Royal Commission into Antisemitism a “$131 Million Whinge”
by Andrew Brown | Aug 5, 2026, https://michaelwest.com.au/royal-commission-into-antisemitism-a-131-million-whinge/
“Australians are not being investigated for hating Jews. They are being investigated for objecting to a genocide.” Andrew Brown on the Royal Commission into Antisemitism.
Apparently antisemitism simply fell from the sky. Fully formed. Immaculately conceived. Entirely unrelated to anything happening in Gaza. That is the finding Australia has pre-purchased for $131.1 million, confirmed at Senate Estimates in February, with $91 million alone for staffing, property, lawyers and security.
“Every single dollar buys theatre.“
Measure the obscenity. The banking royal commission, which gutted an entire industry’s misconduct, cost $75 million. Aboriginal Deaths in Custody cost $50.2 million.
This inquiry outspends both combined. Meanwhile there is no royal commission into the domestic violence killing a woman most weeks, none into Islamophobia, now soaring. Australia found $131 million for the one inquiry designed never to ask an obvious question.
Blame where it belongs. Anthony Albanese wrote the answer into the question. His Letters Patent instruct the Commission to find the drivers of antisemitism in extremism and radicalisation, the war deleted from the terms of reference before Virginia Bell was even sworn in.
The Albanese government wrote the verdict into the terms of reference, then spent more than the banking royal commission to have a judge read it back. Here is what the money is buying.
Commissioning an alibi
Albanese promised the inquiry would deliver, in his own words, the right outcome. A Prime Minister announcing the right outcome in advance is commissioning an alibi.
This is the government that will gesture at recognising Palestine while refusing to utter the word genocide, that ships F35 components into the supply chain of the slaughter, that sanctions two Israeli ministers and calls it courage. It needed a grand national explanation for collapsing social cohesion that never once mentions its own complicity.
“For $131 million, it has bought one.“
The process delivered. In the first three days of hearings, 23 of 36 witnesses characterised criticism of Israel, opposition to Zionism or Palestine advocacy as antisemitic. Jewish organisations opposed to Zionism were refused leave to appear. Palestinian voices were excluded for lacking a direct and substantial interest.
The accused were barred from the courtroom so the prosecution could run unopposed at public expense.
The grievance parade
And the substance? A grievance parade.
The ABC and SBS hauled in to answer for Jillian Segal’s strong perception, her phrase, that their Gaza coverage lacks balance, then interrogated for declining the contested IHRA definition Bell waved through as uncontroversial.
Keffiyehs, flags, watermelon art, chants of Free Palestine, student encampments and fundraisers for maimed children tendered as exhibits of hate. Protest. Tents. Journalism. Every place an ordinary Australian expressed solidarity with a people being exterminated, recast at public expense as a crime scene. Australians are not being investigated for hating Jews.
“They are being investigated for objecting to a genocide.“
The complainants were welcomed like royalty. Alex Ryvchin of the ECAJ, who called the anti-Israel movement indistinguishable from neo-Nazism, testified at length while his silk objected to opposing counsel merely uttering the word genocide, a finding the International Court of Justice considered plausible back in January 2024.
Robert Gregory of the self-appointed Australian Jewish Association, which the ECAJ itself calls unrepresentative, told the Commission the government egged on antisemitism, fresh from blaming Bondi on visas for Palestinians fleeing the bombs.
Sky’s the limit
Sky News completes the circuit, wheeling Gregory out to demonise protesters, then feeding its own segments back into the panic as evidence.
The outcomes are as predetermined as the terms.
Come 14 December, expect IHRA stamped across the public service and pushed onto civil society, work Segal has begun. Expect ABC oversight its own ombudsman rejected. Expect protest reframed as policing, and regulators monitoring speech the way AHPRA already does, having admitted under oath it watches nurses and doctors for criticism of Israel after Segal’s pressure.
“Expect everything blamed but the war.“
And expect antisemitism not to fall, because you cannot cure what you refuse to diagnose. Every recommendation will manufacture the resentment it claims to fight, and Labor will call the wreckage cohesion.
For almost three years the world has watched a genocide live-streamed by a state claiming to act in the name of the Jewish people, while its Australian cheer squad defended, excused or denied every atrocity.
Now they ask why anger grows.
None of this excuses antisemitism. Not one word of it. The Bondi gunmen murdered Jews for being Jews, and the law should fall hard on every bigot who follows them. Fifteen dead Australians deserved a fearless inquiry. They got a pantomime, their graves deployed as a shield for a foreign state and the government that armed it.
