Putin ‘shakes the nuclear weapons and threatens, but he is no fool,’ says ex-Iraq weapons inspector Blix

Russian President Vladimir Putin chairs a meeting with members of the Security Council via video conference at the Novo-Ogaryovo state residence, outside Moscow, on Aug. 23, 2024. (Kremlin Pool Photo via AP)
Short Url
Updated 24 August 2024
Follow

Putin ‘shakes the nuclear weapons and threatens, but he is no fool,’ says ex-Iraq weapons inspector Blix

  • Says Putin will not risk a catastrophe at Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant
  • He called Russia’s invasion of Ukraine an “aberration,” adding: “Putin committed a mistake, and I’m sure he regrets it”

STOCKHOLM: Former UN weapons inspector Hans Blix told AFP he believes Russian President Vladimir Putin will not risk a catastrophe at Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant amid mounting international concern over its safety.
The Kremlin leader is “very rational” and “knows what he’s doing,” said the former Swedish foreign minister, who repeatedly insisted that Iraq was not developing nuclear weapons before the Gulf War of 1990.
Blix, 96, who headed the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) from 1981 to 1997, spoke to AFP on a range of issues in an hour-long interview at his apartment in central Stockholm.
Blix later headed a team of UN inspectors tasked with determining whether Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.
He was never able to confirm that.
His findings contradicted claims made by US president George W. Bush, who ordered the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
“It was a terrible mistake on the part of the US, based on erroneous information and a hubris that the US intelligence knew better than what we did,” Blix told AFP. “The Iraq War was an aberration.”
At the time, the US was not at risk of Russia or China intervening, Blix said, and the US and Britain took it upon themselves “to be the world’s sheriffs.”
Blix is today more optimistic about the future of global conflicts.




Former UN weapons inspector Hans Blix, 96, speaks during an interview with AFP at his home in Stockholm, Sweden on August 20, 2024. (AFP)


The former diplomat last year published a book called “A Farewell to Wars” — a title he admitted was “very provocative” given the “headwind right now,” with wars raging in Ukraine and Gaza.
Like the US invasion of Iraq, Blix called Russia’s invasion of Ukraine an “aberration.”
“Putin committed a mistake, and I’m sure he regrets it,” he said.
The IAEA warned on August 17 that the safety situation at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant was “deteriorating” following a nearby drone strike.
The plant, which was seized by Russia’s forces early in the war, has come under repeated attacks that both sides have accused each other of carrying out.
But Blix, who headed the IAEA during the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, doesn’t think Russia would attack the site on purpose.
“I don’t think the Russians would do it deliberately, no.”
“I would be very surprised if the Russians had not instructed their military to stay away from severe damage.”




This file video grab taken from handout footage released by the Ukrainian Presidential Press Service on August 11, 2024, shows a fire at a cooling tower of the Russian-controlled Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in Energodar, eouthern Ukraine. (AFP)

And he isn’t concerned either about Putin’s repeated threats to the West of nuclear warfare.
“He scrambles, he shakes the nuclear weapons and threatens, but he is no fool.”
“As long as there exists the possibility of a second strike, there is the fear of escalation.”
“The big powers — the US and Russia and China — don’t want to get into a situation of direct confrontation with each other.”
Looking ahead to a future after the war in Ukraine, Russia will eventually “have to come back to the world and to Europe,” Blix said, though “it will take time.”
“Maybe,” he said, “there will also be a feeling that now we have to somehow patch up and improve the situation.”
“I’m a multilateralist,” he said, smiling.
“There are so many problems in the globalising world that you cannot manage (if you are) isolated.”
Blix said the international community needed to work together to tackle its biggest challenges, including global warming — which he was “more worried” about than the spectre of war — as well as pandemics and the fight against international organized crime.
 


