Wednesday, November 29, 2023


Orthodoxy, autocracy, anti-Semitism. How the Russian Empire endorsed and justified pogroms

“Pogrom” is one of the few words that European languages borrowed from Russian. Back at home, it seemed to have fallen out of use in recent decades, becoming a relict of the past – until the Makhachkala airport riot gave it a new relevance. That said, Judeophobia was a permanent trait of the Russian Empire, and the history of Jewish pogroms counts many brutal chapters. The authorities almost invariably failed to act, and in some cases even encouraged the looting and the slaughter.



LONG READ

The Insider
24 November 2023

CONTENT

Ivan the Terrible, Peter the Great, and Elizabeth of Russia


The wave of pogroms under Alexander III


The Kishinev pogrom of 1903


The wave of pogroms of 1905: Odessa


The triumph of injustice

RU

Ivan the Terrible, Peter the Great, and Elizabeth of Russia


As early as in the 16th century, Ivan the Terrible refused to let Jewish merchants into Moscow, saying the Jews were “culpable of wrongdoing, turning our people off Christian faith, and bringing poisonous potions into our land.” Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich expelled Jews from the cities that fell under his rule: “And the Jews shall not be and shall have no residence in Mogilev ... Send the Jews from Vilna to live outside the city.”

Peter the Great was relatively lenient to the Jews (in 1708, he even personally stopped a pogrom his soldiers started in Mstislavl and ordered to hang 13 of the pogromists), but once his widow acceded to the throne, the Supreme Privy Council issued a decree banishing Jews from the country: “Jews, both male and female ...shall all be expelled out of Russia abroad immediately and henceforth shall not be allowed to return under any circumstances, and all authorities shall be warned accordingly.” Peter the Great's daughter, Elizabeth of Russia adhered to a similar position.

However, up to the latter half of the 18th century, anti-Semitism was not a major issue in Russia for a simple reason: Jews were few and far between. Things changed after the partition of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, when a huge number of Polish Jews suddenly found themselves under Russian jurisdiction. Already subjects of the empire, they could no longer be simply “prevented” from entering it. The government had to come up with something new, so they invented the Pale of Settlement: an area outside of which Jews (except for those who converted to Christianity and some other categories that varied over time) were forbidden to live and work. The Pale of Settlement was in place from 1791 to 1917, although its borders changed, often along with the state borders of the empire.




Temporary pass for a Jew to travel beyond the Pale of Settlement to other parts of Russia on family matters. Late 19th century


By 1825, the Russian Empire had found itself in a completely new situation: as demographer Pavel Polyan writes, with 1.6 million Jews, Russia was home to nearly half of world Jewry.

As of 1825, 1.6 million Jews lived in the Russian Empire – nearly half of the world's Jewry

Around the same time, in 1821, the empire saw its first major Jewish pogrom – in Odessa (the name of Odesa in imperial Russia). The pogrom was initiated by members of the Greek diaspora, which controlled the bread trade in the region and detested the increasing role of Jewish merchants. As a pretext, they used the murder of Greek Patriarch Gregory, who’d been brutally assassinated in Constantinople by the Turks, but Odessa’s Greeks were spreading rumors that “the Jews were to blame.” The patriarch’s body was brought to Odessa, and on the day of his funeral, Jewish pogroms broke out in three parts of the city – but the non-Jewish population hardly supported them at the time. The instigators of the pogroms were never found.

In 1859, Odessa saw another major pogrom, once again organized and led by the Greeks. The local authorities sent police to quell the pogrom but were reluctant to antagonize the influential Greek diaspora and tried to treat the incident as a trivial brawl.

The next Odessa pogrom, in 1871, lasted three days and damaged 863 houses and 552 shops. This one was different from the previous ones: although the Greeks started it too, this time other ethnicities joined the unrest. The reaction of the authorities, who turned a blind eye to the pogrom for three days and reacted only on the fourth, is also noteworthy. “Gloating, the local government and the general public reveled in the destruction and encouraged the aggressors to loot,” wrote historian Yuliy Gessen.

And yet that was only the backstory. The pogroms in Russia reached full force in 1881.
The wave of pogroms under Alexander III

Almost all of the Romanovs were anti-Semites to a degree: even “enlightened” Alexander II, who somewhat liberalized the position of the Jews, could easily be heard saying things like “the people are generally courteous but extremely unkempt and resemble Jews” (his take on Italians). Meanwhile, his successor, Alexander III, made no secret of his anti-Semitiс views. A man of less than stellar education, he sincerely believed in blood libel and was Judeophobic even in everyday life. Count Sergei Witte, Russia's first Prime Minister, recounted how the Emperor refused to give loans to Jewish bankers because he “couldn't fathom why to offer any kind of loans to Jews” and sometimes rejected cooperation with Jews even to the detriment of his own interests.

Alexander III was a Judeophobe even in everyday life

This had an immediate impact on policies: not only did Alexander III repeal all the relaxations introduced by his father, but he also tightened anti-Jewish laws whenever he could. “Temporary rules”, which prohibited Jews from settling in the countryside, purchasing real estate, renting land outside of towns and shtetls, and doing business on Sundays, both deprived many Jewish families of their livelihood and, as publicist Semyon Dubnov notes, ushered in legitimate pogroms. And they were only a fraction of the anti-Jewish laws passed under Alexander III, as the policy of the “peacemaking tsar” was blatantly anti-Semitic. His attitude could not but affect public sentiment. Admittedly, the government was unlikely to initiate the pogroms, but it spared no effort in showing that pogroms were allowed.

The impression that the government tacitly approved of pogroms, if not directly called for them, was a major factor behind the wave of pogroms in 1881-1884, which was formally triggered by the assassination of Alexander II. Soon after the attack, many newspapers were quick to place blame on the Jews, directly or indirectly.

The accusations were absurd: only one of the arrested Narodnaya Volya terrorists, Gesya Gelfman, and she was far from being the mastermind. This did nothing to assuage the anti-Semitic press; many were especially outraged that Gelfman, who was pregnant, had had her execution postponed until after childbirth. Some newspapers explicitly announced upcoming anti-Jewish marches on Easter Eve. Given the level of censorship in the time of Alexander III, such outbursts couldn’t have been printed without the tacit approval of censors, who were the mouthpiece for the state authorities. And that was exactly how the general public interpreted the situation: what’s printed has to have been approved.

The wave of pogroms began on April 15 in Elisavetgrad (now Kropyvnytskyi) with a petty clash between a tavern keeper and a visitor over a broken glass. A brawl that began in the tavern soon spilled over into the street. “Booing and shouting, the crowd rushed in pursuit of the fleeing Jews, smashing windows in Jewish shops along the way... Ravaging shops, throwing personal effects and goods outside, and destroying any Jewish property they could lay their hands on,” eyewitnesses recalled.

The patrols tried to intervene, but showed little enthusiasm: firstly, there were no orders from above, and secondly, because of “the crowd of onlookers from among the educated and the wealthy: ladies, women with infants and young children, against whom the officers did not dare to use force.” The next day the pogroms resumed with a new vigor: shops smashed, Jews beaten, the police and cadets trying – and failing – to stop the rioters. It wasn't until regular troops entered the city that the pogroms in Elisavetgrad were curbed. But it was too late as the unrest was rapidly engulfing the neighboring towns. In total, the wave of pogroms rolled over 150 settlements.

All of these pogroms had a common trait: the participants were absolutely convinced of their impunity. A rumor persisted that there was even a royal decree to beat the Jews, a decree that was never made public because the Jews allegedly interfered with it. Besides, the pogroms were not entirely spontaneous: provocateurs appeared the day before in almost every settlement where they broke out.

They argued that “Jews are being beaten everywhere, and this goes unpunished,” that «the Emperor dislikes Jews» and won't give soldiers the order to “shoot at Russian people,” that they “personally heard a police officer cite the Emperor’s decree allowing the beating of the Jews since they are oppressing the Russian people,” or that “the Emperor is traveling abroad and ordered for all Jews to be beaten before his return.” Leaflets by anonymous authors were posted everywhere, calling for the “eradication of the heinous Jewish tribe” and conveniently announcing the dates of upcoming pogroms.

Leaflets called for the “eradication of the heinous Jewish tribe” and conveniently announced the dates of upcoming pogroms


There are different opinions about the extent to which the pogroms were planned. A note submitted to the government by Baron Ginzburg stated that most of the pogroms had occurred in settlements along the railroad, and all of them had followed the same scenario: first, a rumor emerged about an upcoming pogrom on a particular date; on that day a “gang of ragamuffins” arrived by train, got drunk, and started the pogrom, taking the cue from their ringleaders (who had lists with addresses of Jewish apartments and shops in advance). In the crowd, there were always a few instigators, reading out anti-Semitic articles and presenting them as decrees authorizing the beating of Jews.