The elephant is blocking the doorway and eating $131 million of paperwork, yet everyone keeps peering around it, declaring there is nothing to see.This Commission will not defeat antisemitism. It will deliver the most expensive whinge in Australian history, commissioned by a government purchasing its own absolution with public money.
The Advertiser (Adelaide) tries to be fair about AUKUS nuclear waste, but can’t quite make it.
Waste Storage Issue
Robyn Wood, 3 August 26
The Advertiser published my letter on AUKUS today, though they edited it to remove the cost of “tens of billions of dollars” and removed my sentence asking just what the government was trying to hide from us.
To answer David Harris’ suggestion on the eventual storage of high level waste at the end of AUKUS nuclear submarine life – (Stiring the waste – letters 30/7/26), Australia is definitely responsible for it, even nuclear waste generated by the U.S. in the second-hand subs we will supposedly get from them.
Eventually a deep geological nuclear waste facility would have to be built in Australia at a vast cost which has not been budgeted for.
The government is keeping its plans secret.
Former Senator Rex Patrick recently won a legal case to bring about release of government documents detailing potential AUKUS nuclear waste storage and disposal sites, which the government is currently appealing, in their wish to keep the plans from public view.
Giant space radars in Pembrokeshire branded ‘instrument of evil’ as campaigners hail small victory in fight against Ministry of Defence plans
“If we put such an installation like that it makes Wales suddenly a supporter of the most provocative regime in the world at the moment. That makes enemies.”
those against it fear the US would have primary control of the dishes, helping a US-led escalation in space warfare and to turn Wales into a military target for its enemies.
The radars, which would be built by American defence company Northrop Grumman are earmarked for Cawdor Barracks, near St Davids, and are part of the AUKUS security partnership between the UK, US and Australia.
“And the argument for it bringing jobs is just ridiculous,” he added. “Because the local people won’t be involved in the operation. Jobs will be lost.”
“If we put such an installation like that it makes Wales suddenly a supporter of the most provocative regime in the world at the moment. That makes enemies.”
those against it fear the US would have primary control of the dishes, helping a US-led escalation in space warfare and to turn Wales into a military target for its enemies.
By Bronwen Weatherby, 6 Aug 2026, https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/radars-pembrokeshire-wales-campaign-5HjdfgP_2/?fbclid=IwY2xjawThW2BwZG9mAWV4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkEDIyMjAzOTE3ODgyMDA4OTIAAR4xadMM94NX9NwkoA9egZO764QyF026XrpxAGhLphH2dG6lSMLNQaypWZUNuQ_aem_AryMN-WJ0muRN-wPxngdOA
Campaigners have branded the proposed installation of twenty-seven giant space radars in Pembrokeshire “an instrument of evil”, claiming it would seriously impact the health, environment and safety of the local community.
A planning decision on the DARC – Deep Space Advanced Radar Capability – project was due to take place last week, but the Welsh Government called in the decision days before the vote – in a move that could trigger a row with Westminster over the UK’s national security.
Opponents of the radar have hailed it as a small victory in the battle against the Ministry of Defence’s (MOD) plans, as the newly elected Plaid Cymru government has been openly resistant to it.
However, the area’s Labour MP Henry Tufnell was scathing of Plaid ministers saying “their priorities are all in the wrong place”.
The radars, which would be built by American defence company Northrop Grumman are earmarked for Cawdor Barracks, near St Davids, and are part of the AUKUS security partnership between the UK, US and Australia.
Each 20-metre-high by 15-metre-wide radar dish is designed to find, track, and identify objects up to 22,000 miles out in space and once in place, the three sites – one in each nation – would connect to give a complete 360-degree, 24 hours a day view of space.
‘Desecration of the land’
Among those leading the campaign against it is Game of Thrones star Jerome Flynn who spoke to LBC, saying: “I see it as a desecration of the land.
“It’s not our airspace, it’s our beautiful coastal birds and their migratory space. And there is much evidence to show that they’re one of the biggest emitters of harmful EMFs [high-frequency ionizing radiation]
“So we need to think about human beings, including the ones that come and visit here and what it might do to the tourist industry.
“And the argument for it bringing jobs is just ridiculous,” he added. “Because the local people won’t be involved in the operation. Jobs will be lost.”
“I don’t think anybody feels like that installation is going to make us safer.
“If we put such an installation like that it makes Wales suddenly a supporter of the most provocative regime in the world at the moment. That makes enemies.”
Mr Flynn argued the radars were “antithetical” to what the St David’s peninsula represents, particularly as an important pilgrimage site.