Nearly $6 billion in US funding for Ukraine will expire if Congress doesn’t act by the end of the month

Updated 5 sec ago
Follow

Nearly $6 billion in US funding for Ukraine will expire if Congress doesn’t act by the end of the month

  • Delays in passing that $61 billion for Ukraine earlier this year triggered dire battlefield conditions as Ukrainian forces ran low on munitions and Russian forces were able to make gains
  • Officials have blamed the monthslong deadlocked Congress for Russia’s ability to take more territory

WASHINGTON: Nearly $6 billion in US funding for aid to Ukraine will expire at the end of the month unless Congress acts to extend the Pentagon’s authority to send weapons from its stockpile to Kyiv, according to US officials.
US officials said the Biden administration has asked Congress to include the funding authority in any continuing resolution lawmakers may manage to pass before the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30 in order to fund the federal government and prevent a shutdown. Officials said they hope to have the authority extended for another year.
They also said the Defense Department is looking into other options if that effort fails.
The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the funding talks, did not provide details on the options. But they said about $5.8 billion in presidential drawdown authority (PDA) will expire. Another $100 million in PDA does not expire at the end of the month, the officials said. The PDA allows the Pentagon to take weapons off the shelves and send them quickly to Ukraine.
They said there is a little more than $4 billion available in longer-term funding through the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative that will not expire at the end of the month. That money, which expires Sept. 30, 2025, is used to pay for weapons contracts that would not be delivered for a year or more.
Gen. CQ Brown, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Thursday that as the Defense Department comptroller provides options to senior defense and military service leaders, they will look at ways they can tap the PDA and USAI funding.
He said it could be important to Ukraine as it prepares for the winter fight.
“One of the areas that we could do work with them on ... is air defense capabilities and the ability to defend their critical infrastructure,” Brown told reporters traveling with him to meetings in Europe. “It’s very important to Ukraine on how they defend their national infrastructure, but also set their defenses for the winter so they can slow down any type of Russian advance during the winter months.”
Earlier Thursday at the Pentagon, Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder, the press secretary, noted that the PDA gives the Pentagon the ability to spend money from its budget to send military aid to Ukraine. Funding in the $61 billion supplemental bill for Ukraine passed in April can reimburse the department for the weapons it sends.
“Right now, we’re continuing to work with Congress to see about getting those authorities extended to enable us to continue to do drawdown packages,” said Ryder. “In the meantime, you’re going to continue to see drawdown packages. But we’ll have much more to provide on that in the near future.”
The US has routinely announced new drawdown packages — often two to three a month.
Failure by lawmakers to act on the PDA funding could once again deliver a serious setback in Ukraine’s battle against Russia, just five months after a bitterly divided Congress finally overcame a long and devastating gridlock and approved new Ukraine funding.
Delays in passing that $61 billion for Ukraine earlier this year triggered dire battlefield conditions as Ukrainian forces ran low on munitions and Russian forces were able to make gains. Officials have blamed the monthslong deadlocked Congress for Russia’s ability to take more territory.
Since funding began again, US weapons have flowed into Ukraine, bolstering the forces and aiding Kyiv’s incursion into Russia’s Kursk region. Ukraine’s forces stormed across the border five weeks ago and put Russian territory under foreign occupation for the first time since World War II.


In swing states, Harris touts Republican endorsements while Trump leans into incendiary rhetoric

Updated 36 min 52 sec ago
Follow

In swing states, Harris touts Republican endorsements while Trump leans into incendiary rhetoric