The note also stated that the authorities tacitly sympathized with the pogromists: despite knowing the dates of the pogroms in advance, they never took preventive measures. The authorities sometimes confirmed this. Thus, General Novitsky, an eyewitness of the Kiev (currently Kyiv) pogrom of 1881, wrote that the Jews “undoubtedly owed this pogrom to the governor-general of Kiev, Adjutant General Alexander Drenteln, who hated Jews with all his heart and gave carte blanche to rampant mobs of ruffians and Dnieper tramps who openly thrashed Jewish properties, shops, stores, and markets, even in the presence of the general himself and his troops, who’d been summoned to curb the unrest. The troops became impassive spectators of all the lawlessness, havoc, and robberies of Jewish properties, and their morale was so low that they even looted Jewish stalls on outdoor markets, which I saw for myself.”


The Pogroms of the 1880s
Print by Johann Schonberg


The same failure to act, bordering on complicity, characterized the Balta pogrom in March 1882. This pogrom turned out to be one of the most violent, with 211 people injured, 12 killed, at least 20 cases of rape reported, and 976 houses and 278 shops looted.

“Deliberately or inadvertently, [the authorities'] actions only fueled the riots,” writes historian Arkady Zeltser. “Thus, on the first day of the pogrom, the troops prevented Jews from passing over the bridge to the Turkish side, which enabled the rioters to destroy Jewish property there; further on, the authorities released 24 Christians arrested on the first day of the pogrom under the pressure of the mob, while the detained Jews remained under arrest until the governor’s arrival. ... The troops tried to contain the riots to some extent; patrolling the town, the local battalion cordoned off the crowd and held it for almost an hour ... but when the police officer, the military chief, and the police inspector appeared, the chain was broken, and the mob, accompanied by peasants who had arrived from the villages, pounced on the liquor store, got drunk and began to smash and crush everything in their path. ... The police officer disappeared somewhere, and no one saw him throughout the pogrom. The police and soldiers aided and abetted the hooligans. Military chief Karpukhin patrolled the city throughout the day, accompanied by soldiers, who, however, did not counter the pogrom.”

During the subsequent debriefing, Balta’s authorities tried to convince their superiors that the riots had been organized... By none other than the Jews themselves.

Other government representatives blamed the Jews for the pogroms too, although indirectly, by saying they’d pushed people to the extreme. The most common explanations include the ‘economic domination’ of Jews, their making drunkards of Russian people, and their ‘malicious’ commercial activities. Jewish communities were even reproached for their secluded, tightly-knit nature – which they largely owed to the Pale of Settlement and other anti-Semitic laws.

The wave of pogroms abated in 1884, after causing the first major outflux of Jews from the Russian Empire. The First Aliyah, which included about 2 million Jews, was largely triggered precisely by the pogroms.
The Kishinev pogrom of 1903

Under Nicholas II, pogroms resumed. In the 1890s, they flared up sporadically all over the country. But the most outrageous bloodshed occurred already in the 20th century in Kishinev (now Chisinau), on April 6 and 7, 1903.

This pogrom was all the more shocking because Bessarabia was considered an oasis of calm. Unfortunately, the government had created an atmosphere that strongly favored pogroms.

Firstly, the post of Minister of the Interior and Chief of the Gendarmes during these years was occupied by Vyacheslav von Plehve, an open anti-Semite. Many eyewitnesses named him as one of the main culprits and organizers of the Kishinev pogrom (Count Witte also shared this opinion). And while today's historians doubt his immediate involvement, hardly anyone questions his approval of pogroms. General Kuropatkin, former Minister of War under Nicholas II, looks back on a conversation with Plehve in his diary: “As well as from the Sovereign, I heard from him that the Jews should be taught a lesson, that they’d grown arrogant and were spearheading the revolutionary movement.”

The important caveat is “as well as from the Sovereign.” Nicholas II was as much of an anti-Semite as his father – and even surpassed him. He appears to have sincerely believed in The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, openly sympathized with the nationalistic Union of the Russian People, which thrived under his rule, and was quick to grant pardon to arrested pogromists. All of the above instilled confidence that pogroms were not just acceptable but desirable to the authorities.

Nicholas II sincerely believed in The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and openly sympathized with nationalists


The groundwork for the Kishinev pogrom was laid by Bessarabets, a newspaper published by the infamous Black Hundred activist Pavel Krushevan, who had also been the first to release The Protocols of the Elders of Zion in 1903. The newspaper painted the previous day's murder of 14-year-old Mikhail Rybachenko (as the investigation soon found out, he'd been killed by a relative over an inheritance) as a brutal ritual killing. Day after day, journalists reveled in the gory details (the killers had allegedly sewn the boy's eyes, ears, and mouth shut) and explained that the Jews had released the child's blood and used it to make matzah. In addition, the Jews were blamed for all their other purported “transgressions.”

The date of the forthcoming pogrom was no secret, with public places strewn with anti-Semitic leaflets, and rumors spreading throughout the city that the tsar had issued a decree “to beat the Jews within three days after Easter.” The Jewish community reached out to the local government with a request for protection, and the Christian population preemptively painted crosses on their doors and put icons in the windows.

The pogrom began on April 6 (19 N.S.), the first day of Orthodox Easter. At first, the pogromists threw stones at the windows of Jewish homes, then started smashing shops. There were no human casualties early on, but the authorities’ indifference convinced the aggressors of their absolute impunity. Dr. Moses Slutsky, the chief physician of the Jewish hospital, who treated the pogrom victims, recalled that more wounded and killed were arriving every minute: “A cabman I knew and whose services I often used brought a severely wounded man to the hospital and left; half an hour later, his own corpse was brought in his carriage.”

“The faces of the dead were disfigured to such an extent,” writes the doctor, “that even the closest relatives of the deceased – their wives and children – could barely recognize them: broken skulls, from which the brains fell out, smashed faces, covered with blood and down... Often, the dead could only be identified by what they were wearing.” There was no fleeing from the pogromists: they broke into houses, beat up anyone who got in their way, searched for those who’d hid, and chased everyone who tried to escape.




Kishinev, after the pogrom


As Slutsky recalls, a family climbed to the roof, and “the thugs followed them. Soon the thugs caught them and started pushing the poor things off the roof one by one as the crowd below roared with laughter.” Almost all of the victims died. Another family hid in a shed but also unsuccessfully: a neighbor stabbed the head of the family with a knife, and then “the thugs beat him to death with clubs in front of his wife and children.” Many of the pogromists had indeed been their victims’ good neighbors if not friends. “Interestingly, there was a town policeman on duty near the house and a few soldiers not far away,” remarks Slutsky, “And yet, despite desperate pleas for protection, they remained passive onlookers, excusing themselves by saying they’d received no orders to intervene.” By contrast, according to the doctor's testimony, the police sometimes detained Jews who tried to set up self-defense units.

It wasn’t until the evening of the second day that the local garrison was authorized to use arms against the pogromists. The soldiers were given ammunition – but never fired even a single shot. “Within an hour and a half, peace was restored throughout the city. There was no need for bloodshed or gunfire. All it took was certainty,” wrote Vladimir Korolenko in his essay on the Kishinev pogrom.

Finally, arrests were made, and the casualties were tallied: 49 killed, 600 wounded, and 1,500 houses destroyed – more than one-third of all Kishinev households. “Everywhere, the trees were sprinkled with down like snow. Holes from ripped-out doors and windows gaped. The streets were strewn with fragments of furniture, smashed crockery, torn bedding, clothes, and pages from Jewish books. ... Ransacked synagogues, where Torah scrolls had been torn and desecrated,” recalls Slutsky, looking back on the city after the pogrom.






The wave of pogroms of 1905: Odessa

In 1905, the pogroms broke out with renewed vigor, and the authorities appeared to have become even more forgiving – for a host of reasons. First, they viewed Jews as potential “insurgents” (the propaganda of the time spared no effort in trying to equate “Jew” with “revolutionary,” making this, in a sense, a self-fulfilling prophecy). Secondly, Nicholas II saw the Black Hundreds as the core of his support in the troubled days, willingly endorsing their activities. Finally, the government was only too willing to direct the rage of the poor toward the Jews, distracting them from the actual source of their troubles.

The pogroms followed the same pattern, always starting with instigators spreading rumors of a Jew desecrating an icon, for instance, or shooting at the Emperor’s portrait. Police and troops often remained passive. However, Jewish self-defense groups had by then emerged in many towns and cities and sometimes managed to stop pogromists, who were unaccustomed to any resistance. They were especially efficient if the authorities did not interfere with their defense (which was not always the case).





