Thursday, November 06, 2025

FAA cancels thousands of flights amid strain from US government shutdown

The Federal Aviation Administration will reduce air traffic by 10% across 40 major markets from Friday to maintain safety, as unpaid air traffic controllers face growing fatigue and staff shortages during the longest government shutdown on record.

Issued on: 06/11/2025 -

By: FRANCE 24

Passengers check a digital display showing flights with completed or uncompleted check-in at Berlin Brandenburg BER airport Willy-Brandt in Schoenefeld. (File Photo) © Tobias Schwarz, AFP

The Federal Aviation Administration said Wednesday that it was taking the extraordinary step of reducing air traffic by 10% across 40 “high-volume” markets beginning Friday morning to maintain travel safety as air traffic controllers exhibit signs of strain during the ongoing government shutdown.

The cutback stands to affect thousands of flights nationwide because the FAA directs more than 44,000 flights daily, including commercial passenger flights, cargo planes and private aircraft. The agency did not immediately identify which airports or cities would be affected but said the restrictions would remain in place as long as necessary.

“I’m not aware in my 35-year history in the aviation market where we’ve had a situation where we’re taking these kinds of measures,” FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford said at a news conference.

Air traffic controllers have been working unpaid since the shutdown began on October 1st, and most have been on duty six days a week while putting in mandatory overtime. With some calling out of work due to frustration, taking second jobs or lacking money for childcare or fuel, staffing shortages during some shifts have led to flight delays at several US airports.

Bedford, citing increased staffing pressures and safety reports indicating growing fatigue among air traffic controllers, said he and US Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy did not want to wait until the situation reached a crisis point.

“We’re not going to wait for a safety problem to truly manifest itself when the early indicators are telling us we can take action today to prevent things from deteriorating,” Bedford said. “The system is extremely safe today and will be extremely safe tomorrow. If the pressures continue to build even after we take these measures, we’ll come back and take additional measures.”

He and Duffy said they would meet with airline executives later Wednesday to determine how to implement the reduction in flights before a list of the selected airports would be released sometime Thursday.

The Associated Press on Wednesday sent requests for comment on the FAA’s decision to major US airlines, including Delta, United and American Airlines.

Calls to customer service hotlines at United and American were answered within a few minutes Wednesday afternoon, suggesting anxious passengers were not swamping the airlines with questions about the status of their upcoming flights.

Southwest Airlines said it was evaluating potential impacts to its flight schedule and would reach out as soon as possible to customers whose travel plans may be affected.

Airline industry analyst Henry Harteveldt, president of Atmosphere Research Group, said he believed the government might have mishandled the announcement by not meeting with airlines first and giving them more time to adjust schedules made months in advance.

“To tell airlines you’ve got 48 hours to rebuild your schedules at 90% of what you’ve got isn’t much time, and it’s going to result in a lot of chaos,” Harteveldt said. He added that the Trump administration might be using aviation safety “to force the two sides in Washington back to the negotiating table to resolve the shutdown.”

AAA spokesperson Aixa Diaz advised travellers to watch for flight updates on airline apps and airport websites. She also recommended allowing plenty of time at the airport before a scheduled flight.

“It’s frustrating for travellers, because there’s not much you can do. At the end of the day, you either fly or you don’t,” she said.

The cuts could represent as many as 1,800 flights and upward of 268,000 seats combined, according to an estimate by aviation analytics firm Cirium. For example, O’Hare International Airport in Chicago could see 121 of its 1,212 flights scheduled for Friday cut if the FAA distributes the reductions equally among affected airports, Cirium said.

The FAA regularly slows down or stops flights from taking off toward an airport for a number of reasons, including weather conditions, equipment failures and technical problems. Staffing shortages may also lead to slowed or halted departures if other personnel cannot fill in or another facility cannot absorb some of the workload.

Last weekend saw some of the worst staffing shortages of the shutdown, which became the longest on record early Wednesday.

From Friday to Sunday evening, at least 39 different air traffic control facilities announced the potential for limited staffing, according to an Associated Press analysis of operations plans sent through the Air Traffic Control System Command Center. The figure, likely an undercount, is well above the average for weekends before the shutdown.

During weekend periods from January 1st to September 30th, the average number of airport towers, regional centres overseeing multiple airports and facilities monitoring traffic at higher altitudes that announced potential staffing issues was 8.3, according to the AP analysis. But during the five weekend periods since the shutdown began on October 1st, the average more than tripled to 26.2 facilities.

Major airlines, aviation unions and the wider travel industry have urged Congress to end the shutdown.

Wednesday’s announcement followed Duffy’s warning a day earlier that there could be chaos in the skies next week if the shutdown drags on long enough for air traffic controllers to miss their second full paycheques next Tuesday.

Duffy said the FAA wanted to take a proactive approach instead of reacting after a disaster. He pointed to all the questions that arose after the deadly mid-air collision in January between a commercial jet and a military helicopter near Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport about why the FAA had not recognised the risks and acted sooner.