The MOD states ‘the radio waves used by DARC are non-ionising radiation. They are not hazardous to health because they do not have enough energy to cause harmful ionisation.
‘Levels of non-ionising radiation in the area surrounding the DARC site would be less than or equal to that received from using a mobile phone, presenting no danger to members of the public in the area.’
It also argues the radar would protect satellites essential to GPS navigation, emergency communications, banking systems, weather forecasting and military operations from hostile military actions including missiles, hostile spacecrafts and blinding lasers as well as accidental hazards such as fast-moving space junk and orbital debris.
But those against it fear the US would have primary control of the dishes, helping a US-led escalation in space warfare and to turn Wales into a military target for its enemies.
Northrop Grumman’s director of space surveillance, Kevin Giammo, has previously stated that he sees DARC as a key asset in the US’s ‘Golden Dome’ initiative – a plan to create an air and missile defense shield over America.
Several of those LBC spoke with at a PARC Against DARC (Pembrokeshire Against the Radar Campaign) rally referenced Iran’s destruction of radar infrastructure in the Gulf in response to the US-Israel attacks and their fear Pembrokeshire would become a similar target.
Roy Jones, one of the group who successfully fought a similar proposal in the 1990s told LBC: “We often get accused of being NIMBY’s. Yes I feel passionate about my local landscape and my local community, but I wouldn’t want to see this thing put anywhere in Britain or anywhere in the world because it’s an instrument of evil.”
Such is the strength of feeling among some in the community that local Labour MP, Henry Tufnell, has come under personal attacks with protesters referring to him as ‘Toff-nell’, holding cut outs of his face at rallies while chanting “Where’s Toff-nell?”
In response to Plaid’s move to seize control of the planning decision, he told LBC: “How do we make sure there are good well-paid jobs, how do we make sure they go beyond the construction phase, how do we make sure we reap the benefits as a local community? Those are the right questions to be asking.
Outside his office in Haverfordwest, Mr Tufnell who has publicly advocated for the plans insisted he had been engaging with the MOD and Northrop Grumman to minimise the impact on the landscape and on health and ensure it benefits the local economy.
“Not shall we put into question our national security and hand ourselves to China and Russia on a plate and forget about our international partners. I think they’re priorities are all in the wrong place.”
Welsh Ministers are no longer able to comment on the application while the call-in process is active but a statement provided by some Plaid backbenchers said: “We do not support the construction of the DARC radar array and have been consistent in expressing our serious concerns about the impact of this project on Pembrokeshire’s landscape, tourism economy, and public health – none of which have been adequately assessed.
“The scale of opposition also makes it clear that many residents reject this proposal and the lack of transparency surrounding it.”
An MoD spokesman said: “The programme has worked with Pembrokeshire County Council to develop the planning application in accordance with applicable regulations in addition to Welsh national requirements. This will continue to be the case as the application is now considered by Welsh Ministers.”
Northrop Grumman and Montagu Evans, the planning agent for the project, were contacted for comment.
Australian news this week.
Australian news this week
- The Advertiser (Adelaide) tries to be fair about AUKUS nuclear waste, but can’t quite make it.
- Ivy Lee Patrick: “I was not only grieving AUKUS itself” – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwE3TgLUnIA
- Jonathan Huston MLA: “HMAS Stirling pens will become a perfect open-air target”- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGh8TNLAB5E
- Joseph Camilleri: “One of the saddest decisions ever made by an Australian Government”-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9pZlIm6w48
- Eileen Darley & Sandra Dann (PACOA): “AUKUS is a war pact”-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvQaVN1T7YU
- Stop AUKUS WA says AUKUS “debases our democracy” and “threatens our sovereignty” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJP7Ic__6yw&t=197s
- FROM THE ARCHIVES – Lucas Heights nuclear reactor was always intended as a step towards nuclear weapons, AND IT STILL IS.
- Chris Schacht says “The AUKUS deal is terrible” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONKsPZAFdmg
- UK and Australia form closer nuclear ties.
- Royal Commission into Antisemitism a “$131 Million Whinge”
- Royal Commission: lawyers spar over Gaza genocide, health regulator admits Segal pressure.
UK and Australia form closer nuclear ties
Nuclear Institute to join forces with the Australian Nuclear Association. The UK’s Nuclear
Institute (NI) and the Australian Nuclear Association (ANA) will now
operate as a partnership in the hope to support better knowledge exchange.