The wake of the Odessa pogrom


The pogroms peaked in October 1905: 690 episodes in 102 settlements, with a total death toll ranging from 800 to 4,000 (by different estimates). The bloodiest one occurred in Odessa (currently Odesa) on October 18-21, 1905.

When the pogrom began, the situation in the city was already unstable, so all it took was a tiny spark. A conflict occurred between two protests; a child died, and the mob was quick to blame the Jews. On the first day, Jewish self-defense units were quite successful in containing the riots, disarming and detaining at least 200 pogromists. Unfortunately, the local authorities intervened, stepping up for the opposite side. The town mayor Dmitry Neidgardt ordered to remove police officers from the streets (allegedly fearing for their safety), and the governor-general A. Kaulbars, according to some sources, ordered the troops to use all kinds of weapons to suppress Jewish self-defense. The pogromists were given the green light.

After that, the pogroms continued for another four days, and many soldiers also joined in, according to eyewitness accounts. A Russkoye Slovo correspondent telegraphed from Odessa: “The riots are taking on grand, threatening proportions, accompanied by killings, violence, rape, attacks on civilians, and endless looting. Huge crowds of hooligans, reinforced by residents of the suburbs, scum, port beggars, armed with crowbars, clubs, and stakes with iron ends, are moving along the streets in groups, destroying and looting everything in their path.”

The riots spilled over into the suburbs. Jews who tried to escape were drowned at sea or killed right on the trains. The police did not interfere; from the onset, rumors circulated among the pogromists about orders to leave them alone until October 21. And indeed, the order to use force was issued only on the morning of October 22, and the riots immediately stopped.

According to various estimates, the Odessa pogrom killed from 500 to 1100 people. There was not enough space in the cemetery, and Jews had to be buried in mass graves. Another 3,000 people were wounded. Tens of thousands were left homeless.
The triumph of injustice

The pogroms were followed by trials, but more often than not they became a new source of abuse for the victims: “procedural pogroms,” as lawyers put it. Jews were treated like criminals. The sworn attorney and publicist Lev Kupernik wrote about the “presumption of a Jew's guilt”: “Every man is considered decent until the contrary is proved; conversely, every Jew is considered a scoundrel until the contrary is proved.”

The trial after the Gomel pogrom in 1903 is very indicative in this sense. Thirty-six Jews from self-defense groups ended up in the dock with the pogromists. Eyewitnesses recall that the court was biased against both the Jews and their defenders: at one point, the atmosphere became so outrageous that the Jews’ defenders resigned halfway through the session. Eventually, 23 of the 36 Jews were convicted, with the same punishment as the pogromists. The indictment was a clear message from the authorities: Jews weren't allowed to defend themselves against pogroms.

The indictment was a clear message from the authorities: Jews weren't allowed to defend themselves against pogroms


The fate of the Odessa mayor Dmitry Neidgard, who was guilty of at least failure to act during the pogroms of 1905, is also noteworthy. Under public pressure, he was removed from office but received subsequent promotion, becoming a senator, then a Privy Councillor, and in 1907, the Odessa Duma awarded him the title of honorary citizen of Odessa.

Nicholas II himself made no secret of his allegiance. “The people were outraged by the insolence and impudence of revolutionaries and socialists, and since nine-tenths of them are Jews, all the anger fell on them – hence the Jewish pogroms,» he wrote to his mother on October 27, 1905.

The global community sharply condemned the pogroms in the Russian Empire. U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt demanded that Nicholas II amend the anti-Semitic laws (primarily on settlement), but the emperor refused, even though it meant losing much-needed foreign loans. He was not in a hurry to offer pogrom victims financial aid either, believing they were already receiving enough from domestic and Western Jewish organizations.

The Kishinev pogrom and subsequent incidents are believed to have indirectly influenced even the outcome of the Russo-Japanese War because American bankers of Jewish descent financially supported the Japanese in protest against Russia's policy toward the Jews. In the future, the anti-Semitism of Nicholas II and his entourage served them poorly, pushing Jewish youth, who had no chance for a normal life under their rule, to join the revolutionary movement.
Economic statecraft with American characteristics

MARK BEESON VAN JACKSON

The United States keeps pitching Asia regional deals for
economic arrangements that are not politically viable at home.


Pressing trade deals that do little more than insulate American tech oligopolies from the laws and regulations of Asian nations will not restore US primacy or counteract China’s influence 
(Dall.e/Canva)



Published 29 Nov 2023 
 Follow @WonkVJ

Once upon a time, trade policy was a bit dull and the preserve of pointy-headed specialists. Its ends were rarely scrutinised. Its means were obscure to the public and largely exempted from political friction.

Now, however, trade policy is increasingly integral to a nationalist form of “economic statecraft” that has come to define inter-state competition, especially between the United States and China. Consequently, “getting trade policy right” is a highly political question subject to a range of conflicting interests and priorities that make identifying – let alone pursuing – a clear-cut “national interest” all but impossible.

The difficulties of separating economic and strategic policies are unusually acute for the United States.

For example, Donald Trump signalled just how dramatically American priorities can change with the abrupt departure of the United States from negotiations for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). But American attitudes toward globalisation and neoliberal economics have changed too, and Trump’s possible return highlights just how persistent the theme of American unpredictability is likely to be as it struggles to accommodate competing goals and interests within the fractious world of Washington.
China is already the region’s dominant economic actor and the principal economic partner of all its neighbours.

The latest iteration of regional economic statecraft is the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF), an initiative that many in the region would struggle to name, let alone benefit from. And the plan has become increasingly tangled with domestic politics, with criticism about the influence of “Big Tech” lobbyists that not only advocated for but literally wrote portions of the IPEF text for the Biden administration. Members of the Democratic Party in Congress are increasingly vocal about the agreement’s failure to protect labour rights and the environment, forcing a promised grand announcement about IPEF at the recent APEC summit in San Francisco to be reined in at the last minute.

As happened with the TPP, which was eventually adopted as the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), the United States has solicited the support of Asian governments for an economic arrangement that is not politically viable for the United States itself. And even if the Biden administration was willing to make IPEF a vessel for worker interests and environmental protections, insisting on either may make the agreement much more difficult for countries in Southeast Asia to accept, especially given that it offers no privileged market access to the United States.A launch event for the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF) in May 2022 ahead of the Quad summit in Tokyo (Adam Schultz/Official White House Photo)

More fundamentally in the context of the United States’ long-term competition with China for regional influence, IPEF is unlikely to change the existing direction of travel. China is already the region’s dominant economic actor and the principal economic partner of all its neighbours.

Enthusiasts of great-power rivalry often overlook that in the decades since the 1997–98 Asian Financial Crisis, Asian governments have constructed a financial and economic architecture that buoys their economic interdependence largely to the exclusion of the United States. The Chiang Mai Initiative for intra-regional currency swapping, the Asian Bond Market Initiative, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Plus-Three (China, Japan, and South Korea), the ASEAN Surveillance Process, the Northeast Asia Trilateral Cooperation Secretariat, and the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) are just a handful of the arrangements that constitute Asia’s economic order.

China is party to most of them; the United States is party to none of them. And this list excludes the numerous Sino-centric institutions networking the region such as the Belt and Road Initiative, or the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (RCEP), which excludes the United States but includes all its key regional allies.
Unpalatable and unlikely as it may be, perhaps there is something that American policymakers might learn from the Chinese approach.

The salutary lesson is that America does not run the table on Asian political economy anymore. Pressing trade deals that do little more than insulate American tech oligopolies from the laws and regulations of Asian nations will not restore US primacy or counteract China’s influence. America’s “Build Back a Better World” initiative is a pale imitation of China’s grandiose Belt and Road Initiative, which despite much criticism, has delivered tangible outcomes that are literally cementing China’s place in the Indo-Pacific and beyond.

Unpalatable and unlikely as it may be, perhaps there is something that American policymakers might learn from the Chinese approach. Successful economic statecraft depends more on addressing the key concerns of potential partners: poverty alleviation, transitioning to sustainable economic growth, and delivering useful infrastructure and investment.

But at a time when the United States is distracted by conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine, not to mention the polarisation of domestic politics, it may prove difficult for American foreign policymakers to move beyond the all too familiar staples of containment and zero-sum competition with its principal rival.