“We learned from that. And so now we look at data, and before it would become an issue, we try to assess the pressure and make moves before there could be adverse consequences,” Duffy said. “And that’s what’s happening here today.”

(FRANCE 24 with AP)

US to reduce air traffic by 10% across 40 high-volume airportsover government shutdown

By Jerry Fisayo-Bambi with AP

Published on 6/11/2025 - EURONEWS

The cuts could represent as many as 1,800 flights and upward of 268,000 seats combined, according to an estimate by an aviation analytics firm.

US aviation authorities said Wednesday that they were taking the extraordinary step of reducing air traffic by 10% across 40 “high-volume” airports beginning Friday morning as air traffic controllers exhibit signs of strain during the ongoing government shutdown.

According to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the cutback is expected to affect thousands of flights nationwide, as it directs more than 44,000 flights daily, including commercial passenger flights, cargo planes and private aircraft.

The agency did not immediately identify which airports or cities would be affected but said the restrictions would remain in place as long as necessary.

Air traffic controllers have been working unpaid since the shutdown began on 1 October, and most have been on duty six days a week while putting in mandatory overtime.

“I’m not aware of my 35-year history in the aviation market where we’ve had a situation where we’re taking these kinds of measures,” FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford said at a news conference.

Citing increased staffing pressures and voluntary safety reports from pilots indicating growing fatigue among air traffic controllers, Bedford said he and US Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy did not want to wait until the situation reached a crisis point.

“We’re not going to wait for a safety problem to truly manifest itself when the early indicators are telling us we can take action today to prevent things from deteriorating,” Bedford said.

“The system is extremely safe today and will be extremely safe tomorrow. If the pressures continue to build even after we take these measures, we’ll come back and take additional measures.”

A sign is posted near a TSA screening area at Philadelphia International Airport in Philadelphia, Wednesday, Nov. 5, 2025. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke) Matt Rourke/Copyright 2025 The AP. All rights reserved.

Meanwhile, several airlines, including United, Southwest and American, all said they will try to minimise the impact on consumers as they cut their schedules to comply with the order.

Media reports said calls to United and American Airlines customer service hotlines were answered within a few minutes on Wednesday afternoon, suggesting anxious passengers were not swamping the airlines with questions about the status of their upcoming flights.

According to an estimate by aviation analytics company Cirium, the losses could amount to 1,800 flights and 268,000 seats.

For example, O’Hare International Airport in Chicago could see 121 of its 1,212 flights currently scheduled for Friday cut if the FAA distributes the reductions equally among impacted airports, Cirium said.

Data shows worsening staffing

It is common for the FAA to slow down or stop flights from taking off toward an airport for many reasons, including weather conditions, equipment failures, and technical problems.

Staffing shortages also may lead to slowed or halted departures if there aren’t enough controllers and another facility can’t absorb some of the workload.

Last weekend saw some of the worst staffing shortages of the shutdown.

According to an Associated Press report showing plans issued through the Air Traffic Control System Command Center system, at least 39 distinct air traffic control facilities announced there was some possibility of restricted staffing between Friday and Sunday evening.

The figure, which the report described as likely an undercount, is well above the average for weekends before the shutdown.

Major airlines, aviation unions and the wider travel industry have urged the US Congress to end the shutdown, which became the longest on record early Wednesday.

Flying to or from the US? Here's how a potential airspace closure could affect your trip

By Craig Saueurs & AP News

Published on 05/11/2025 - EURONEWS

The last time the US closed parts of its air space was in the wake of the 11 September 2001 attacks.

An already chaotic time for travellers in the US could become even worse.

As America’s government shutdown hits a record-breaking 36 days, the fallout is spreading from Washington’s halls of power to airports across the country.

On Tuesday, Transport Secretary Sean Duffy upped the stakes, declaring that parts of US airspace could be closed due to safety concerns if the deadlock continues.

His warning has raised the prospect of unprecedented disruption for millions of passengers entering, leaving or travelling in the country.

“If you bring us to a week from today, Democrats, you will see mass chaos, you will see mass flight delays. You’ll see mass cancellations, and you may see us close certain parts of the airspace, because we just cannot manage it,” Duffy said.

“We will restrict the airspace when we feel it’s unsafe.”

But what would this mean for travellers, and is chaos in the skies really on the horizon?

‘Mass chaos’ looms as unpaid staff walk off the job

The last time the US closed its airspace was in the wake of the 11 September 2001 attacks. With no end to the shutdown in sight, frustration is spilling into the country’s air network and making another closure suddenly seem possible.

Thousands of air traffic controllers and airport security officers are still working without pay. According to aviation insiders, more are beginning to call in sick to find temporary jobs elsewhere to make ends meet.

“I think you’re also seeing people who are just calling in sick because they’re fed up and they’re like, ‘well, I’m going to spend the holiday weekend with my kids for once,’” one air traffic controller told NPR this week.