NI members who live in the UK and ANA members living in Australia are
eligible to join the organisation at no cost. The agreement is said allow
to nuclear professionals to work internationally with ease. The
collaboration will also give members access to benefits including
discounted event rates, better professional networks and new development
opportunities in both countries.
Energy Live News 4th Aug 2026, https://www.energylivenews.com/2026/08/04/uk-and-australia-form-closer-nuclear-ties/
Royal Commission: lawyers spar over Gaza genocide, health regulator admits Segal pressure
by Stephanie Tran and Wendy Bacon | Jul 30, 2026 , https://michaelwest.com.au/royal-commission-lawyers-spar-over-gaza-genocide-health-regulator-admits-segal-pressure/
A heated exchange erupted at the Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion on Wednesday after counsel for the Jewish Council of Australia, Kirsten Edwards SC, questioned Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA) chief executive Justin Untersteiner about whether healthcare workers could face complaints for describing Israel’s conduct in Gaza as genocide.
The exchange prompted strong objections from counsel for the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, Michael Borsky KC, who argued the commission should not become
“a platform” for “false claims” about Israel.”
Edwards’ questioning centred on an example contained in the Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism’s handbook, which AHPRA adopted alongside the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition in June.
One reading of the analysis provided of this example is that describing or using the words genocide, apartheid, or ethnic cleansing in connection with Israel’s actions in Palestine is antisemitic,” Edwards said.
She noted that international bodies, including the International Court of Justice, had used the term genocide in relation to Israel’s conduct in Gaza and asked how practitioners expressing similar views would be treated under AHPRA’s new approach.
“Prior to the publication of this handbook in January 2024, the International Court of Justice ruled that it was
plausible that Israel’s acts in Gaza could amount to genocide,” Edwards said.
“Genocide claims antisemitic, claims Israel lobby lawyer“
Borsky immediately objected and said the “false claims” would “fuel antisemitism”.
“I object. We respectfully submit that this Commission ought not be used as a platform for referring to such allegations. My friend is wrong. That’s not what was found, and the suggestion is, in any event, irrelevant to the Commission’s terms of reference, it could only be relevant to the subject of the Commission’s terms of reference in fuelling anti-Semitism and eroding social cohesion for these false claims to be advanced through this forum,” he said.
Commissioner Virginia Bell rejected the submission that the questioning was irrelevant.
“As I understand where Ms Edwards is going,” Bell said, “it is to contend that in some contexts, use of the word genocide … might nonetheless not be evidence of hostility towards Jews, but might reasonably be taken as a political statement about the conduct of the State of Israel.”
“I think that’s very much at the heart of aspects of the work of this Commission.”
Genocide denied
Borsky doubled down.
“Commissioner, with the greatest of respect, we understand and accept that. But accuracy matters and what my friend put was inaccurate. It was false. She put that the International Court of Justice has ruled that it was plausible that Israel’s acts in Gaza could amount to genocide.
“That is false, and its airing in public is liable to exacerbate the problem of anti-Semitism in his country,” he said.
Commissioner Bell disagreed.
“Mr Borsky, calling it false might be going one step beyond a neutral way of framing it,” she said.
Bell observed that the ICJ had not determined whether genocide had occurred but had accepted there was a prima facie case warranting provisional measures while proceedings continue.
Counsel assisting the Royal Commission, Richard Lancaster SC also interjected Edwards’ line questioning twice.
On the first occasion, Lancaster objected to Edwards’ characterisation of the example in the Special Envoy’s handbook, telling the Commission:
“I object to that because it refers to Zionism. It doesn’t refer to Israel.”
On his second interjection, he once again emphasised that the example of antisemitism in the handbook referred to the term “Zionist”.
“The launching pad for Ms Edwards’ questions was an example given in the ASECA handbook.The example does not involve expressions using the word Israel or the government of Israel. It uses the terms Zionist, and so the launching pad for the question does not sit well with Miss Edwards’ explanation of it,” Lancaster said.
The analysis of the example on page 76 of Segal’s handbook argues that “trying to separate ‘antisemitism’ from ‘antizionism’ ignores the history of misinformation, disinformation and antisemitic propaganda that has shaped narratives about Israel and Zionism … Antisemitism and antizionism are both expressions of hatred towards Jews.”
Untersteiner was unable to answer whether the handbook example would be found to be antisemitic. He said that it would depend on “context” in each case and that he was not a decision maker of complaints.
Segal handbook was “tipping point”
Earlier in his evidence, AHPRA CEO Justin Untersteiner confirmed AHPRA had resisted adopting the IHRA definition because of concerns it could inhibit legitimate political speech.