It’s worth remembering the long peace of Asia owed a good deal to the development of cooperative coexistence between the United States and China. Economic interdependence could still be a force for more stable great power relations, and one that would likely be welcomed throughout the Indo-Pacific. Whether any country’s economic statecraft can rise above the short-term national interest may prove to be the defining issue of our time.
Scientists 'Surprised' by Antarctic Glacier Suddenly Doubling Its Speed


Nov 28, 2023 
By Jess Thomson
NEWSWEEK
Science Reporter

A huge Antarctic glacier has suddenly started melting much faster than before after years of little change thanks to warming oceans, researchers have found.

The Cadman Glacier, situated on the Antarctic Peninsula, increased the speed of its retreat by around 94 percent between 2018 and 2019 after nearly 50 years of relatively little change, showing how vulnerable the region is to climate change, a new paper in the journal Nature Communications reveals.


The researchers used satellite observations and oceanographic measurements to look into how the Cadman Glacier changed between 1991 and 2022, finding that the speed at which the glacier was melting was accelerating, increasing by a rate of around 0.5 gigatons (around 200 billion pounds) per year. Between November 2018 and December 2019, the Cadman Glacier's calving front crept back by 5 miles.
The mountainous and glaciated coastline of the Antarctic Peninsula. Researchers have found that the Cadman Glacier is melting at an accelerated pace thanks to warming oceans.
ANNA HOGG

"Cadman Glacier is on the west coast of the Antarctic Peninsula, the mountainous spine that points out from the continent toward South America. Since the 1970s, when we started having regular satellite images, the glacier appeared stable with its terminus (where it meets the sea) not changing position significantly," Benjamin Wallis, a glacier and climate researcher at the University of Leeds and a co-author of the paper, told Newsweek.

"But in 2018 the glacier started accelerating its flow and retreating, shrinking in length by 8 kilometers (5 miles) between 2018 and 2021. Since 2021, the glacier has not shown any signs of readvancing."

The researchers also found that the retreat of the glacier occurred at the same time as a positive temperature anomaly in the upper ocean, with a 1,300-foot deep channel allowing warm water to reach the Cadman Glacier. Having nearly doubled in its speed of retreat, 2.16 billion tons of ice are now draining from the Cadman Glacier into the ocean each year.

"We were surprised to see the speed at which Cadman went from being an apparently stable glacier to one where we see sudden deterioration and significant ice loss," Wallis said in a statement.

The retreat of glaciers in Antarctica increasingly destabilizes the Antarctic Ice Sheet, which is the largest single mass of ice on Earth. Until recently, most research had been focused on glacier melt toward the eastern Antarctic Peninsula due to the breakup of the Larsen ice shelves, as the western peninsula had been more stable. This research shows that the western peninsula glaciers, including the Cadman Glacier, are less stable now than they were before.

"Our work points to the warming ocean causing the glacier to accelerate and retreat. This is because the oceans around Antarctica have been warming and the glacier is in contact with these waters where it flows into the ocean and begins to float," Wallis said. "It was melting from beneath, which we were able to detect using satellite data.
Sign up for Newsweek’s daily headlines

"Outstanding and pioneering work by other glaciologists and oceanographers has shown that ice shelves and glaciers in Antarctica are being eroded by warm ocean water. This paper is an example of how this can lead to sudden and rapid ice loss. There are other glaciers in the same region which might behave in a similar way in the future."


A map showing the location of the Cadman Glacier on the Antarctic Peninsula. A study has found that ocean warming caused the glacier to rapidly retreat between 2018–2019, after years of stability.
Created with Datawrapper


The researchers stress that while the Cadman Glacier alone melting won't have much of an impact on sea level rise, it's symptomatic of the Antarctic ice sheet slowly decaying due to increasing water temperatures. As the Cadman and other glaciers across the peninsula start melting further, this may lead to significant increases in sea level over the next few decades.

"The glacier in this study, Cadman Glacier, is small in Antarctic terms and won't contribute significantly to sea level rise on its own," Wallis said. "However, it's important that we understand how glaciers like this in Antarctica respond to the changing environment so that we can make better projections of future sea level rise."

A marine-terminating glacier in Antarctica.
ANNA HOGG

Michael Meredith, a paper co-author and oceanographer at the British Antarctic Survey, agreed: "We have known for some time that the ocean around Antarctica is heating up rapidly, and that this poses a significant threat to glaciers and the ice sheet, with consequences for sea level rise globally," he said in the statement.

"What this new research shows is that apparently stable glaciers can switch very rapidly, becoming unstable almost without warning, and then thinning and retreating very strongly. This emphasizes the need for a comprehensive ocean observing network around Antarctica, especially in regions close to glaciers that are especially hard to make measurements."

Braving the frigid air in Antarctica, painter draws inspiration for global exhibit, highlights impact of climate change


Stepping out onto land in Antarctica, I marveled at the grayscale panorama. It looked like a blend of light sky and dark sea that inspired my first piece of art.

Grisel GonzĂĄlez
November 28, 2023

SOFIA, Bulgaria ꟷ Eighteen years ago, I received an invitation to join the Argentine Antarctic Cultural Project, a remarkable event commemorating the 100th anniversary of Argentina’s presence in Antarctica. Managed by the powerhouse behind Argentina’s Antarctic missions, The National Antarctic Directorate (DNA), I embarked on a 40-day odyssey across the region. Immersing myself in the pristine white expanse and the breathtaking visual landscape, an unparalleled creativity ignited within me. Antarctica quickly became the nucleus of my artistic pursuits, culminating in my art collection and book Al Sur del Sur, mi AntĂĄrtida.

This year I unveiled a retrospective exhibition at St. Kliment Ohridski at Sofia University. The collection encapsulated the depth of my remarkable journey through Antarctica and celebrated the 30-year scientific alliance between Argentina and Bulgaria.

Read more arts & culture stories at Orato World Media
Committing to an expedition in Antarctica: simple tasks required complex routines

I approached my trip to Antarctica with an open mind, eagerly anticipating surprises along the way. Those surprises began immediately. When I arrived on the dock to board our ship, the sight of the ARA Almirante IrĂ­zar icebreaker stunned me. [An icebreaker is a ship or boat designed to navigate through ice-covered waters and create safe waterways for other boats and ships.] It resembled a bustling city on ice.

After several days of travel on the ship, at 5:00 a.m., we arrived at the Esperanza base where we would take refuge for the following weeks. Stepping out onto land in Antarctica, I marveled at the grayscale panorama. It looked like a blend of light sky and dark sea that inspired my first piece of art.

Settling into the base, the lack of accommodation surprised me. Between another group and ours, the base offered too few beds so we took over the gym and spread out our sleeping bags. I sought solace in a heated area but the warmth soon dissipated. Despite bundling up and wearing a hat, the freezing temperatures penetrated everything. I had to learn to adapt to this shift in climate.

I soon discovered that simple tasks like using the bathroom demanded complex routines. At night, I would emerge from my sleeping bag, dress in my warm clothes, trek to the school’s bathroom, return, undress, and resettle into bed.
I faced fear and risk but the landscape informed my art as I captured stunning moments

Exploring Antarctica presented clear risks. I made sure only to venture out in groups and never lose sight of the base. Nevertheless, every landscape before me delivered a thrill. Antarctica’s sheer beauty exceeded all my expectations.

Sometimes, the glaciologists gathering samples invited me to join their expeditions. Scaling the glacier’s foothills, we donned spiked crampons to traverse the icy terrain. Walking alongside the group leader, I learned the importance of proceeding in a single line to prevent potential accidents. The level of danger during these trips dawned on me, but it felt like the beginning of an adventure.

Dangerous situations loomed, like a rubber boat failing in the middle of the sea, and I felt a growing fear. Despite my distress, I felt a driving force to keep going. Antarctica’s barren landscapes, snow-capped mountains, and coastal moss delighted me. I absorbed all the information I learned and aimed to capture moments like the feeling of the biting cold and observing wildlife. I embraced the unique lighting and sought to create figurative art – that in which the subject matter is recognizable from the real world.

Soon, I discovered another inspiration: the constant and unexpected rain. In Antarctica, heat transformed snow into rain, revealing the impact of climate change. Witnessing increased moisture which fostered moss growth drove me to mix the color green into my work, symbolizing the changing landscape.
Bringing experiences from Antartica to a wider audience around the world

One day at what we called the seventh point [seven kilometers from base], scientists from the University of La Plata studied minerals, fauna like seals and penguins, and food sources. I began to approach the group as they collected samples from an elephant seal, when suddenly an approaching sea elephant startled us.

This experience inspired me. I wanted to begin to raise awareness about the importance of harmonizing our work with nature, and I did this by interjecting emotional intelligence into my art. Depicting the emotional impact that shifts in climate have on both landscapes and life forms became my primary focus.