The Trump administration has said the shutdown has left shortages of up to 3,000 air traffic controllers. Employees of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) have already missed one paycheck.

Duffy and the head of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association have warned that the longer it continues, the more the financial pressure on those forced to work without pay will grow.

It is difficult to predict how much worse the situation could get if they miss a second paycheck but the shutdown has already left some passengers facing longer queues, missed connections and hours of waiting in airports or on the tarmac.

What do delays and cancellations look like for US travellers so far?

Normally, airlines strive to have at least 80 per cent of their flights depart and arrive within 15 minutes of when they are scheduled. Aviation analytics firm Cirium said that since the shutdown began on 1 October, the total number of delays overall has not fallen significantly below that goal because most of the disruptions so far have been no worse than what happens when a major thunderstorm moves across an airport.

But on Sunday, only about 56 per cent of Newark's departures were on time, and the Orlando airport reported that only about 70 per cent of its flights were on time, according to Cirium.

Industry groups estimate that more than 3.2 million passengers have already been affected since the shutdown began. On Tuesday alone, nearly 3,000 flights were delayed after shortages hit air hubs such as Phoenix, Houston, Detroit and Denver.

Airlines are also warning that the chaos could soon hit bookings if travellers lose confidence in the system – especially if the safety of American skies takes a PR hit.

“Every single day that this goes on tomorrow is now less safe than today,” Nick Daniels, president of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, told CNN.

What would airspace closures mean for travellers?

Even a partial closure of US airspace would have widespread consequences because the country’s air traffic control system is highly interconnected.

According to the Federal Aviation Administration, air traffic centres handle flights across multiple regions, meaning delays or restrictions at one facility quickly affect others. Industry analysts, including Airlines for America (A4A), have also warned that staffing shortages in one region can cause “nationwide ripple effects” across the network.

If a major centre limits arrivals or departures, those delays cascade through other airports, creating knock-on cancellations and missed connections far from the original problem. And reroutings and reduced capacity across the US could have a huge impact on international schedules, complicating onward travel to Europe and elsewhere.

While a full closure isn’t yet on the table, the warning highlights how fragile the system has become after more than a month without funding.

At the time of writing, more than 480 flights within, into or out of the United States had already been delayed today, while 57 had been cancelled, according to FlightAware.

US Army removes food bank guidance for its soldiers after Euronews report

By Laura Fleischmann

Published on 06/11/2025 - EURONEWS

The US Army removed guidance directing soldiers to food banks during the government shutdown after Euronews reported it. Soldiers await mid-November pay.

The US Army removed website guidance directing soldiers to food banks and food-sharing facilities during the government shutdown after Euronews first reported the case, which caused social media controversy.

US military publication Stars and Stripes published a US Army Europe and Africa statement explaining that "the list of local food assistance offers was created several weeks ago when the US Army was concerned that its German personnel might not receive pay during the shutdown, which could make them temporarily dependent on aid."

The army claimed the advice was meant for civilian employees rather than soldiers, though the website section heading referenced "kit bags," a military term. The guidance can still be seen in archived versions after it was removed from the active site.

US soldiers continue awaiting mid-November salary payments as the most extended shutdown in US history persists. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CBS News that "as of 15 November, soldiers who are willing to risk their lives will no longer be able to receive a paycheck."

October salary payments came from multiple sources: $2.5 billion from summer tax cut legislation, $1.4 billion from military procurement accounts and $1.4 billion from research and development, according to US media reports.

Blue Star Families, a military-founded initiative, warned at the beginning of October that "less than one in three military families have savings of $3,000."

Meanwhile, Senate Democrats are using momentum from recent electoral victories — including New York City's mayoral race and gubernatorial elections in New Jersey and Virginia — to pressure Republican colleagues toward a budget compromise, according to US media reports.

Democrats and Republicans have been fiercely debating over the budget since 1 October. Although Republicans control both the Senate and the House of Representatives, they require Democratic votes to resolve the impasse.

The shutdown eliminated salaries for civil servants or placed them on compulsory leave. The German government temporarily stepped in financially to pay civilian US military employees in Germany.

US military personnel receive pay fortnightly, which can intensify financial pressure during payment gaps. Approximately 37,000 US soldiers stationed in Germany, including those at Ramstein Air Base and Bavarian garrisons, face continued uncertainty about November wages as congressional negotiations continue.

Joint Expeditionary Force launches enhanced partnership with Ukraine

By Amandine Hess

Published on 06/11/2025 - EURONEWS

Defence ministers of the UK-led coalition met with their Ukrainian counterparts in Bodø in Norway to deepen their collaboration and strengthen security in the Nordic-Baltic region.

Defence ministers of the northern European multinational Joint Expeditionary Force have met with their Ukrainian counterparts in Norway to launch an enhanced partnership with Ukraine.

The partnership with Ukraine is seen as a milestone in strengthening Euro-Atlantic security in the Nordic-Baltic region.