CHARLOTTE: Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump launched campaign blitzes Thursday with dramatically different approaches to attracting swing-state voters who will decide the presidential contest.
In North Carolina, Democratic nominee Harris used rallies in Charlotte and Greensboro to tout endorsements from Republicans who have crossed the aisle to back her. She also promised to protect access to health care and abortion, while delighting her partisan crowds with celebrations of her debate performance Tuesday, taking digs at Trump and cheerleading for her campaign and the country.
“We’re having a good time, aren’t we?” Harris declared, smiling as her boisterous crowd chanted: “USA! USA! USA!”
In the border state of Arizona, the Republican Trump pitched a tax exemption on all overtime wages, adding it to his previous proposals to not tax tip s or Social Security income. But the former president squeezed those proposals, along with a nonspecific pledge to lower housing costs, into a stemwinding speech marked by his most incendiary rhetoric on immigration and immigrants themselves, name-calling of Harris and others, and a dark, exaggerated portrait of a nation Trump insisted is in a freefall only he can reverse.
“I was angry at the debate,” Trump said, mocking commentators’ description of his performance Tuesday. “And, yes, I am angry,” he said, because “everything is terrible” since Harris and President Joe Biden are “destroying our country.” Upon his repeated use of the word “angry,” Trump’s crowd in Tucson answered with its own “USA! USA! USA!” chants.
The competing visions and narratives underscored the starkly different choices faced by voters in the battleground states that will decide the outcome. Harris is casting a wide net, depending on Democrats’ diverse coalition and hoping to add moderate and even conservative Republicans repelled by the former president. Trump, while seeking a broad working-class coalition with his tax ideas, is digging in on arguments about the country — and his political opponents — that are aimed most squarely at his most strident supporters.
That could become a consistent frame for the closing stretch of the campaign after Trump shut the door on another debate. That potentially could have been another seminal moment during a year that already has boomeranged around milestones like Trump’s criminal conviction by a New York jury, Trump surviving an assassination attempt, Biden ending his reelection bid amid questions about his age, and Harris consolidating Democratic support to become the first woman of color to lead a major-party ticket.
“There will be no third debate,” Trump said Thursday, counting his June matchup against Biden in the total, and insisting he had won his lone encounter with Harris on Tuesday in Philadelphia.
The post-debate blitz reflected the narrow path to 270 Electoral College votes for both candidates, with the campaign already having become concentrated on seven swing states: Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
Harris’ itinerary Thursday put her in a state Trump won twice, but his margin of 1.3 percentage points in 2020 was his closest statewide victory. Arizona, meanwhile, was one of Trump’s narrowest losses four years ago. He won the state in 2016.
In North Carolina, Harris took her own post-debate victory lap, and her campaign already has cut key moments of the debate into ads. But Harris warned against overconfidence, calling herself an underdog and making plain the stakes.
“This is not 2016 or 2020,” she said in Charlotte. “Just imagine Donald Trump with no guardrails.”
She touted endorsements from Republican former Vice President Dick Cheney and his daughter, former Rep. Liz Cheney, both of whom have deemed Trump a fundamental threat to American values and democracy.
“Democrats, Republicans and independents are supporting our campaign,” Harris said in Charlotte, praising the Cheneys and like-minded Republicans as citizens who recognize a need to “put country above party and defend our Constitution.”
Yet she also made a full-throated defense of the Affordable Care Act, the 2010 law commonly called “Obamacare” and passed over near-unanimous Republican opposition. She mocked Trump, who has spent years promising to scrap the law but said at their debate that he still has no specific replacement plan.
“He said, ‘concepts of a plan,’” Harris said. “Concepts. Concepts. No actual plan. Concepts. ... Forty-five million Americans are insured through the Affordable Care Act. And he’s going to end it based on a concept.”
She saddled Trump again with the Supreme Court’s decision to end a woman’s federal right to abortion, paving the way for Republican-led states to severely restrict and in some cases effectively ban the procedure.
“Women are being refused care during miscarriages. Some are only being treated when they develop sepsis,” Harris said of states with the harshest restrictions.
The vice president added her usual broadsides against Project 2025, a 900-page policy agenda written by conservatives for a second Trump administration. Trump has distanced himself from the document, though there is a notable overlap between it and his policies — and, for that matter, some of the policy aims of Republicans like the Cheneys.
Harris’ approach in Charlotte and Greensboro tracked perhaps her widest path to victory: exciting and organizing the diverse Democratic base, especially younger generations, nonwhite voters and women, while convincing moderate Republicans who dislike Trump that they should be comfortable with her in the Oval Office, some policy disagreements notwithstanding. That’s the same formula Biden used in defeating Trump four years ago, flipping traditionally GOP-leaning states like Arizona and Georgia and narrowing the gap in North Carolina.
Trump, meanwhile, appears to bet that his path back to the White House depends mostly on his core supporters, plus enough new support from working- and middle-class voters drawn to his promises of tax breaks.
A raucous crowd cheered his new pitch to end taxes on overtime wages. In a state where rising housing prices has been an acute issue since the COVID-19 pandemic, Trump’s audience exulted in his pledge to reduce housing construction costs by “30 to 50 percent” — a staggering drop that he did not detail beyond pledging to cut regulations and ban mortgages “for illegal aliens.”
“We are going to bring back the American dream bigger, better and stronger than ever before,” Trump said, beaming.
But he reserved most of 75 minutes at the podium for, in his words, being “angry.” Mostly about an influx of migrants across the US Southern border, but also about the ABC debate moderators he said were unfair in the debate he insisted he won. He singled out Linsey Davis, calling her “nasty” — the same word he would use to describe his 2016 Democratic rival Hillary Clinton.
Trump ticked through many of his usual immigration bromides, arguing that migrants in the US illegally have “taken over” US cities and suburbs. He again alluded to the debunked claims — fueled by right-wing actors on social media — that Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, are eating domesticated pets and fowl in public parks. Trump invoked the approval of Hungary’s authoritarian leader, Viktor Orban, and he elicited roars when he promised “largest deportation operation in the history of our country.”
And the former president repeatedly mispronounced Harris’ first name, while insisting she is both a Marxist and a fascist — political ideologies that rest on opposite ends of the left-right political spectrum.