Now, nearly two decades later, my works are being recognized for their impact. In a recent visit to Buenos Aires, the Head of Culture from the Bulgarian Antarctic Institute, Gergana Lapteva, unexpectedly invited me present a retrospective exhibition in Bulgaria. The exhibition commemorated a 30-year alliance between Argentina and Bulgaria and would feature a collection of 30 pieces.

We established a gallery connection and finalized the project with a sales agreement, leaving four pieces there on display. The palpable delight of those who attended and the incredible reception to my work felt intensely gratifying. During the visit, the Argentina ambassador in Bulgaria graciously hosted us, sparking a conversation about translating my book Al Sur del Sur, mi AntĂĄrtida into Bulgarian.

Further discussions with the Argentina embassy in Paris, facilitated by the Foreign Ministry, revealed an eagerness to create an exhibition there next year, and to translate the book into French. As I experience this new joy – rooted in my experiences in Antarctica – I have a new goal: to replicate my expedition, this time at the North Pole, and to unite the two polar extremes into a singular artistic endeavor.

All photos courtesy of Alberto Morales.










JOURNALIST’S NOTES
INTERVIEW SUBJECT
Alberto Morales, an Argentinean artist, started exhibiting in Buenos Aires in 1969 and later at the Lirolay Gallery in 1976 and 1977. In 2005, an invitation from the National Antarctic Directorate sparked his transformative journey across Antarctica. Recently, he presented “Al Sur del Sur, mi AntĂĄrtida” and curated a retrospective exhibition at Sofia University from September 12 to 22, showcasing his work influenced by Antarctica from 2005 to 2023.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Alberto Morales, an Argentinean artist, established his career in Buenos Aires, Argentina. His debut exhibition as a student occurred in 1969, followed by individual showcases at the Lirolay Gallery in 1976 and 1977. Invited by the National Antarctic Directorate in 2005 to journey across Antarctica for 40 days, this experience profoundly influenced his artistic direction. Recently, Morales presented his book “Al Sur del Sur, mi AntĂĄrtida” and curated a retrospective exhibition titled “Al Sur del Sur, AntĂĄrtida Argentina,” spanning his work from 2005 to 2023. The exhibition, hosted at Sofia University’s central hall from September 12 to 22, celebrated Morales’ artistic journey shaped by Antarctica.
What is life like for women held in Japan's prisons?

Julian Ryall in Tokyo
DW
November 28, 2023

Rights groups are calling on the Japanese government to improve conditions for women in Japanese prisons. Statistics show most women in Japan are incarcerated for non-violent offenses.


Japan has 11 dedicated women's prisons, with 3,913 female inmates as of 2021, the most recent figures show
Image: Suksao/IMAGO

Many of the women held in Japanese prisons endure "serious human rights violations," according to a report released by a rights watchdog this month.

The violations include inadequate access to health care, separation from their children and excessive restrictions in their communications within and outside of prison.

A number of women questioned for the report, published by the Japan office of Human Rights Watch, even claimed they had been handcuffed while giving birth in prison, a charge that the Ministry of Justice has denied.


Japan has 11 dedicated women's prisons, with 3,913 female inmates as of 2021, the most recent figures show. The number of incarcerated women is down from a high of 5,345 in 2011, although the number of inmates aged 65 or older is increasing and stood at 20% of the total in 2021.

The leading causes of imprisonment are theft or crimes involving drugs, with 48% of all inmates serving time for theft and a further 33% convicted of narcotics offenses.
Falling short of standards

While the Japanese government is a signatory to international human rights conventions on the treatment of prisoners, Teppei Kasai, the rights watchdog's program officer, said it is falling short of the required standards.

"The reasons for these violations are complex," he told DW. "First, there are many women in Japan who shouldn't be imprisoned in the first place. Petty theft by older women, and the simple possession and use of drugs are the two leading crimes for which women are imprisoned for."

"Once they are imprisoned, they are in an environment that faces a serious shortage of resources, such as a lack of prison doctors and guards, which results in inadequate access to medical care as well as other abusive practices."

The agency's study, which is titled "They don't treat us like human beings," examined the experiences of 59 former and serving female inmates. It said penal institutions in Japan are "incredibly opaque" in that they have no adequate independent and effective oversight.

And that, Kasai said, can lead to abuse of power.

In one case that he said he found particularly shocking, a former inmate was punished with solitary confinement for 28 days. After her release, a mental health professional diagnosed her with bipolar disorder.

Under the United Nations' Nelson Mandela Rules, to which Japan is a signatory, "In no circumstances may restrictions or disciplinary sanctions amount to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of punishment."

That includes prolonged solitary confinement, which the Mandela Rules identify as anything longer than 15 days

Newborn babes taken from mothers

Ayuko Takatoh, an attorney with the Clarte Law Office in Tokyo, said that the wording of the legislation is often problematic if it is open to interpretation by prison authorities, such as with regard to children in prisons.

"With regard to a mother bringing up her child in a penal institution after giving birth, the law stipulates that the director of the penal institution 'may permit' the mother to bring the child up in the prison," she pointed out.

As a result of the wording of the law, virtually every child is taken away from their incarcerated mother soon after being born.

And while the Justice Ministry disputes reports of women being handcuffed during childbirth, Takatoh said women are restrained immediately before going into the delivery room and while they are in labor and then again shortly after they have given birth.

Between 2009 and 2017, 184 women gave birth in Japanese prisons. From 2011 to 2017, just three women were permitted to keep their babies with them in jail, the longest time being 12 days.

Improper treatment of prison inmates is a result of "low awareness of human rights among Japanese people due to a lack of education," said Takatoh.

"While Japan is a safe country and crime is low, there seems to be a sense that people who commit crimes are different from us and they are 'monsters' who should be excluded from society," she said.

Human Rights Watch and other activists are calling on the government to improve conditions in Japanese prisons and the wider judicial environment, including by decriminalizing the possession of small amounts of drugs and introducing alternative punishments that would better help criminals to be reintegrated into society.

No job too hard for a woman: Tokyo's 'Rickshaw Girls'



"Imprisonment should be the last resort," said Kasai, who said community service is a far more appropriate sentence for older women charged with petty theft.

Kasai added that measures should be implemented to improve prison conditions, "Including not using restraints such as handcuffs on imprisoned pregnant women when they are being transferred to a hospital to get a checkup or to give birth, as well as immediately after giving birth."

Campaigners also believe women should be able to keep their babies for up to 18 months in prison and that they should have "adequate access" to medical care, including mental health care.

In addition, solitary confinement for misbehavior in prison should be limited to a maximum of 15 days, they said.

And Kasai is confident that positive change is possible.

"Robust debate and action within the Ministry of Justice and the parliament will be needed, but the necessary reforms should be possible with the clear understanding of both the authorities and the general public that the dignity of people who are in prison needs to be protected," he said.

Edited by: Srinivas Mazumdaru
WAIT, WHAT?!
GOPer accuses Hunter Biden of 'blocking' Comer's investigation by offering to testify
BE CAREFUL OF WHAT YOU WISH FOR
David Edwards
November 28, 2023

Newsmax/screen grab
Rep. Ben Cline (R-VA) accused Hunter Biden of "blocking" Rep. James Comer's (R-KY) impeachment investigation by offering to testify in public.

During an interview on Newsmax, Cline suggested that the offer was a plot to stall the probe.

"Well, this committee is trying to get the facts, get to the bottom of the corruption that was going on in the Biden family between Hunter Biden and the rest of the family and exactly follow the money to where it leads, and they're preparing a report to give to the Judiciary Committee," Kline explained. "The Democrats are stalling. They've essentially sent the message to Hunter Biden that we will protect you if it's in public and for show."

Kline claimed Biden would not "have to give any facts" if he testifies publicly.

"You won't have to give any information as you would in a deposition because in a deposition, it takes hours and hours and hours," he remarked. "You ask the little questions that won't be kind of interfered with by counsel for the other side, by members from the other side who just want to play for the cameras."

"So that's what this is all about," Kline added. "It's about blocking, continuing to block Chairman Comer and this House of Representatives from finding out the facts for the American people."

OUTLAW WMD

B-2 Spirit Now Operational With New B61-12 Nuclear Bombs
Joseph Trevithick
Mon, November 27, 2023 

The B61-12 nuclear bomb is now officially in the U.S. stockpile and approved for employment from the B-2A Spirit stealth bomber.


The B61-12 nuclear bomb is now formally in the U.S. stockpile and cleared for operational use on the B-2A Spirit stealth bomber. It's the first U.S. combat aircraft cleared to employ the advanced B61 variant operationally.