"This is a powerful signal to Putin and any other would-be aggressors that JEF is stronger than ever. More united than ever, more innovative than ever, more flexible in our operational responses than ever," UK Defence Secretary John Healey said.

Established in 2014, JEF is a UK-led multinational force comprising 10 European countries.

Seeking to learn from Ukraine's battlefield experience, the coalition will deliver training to the Ukrainian armed forces and collaborate on protecting critical underwater infrastructure, drones, battlefield medicine, and methods to counter disinformation.

"From partners including JEF countries, Ukraine seeks access to European technologies and production capacities on the basis of which we could launch joint manufacturing", Ukrainian Defence Minister Denys Shmyhal said.

"This modern weaponry will not only defend Ukraine now, it will guarantee Europe's security for years to come and reliably protect its eastern flank from permanent Russian aggression," Shmyhal added.

The meeting follows the conclusion last week of Tarassis, the coalition's largest-ever military operation. The two-month-long operation across the Nordic-Baltic region mobilised more than 1,700 British personnel alongside JEF allies.

Following reports of undersea cable damage in the Baltic Sea earlier this year, the multinational defence force activated a reaction system called Nordic Warden to track potential threats to undersea infrastructure and monitor the Russian shadow fleet.

THE ORIGINAL JOINT EXPEDITIONARY FORCE WAS UK, CANADA, AND EURO COUNTRIES AGAINST THE BOLSHEVIK REVOLUTIONARIES

'Saint or Sinner'? British artist Mason Storm crucifies Donald Trump in sculpture on show in Basel

By David Mouriquand

Published on 05/11/2025 - EURONEWS

Hero or villain? Martyr or criminal? “Saint or Sinner”?

A hyperrealistic sculpture depicting Donald Trump nailed to a cross while wearing an orange prison jumpsuit has gone on display at the Basler Kunstmeile in Switzerland, weeks after its debut near Basel Central Station was postponed over fears of public backlash.

The sculpture, titled “Saint or Sinner”, is by British artist Mason Storm, who is celebrated for his satirical and often politically charged art. And like Banksy, he cultivates a sense of anonymity by wearing masks and balaclavas.

Here, he plays on the dichotomy between a vertical crucifixion and a horizontal execution gurney, leaving a provocative space where religion and politics mix to better question whether the current US president deserves entry to heaven or a lethal injection.

The sculpture is eerily realistic – something which Konrad Breznik, owner of the Gleis 4 gallery, marvels at

“You can see every wrinkle, the skin is so realistic, it's really disturbing,” he told AFP.

Breznik even said he believed that Trump might actually appreciate the piece.

“I do absolutely think that Mr Trump might see himself very well in the role of a modern Jesus,” he said. “I’m pretty sure he is very much convinced that he is doing the right thing.”

Appropriately, Trump himself said last month, aboard Air Force One: "I don't think there's anything that's going to get me into heaven. I think I'm not maybe heaven-bound."

Well, there we have it, folks.

Whether or not the artwork could be exhibited in the US remains another matter... It has already sold to an “internationally renowned” European collector, whose name remains confidential, according to the gallery.

Mushroom Clouds On The Horizon? What Trump’s Threat Means For Global Nuclear Testing – Analysis

CROWN OF CREATION

The Wilson cloud from test Baker, situated just offshore from Bikini Island.

Photo Credit: U.S. Army Photographic Signal Corps, Wikipedia Commons

November 6, 2025

RFE RL
By Mike Eckel

In June 2019, the director of the Pentagon’s main intelligence agency made an eyebrow-raising allegation about Russia and its nuclear programs: Moscow is testing its atomic weapons.

“The U.S. government, including the Intelligence Community, has assessed that Russia has conducted nuclear weapons tests that have created nuclear yield,” Lieutenant General Robert Ashley said.

China may also be conducting its own tests, Ashley added, possibly by using “zero-yield” methods in which no actual atomic explosion — a fission chain reaction — takes place.

Fast forward six years. The United States and Russia are on the verge of a new arms race. The Kremlin is boasting that it is developing new, nuclear-capable superweapons. And President Donald Trump is threatening to resume US nuclear tests.

“Russia’s testing and China’s testing, but they don’t talk about it,” Trump said in an interview with CBS News recorded on October 31. “No, we’re gonna test, because they test and others test.”

On November 5 he reiterated that “because of other countries testing programs, I have instructed the Department of War to start testing our Nuclear Weapons on an equal basis.”

The claim Russia and China are testing is subject to debate.

Regardless, the threat has drawn criticism from Moscow and cheers from US national security hawks, not to mention handwringing among arms control advocates.

After years of collapsed or eroded arms control agreements — the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, the Open Skies, New START — advocates worry that the global pact banning nuclear tests may be next.

At a meeting of Russia’s Security Council on November 5, Defense Minister Andrei Belousov called for preparations to resume nuclear testing — at ranges on the Arctic archipelago of Novaya Zemlya.