Trump rules out new Harris debate as swing state fight resumes

Updated 13 September 2024
Follow

Trump rules out new Harris debate as swing state fight resumes

CHARLOTTE: Donald Trump said Thursday he would not take part in another debate with Kamala Harris, as the White House rivals headed back to battleground states that are set to decide a nail-bitingly close US presidential election.

The Republican former president lashed out two days after his first televised clash with the Democratic vice president, when Harris put Trump on the defensive and got under his skin with a series of barbs.

“THERE WILL BE NO THIRD DEBATE!” the 78-year-old wrote on his Truth Social platform, including in his tally the earlier debate with Joe Biden in June that drove the incumbent out of the race, and his Tuesday showdown with Harris.

Trump claimed that “polls clearly show that I won the Debate against Comrade Kamala Harris” — despite several snap surveys that showed Harris came out well on top in the clash viewed by more than 67 million Americans.

In a rally in the key swing state of North Carolina, Harris insisted that they should debate again before the November 5 election. It wasn’t clear if she was aware of Trump’s statement.

“Two nights ago Donald Trump and I had our first debate and I believe we owe it to the voters to have another,” Harris said to cheers from supporters in the city of Charlotte.

“Because this election and what is at stake could not be more important,” added the Democrat, who heads to a second rally in Greensboro, North Carolina later on Thursday.

The 59-year-old went on to reference several Trump statements on issues including abortion and his widely mocked assertion that he had “concepts of a plan” to reform the US health care system.

The Harris campaign said earlier that she was entering a “more aggressive” phase of her White House bid and was “seeking to capitalize on her decisive debate victory and build on momentum.”

Trump was taking the stage later Thursday in Tucson, Arizona, amid media reports of turmoil in his camp over the way Harris succeeded in goading him into angry responses.

He will focus on “our struggling economy and the rising cost of housing,” his campaign said — indicating an attempt to get Trump to stick to mainstream voter concerns, rather than his penchant for wild conspiracy theories and lobbing of insults.

Trump and Harris remain neck and neck in the polls with just 54 days until the election, with the result expected to hinge on a few thousand voters in half a dozen swing states including North Carolina and Arizona.

Harris has erased Trump’s lead since Biden ended his reelection bid on July 21 but insists she is the underdog in perhaps the shortest and most dramatic campaign in US political history.

The election is also further stoking political tensions in an already deeply polarized nation.

The White House on Thursday condemned a false story about migrants eating pet cats and dogs in Ohio — which Trump pushed during the debate — as “filth” and said it put “lives in danger.”

The US government has meanwhile declared the formal electoral count on January 6, 2025 a “special security event” — amid apparent fears of a repeat of the storming of the US Capitol in 2021 by Trump supporters who refused to accept his defeat by Biden.

The announcement came as Republican Alberto Gonzales, who was attorney general under president George W. Bush, said he backed Harris because of Trump’s behavior on that day made him a threat to the rule of law.

Trump and Harris though have their eyes firmly fixed on the battlegrounds.

Harris returns to pivotal Pennsylvania on Friday for campaign events in Johnstown and Wilkes-Barre before attending an awards dinner Saturday with Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff.

Trump will deliver remarks in Las Vegas on Friday on the cost of living, as he targets Nevada, yet another key swing state.

Harris’s running mate Tim Walz will travel to Michigan and Wisconsin from Thursday to Saturday as part of the campaign’s New Way Forward swing state tour.


Colombia seeks information on ‘mercenaries’ held in Russia

Updated 13 September 2024
Follow

Colombia seeks information on ‘mercenaries’ held in Russia

BOGOTA: Colombia’s government said Thursday it had asked Russia for information about the welfare of three of its nationals held by Moscow on suspicion of acting as mercenaries in Ukraine.