U.S. Air Force F-35A Joint Strike Fighters, F-15E Strike Eagles, and F-16C/D Vipers, as well as the service's future B-21A Raider stealth bombers, are also in the process of being certified to employ the B61-12. Some NATO F-35s and F-16s, as well as Germany's swing-wing Tornado combat jets, are also set to be cleared to employ these weapons as part of the alliance's nuclear sharing arrangements.

An unarmed B61-12 test article is seen here on a trailer during a US Air Force test of the weapon on the B-2A in 2023. USAF

The updates about the B61-12, among other items of interest, are contained in a new unclassified Stockpile Stewardship and Management Plan (SSMP) report for the 2024 Fiscal Year that the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) released earlier today. NNSA, part of the Department of Energy, oversees America's nuclear stockpile in coordination with the U.S. military.

A table showing all nuclear weapons currently in U.S. service and their approved delivery platforms, including the B61-12 nuclear bomb, which is now authorized for use on the B-2. NNSA

The B61 series are some of the longest-serving nuclear weapons in the U.S. stockpile. The B61-12 has been slated to eventually supplant existing B61-3, -4, and -7 variants, but more on that later.

The first production B61-12 was completed in late 2021 and the weapons began being delivered to the U.S. military in 2022. The B61-12 program, which is technically a life-extension effort, is currently slated to wrap up in Fiscal Year 2025.

The B61-12 is not an entirely new weapon, and leverages components from multiple existing B61 types while also combining them with various new and improved features. The most significant new capability found on the B61-12, each of which famously costs more than its literal weight in gold, is its precision guidance package. However, this functionality will not be usable when the weapon is employed from F-16s belonging to the Air Force and select NATO member countries, as well as German Tornados. You can read more about all this here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhs4VQ9dN3s


The B61-12, which also has small rockets at the rear of the body that spin the bomb to help stabilize it, is a so-called dial-a-yield bomb that can be set to detonate with various degrees of explosive force. Its reported maximum yield setting is 50 kilotons. This is similar, if not identical to what is understood to be the highest yield setting on the B61-4 (45-50 kilotons, depending on the source).

Flight testing of the B61-12 on the B-2, as well as other aircraft, has been ongoing for years now. Back in 2018, when the bomb was still in development, NNSA announced it had completed an initial round of end-to-end qualification flight tests on the B-2.

In June of that year, a B-2 conducted another test demonstrating the ability of the bomber to employ the weapon using the Radar Aided Targeting System (RATS).

"RATS improves weapon guidance accuracy in a Global Positioning System-degraded environment," the Air Force said at the time.

"The integration of RATS allows the B-2 to fully employ the B-61 mod 12 nuclear bomb," Northrop Grumman, the B-2's manufacturer, which remains responsible for the continued modernization and sustainment of the bombers, said in a subsequent press release in August 2022. "RATS is the key element of the nuclear modernization, as GPS may not be available during a bomber task force mission."


A B-2A bomber at Northrop Grumman's facility within the US Air Force's Plant 42 in Palmdale, California. USAF

The timeline for when the B61-12 will be approved for use with the F-35, F-15, F-16, or any NATO aircraft is unclear. NNSA and the U.S. Air Force have previously announced initial certification of the B61-12 on the F-15E and the F-35A. The Royal Netherlands Air Force publicly announced just earlier this month that it had reached a similar milestone with its F-35As.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1JGe1jj9u0

NNSA's new SSMP report says the B-2's nuclear armament options also still include the B61-7, B61-11, and B83-1 nuclear bombs. The Spirit is actually currently the only aircraft approved to employ any of these bombs. The B61-7 is a higher-yield variant of the B61 family, which can reportedly be set to detonate with a force of up to 400 kilotons. The B61-11 is a highly specialized deep-penetrating version with a maximum yield similar, if not the same as the B61-7. You can read more about the entire B61 family in detail in this past War Zone feature.

The B83-1 is a completely different design with a megaton-class maximum yield.

The B61-11 and B83-1 are primarily intended to be utilized against deeply buried and otherwise hardened high-value targets, such as strategic command and control bunkers and missile silos. President Barack Obama's administration had moved to retire the B83-1 completely, a decision that was then reversed under President Donald Trump.

An inert B83 nuclear bomb. DOD

President Joe Biden's "2022 Nuclear Posture Review directed the retirement of the B83-1" again, but "specific details of the B83-1 retirement and dismantlement plan remain classified," according to NNSA's latest SSMP report.

There had previously been discussion about the possibility of the B61-12 replacing the B61-11 and the B83-1 through its ability to focus the full brunt of its lower-yield payload more precisely thanks to its guidance kit and spin stabilization. However, that idea now looks to have given way to a new version of the B61 with all the new and improved features of the B61-12, but a maximum yield equivalent to that of the B61-7. The Pentagon announced its intention to develop this B61 variant, tentatively dubbed the B61-13, last month.

"The B61-13 will provide the President with additional options against certain harder and
large-area military targets, even while the Department works to retire legacy systems
such as the B83-1 and the B61-7," an official fact sheet explained. No mention was made of any plans to retire the B61-11.

https://twitter.com/Casillic/status/1470605862406348805

The B61-13 plan, which still requires approval from Congress, would also see the expected stockpile of B61-12s shrink to some degree. The balance would, instead, be made up of some number of higher-yield -13 versions. The total numbers of B61-12s and B61-13s the U.S. military wants to acquire under this new course of action are classified. You can read more about what is known about the B61-13 and the reasoning behind its proposed development and acquisition here.

All of this will also have impacts on what nuclear bombs are available in the future for the Air Force's forthcoming B-21A bombers. The Raiders will likely be able to employ the same slate of nuclear bombs, as long as they're still in the stockpile, as the B-2A. The B61-13 is also expected to be for U.S. military use only, unlike the B61-12. The elimination of the B83-1 and B61-7 would leave only B61-11, 12, and 13s as the only nuclear gravity bombs in the U.S. stockpile at all.

It's also worth noting that the B-52H is no longer authorized to carry any nuclear gravity bombs of any type, with the understanding that it is too vulnerable to actually get to the kind of heavily defended targets against which they would be employed. Instead, the only known current and future nuclear weapon options for those bombers, which are set to keep flying at least into the 2040s with the help of new engines and other major upgrades, will be nuclear-tipped cruise missiles. The existing AGM-86B Air Launched Cruise Missile (ALCM) will eventually be replaced by the more capable AGM-181A Long Range Stand-Off (LRSO) cruise missile. LRSO is expected to enter service sometime in the 2030s and will also be integrated onto the B-21A.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qu03xx2o_vs


Altogether, what the exact mix of nuclear weapons available for employment from U.S. Air Force aircraft, as well as those belonging to select NATO partners, will be in the 2030s remains to be seen.

What we do know is that the B61-12 is now officially in the U.S. stockpile and that B-2 stealth bombers can drop them in anger.

Let's hope this capability is never tested in combat.

Contact the author: joe@thedrive.com

US defence tour of RAF site hints at new nuclear weapons deal

Tony Diver
Tue, November 28, 2023 


The US Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks visits RAF Lakenheath

The US deputy defence secretary has been given a guided tour of an RAF base thought to be the destination of the first American nuclear weapons on UK soil for 15 years.

Kathleen Hicks visited RAF Lakenheath on Tuesday for a tour of “infrastructure improvements”, on a site where the US government is planning a £39.5 million dormitory for troops.

US budget documents said the site was for “surety”, jargon used by the Pentagon to describe operations related to nuclear weapons, and would be constructed next year.

Both the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and the US Department of Defense have refused to comment on whether the Suffolk base will become home to the first American nuclear weapons in the UK since 2008, when 110 warheads were removed.

But Ms Hicks’s visit is the latest indication that the site has major strategic importance to the US Air Force, which is in charge of storing and maintaining the weapons.

Eric Pahon, a Pentagon spokesman, said Ms Hicks visited the base as part of a three-day trip to the UK to meet with British counterparts.

“While at RAF Lakenheath, deputy secretary toured infrastructure improvements designed to improve base resilience and support for the base’s F-35 squadron and see demonstrations of US capabilities,” he said.

A US budget request earlier this year revealed the Pentagon planned to construct a new 144-bed “surety dormitory” in what is thought to be a high-security bomb-proof bunker for nuclear warheads.

It said the purpose of the building was to “house the increase in enlisted personnel as the result of the potential surety mission”.

A previous document, published in 2022, referred to a Nato project to build new “secure sites and facilities” to store “special weapons” in countries including the UK.

Following reports of the plans, RAF Lakenheath was hit with a planning objection by the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND), which argued that the MoD and West Suffolk Council failed to conduct an environmental impact assessment for the stationing of nuclear weapons on their former site.

RAF Lakenheath was chosen as one of three sites for US nuclear weapons at the height of the Cold War.