The last time the United States used explosives in its weapons arsenal to split a uranium or plutonium isotope and spark the nuclear chain-reaction known as fission was in the dusty landscape of Nevada in 1992. It wasn’t a mushroom cloud like you see in the movies — those went out of favor in the 1960s, with a treaty — but an underground blast.

Moscow’s last fission test of a weapon? That was in 1990, a year before the Soviet collapse, on Novaya Zemlya. Beijing’s was in 1996 at Lop Nur, in the windswept reaches of the far western Xinjiang province.

That same year, the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) came into being. Since that time, only Pakistan and India have conducted similar critical tests — and North Korea has conducted half a dozen, most recently in 2017.

Generally speaking, nuclear tests that involve actual explosions of fissile material are relatively easy to detect.

Highly sensitive seismic monitoring devices, like those that monitor earthquakes, can pick up shock waves from a blast underground, where all tests have occurred for decades. Aircraft equipped with sophisticated “sniffing” equipment can register radioactive isotopes floating into the atmosphere, telltale signs of a nuclear detonation.

Noncritical. Critical. Supercritical.

The end of the Cold War, and of the Soviet-US arms race, meant major cuts to nuclear arsenals and a downgrade of budgets and investments into the infrastructure needed to plan the bombs and build them.

All nuclear-armed countries need to ensure that their arsenals can devastate as they’re expected to, so testing continues — just not in a mushroom-cloud sort of way. Noncritical tests, in which explosives and fissile material are used but not detonated to cause fission, are allowed under the CTBT. Researchers use supercomputers and powerful lasers to test or mimic fission reactions.

Trump first suggested the possibility of new tests in a social media post just before meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping in South Korea. He expanded on that later in his CBS News interview.

US officials have maintained a test site in Nevada where subcritical experiments have continued. However, doing a full-blown fissile explosion could not happen right away.

“The US could not conduct a test in days or weeks but, depending on the details of the test and the diagnostics, we could resume testing in months to a few years,” said Jill Hruby, a former director of the Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico and former head of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), which manages storage and tests of the US nuclear arsenal.

Energy Secretary Christopher Wright, whose department oversees the NNSA, later clarified Trump’s comments.

“I think the tests we’re talking about right now are system tests,” Wright said in an interview with Fox News on November 2. “These are not nuclear explosions. These are what we call noncritical explosions.”

US authorities have ample data from previous underground testing, plus laboratory testing and subcritical experiments, according to Hruby — one argument, she said, for not resuming full tests.

“Additionally, if we start testing it is clear others would resume or start testing,” she said. “Once testing is resumed, it is highly likely in my opinion that new types of devices will be explored, fueling more arms racing.

“Finally, while testing can be safe, accidents can occur. I think most people would agree that large-scale nuclear testing is not something that environmentally benefits our planet and humanity,” she said.

Real World Testing

In April, the US State Department released its annual report on countries complying with arms control treaties. The report said Russia had conducted “supercritical” nuclear weapons tests in past years, but failed to notify the US or other countries as required under a 1974 treaty that also put a cap on the size of underground explosive blasts.

“Concerns remain due to these past activities and the uncertainty and lack of transparency relating to Russia’s activities at Novaya Zemlya,” the report said.

Broadly speaking, the term “supercritical” refers to a fission reaction, when an isotope is split and causes a full-blown chain reaction. “Noncritical” or ‘subcritical” do not.

For national security hawks — in Washington or Moscow or even Beijing — the world has changed. China, which is not constrained by the soon-expiring New START Treaty between Washington and Moscow, is expanding its arsenal. The Kremlin is modernizing its arsenal and rolling out new intercontinental ballistic missiles like the Sarmat and other nuclear-capable weapons like the Burevestnik and the Poseidon, an unmistakable signal.

Days after Trump’s comments, CIA Director John Ratcliffe said in a post on X that Trump “was right” about Chinese and Russian testing.

“The United States has to maintain technical and numerical superiority to the combined Chinese and Russian nuclear stockpiles,” Robert O’Brien, who served as White House national-security adviser during Trump’s first term, wrote in a Foreign Affairs article last year. “To do so, Washington must test new nuclear weapons for reliability and safety in the real world for the first time since 1992 — not just by using computer models.”

“If China and Russia continue to refuse to engage in good-faith arms control talks, the United States should also resume production of uranium-235 and plutonium-239, the primary fissile isotopes of nuclear weapons,” he wrote.

O’Brien did not respond to a request for comment sent to his Washington firm.

In Moscow, Russian officials have criticized Trump’s pledge to resume testing and denied the accusation that they had conducted actual nuclear tests.

At a televised Security Council meeting at the Kremlin on November 5, President Vladimir Putin echoed Belousov’s remarks and ordered officials to make proposals for the “possible start of work to prepare for nuclear weapons testing.” But he also said Moscow had no intention of violating the CTBT.