We resisted it for a period of time,” he said, because AHPRA had heard concerns about “the risk of the IHRA definition stifling free speech … within the healthcare system.”He said publication of the Special Envoy’s handbook earlier this year altered the regulator’s assessment.
“The handbook really provided greater granularity and detail about the definition, about what it does mean and what it doesn’t mean,” Untersteiner said.
“It was on the basis of that handbook, as well as all the feedback that we’d had over a period of time, that we felt it was the right decision then to adopt it.”
When Edwards suggested the handbook had been the “tipping point” in AHPRA’s decision, Untersteiner agreed.
Handbook to inform disciplinary action
Untersteiner also confirmed the handbook would not simply assist staff in triaging complaints but could
“inform disciplinary decisions made by professional boards.“
Asked whether the IHRA definition would be referenced if AHPRA alleged a practitioner had breached professional standards through antisemitic conduct, Untersteiner replied that it would.
“The recommendation and the report … would very much reference IHRA,” he said.
“The appropriate board would be referencing IHRA in making that final decision.”
He further agreed that AHPRA was embedding not only the IHRA definition but also the Special Envoy’s handbook into its regulatory framework.
When asked whether both documents could inform assessments of whether conduct was antisemitic and whether complaints were vexatious, Untersteiner answered: “Correct.”
AHPRA begins social media monitoring
The hearing also revealed AHPRA has begun using social media monitoring tools to monitor practitioners’ social media activity.
“We, like most regulators, use a range of different regulatory tools,” Untersteiner said.
“That includes the use of social media monitoring tools … to help us identify where there might be activity of concern to us related to, for instance, racism or discrimination.”
“We’ve engaged a service provider that undertakes general social media monitoring, and they will use a range of different methods to identify. And by the way, this isn’t just about discrimination, which relates to other issues that might play out in the health system,” he said.
Pressed on whether the monitoring involved searching for particular terms, such as “genocide”, Untersteiner said he was not sufficiently familiar with the technical operation of the system to answer.
Untersteiner said that 85% of complaints related to Islamophobia and anti-Semitism were related to social media activity compared to 40 to 45% of overall complaints regarding racism and discrimination.
Chilling effect acknowledged
Edwards also questioned Untersteiner about complaints made against doctors who had spoken publicly about Gaza.
She referred to correspondence from the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners raising concerns that complaints relating to political speech, even when ultimately dismissed, were taking months to resolve and causing considerable stress to practitioners.
Untersteiner acknowledged that even
“unsubstantiated complaints could have a “chilling effect”.
He said AHPRA was considering whether practitioners should sometimes not be notified about complaints unlikely to result in regulatory action in order to reduce unnecessary anxiety.
Abuse after adopting IHRA
Questioned later by Borsky, Untersteiner said he had received abuse following AHPRA’s adoption of the IHRA definition, including allegations that he supported genocide or had been influenced by the Israel lobby.
Borsky also referred to abuse directed at Special Envoy Jillian Segal, who will reappear at the Commission on Thursday.
The hearing did not examine claims that AHPRA had also come under sustained lobbying from pro-Israel organisations before adopting the IHRA definition.
MWM previously revealed that AHPRA’s decision followed months of lobbying by the Australian Zionist Health Alliance and other advocacy groups, including calls for Untersteiner’s removal and repeated engagement with senior government officials.
Lucas Heights nuclear reactor was always intended as a step towards nuclear weapons, AND IT STILL IS.
Canberra hoped that aiding Britain might be a step toward its own bomb.
Australia took tentative steps to go it alone. This included the Lucas Heights nuclear plant on Sydney’s southern fringe. Still Australia’s only reactor, it began its life researching, among other things, nuclear weapons
“We have the people, the knowledge, the history, the uranium and we still have Lucas Heights.”
Australia’s secret plans to have its own nuclear arsenal, AMERICA. Russia. China. Britain. The world’s most powerful countries all have nuclear arsenals — and few people know Australia was almost one of them, Benedict Brook@BenedictBrook, news.com.au, JULY 11, 2017 “…….A military expert has told news.com.au, that top secret plans were so advanced Australia was considered “top of the pile” of countries expected to acquire its own nuclear arsenal
It was 60 years ago that the last nuclear bomb was detonated in Australia, a British weapon at the Maralinga test site in South Australia.
If you look closely, evidence of Australia’s plans for its own nuke remain. A few hours south of Sydney, at picturesque Jervis Bay, a small road leads into the bush. By a boat ramp is a large car park.
However, this was never designed to be a place for tourists’ vehicles. Rather, it is the unfinished foundations of Australia’s first commercial nuclear power station.
