth and climate change.. Their interest in climate change  more about the impact it will have on the economy, not about the impact on you and me.

USA soldiers made ill by depleted uranium

USA’s cover-up of effects of depleted uranium on US soldiers

The U.S. Army’s own contractor, Doug Rokke, who headed a clean up of depleted uranium (DU) after the first Gulf War stated, “Depleted uranium is a crime against God and humanity.” Mr. Rokke went on to state that when his crew went to the Gulf they were all very healthy people, yet after performing clean up operations, 30 members of his staff died and the majority of the others, to include Mr. Rokke himself, “developed serious health problems.

The military is aware of depleted uranium’s harmful effects on the human genetic code.

The U.S. Military does not want the rest of the world to find out what we have done

Dangers and Health Effects of Depleted Uranium, Disabled World,  Thomas C. Weiss, 4 Sept 13 “…….According to an article by Robert C. Koehler in 2007, the Veterans Administration presented figures of 205,000 soldiers who returned from wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Of these soldiers, one-third have sought medical care for issues such as:

Perhaps the most compelling evidence of all is the sheer number of veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts suffering physical ailments. In an April 12, 2007 article, Robert C. Koehler examined the issue:

• Malignant tumors (1,584)
• Mental disorders (73,157)
• Mystery conditions (67,743)
• Nervous system diseases (61,524)
• Musculoskeletal diseases (87,590)
• Digestive system diseases (63,002)
• Endocrinal and metabolic diseases (36,409)

Many times these conditions are lumped together under the convenient catch all heading of, ‘Gulf War Syndrome.’ It is very likely that at least some of these illnesses are caused by exposure to depleted uranium (DU). The effects of DU contamination may take up to 10 years to manifest and it is likely the number of veterans who will need medical care will be higher than from prior conflicts.

Dr. Jawad Al-Ali, Director of the Oncology Center at the largest hospital in Basra, Iraq stated in a conference in Japan, “Two strange phenomena have come about in Basra which I have never seen before. The first is double and triple cancers in one patient. For example, leukemia and cancer of the stomach. We had one patient with 2 cancers – one in his stomach and kidney. Months later, primary cancer was developing in his other kidney–he had three different cancer types. The second is the clustering of cancer in families. We have 58 families here with more than one person affected by cancer. Dr Yasin, a general Surgeon here has two uncles, a sister and cousin affected with cancer. Dr Mazen, another specialist, has six family members suffering from cancer. My wife has nine members of her family with cancer. Children in particular are susceptible to DU poisoning. They have a much higher absorption rate as their blood is being used to build and nourish their bones and they have a lot of soft tissues. Bone cancer and leukemia used to be diseases affecting them the most, however, cancer of the lymph system which can develop anywhere on the body, and has rarely been seen before the age of 12 is now also common.”

The U.S. Army’s own contractor, Doug Rokke, who headed a clean up of depleted uranium (DU) after the first Gulf War stated, “Depleted uranium is a crime against God and humanity.” Mr. Rokke went on to state that when his crew went to the Gulf they were all very healthy people, yet after performing clean up operations, 30 members of his staff died and the majority of the others, to include Mr. Rokke himself, “developed serious health problems.”Mr. Rokke has reactive airway disease now, as well as neurological damage, kidney issues, and cataracts………

A special advisor to the World Health Organization, the United Nations, and the Iraqi Ministry of Health, Dr. Ahmad Hardan, documented the effects of depleted uranium (DU) use in Iraq. Dr. Hardan stated, “American forces admit to using over 300 tons of DU weapons in 1991. The actual figure is closer to 800. This has caused a health crisis that has affected almost a third of a million people. As if that was not enough, America went on and used 200 tons more in Bagdad alone during the recent invasion. ”

The military is aware of depleted uranium’s harmful effects on the human genetic code. A study performed in 2001 related to DU’s effect on DNA was done by Dr. Alexandra C. Miller of the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute in Bethesda, Md. And indicates that DU’s chemical instability causes 1 Million times more genetic damage than would be expected from its radiation effect alone. We are poisoning the people of Iraq and Afghanistan, yet we are making a concerted effort to keep out specialists from other nations who can help. The U.S. Military does not want the rest of the world to find out what we have done………….http://www.disabled-world.com/health/uranium.php

 

South Australia’s Four Mile uranium project – its dangerous and dirty connections