If the Trump administration does move forward with full testing, it would likely spark its own race, as other nations — China first and foremost — move to resume testing. That would push the CTBT agreement toward outright collapse. Russia “de-ratified” the treaty in 2023; Washington has signed it but not ratified it. Some administration officials have called for “un-signing” it. China has signed but not ratified the pact.

“Explosive testing would open the way for other nations to do the same. They have not done as many tests as the US has and would benefit more from explosive testing,” said Cheryl Rofer, a retired nuclear scientist at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, where US researchers developed the first nuclear weapons in the 1940s.

A return to full-scale testing would also likely doom the New START treaty, which caps the size of the Russian and American nuclear arsenals, experts say. That treaty is due to expire next year, and no negotiations are under way to replace it.

In September, Putin proposed adhering to the treaty’s requirements for a year after it expires in early February, something the White House signaled openness to.

Mike Eckel is a senior international correspondent reporting on political and economic developments in Russia, Ukraine, and around the former Soviet Union, as well as news involving cybercrime and espionage. He’s reported on the ground on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the wars in Chechnya and Georgia, and the 2004 Beslan hostage crisis, as well as the annexation of Crimea in 2014.

RFE RL

RFE/RL journalists report the news in 21 countries where a free press is banned by the government or not fully established.

What Should Countries Do With Their Nuclear Waste?

November 6, 2025

By Eurasia Review

One of the highest-risk components of nuclear waste is iodine-129 (I-129), which stays radioactive for millions of years and accumulates in human thyroids when ingested. In the U.S., nuclear waste containing I-129 is scheduled to be disposed of in deep underground repositories, which scientists say will sufficiently isolate it.

Meanwhile, across the globe, France routinely releases low-level radioactive effluents containing iodine-129 and other radionuclides into the ocean. France recycles its spent nuclear fuel, and the reprocessing plant discharges about 153 kilograms of iodine-129 each year, under the French regulatory limit.

Is dilution a good solution? What’s the best way to handle spent nuclear fuel? A new study by MIT researchers and their collaborators at national laboratories quantifies I-129 release under three different scenarios: the U.S. approach of disposing spent fuel directly in deep underground repositories, the French approach of dilution and release, and an approach that uses filters to capture I-129 and disposes of them in shallow underground waste repositories.

The researchers found France’s current practice of reprocessing releases about 90 percent of the waste’s I-129 into the biosphere. They found low levels of I-129 in ocean water around France and the U.K.’s former reprocessing sites, including the English Channel and North Sea. Although the low level of I-129 in the water in Europe is not considered to pose health risks, the U.S. approach of deep underground disposal leads to far less I-129 being released, the researchers found.

The researchers also investigated the effect of environmental regulations and technologies related to I-129 management, to illuminate the tradeoffs associated with different approaches around the world.

“Putting these pieces together to provide a comprehensive view of Iodine-129 is important,” says MIT Assistant Professor Haruko Wainwright, a first author on the paper who holds a joint appointment in the departments of Nuclear Science and Engineering and of Civil and Environmental Engineering. “There are scientists that spend their lives trying to clean up iodine-129 at contaminated sites. These scientists are sometimes shocked to learn some countries are releasing so much iodine-129. This work also provides a life-cycle perspective. We’re not just looking at final disposal and solid waste, but also when and where release is happening. It puts all the pieces together.”

MIT graduate student Kate Whiteaker SM ’24 led many of the analyses with Wainwright. Their co-authors are Hansell Gonzalez-Raymat, Miles Denham, Ian Pegg, Daniel Kaplan, Nikolla Qafoku, David Wilson, Shelly Wilson, and Carol Eddy-Dilek. The study appears today in Nature Sustainability.

Managing waste

Iodine-129 is often a key focus for scientists and engineers as they conduct safety assessments of nuclear waste disposal sites around the world. It has a half-life of 15.7 million years, high environmental mobility, and could potentially cause cancers if ingested. The U.S. sets a strict limit on how much I-129 can be released and how much I-129 can be in drinking water — 5.66 nanograms per liter, the lowest such level of any radionuclides.

“Iodine-129 is very mobile, so it is usually the highest-dose contributor in safety assessments,” Wainwright says.

For the study, the researchers calculated the release of I-129 across three different waste management strategies by combining data from current and former reprocessing sites as well as repository assessment models and simulations.

The authors defined the environmental impact as the release of I-129 into the biosphere that humans could be exposed to, as well as its concentrations in surface water. They measured I-129 release per the total electrical energy generated by a 1-gigawatt power plant over one year, denoted as kg/GWe.y.

Under the U.S. approach of deep underground disposal with barrier systems, assuming the barrier canisters fail at 1,000 years (a conservative estimate), the researchers found 2.14 x 10–8 kg/GWe.y of I-129 would be released between 1,000 and 1 million years from today.

They estimate that 4.51 kg/GWe.y of I-129, or 91 percent of the total, would be released into the biosphere in the scenario where fuel is reprocessed and the effluents are diluted and released. About 3.3 percent of I-129 is captured by gas filters, which are then disposed of in shallow subsurfaces as low-level radioactive waste. A further 5.2 percent remains in the waste stream of the reprocessing plant, which is then disposed of as high-level radioactive waste.