The public were told it would revolutionise the country’s energy needs. The truth was it would enrich uranium for Australia’s atomic bombs.
Associate Professor Wayne Reynolds is a defence and foreign policy expert at the University of Newcastle and author of the book Australia’s Bid for the Atomic Bomb….. “We wanted to have a navy; in WWII we wanted access to heavy bombers; and so we wanted nuclear weapons. We wanted to maintain a strategic leading edge.”
Australia didn’t want to go it alone. During WWII, British and Australian experts had worked alongside their American counterparts on the Manhattan Project to build the world’s first atomic bomb.
The expectation was that the US would share the results with its allies.
“In 1946, the Americans changed that calculation by announcing they would not share any of the technology or weapons,” says Prof Reynolds. “Britain and Australia were cut out from the club”……. Many in the government harboured a desire for a joint “Empire” bomb produced between Australia, Britain, Canada and South Africa.
Despite the UK’s ownership of the bombs it detonated at Maralinga, Canberra hoped aiding Britain might be a step toward its own bomb. Certainly, no one underestimated Australia’s atom ambitions. “German, Italy, the Netherlands — all wanted nuclear weapons but Australia was top of the list because of our uranium resources, our scientists and our enrichment program,” Prof Reynolds says.
Australia took tentative steps to go it alone. This included the Lucas Heights nuclear plant on Sydney’s southern fringe. Still Australia’s only reactor, it began its life researching, among other things, nuclear weapons…..
In the early 1960s, the Menzies Government was discussing with the US the top secret “SEATO plan 4” which could have seen American bombs on Australian soil.
“This were absolutely not known by the public and plan 4 was only declassified thirty years later,” says Prof Reynolds.
…..In 1968, ex-RAAF pilot Gorton became Prime Minister. The nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT) was already in the works. However, a big supporter of a homegrown nuclear deterrent, Gorton wanted to Australia to be on the “brink of manufacture” of a weapon, says Prof Reynolds…….
Gough Whitlam formally ended Australia’s atom ambitions by signing onto the NPT and tying the country’s security to the US…….
Prof Reynolds says it is unlikely Australia would seek to host nuclear bombs — its own or others. But history warns you to never say never.
“Historically, we’ve gone with the major powers. But if this unravels we might need a capability down here,” he says.” “We have the people, the knowledge, the history, the uranium and we still have Lucas Heights.” benedict.brook@news.com.au http://www.news.com.au/technology/science/australias-secret-plans-to-have-its-own-nuclear-arsenal/news-story/2bcac85b0f2cbe3f7e377217d6ef999b?platform=hootsuite
News indirectly related to the nuclear industry, week to 1 August 2026
Some bits of good news – How to stitch a massive wildlife corridor through the Rocky Mountains. Indonesia’s free nutritious meal program reaches 62.4 mln beneficiaries. White Storks Return to the Midlands After Six Hundred Years
TOP STORIESZelensky’s Dangerous Gambit To Merge The Iran And Ukraine Wars . Not Even Israelis Are Willing To Die For Israel.
A nuclear deal for the Saudis, media blackout for Kushner’s corruption.
From the archives: Saudi Arabia, the Khashoggi murder case: the nuclear connections with Terra Power, Bill Gates, Breakthrough etc
Climate ‘The heat took him from me’: India’s death toll rises amid escalating heat crisis.
‘Fire cloud’ over Bordeaux as France braces for new heatwave. Uganda begins emergency food handouts after 19 die from hunger,
AUSTRALIA
. AUKUS Inquiry exposes nuclear weapon-sized crater.
Coalition MPs push for nuclear-powered data centres.
The Quiet Surrender of our Nation’s Sovereignty
| ATROCITIES. Israel Is Erasing Entire Gaza Families From The Civil Registry. |
| CIVIL LIBERTIES. Suffolk fire live: Hundreds of firefighters battle ‘unprecedented’ wildfire near nuclear plant. |
| ECONOMICS. Nuclear revival needs $250bn a year, industry says. Nuclear needs $6tn investment surge to meet 2050 ambitions. |
| MEDIA. ‘Earth’s Greatest Enemy‘ Delivers A Penetrating Insight Into The Heart Of Our Dystopia. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kz7MfkVAC40&t=110s |
| OPPOSITION to NUCLEAR .Campaign steps up opposition to south Wales nuclear project. |
POLITICS .
- Ontario touts small nuclear reactors with $500,000 for Haldimand County.