The warheads were removed at the end of George Bush’s administration as the likelihood of nuclear warfare reduced, but may return amid new tensions with Russia.

The Pentagon declined to offer additional detail on Ms Hicks’ visit. The MoD was contacted for comment.




https://issuu.com/foreignpolicyresearchinstitute/docs/fpri_p0035_technical_report_dtra_8_31_23-lp





SASKATCHEWAN
Westinghouse Secures First Customer for eVinci Nuclear Microreactor

Sonal Patel
Updated Mon, November 27, 2023 

Westinghouse’s first customer for its eVinci microreactor—a flagship 5-MWe/13-MWth “nuclear battery”—is poised to be the Saskatchewan Research Council (SRC), Canada’s second-largest research and technology organization.

SRC—a Saskatchewan government Treasury Board Crown Corporation that serves as a commercial laboratory to provide research and development (R&D) for Saskatchewan industries—on Nov. 27 said it plans to pilot an eVinci microreactor by 2029. However, that timeframe will be subject to licensing and regulatory requirements. The location of the eVinci microreactor will be "determined as the project progresses," the provincial government said on Monday.

SRC, which will serve as the microreactor's licensed operator, will pursue the demonstration boosted with CA$80 million in government funding announced by Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe on Monday. The CA$80 million will cover "SRC's costs for licensing and SRC's project costs," SRC told POWER. "We will be working with Westinghouse to learn how this technology can be applied in Saskatchewan, and part of that will be to understand project costs for future deployments," it said.

[caption id="attachment_208776" align="alignnone" width="500"]

The eVinci microreactor has very few moving parts, working "essentially as a battery, providing the versatility for power systems ranging from several kilowatts to 5 MW of electricity, delivered 24 hours a day, 7 days a week for eight-plus years without refueling," Westinghouse says. "It can also produce high temperature heat suitable for industrial applications including alternative fuel production such as hydrogen, and has the flexibility to balance renewable output." The technology is 100% factory built and assembled before it is shipped in a container to any location. Courtesy: WestinghouseMore

Westinghouse's eVinci microreactor ranges from several kilowatts to 5 MW of electricity, "delivered 24 hours a day, 7 days a week for eight-plus years without refueling," Westinghouse says. "It can also produce high-temperature heat suitable for industrial applications including alternative fuel production such as hydrogen, and has the flexibility to balance renewable output." The technology is 100% factory-built and assembled before it is shipped in a container to any location. Courtesy: Westinghouse[/caption]
An Industrial Application That Could Lay 'Groundwork' for More Projects

If built by the anticipated timeframe, the eVinci demonstration would become Saskatchewan's first advanced nuclear reactor. SaskPower, a utility owned by the provincial government, has selected GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy’s (GEH’s) 300-MW BWRX-300 for its first two potential nuclear units. While SaskPower intends to decide to build the new nuclear units in 2029, it suggests construction of the first small modular reactor (SMR) could begin as early as 2030, with a targeted in-service date of 2034. In August, Canada’s federal government committed CA$74 million to support SaskPower’s potential deployment through two federal mechanisms.

Last year, the Canadian federal government awarded Westinghouse a CA$27.2 million grant from its Strategic Innovation Fund (SIF) to support further development of the eVinci microreactor. The “investment” is aimed at helping to fight climate change and “build on Canada’s global leadership in SMRs,” said François-Philippe Champagne, Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry.

SRC's effort to pilot an eVinci microreactor follows a May 2022–signed memorandum of understanding (MOU) between Westinghouse and SRC to jointly develop a project to locate an eVinci microreactor in Saskatchewan. “Our vision is to see the first eVinci microreactor in an industrial application and lay the groundwork for many more projects in the future,” SRC President and CEO Mike Crabtree said on Monday. “What we learn through this project will prepare SRC to assist communities and industries in future projects.”

SRC, notably, served as the licensed owner and operator of the SLOWPOKE-2, a 20-kW nuclear research reactor housed at the SRC Environmental Analytical Laboratories in Saskatoon. The 1981-commissioned research reactor ran for 38 years until decommissioned in 2019. While SLOWPOKE-2 provided an intense neutron source for teaching, training, and research, SRC has suggested an eVinci microreactor could be developed as a distributed energy alternative to diesel-powered generators.

Providing a reliable source of industrial-grade heat—of up to 600C—or operating in combined heat and power mode, the “very small modular reactor” could support various applications in the province, including remote mining operations, remote communities, and industry. It says the microreactor could also serve as a crucial energy source to power distributed hydrogen generation, desalination, and other integrated energy applications.
A Major Milestone for Westinghouse’s Novel Nuclear Battery

Bagging a first customer for the eVinci marks a big win for Westinghouse. While Westinghouse has long-fielded a research and development (R&D) effort, including developing and testing components for its heat pipe and novel moderator, it has more recently picked up the pace of its varied eVinci business activities to ready it for the market by 2027.

The nuclear technology giant introduced eVinci in 2017 as one of several key advanced nuclear designs in its portfolio, touting the microreactor’s innovative design, which has several safety features and is based on design simplicity. At the time, Westinghouse set an ambitious six-year technology development goal, anticipating that the next-generation nuclear reactor would be integral for decentralized generation markets.

At the heart of the eVinci is a fully passive heat pipe–cooled design that will use tristructural isotropic (TRISO) fuel. Its alkali metal heat pipe technology relies on alkali metal phase change to capture temperature uniformity within the reactor core. The reactor’s core, built around a solid steel monolith, has channels for both heat pipes and fuel pellets, with each fuel pin placed adjacent to several heat pipes. The array of closed heat pipes essentially removes heat from the nuclear core and transfers that heat to air, which then turns a turbine in an open-air Brayton thermodynamic power conversion cycle.

[caption id="attachment_130079" align="alignnone" width="500"]


eVinci’s reactor core is a solid-steel monolith that features channels for fuel pellets, the moderator (metal hydride), and heat pipes, which are arranged in a hexagonal pattern. The monolith will serve as the second fission product barrier (the fuel pellet is the first barrier) as well as the thermal medium between the fuel channels and heat pipes. The heat pipes will extract heat from the core using a technology based on thermal conductivity and fluid phase transition. Courtesy: Westinghouse[/caption]

Along with providing redundancy of the primary heat removal path, the heat pipes eliminate the need for a reactor coolant pump, bulk coolant, and associated equipment, as well as enable a modular core design, Westinghouse President of eVinci Microreactor Jon Ball told POWER in October.

An eVinci microreactor and surrounding infrastructure is about “half the size of a hockey rink,” Westinghouse says. In addition, unlike a high-temperature gas reactor (HTGR), heat pipe reactors are not pressurized and have no moving parts, though they are passive (naturally driven) and can self-adjust to the amount of heat transferred—which allows inherent load following.
Readying eVinci for Market

However, while heat pipe technology is not new—the passive heat transport devices have been applied for nearly 60 years in aerospace and other industries and are mature and robust with an extensive experimental test database—they have not been utilized in commercial nuclear technology. eVinci, notably, will also utilize high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) in TRISO form, further contributing to the reactor's safety and efficiency.

Following Westinghouse’s recent success in manufacturing a 12-foot heat pipe at its Waltz Mill, Pennsylvania, facility (as part of a $9 million federal cost-share project under the Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program), the company has garnered a series of crucial partnerships with potential customers.

[caption id="attachment_211956" align="alignnone" width="300"]

Westinghouse successfully manufactured a 12-foot heat pipe at their facility in Waltz Mill, Pennsylvania. The heat pipe is one of the largest of its kind ever built and will be used to support the Nuclear Test Reactor (NTR). Courtesy: Westinghouse

Westinghouse in 2023 successfully manufactured a 12-foot heat pipe at their Waltz Mill, Pennsylvania facility. The heat pipe is one of the largest of its kind ever built and will be used to support the Nuclear Test Reactor (NTR). Courtesy: Westinghouse[/caption]

In June, Westinghouse moved to establish eVinci Technologies as a separate business unit, with Ball—a long-time nuclear expert who was pivotal in leading the creation, development, and customer adoption of GE Hitachi’s BWRX-300—at its helm. In October, Westinghouse then launched a new design and manufacturing facility near downtown Pittsburgh that will house eVinci’s engineering and licensing operations, testing, prototype trials, business development, and sales. Construction on the facility is slated to wrap up early in 2024.

Also in October, the Department of Energy (DOE) revealed eVinci would be part of its first batch of microreactors to further their designs through a front-end engineering and experiment design (FEEED) process at Idaho National Laboratory’s (INL’s) DOME test bed. Testing at DOME could start “as early as 2026,” the DOE said.