If the waste is recycled with gas filters to directly capture I-129, 0.05 kg/GWe.y of the I-129 is released, while 94 percent is disposed of in the low-level disposal sites. For shallow disposal, some kind of human disruption and intrusion is assumed to occur after government or institutional control expires (typically 100-1,000 years). That results in a potential release of the disposed amount to the environment after the control period.

Overall, the current practice of recycling spent nuclear fuel releases the majority of I-129 into the environment today, while the direct disposal of spent fuel releases around 1/100,000,000 that amount over 1 million years. When the gas filters are used to capture I-129, the majority of I-129 goes to shallow underground repositories, which could be accidentally released through human intrusion down the line.

The researchers also quantified the concentration of I-129 in different surface waters near current and former fuel reprocessing facilities, including the English Channel and the North Sea near reprocessing plants in France and U.K. They also analyzed the U.S. Columbia River downstream of a site in Washington state where material for nuclear weapons was produced during the Cold War, and they studied a similar site in South Carolina. The researchers found far higher concentrations of I-129 within the South Carolina site, where the low-level radioactive effluents were released far from major rivers and hence resulted in less dilution in the environment.

“We wanted to quantify the environmental factors and the impact of dilution, which in this case affected concentrations more than discharge amounts,” Wainwright says. “Someone might take our results to say dilution still works: It’s reducing the contaminant concentration and spreading it over a large area. On the other hand, in the U.S., imperfect disposal has led to locally higher surface water concentrations. This provides a cautionary tale that disposal could concentrate contaminants, and should be carefully designed to protect local communities.”

Fuel cycles and policy

Wainwright doesn’t want her findings to dissuade countries from recycling nuclear fuel. She says countries like Japan plan to use increased filtration to capture I-129 when they reprocess spent fuel. Filters with I-129 can be disposed of as low-level waste under U.S. regulations.

“Since I-129 is an internal carcinogen without strong penetrating radiation, shallow underground disposal would be appropriate in line with other hazardous waste,” Wainwright says. “The history of environmental protection since the 1960s is shifting from waste dumping and release to isolation. But there are still industries that release waste into the air and water. We have seen that they often end up causing issues in our daily life — such as CO2, mercury, PFAS and others — especially when there are many sources or when bioaccumulation happens. The nuclear community has been leading in waste isolation strategies and technologies since the 1950s. These efforts should be further enhanced and accelerated. But at the same time, if someone does not choose nuclear energy because of waste issues, it would encourage other industries with much lower environmental standards.”

The work was supported by MIT’s Climate Fast Forward Faculty Fund and the U.S. Department of Energy

SLOWER THAN MOLASSES IN JANUARY

Secretary Noem Approves $1 Million In Expedited Funding For Alaska To Assist With October Storm Recovery Efforts

A MONTH LATE

The village of Kipnuk, largely submerged by the remnants of Typhoon Halong, is seen from the air on Oct. 12, 2025. Alaska Air National Guard rescue personnel conducted search and rescue operations there, and the Alaska Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management has worked with the Alaska Organized Militia and the U.S. Coast Guard in the response. The storm displaced at least 1,500 people and resulted in at least one death. (Photo provided by the Alaska National Guard)

November 6, 2025

By Eurasia Review

Secretary Kristi Noem announced Wednesday that the Department of Homeland Security is expediting $1 million in up-front FEMA funding to help Alaska recover from the devastation of Typhoon Halong in early October.

“Under President Trump and Secretary Noem’s leadership, FEMA is moving at an unprecedented speed to provide Alaska with immediate support that it needs to recover from this tragedy,” said Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin. “Disasters are best managed when they’re state managed, locally executed, and federally supported. From FEMA’s on-the-ground efforts to the U.S. Coast Guard’s successful rescue operations, DHS is ensuring that Alaskans are getting the help they need.”

This funding, which will be immediately accessible, will be used to stabilize dangerous conditions and help communities stay safe. This work includes making temporary repairs to critical infrastructure or utilities and staffing emergency operations to coordinate response. Additional funding for recovery efforts will follow.

As of November 3, 147 FEMA staff are deployed to Bothell and Anchorage to support disaster relief operations. In the immediate aftermath of the flooding, the U.S. Coast Guard air crews rescued 34 people and successfully helped evacuate an additional 28 people from a temporary shelter. Coast Guard crews conducted a total of 8.5 hours of aerial searches and searched a total of 88 square miles.

Public Assistance is FEMA’s disaster assistance program to reimburse state, tribes and local governments for eligible debris removal, emergency protective measures, and other permanent work. FEMA will continue providing technical assistance, oversight and best practices to help Alaska accelerate recovery and protect public safety and health.