- The Small Modular Nuclear Reactor Hyper spreads to Italy. Philippines’ Marcos says ‘perhaps time to revisit nuclear energy’.
- Republican senator breaks ranks with Trump over controversial nuclear deal with Saudi Arabia. The Guardian view on a US-Saudi nuclear agreement: an offer that further erodes international safeguards. Enrichment Antics: Trump’s Saudi Nuclear Deal. Democrats prepare to resist Saudi nuclear deal.
- Trump Administration Picks Five States for Nuclear Fuel-Cycle Hubs.
- Trump threat to hit Pickaxe renews calls in Iran for nuclear bomb, NPT exit.
- The Collapse of the Bipartisan Consensus over US-Israel Ties. Democrats prepare to resist Saudi nuclear deal. Canada’s silence on the U.S. and Saudi Arabia’s nuclear agreement isn’t neutrality. It’s something much worse-ALSO AT https://nuclear-news.net/?s=Canada%E2%80%99s+silence+on+the+U.S.+and+Saudi+Arabia%E2%80%99s+
POLITICS INTERNATIONAL and DIPLOMACY.
Saudi Arabia stares down Trump whiplash US‑Saudi nuclear deal invites proliferation risks … unless safeguards are written in on nuclear deal.
The Saudi Nuclear Deal Invites Disaster (Wall Street Journal)
The US-Saudi nuclear deal.
Trump stuns Saudis by pinning nuclear deal to Israel ties.
UK’s New Defence Minister Called Israel ‘Rogue State’.
The nuclear lobby getting cold feet about public acceptance?
| RADIATION. As Trump boosts nuclear power, regulators seek to eliminate a longstanding radiation safety practice. |
| SAFETY. No more sheltering or iodine tablets: Why are we getting a new nuclear emergency plan? |
| SECRETS and LIES. Israel Is Paying Millions to Train AI Chatbots How to Talk About Gaza – It’s Working. Trump’s Phantom Enemies. |
WAR and CONFLICT.
- Colonel Doug Macgregor: Sleepwalking into World War III.
- Israel builds massive barrier inside Gaza to partition strip beyond ‘Yellow Line’
- War Criminal Pete Hegseth Disrupted.
- What would happen if the UK’s Faslane nuclear weapons base was hit in a nuclear strike? An Iranian missile attack on the UK is no longer far-fetched.
- The Chris Hedges Report: Is Iran Becoming Another ‘Forever War’?
- US Troops Always Die For The US Alone.
- A Big War is Coming. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXMjSY0spzQ&t=74s
WASTES. White House wants to entice ‘willing states’ to take nation’s nuclear waste with promises of economic boost. 5 states offer to accept nuclear waste in exchange for help developing nuclear energy!
WEAPONS and WEAPONS SALES.
- Andy Burnham pitches £8.4bn nuclear submarine investment as great for youth employment. Russia’s
- Starlink killers showcase new era of electronic battlefield warfare. The Guardian view on a US-Saudi nuclear agreement: an offer that further erodes international safeguards. Is Trump’s Saudi nuclear deal set to trigger a Middle East arms race?
- The rise of the military-technology complex.
US Navy’s nuclear battleship plan raises questions for carriers, submarines and AUKUS
The same reactor vendor, dockyards and specialist workforce that sustain the Virginia boats promised to Australia under the trilateral AUKUS partnership are already working at their limit
Navy Lookout 30 July 26, https://www.navylookout.com/us-navys-nuclear-battleship-plan-raises-questions-for-carriers-submarines-and-aukus/
The US Navy has confirmed that its planned Trump-class guided-missile battleship, whose lead ship would be USS Defiant, will be nuclear-powered. The propulsion decision could have consequences extending beyond the BB(X) programme (now redesignated BBGN), placing additional pressure on US aircraft-carrier construction and the naval nuclear industrial base, with potential second-order implications for AUKUS and the submarine programmes of Australia and Britain.
Going nuclear
When BBG(X) was unveiled at the end of 2025, the Navy’s initial concept depicted conventional integrated electric propulsion using gas turbines and diesel generators. The FY2027 thirty-year shipbuilding plan subsequently confirmed that the battleship would be nuclear-powered, while Navy officials told Congress that it was expected to use the A1B reactor type fitted to the Ford-class carriers.
There is an operational logic to the decision. A large combatant intended to carry extensive missile batteries, high-output lasers, powerful sensors, electronic-warfare equipment and future energy-intensive weapons will require considerable generating capacity. Nuclear power also removes the fuel constraint that would otherwise limit a ship expected to operate across the distances of the Indo-Pacific, and it would make the Defiant-class the first American nuclear-powered surface combatant since the last of the Virginia-class cruisers paid off in the 1990s.