[caption id="attachment_211955" align="alignnone" width="500"]

The new eVinci accelerator hub under construction in the borough of Etna in Pennsylvania will be home to engineering and licensing operations, testing, prototype trials, business development and sales. It also includes manufacturing space. Courtesy: Westinghouse

The new eVinci "accelerator hub" under construction in the borough of Etna in Pennsylvania will be home to engineering and licensing operations, testing, prototype trials, business development, and sales. It also includes manufacturing space. Courtesy: Westinghouse[/caption]
Crucial Next Steps: Scaling Up, Licensing

Ball told POWER eVinci’s nuclear test reactor (NTR) at DOME will be “roughly a one-fifth scale version of the commercial eVinci that we’re planning to license and deploy.” The reason Westinghouse is testing the NTR at DOME is that the company is in the process of scaling up some of the laboratory testing that has already been performed on the system, Ball said. “Ultimately, what we need to be able to do is demonstrate the scaling and our understanding of the core performance, which will be a key aspect in terms of the licensing of the eVinci commercial system,” he added.

Once Westinghouse has completed the NTR, it plans to scale up its ability to manufacture longer heat pipes required for its commercial system. “We’ve made tremendous progress to date and have every confidence that we’re going to be successful as we continue to scale the system to our commercial size,” Ball said.

The next crucial step will be to license the eVinci. In the U.S., Westinghouse has already submitted 31 technical white papers detailing the eVinci reactor's safety aspects and three topical reports to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), considering a license submission under 10 CFR Part 52.

In 2021, the company said it planned a comprehensive testing and analysis program that would be sufficient for the Design Certification (DC) of the “eVinci facility,” which would support the deployment of standard eVinci reactors for a range of sites in the U.S. However, in addition to a DC, it said it intended to explore various licenses, including a manufacturing license (10 CFR 52 Subpart F), a certificate of compliance, and a license for transport (10 CFR 71).

In Canada, Westinghouse has initiated the Vendor Design Review (VDR) process, submitting its first package to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) in June. On Monday, SRC told POWER it would lead the licensing process for the Saskatchewan's first deployment. "CNSC regulations must be met," it noted. "The CNSC makes licensing decisions for reactors and reactor operators in Canada."

Westinghouse is also working with both regulators—the NRC and the CNSC—to coordinate the evaluation of future joint reviews on “a couple of key topics,” Ball said. “Those documents have not been submitted yet, but that is the near-term intent, to submit the first package that will have a joint review,” he said.

—Sonal Patel is a POWER senior associate editor (@sonalcpatel@POWERmagazine).

NM
Final testing underway at $486M air system for nuclear waste site near Carlsbad

Adrian Hedden, Carlsbad Current-Argus
Tue, November 28, 2023 

Construction of an almost half-billion-dollar rebuild of the ventilation system at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant was nearing completion, and testing was being conducted ahead of an expected 2025 start date following years of delays for the project.

It began in 2018, intended to increase airflow in the WIPP underground for workers to breathe, allowing waste emplacement, mining and maintenance to occur simultaneously.

At WIPP, transuranic (TRU) nuclear is disposed of via burial in an underground salt deposit.

More: A nuclear reactor in Carlsbad? City officials call for project at federal waste repository

It is brought via truck to the WIPP site about 30 miles east of Carlsbad from U.S. Department of Energy laboratories and facilities around the country.

Airflow was restricted at the WIPP facility after a ruptured drum from Los Alamos National Laboratory in 2014 contaminated parts of the underground.

The Safety Significant Confinement Ventilation System (SSCVS), combined with a new air intake shaft at the site, was intended to up the remaining air flow from 170,000 cubic feet per minute (cfm) to 540,000 cfm.

The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant is pictured on Thursday, Oct. 5, 2023, in Carlsbad, NM.

More: Oil & gas industry joins fight against nuclear waste site proposed in southeast New Mexico

It was initially planned for completion in 2022 but was marred in delays tied to the COVID-19 pandemic, a dispute with the first contractor hired for the work and a budget climbing from the initial $288 million price tag to the latest estimate at $486 million, according to a 2022 report from the Government Accountability Office.

The DOE announced on Nov. 21 that workers began the commissioning phase of the project, first testing electrical cables for the mechanical aspects of the system like motors, fans and air filtration units.

As work building various components of the SSCVS is completed, they are gradually shifted to commissioning to ensure proper function, read a DOE news release, and interaction with other parts of the system.

More: Feds tout progress in cleaning up nuclear waste at Los Alamos using Carlsbad-area site


Construction continues on Thursday, Oct. 5, 2023, at Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in Carlsbad, NM.

The SSCVS will add a layer of protection from any future radiological events in the underground, read the release, by pushing air brought in to the site through a series of fans and filters before it is exhausted into the environment.

That includes two buildings: the Salt Reduction and New Filter buildings.

The Salt Reduction Building will pre-filter salt out of the air as it is drawn from the WIPP underground.

More: Air shaft at nuke repository near Carlsbad hits final depth amid recent safety incidents

Then, the New Filter Building will sees fans push the air through high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters, to remove any other contaminates before the air is released above ground.

Michael Gerle, environmental regulatory compliance director with the DOE’s Carlsbad Field Office said the project when complete will support WIPP’s continued mission of cleaning up the DOE’s nuclear waste.

Officials estimated that based on WIPP’s legal capacity and production rates of the waste, the facility could remain operational until 2080, and recently said they planned to increase shipments to the site up to 17 per week.

More: Nuclear waste disposal permit issued for New Mexico site, WIPP to get bigger in November

“The SSCVS will enhance the quantity, and quality, of air flow for our workforce in the WIPP underground mine,” Gerle said. “Additionally, the new infrastructure will ensure our operations remain safe for the environment and the public.”

The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant is pictured on Thursday, Oct. 5, 2023, in Carlsbad, NM.

Switching to the commissioning phase of the project was an important process to ensure the SSCVS would function properly during WIPP operations, said Ralph Musick, capital asset project manager at Salado Isolation Mining Contractors (SIMCO) – the DOE’s primary contractor at WIPP.

“This achievement is the culmination of many people’s efforts to support the engineering, procurement and construction of WIPP’s SSCVS project,” he said. “Initiating commissioning is a careful, step-by-step process to eventually integrate the SSCVS into daily WIPP operations.”

More: New Mexico could try again to challenge nuclear waste storage project in court

Safety issues at both the SSCVS and shaft were reported in the latest Defense Nuclear Facility Safety Board report for October for WIPP, published Nov. 3.

At the shaft, a rigging cable broke after it scrapped against a spool guide, causing a loader vehicle to swing uncontrollably in the shaft, striking a scaffolding platform.

No workers injuries were reported but hoisting and rigging work was suspended amid an indefinite “safety pause,” the report read, until a new hoisting and rigging plan is approved.

Concerns with the SSCVS’s underground continuous air monitors (CAMs) were also expressed, read the report, leading to a “full-scale” emergency exercise which was conducted Oct. 16.

Other CAMs in place at WIPP previously malfunctioned on Sept. 29, read the board’s report for that month, and set off alarms which led to an evacuation of the underground and an order to shelter in place for the rest of the facility.

Adrian Hedden can be reached at 575-628-5516, achedden@currentargus.com or @AdrianHedden on X, formerly known as Twitter.

This article originally appeared on Carlsbad Current-Argus: Final testing underway at new air system for nuclear waste repository


FRACKING FOR GOOD
EU’s largest geothermal district heating system construction starts in Denmark


View of the construction site (image from www.icenews.is)


Drilling has recently commenced in Aarhus, Denmark, on the first wells of what is going to be the European Union’s largest geothermal district heating system.

Furthermore, Project Aarhus is going to consist of 17 wells, constructed on seven sites, which are going to have a 110 MW capacity, and provide 20% of the city’s district heating by 2030.

It was made known in late November that drilling for the first well has started on the Port of Aarhus site, which is expected to go into service in 2027.

The 31-meter tall, 6,000-horsepower drilling rig is scheduled to be on the Port of Aarhus in the coming months to complete the first 2.5 kilometer well.

After that, the rig is going to be relocated to the Skejby site, where an additional plant is expected to be delivered in 2025.

The project aims to help Aarhus achieve its goal of net zero CO2 emissions by 2030, cutting some 165,000 tons of them annually.

It is worth noting that the plants are going to be connected to existing exchange stations, which also means that the sites are going to be located in residential areas and produce noise during construction.

An electric rig is being used in this project and noise walls will be established to ensure reduced nuisance.


Nov, 20, 2023 

Sources: www.thinkgeoenergy.com, www.icenews.is, innargi.com, innargi.com