Targeting Palantir And Nvidia: Profits, Prophets And Overvalued AI Stocks – OpEd

November 6, 2025
By Binoy Kampmark

In an industry of seedy soothsayers, cocksure charlatans and resourceful rogues, honest and accurate appraisals are exquisitely rare. When it comes to economics, investments and finance, this is particularly so. Certitude, however, tends to be in abundance for those predicting the next financial crash, the sort that will singe earnings and strafe savings. Take, for instance, hedge fund investor Michael Burry, a man of sufficient notoriety to warrant a celluloid depiction of himself by Christian Bale in the 2015 film The Big Short.
Financial software

On that occasion, Burry’s hunch, albeit an educated one, was that the US housing bubble would implode in what became the Great Recession of 2007-9. The buccaneering investor shorted mortgage-backed securities ahead of the collapse, raking in profits as the subprime mortgage sundered. But his record is by no means immaculate, seeing falls when they have not eventuated, especially on tech stocks. For him, the language of catastrophe is never far away. An April 7 post on X this year is fabulously bleak: “Millennials going through 9/11, two economic recessions, a pandemic, the looming threat of WW3, AI job automation, and now facing the ‘biggest crash in history’.”

Towards the end of October, he felt in an oracular mood: “Sometimes we see bubbles,” he wrote in another post. “Sometimes, there is something to do about it. Sometimes, the only winning move is not to play.” His Scion Asset Management hedge fund subsequently moved 80% of its US$1.1 billion portfolio to place options against Palantir (PTLR) and Nvidia (NVDA). These will pay handsomely should shares in these AI-linked companies fall. Burry remains convinced that technology stocks, certainly when it comes to artificial intelligence, are overvalued and set for the precipitous plummet. Whether this is due to growing scepticism about the herd-like rush to adopt AI, the debate about necessary regulation, or that broader sensibility that what rises or swells so rapidly must fall or puncture, is impossible to know. Certainly, the incestuous circular financing tech companies have been engaging in is crying out for a stinging correction. But it is precisely moves of this nature by Scion Asset Management that send jitters through the market, turning preaching prophets into market saboteurs.

Surely enough, Palantir’s shares fell by 8% on November 4 despite exceeding Wall Street estimates of returns for the third quarter. The stocks had risen to skyscraper levels – 173% for the year heading into trading that day. Nvidia’s fell by 4% after having improved by 50% this year. “It seems fatigue over AI and the current earnings run has investors questioning the sustainability of the AI hype,” reasoned financial analyst Farhan Badami. “That’s dragged down AI companies overnight in markets.”

Sympathy for such companies is bound to be in short supply. Palantir is the sort of data analytics company any half-decent minded individual would wish to fail. In April this year, 404 Media revealed that US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had paid the company millions of dollars to modify the ICE database to enable it to “complete target analysis of known populations” and spruce up the targeting of that tool and enforcement priorities. The database gives ICM agents the means to sort individuals using hundreds of specific categories covering physical attributes, administrative background and mobility. ICE Director Todd Lyons has fantasies of running the agency’s crude, clumsy deportation policy “like [Amazon] Prime, but with human beings” in an effort to treat the matter “like a business”.

This charming dystopian thought is a good pairing with the sinister propaganda Palantir enjoys promoting, including a campaign on college campuses that echoes the stirrings of a Nuremberg rally cry: “Our culture has fallen into shallow consumerism while abandoning national purpose. Too few in Silicon Valley have asked what ought to be built – and why.” Palantir, to that end, was built to conquer such flabby complacency. “On the factory floor, in the operating room, across the battlefield – we build to dominate.”

The company CEO, Alex Karp, has been less than impressed by Burry’s short selling efforts. “The two companies he’s shorting are the ones making all the money, which is super weird,” he told CNBC’s Squawk Box in sheer bafflement. “The idea that chips and ontology is what you want to short is batshit crazy.” He is confident that any damage will be minimal. “I do think this behaviour is egregious and I’m going to be dancing around when it’s proven wrong.”

The latest fall is being taken with a grain of salt among some investors, though you can hardly trust them. Take the tepid assessment from equity trading strategist at Citi, Vishal Vivek. “A little bit of risk is not going to take the sheen off what’s been a pretty remarkable year, in fact, a pretty remarkable three-year stretch,” he tells Reuters on whether AI stocks were proving less attractive. “If anything, there’s a reasonable chance that you’re going to pause your buying maybe, but you’re not going to necessarily sell your big positions into year-end because you’re worried about one or two companies that have underperformed.”

Leaving aside such babble and bloviation, if there is a crash in overvalued AI stocks likely to rival the market falls that took place in the Great Recession, a similar government program used for the banks and banksters will be sought by Karp and company. In the private sector, foolish losses and unscrupulous conduct regarding investments often turns its members into temporary socialists. Profit, on the hand, is the sort of thing that rests firmly and assuredly in the clasping hands of the corporate sector, the result of purported intelligence and industry. That’s private enterprise for you.

Binoy Kampmark

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment