ReportWire

Tag: possibility

  • Analysts warn that Iran crisis carries potential nuclear risks

    [ad_1]

    In the wake of spiraling tensions between the United States and Iran over Tehran’s violent crackdown on protests, analysts warn that the internal upheaval affecting the Iranian theocracy could carry nuclear proliferation risks.While in recent days U.S. President Donald Trump seemed to have backed away from a military strike on Iran, he called Saturday for an end to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s nearly 40-year reign in Iran. Trump’s comments came in response to Khamenei branding Trump a “criminal” for supporting protesters in Iran, and blamed demonstrators for causing thousands of deaths.Meanwhile, a U.S. aircraft carrier, which days earlier had been in the South China Sea, passed Singapore overnight to enter the Strait of Malacca — putting it on a route that could bring it to the Middle East.With those dangers, analysts warn Iran’s nuclear material could be at risk as well.Nuclear material could fall into the wrong handsDavid Albright, a former nuclear weapons inspector in Iraq and founder of the nonprofit Institute for Science and International Security in Washington, said that in a scenario of internal chaos in Iran, the government could “lose the ability to protect its nuclear assets.”He said that Iran’s highly enriched uranium stockpile “would be the most worrisome,” adding that there is a possibility that someone could steal some of this material.There are historical precedents for such a scenario.Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, highly enriched uranium and plutonium suitable for building nuclear bombs went missing due to eroded security and weakened protection of these assets.So far, Iran has maintained control of its sites, even after the U.S. bombed them in the 12-day war in June that Israel launched against the Islamic Republic.Iran maintains a stockpile of 440.9 kilograms (972 pounds) of uranium enriched up to 60% purity — a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90%, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Vienna-based U.N. nuclear watchdog.The agency said in a report last November that it has not been able to verify the status and location of this highly enriched uranium stockpile since the war in June.The agency said in November that therefore it had lost “continuity of knowledge in relation to the previously declared inventories of nuclear material in Iran” at facilities affected by the war.A diplomat close to the IAEA confirmed Monday that the agency had still not received any information from Iran on the status or whereabouts of the highly enriched uranium stockpile. The diplomat spoke on condition of anonymity in line with diplomatic protocol.Albright said that Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium would fit in around 18 to 20 cylinders that are designed for transport, weighing around 50 kilograms (110 pounds) each when full. “Two people can easily carry it,” he said of each container.Kelsey Davenport, director for nonproliferation policy at the Washington-based Arms Control Association, said that there is a risk that the stockpile “could be diverted either to a covert program or stolen by a faction of the government or the military that wanted to retain the option of weaponization.”She said that this risk increases as the Iranian government feels threatened or gets destabilized.Some of the nuclear material could get smuggled out of Iran or sold to non-state actors in the event of internal chaos or potential government collapse, Davenport said.“The risk is real but it is difficult to assess, given the unknowns regarding the status of the materials and the whereabouts,” she stressed.Possibility of Iran building a nuclear bombBoth Davenport and Albright pointed out that there is also a theoretical possibility of making nuclear bombs with Iran’s 60% enriched uranium. Tehran has insisted for years its program is peaceful.However, a weapon made directly from 60% enriched uranium rather than the usual 90% purity requires more nuclear material, which makes it “much bigger and bulkier and probably not well suited to delivery” on a missile, said Eric Brewer, a former U.S. intelligence analyst and now deputy vice president at the Nuclear Threat Initiative.He added that such a device could still be “blown up in the desert,” for example.Brewer said that the possibility that the current government in Iran goes down that road should not be “totally dismissed,” but he underlined that most information suggests that the highly enriched uranium “remains buried in a tunnel as a result of the U.S. strikes and is probably not easily accessible to the regime; at least not with some major risk of detection and another strike by the U.S. or Israel.”He added that recent events “have also shown that the Supreme Leader has a very high bar for any decision to weaponize.”Nuclear power reactor could be a targetIn the case of internal chaos, Iran’s nuclear power reactor in Bushehr — Iran’s only commercial nuclear power plant some 465 miles south of Tehran — could also get sabotaged or targeted with the aim of causing havoc or making a political point, Albright said. Bushehr is fueled by uranium produced in Russia, not Iran.So far, there has been no sign of Iran losing command and control of its security forces.Albright pointed to the attack by the African National Congress’s armed wing on South Africa’s Koeberg Nuclear Power Station near Cape Town, as the country went through increased anti-apartheid resistance in 1982. The act of sabotage caused significant damage but resulted in no nuclear fallout.“If the Bushehr reactor has a major accident, the winds would carry the fallout within 12 to 15 hours to the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Oman,” Albright said.

    In the wake of spiraling tensions between the United States and Iran over Tehran’s violent crackdown on protests, analysts warn that the internal upheaval affecting the Iranian theocracy could carry nuclear proliferation risks.

    While in recent days U.S. President Donald Trump seemed to have backed away from a military strike on Iran, he called Saturday for an end to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s nearly 40-year reign in Iran. Trump’s comments came in response to Khamenei branding Trump a “criminal” for supporting protesters in Iran, and blamed demonstrators for causing thousands of deaths.

    Meanwhile, a U.S. aircraft carrier, which days earlier had been in the South China Sea, passed Singapore overnight to enter the Strait of Malacca — putting it on a route that could bring it to the Middle East.

    With those dangers, analysts warn Iran’s nuclear material could be at risk as well.

    Nuclear material could fall into the wrong hands

    David Albright, a former nuclear weapons inspector in Iraq and founder of the nonprofit Institute for Science and International Security in Washington, said that in a scenario of internal chaos in Iran, the government could “lose the ability to protect its nuclear assets.”

    He said that Iran’s highly enriched uranium stockpile “would be the most worrisome,” adding that there is a possibility that someone could steal some of this material.

    There are historical precedents for such a scenario.

    Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, highly enriched uranium and plutonium suitable for building nuclear bombs went missing due to eroded security and weakened protection of these assets.

    So far, Iran has maintained control of its sites, even after the U.S. bombed them in the 12-day war in June that Israel launched against the Islamic Republic.

    Iran maintains a stockpile of 440.9 kilograms (972 pounds) of uranium enriched up to 60% purity — a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90%, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Vienna-based U.N. nuclear watchdog.

    The agency said in a report last November that it has not been able to verify the status and location of this highly enriched uranium stockpile since the war in June.

    The agency said in November that therefore it had lost “continuity of knowledge in relation to the previously declared inventories of nuclear material in Iran” at facilities affected by the war.

    A diplomat close to the IAEA confirmed Monday that the agency had still not received any information from Iran on the status or whereabouts of the highly enriched uranium stockpile. The diplomat spoke on condition of anonymity in line with diplomatic protocol.

    Albright said that Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium would fit in around 18 to 20 cylinders that are designed for transport, weighing around 50 kilograms (110 pounds) each when full. “Two people can easily carry it,” he said of each container.

    Kelsey Davenport, director for nonproliferation policy at the Washington-based Arms Control Association, said that there is a risk that the stockpile “could be diverted either to a covert program or stolen by a faction of the government or the military that wanted to retain the option of weaponization.”

    She said that this risk increases as the Iranian government feels threatened or gets destabilized.

    Some of the nuclear material could get smuggled out of Iran or sold to non-state actors in the event of internal chaos or potential government collapse, Davenport said.

    “The risk is real but it is difficult to assess, given the unknowns regarding the status of the materials and the whereabouts,” she stressed.

    Possibility of Iran building a nuclear bomb

    Both Davenport and Albright pointed out that there is also a theoretical possibility of making nuclear bombs with Iran’s 60% enriched uranium. Tehran has insisted for years its program is peaceful.

    However, a weapon made directly from 60% enriched uranium rather than the usual 90% purity requires more nuclear material, which makes it “much bigger and bulkier and probably not well suited to delivery” on a missile, said Eric Brewer, a former U.S. intelligence analyst and now deputy vice president at the Nuclear Threat Initiative.

    He added that such a device could still be “blown up in the desert,” for example.

    Brewer said that the possibility that the current government in Iran goes down that road should not be “totally dismissed,” but he underlined that most information suggests that the highly enriched uranium “remains buried in a tunnel as a result of the U.S. strikes and is probably not easily accessible to the regime; at least not with some major risk of detection and another strike by the U.S. or Israel.”

    He added that recent events “have also shown that the Supreme Leader has a very high bar for any decision to weaponize.”

    Nuclear power reactor could be a target

    In the case of internal chaos, Iran’s nuclear power reactor in Bushehr — Iran’s only commercial nuclear power plant some 465 miles south of Tehran — could also get sabotaged or targeted with the aim of causing havoc or making a political point, Albright said. Bushehr is fueled by uranium produced in Russia, not Iran.

    So far, there has been no sign of Iran losing command and control of its security forces.

    Albright pointed to the attack by the African National Congress’s armed wing on South Africa’s Koeberg Nuclear Power Station near Cape Town, as the country went through increased anti-apartheid resistance in 1982. The act of sabotage caused significant damage but resulted in no nuclear fallout.

    “If the Bushehr reactor has a major accident, the winds would carry the fallout within 12 to 15 hours to the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Oman,” Albright said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Sen. Alex Padilla says he won’t run for California governor

    [ad_1]

    U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla announced Tuesday that he will not run for California governor next year, ending months of speculation about the possibility of the Democrat vying to succeed Gov. Gavin Newsom.

    “It is with a full heart and even more commitment than ever that I am choosing to not run for governor of California next year,” Padilla told reporters outside his Senate office in Washington.

    Padilla instead said he will focus on countering President Trump’s agenda in Congress, where Democrats are currently in the minority in both the House and Senate, but hope to regain some political clout after the 2026 midterm elections.

    “I choose not just to stay in the Senate. I choose to stay in this fight because the Constitution is worth fighting for. Our fundamental rights are worth fighting for. Our core values are worth fighting for. The American dream is worth fighting for,” he said.

    Padilla said his decision was influenced by his belief that under President Trump, “these are not normal times.”

    “We deserve better than this,” he said.

    Many contenders, no clear favorite

    Padilla’s decision to bow out of the 2026 governor’s race will leave a prominent name out of an already crowded contest with many contenders but not a clear favorite.

    For much of the year, the field was essentially frozen in place as former Vice President Kamala Harris pondered whether she would run, with many donors and major endorsers staying out of the game. Harris said at the end of July that she wouldn’t run. But another potential candidate — billionaire developer Rick Caruso — remains a question mark.

    Caruso said Monday night that he was still considering running for either governor or Los Angeles mayor, and will decide in the next few weeks.

    “It’s a really tough decision,” Caruso said. “Within a few weeks or so, or something like that, I’ll probably have a decision made. It’s a big topic of discussion in the house with my kids and my wife.”

    Major Democratic candidates include former Orange County Rep. Katie Porter, former U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, current California Supt. of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, former state Controller Betty Yee and wealthy businessman Stephen Cloobeck. Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and conservative commentator Steve Hilton are the most prominent Republicans running.

    Amid fire recovery aftermath, immigration raids and a high-octane redistricting battle, California voters have yet to turn their attention to next year’s gubernatorial matchup, despite the vast power that Newsom’s successor will wield. California is now the world’s fourth-largest economy, and policy decisions in the Golden State often have global repercussions. Newsom is nearing the end of his second and final term.

    Recent polling shows the contest as wide open, with nearly 4 in 10 voters surveyed saying they are undecided, though Porter had a slight edge as the top choice in the poll. She and Bianco were the only candidates whose support cracked the double digits.

    Candidates still have months to file their paperwork before the June 2 primary to replace Newsom.

    June incident brought attention

    Known for soft-spoken confidence and a lack of bombast, Padilla’s public profile soared in June after he found himself cuffed by federal agents, at the center of a staggering viral moment during a news conference by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.

    Despite identifying himself, Padilla was tackled after trying to interrupt Noem with a question. The manhandling of California’s senior senator was filmed by a staffer and broadcast around the world, provoking searing and widespread condemnation.

    Days later, Vice President JD Vance joked about the incident and referred to Padilla — his former Senate colleague — as “Jose Padilla,” a misnaming that Padilla suggested was intentional and others characterized as racist.

    The event put Padilla on the national spotlight and rumors of Padilla’s interest in the gubernatorial race ignited in late August.

    Padilla told reporters Tuesday that he received an “outpouring of encouragement and offers of support for the idea” of his candidacy and that he had “taken it to heart”

    Alongside his wife, Angela, the senator said he also heard from many people urging him to keep his fight going in Washington.

    “Countless Californians have urged me to do everything I could to protect California and the American Dream from a vindictive president who seems hell-bent on raising costs for working families, rolling back environmental protections, cutting access to healthcare, jeopardizing reproductive rights and more,” he said.

    Padilla said he had listened.

    “I will continue to thank them and honor their support by continuing to work together for a better future,” he said.

    Ceballos reported from Washington and Wick from Los Angeles. Times staff writer Noah Goldberg in Los Angeles contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Ana Ceballos, Julia Wick

    Source link