(Christina Macpherson, originally posted on 4 Nov 2012) Leaving aside its nasty little internal squabbles, Australia’s fifth uranium mine Four Mile uranium project in South Australia is without doubt the most striking example of  all that is wrong about Australia’s uranium industry. Well, next door, is Beverley mine – equally bad. But they’re practically the same, in that they are both practically owned by USA’s General Atomics. Neal Blue is the chairman of Quasar Resources, which is affiliated with General Atomics, a major United States weapons and nuclear energy corporation. He is CEO of Heathgate Resources.  a 100 per cent-owned subsidiary of General Atomics (GA) which owns Beverley uranium mine. He is Chairman of the Board of Directors for General Atomics

General Atomics has a murky history  It develops nuclear technologies including arms manufacture. Especially those Predator drones which kill anybody that the Pentagon thinks is “suspicious” in Iraq and Afghanistan. Neal Blue was one of the designers of Predator. At its uranium processing plant on an Indian reservation in Oklahoma, General Atomics for years covered up radioactive water and gas leaks.

General Atomic has spent $thousands’ lobbying and ferrying of  USA politicians to Australia, , and Australian  federal and state politicians to USA . In 2000 Heathgate applauded police brutality against environmentalists and local Aboriginal people. An online video clip details this brutality. the police action (in a 2000 media release which is no longer available online). After a 10-year legal case, 10 people were awarded a total of $700,000 damages.

General Atomics flew a group from the US Congress to Australia, accompanied by company executives, to persuade the Federal Government to buy the company’s Predator unmanned aircraft

As well as its interest in unmanned spy planes, General Atomics has employed human spies. In 2008 it was caught hiring a former undercover police officer turned private investigator to infiltrate Australian environment groups and report on their actions.

In 2008 General Atomics and Neal Blue were  sued for fraudulently hiking uranium prices and manipulating costs. In the settlement One of General Atomics’s customers, Exelon, received $US41 million from the company. It is estimated Mr Blue made $US200 million by breaking the contracts and selling uranium on the spot market

Heathgate Resources  have been promoting the view that low-level radiation is beneficial, and funding the Australian visits of people like Dr Doug  Dr Boreham prepared to promote those views.

Heathgate is not required to clean up  Four Mile uranium mine. and there is no requirement it decontaminate the  Beverley site when mining ceases. Christina Macpherson 25 Oct 12,

Go-ahead for disputed uranium joint venture BY: BARRY FITZGERALD From: The Australian October 25, 2012THE much-delayed Four Mile uranium project in South Australia – a joint venture between ASX-listed Alliance Resources (25 per cent) and US group Heathgate (75 per cent) – is finally being developed.

 

It will be Australia’s fifth uranium mine and comes as the Gillard government begins work on agreements to sell uranium to India.

Shares in Alliance, 25.8 per cent owned by Ian Gandel’s Abbotsleigh,
shot 55 per cent higher to 29.5c on news of the go-ahead.

That was despite plans for Four Mile to start at a much smaller scale
than Alliance would have preferred – a situation that underpins
ongoing litigation between the partners in the joint venture….. as
given environmental clearance by former anti-uranium activist Peter
Garrett when he was federal environment minister in 2009.

Squabbling between the partners over the best way to develop the
resource delayed a go-ahead decision. Heathgate’s operating subsidiary
Quasar wanted to use its processing facilities at the nearby Beverley
uranium operations, while Alliance pushed for a stand-alone operation
on a larger scale…..
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/go-ahead-for-disputed-uranium-joint-venture/story-e6frg8zx-1226502684325

Danger in Australia selling uranium to unstable Middle Eastern regimes

Australia’s plan to sell uranium to the UAE is ill-considered. It essentially requires us to turn a blind eye to the UAE’s poor democratic form and strikes a blow to the goal of a nuclear-free Middle East. It also fails to apply adequate scrutiny and attention to Australia’s corner cutting uranium trade – an industry described by a Senate report as needing urgent changes in order to protect the environment and people from ‘serious or irreversible damage’

Why Australia shouldn’t sell uranium to the UAE Online opinion, By Dave Sweeney , 17 June 2013 For most Australians nuclear issues are the concern of other nations, largely because we don’t, and are most unlikely to ever have, domestic nuclear reactors. But as home to one third of the world’s uranium Australia is a significant player in the global nuclear game and we are playing an increasingly irresponsible hand.

Today in Canberra representatives from the Australian Conservation Foundation, Friends of the Earth, the Medical Association for the Prevention of War and the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons will have a rare window of opportunity to put their case to a Parliamentary committee as to why Australia should not sell uranium to the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

The UAE is country with an illiberal government situated in one of the world’s most insecure regions. The commercial interests of multi-national uranium producers have been prioritised over the wider national interest. Instead of industry assurances it is now time to test the claims – and examine the costs – of Australia’s uranium industry.