Two of the soldiers who had allegedly been fighting on the side of Ukraine reportedly disappeared in July while on their way home through Venezuela, a close ally of Moscow.

In late August, a court in Moscow said the two men — Alexander Ante and Jose Aron Medina — had been remanded in custody on charges of acting as mercenaries, a crime punishable by 15 years in prison in Russia.

The foreign ministry in Bogota said Thursday it had written to Moscow “seeking information on the legal status, current whereabouts and health status of the Colombian citizens.”

It said a third Colombian named Miguel Angel Cardenas was also being held.

The disappearance of Aron and Ante first became public in late July, when Aron’s family told Colombia’s El Tiempo newspaper the two had disappeared just before they were due to board a plane at Caracas airport for Bogota on July 19.

The next time they saw the pair was in a video released by Russia’s FSB security services on July 30, which showed them in Ukrainian uniforms, and then being interrogated in prison.

It was not clear how they had arrived in Russia, which is one of the few countries to have recognized Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro’s claim to have won a second presidential term in disputed July elections.

Venezuela’s opposition claims their candidate Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia was the rightful winner, a claim backed by several Latin American countries, the United States and the European Union.

A friend of Ante’s family told El Tiempo the men were in Ukrainian uniform when they went missing in Venezuela, which borders Colombia.

Colombia, where the security forces have been combatting guerrillas, paramilitaries and drug cartels for over six decades, has one of Latin America’s largest armies.

Some retired soldiers have gone on to fight as mercenaries in foreign battlefields, including in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Since 2022, an unknown number has also enlisted with the Ukrainian army, trying to fight off a Russian invasion.

The relatives of several ex-Colombian soldiers have reported their loved ones killed, wounded or going missing in Ukraine recently.

Last month, leftist President Gustavo Petro’s administration tabled a bill in parliament to ban the training, financing and recruitment of mercenaries in the country.


US calls for Africa to get two permanent UN Security Council seats

Updated 13 September 2024
Follow

US calls for Africa to get two permanent UN Security Council seats

UNITED NATIONS:  Washington called Thursday for two new permanent seats on the UN Security Council for African nations, alongside a rotating seat for island states — but insisted they not have a veto.

The proposals would transform the 15-member top body of the global organization which has been largely unchanged for decades and is mired in dysfunction and disagreements between existing permanent members.

The new African representatives should not wield veto power over council resolutions, unlike the current permanent members — Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States — US officials have said.

“I’m announcing the United States supports three additional changes to the Security Council,” said Washington’s ambassador to the UN, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, at the Council on Foreign Relations think-tank.

This would include “creating two permanent seats for Africa,” she said.

African nations already have three non-permanent seats on the Security Council, allocated on a rotating basis for two year terms.

In addition, “the United States supports creating a new elected seat on the Security Council for small island developing states,” Thomas-Greenfield said.

Reform of the Security Council, long-stalled because of differences among its permanent members, would need to be ratified unanimously among the five top-tier powers — all nuclear armed.

A change in membership would first require adoption and ratification by two-thirds of the 193 member states.

Washington has notably said it is opposed to allowing any new members the veto power enjoyed by the five permanent members, claiming it would cause gridlock.

“We’ve been very, very clear that we do not support expansion of the veto,” Thomas-Greenfield said.

“We have veto power as well, and none of the permanent members want to give up their veto power — including us. I’m being honest about that.”

Sierra Leone President Julius Maada Bio told the Security Council in August that “Africa wants the veto abolished.”

“However, if UN Member States wish to retain the veto, it must be extended to all new Permanent Members as a matter of justice,” he said.

The United Nations said Washington’s call was a positive step for African representation.

“The announcement is an important one, it’s welcome,” said a spokesman for UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.

“All of the details of how this will work will have to be decided by member states,” Stephane Dujarric told a briefing.

“It goes along the lines of what (Guterres) has said, lamenting the lack of African representation.”

In September 2022, US President Joe Biden threw his weight behind reform of the council, supporting calls for permanent seats for Africa and Latin America, without giving details.

Russia has previously called for African nations to be cautious of new seats on the council if granted alongside seats to longstanding US allies like Japan and Germany, which Washington has sought.

“It will not be possible to address historical injustice toward Africa while simultaneously allowing new Western members to join the UN Security Council,” Russian deputy ambassador to the UN Dmitry Polyansky said previously.