Industrial chokepoint
The difficulty is not the nuclear technology itself, which is proven in service and is a design that could be adapted for the battleships. The issue is the increased pressure on the supply chain. Nuclear-powered surface ship construction in the United States is dependent on one yard, HII Newport News. This facility is already experiencing delays and cost growth delivering the Ford-class aircraft carriers. The GD Electric Boat in Groton is the only other yard certified for naval nuclear work but only builds submarines, which are the Navy’s top priority. The most significant industrial bottleneck is the naval reactor supply chain centred on BWX Technologies, the sole supplier of US naval reactor cores and key reactor components. BWX are simultaneously supplying the CVN programme (each ship has 2 reactors) as well as two major submarine programmes. Adding the nuclear requirement to the battleship programme when there is no spare industrial capacity to draw upon means it must compete directly for nuclear-certified labour, drydock time and reactor components already committed years ahead.
The House Armed Services Committee has backed a requirement for the Navy to explain how the programme would avoid disrupting Ford-class carrier construction and the wider naval nuclear industrial base. The concern is grounded in the sequencing of the work, since naval reactors are ordered two to three years before the hulls they power, so any diversion of components or skilled staff is felt long before a battleship takes shape. The Columbia-class SSBN programme, which replaces the sea-based leg of the American nuclear deterrent, is already running late, while Virginia-class SSN construction is below the rate the fleet requires. Adding a third demand to that base without expanding it invites exactly the outcome Congress is trying to avoid.
The AUKUS dimension
The same reactor vendor, dockyards and specialist workforce that sustain the Virginia boats promised to Australia under the trilateral AUKUS partnership are already working at their limit. Nuclear surface ship construction is concentrated at HII Newport News alone. The GD Electric Boat in Groton is the only other yard certified for naval nuclear work but only builds submarines, which are the Navy’s top priority. Reactor components come from a single supplier, BWX Technologies, that is also supplying the Columbia and Virginia submarine lines. The clearest direct risk is to the Ford-class carrier programme, but submarine output would probably be indirectly impacted, through competition for reactor components, nuclear-qualified personnel and investment across the wider supplier base.
For UK reactor production, the exposure is less significant. British naval reactors are designed and manufactured through the UK Defence Nuclear Enterprise, centred on Rolls-Royce Submarines at Raynesway. Reactors for the Dreadnought and SSN-AUKUS boats are made in Britain and complement rather than compete with US capacity. What the UK relies on from the States is the design pedigree of the PWR3, which, to an unknown extent, is modelled on the S9G reactor that powers the Virginia-class and was developed with USN engineering support.
The last public figure put the UK’s Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) stockpile at 21.86 tonnes in 2002, but its present size, composition and availability for future naval fuel are not publicly known. Over half of that stockpile was of US origin and none of it is immediately replenishable since domestic weapons-grade enrichment ended in 1962. It is unclear if there is enough for the 4 Dreadnoughts, up to 12 RN SSN-As planned in the medium-term. (Provision of HEU for the 8 Australian SSN-As also has to be considered, although the source for this has not been publicly established). The genuinely usable reserve is smaller than the headline figure once spent cores, warhead reservation and material form are accounted for, and the stock must also serve every future class indefinitely. Building sovereign enrichment capability takes 15-20 years; the UK has committed £1.7bn to a Nuclear Fuels Programme to explore re-establishing a domestic enrichment to reduce dependence on the US in the long run.
Political and industrial reality
The propulsion decision has also exposed the BBGN programme to an even greater extent politically. Before the decision was finalised, then-Navy Secretary John Phelan said the service was still examining the trade-offs. Admiral Daryl Caudle had earlier warned that nuclear propulsion would add a construction ‘tail’ that could push the ship beyond the timeframe of the operational requirement, although he subsequently endorsed the nuclear design. The ambition for 15 battleships sits awkwardly against a fleet that the same plan does not expect to reach 355 ships until FY2040, and then only if industry achieves a dramatic improvement in delivery performance.
There are plenty who believe that BBGN is essentially a vanity project that will be axed as soon as Trump leaves office. Congress has strongly supported the USN’s continued development of the large, but less demanding, conventionally-powered DDG(X) project, although this is officially a replacement for the Ticonderoga cruisers an
1 This month
.
Australians deserve the truth
about
AUKUS – https://aukuspublicinquiry.com/
PETITION – To: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the Australian Labor Government
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