Nuclear weapons danger in Australia’s SILEX laser uranium enrichment technology

a SILEX facility could make it much easier for a rogue state to clandestinely enrich weapons grade uranium to create nuclear bombs

SILEX could become America’s proliferation Fukushima,

Controversial nuclear technology alarms watchdogs  http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/intelligent-energy/controversial-nuclear-technology-alarms-watchdogs/18138  By David Worthington | July 30, 2012 A controversial nuclear technology is raising alarms bells among critics who claim it may be better suited for making nuclear weapons than lowering the cost of nuclear power and could lead to a nonproliferation “Fukushima” for the United States.

SILEX (separation of isotopes by laser excitation) is a method for enriching uranium with lasers. It was developed by Australian scientists during the mid 1990’s as a way to reduce the cost of nuclear fuel, because uranium must be processed before it can be used to generate power.

Arms race danger in South Korea’s uranium enrichment plans

Obama’s Nuclear Vietnam National Review Online By  Henry Sokolski June 4, 2013 ”………..South Korea. The Obama administration has asked Congress to act in the next few weeks on a two-year extension of the existing U.S. nuclear-cooperative agreement with Seoul. The existing deal was supposed to be renegotiated so it could be extended for another 30-year period. Seoul, however, wanted Washington to allow it to make nuclear fuel from U.S. nuclear materials. This caused U.S. negotiators to balk. Publicly, U.S. officials worried that giving South Korea the go-ahead to enrich uranium and reprocess plutonium would sink any prospect of getting North Korea to back off from doing so.

An additional concern, though, was more immediate and credible: Saying yes might lock down Japanese plans to finally open a large, uneconomical fuel-making plant capable of producing 1,000 to 2,000 nuclear bombs’ worth of “civilian” plutonium a year. If Japan should decide to open this plant, located in Rokkasho, it might easily give Beijing yet another reason to turn its own military preparations up an additional notch. It was for these reasons that U.S. negotiators asked South Korea to agree to a short, two-year extension to allow further negotiations to sort these matters out.

Reflecting these worries, congressional staffers from both parties added modest language to the administration’s draft U.S.–South Korea two-year nuclear-agreement-extension bill. The staffers’ amended language clarified the desirability of keeping nuclear-fuel-making at bay on the Korean peninsula and in Asia more generally. Administration officials, however, have privately made it clear that they want this language taken out.

This raises even more questions. Is the administration going to hold the line on Korean fuel-making? If so, how can it do this without doing the same with Vietnam? Or is the plan to cave in both cases? If so, how do we intend to deal with the nuclear-fuel-making aspirations of Japan, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Jordan, Egypt, and Turkey?

One diplomatic answer is that we will handle these matters country by country (i.e., case by case). If Congress settles for this, though, it will have forgotten what it was trying to make the White House understand when it first complained about Secretary Clinton’s cutting a loose nuclear deal with Vietnam: That a “case by case” policy is no policy at all.http://www.nationalreview.com/article/350043/obamas-nuclear-vietnam-henry-sokolski

Non weapons usable uranium – Iran converts much enriched uranium to this form

Uranium conversion may help ease bomb fears, Japan Times, 1 June 13 VIENNA – An important recent development in Iran’s nuclear program, if it continues, might help to ease international fears that Tehran wants the bomb, but serious questions still remain, analysts and diplomats said.

This potentially positive step, as highlighted in recent quarterly reports by the International Atomic Energy Agency, concerns uranium enriched by Iran to a fissile purity of 20 percent.

This material is of major international concern because if further purified to 90 percent — a process well within Iran’s technical capabilities — it would be suitable for a bomb.

According to the IAEA’s most recent report, Iran has produced 324 kg of uranium enriched to 20 percent, well above the about 240 kg thought to be needed for one nuclear device — which is reportedly also Israel’s “red line”.

But more than 40 percent of this has been converted into another form, triuranium octoxide, which experts say is tricky to convert back to the original uranium hexafluoride.

Iran says that it is converting this uranium in order to provide fuel for a reactor in Tehran, and four others that outgoing President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad last February ordered constructed, for nuclear medicines.

Tehran also calls it a “confidence-building” measure in so-far fruitless talks with six world powers on hold until after the presidential election on June 14…… http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/06/01/world/uranium-conversion-may-help-ease-bomb-fears/#.UapgdNJwo6I