SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
russia
Watchdog Warns of Growing Global Threat as Nuclear-Armed Israel Attacks Iran
One SIPRI expert said the weapons "come with immense risks of escalation and catastrophic miscalculation—particularly when disinformation is rife—and may end up making a country's population less safe."
Jun 16, 2025
As Israel's assault on Iran generates global alarm, an international watchdog on Monday released an annual report warning that "a dangerous new nuclear arms race is emerging at a time when arms control regimes are severely weakened."
The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute's SIPRI Yearbook 2025 begins by acknowledging the 80th anniversary of the only times that nuclear weapons have been used in war: the U.S. bombing of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.
"In those eight decades, a great deal of death and destruction has been meted out in war but the taboo against using nuclear weapons has survived and grown stronger," the yearbook says. "This is, as the Nobel Peace Prize Committee noted when awarding the 2024 Peace Prize to the movement of Japanese nuclear survivors (hibakusha), Nihon Hidankyo, 'an encouraging fact.' Nonetheless, new risks mean it is worth reviewing today's nuclear challenge."
In addition to the United States, the confirmed nuclear-armed nations are China, France, India, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, and the United Kingdom. The global inventory is an estimated 12,241 warheads, most of which belong to the U.S. and Russia, according to SIPRI. As of January, about 9,614 of the weapons were in military stockpiles for potential use, including 3,912 deployed with missiles and aircraft.
"There needs to be a new, general understanding that nuclear weapons do not buy security and their existence demands balanced behavior by political leaders."
"In 2024, global security showed no overall improvement and some deterioration compared to the previous year. Several armed conflicts—not least in Ethiopia, Gaza, Myanmar, and Sudan—continued to escalate," the report states. "Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine continued, confrontation over Taiwan deepened, tensions on the Korean peninsula sharpened, and global politics were marked by increasing divisiveness and polarization sown by, among other causes of disputation, Israel's devastating offensive in Gaza."
The yearbook flags "new uncertainties" stemming from the November 2024 election of U.S. President Donald Trump, pointing out how "both allies and adversaries of the USA and all those in between found themselves navigating uncharted geopolitical and economic waters" in the wake of the Republican's return to office in January.
"Bilateral nuclear arms control between Russia and the USA entered crisis some years ago and is now almost over," the document details. "The one remaining bilateral U.S.-Russian nuclear arms control agreement is the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), agreed in 2010 and entering force in 2011, with a 10-year duration, extendable by five years upon mutual agreement."
Within days of U.S. President Joe Biden's 2021 inauguration, he and Russian President Vladimir Putin extended the treaty, now set to expire early next year—and, as the report notes, "there is no sign of negotiations to renew or replace it, and no sign on either side of wanting to do so."
Concerns extend beyond the U.S. and Russia. Although "the world's nuclear weapon inventory has been shrinking for almost 40 years," the yearbook explains, "in the last few years, the number of nuclear weapons in military stockpiles (deployed warheads and those in central storage available for use) has started to increase," specifically in China and India.
Earlier this year, India and Pakistan engaged in armed conflict—which Matt Korda, associate senior researcher with SIPRI's Weapons of Mass Destruction Program and associate director for the Nuclear Information Project at Federation of American Scientists, pointed to in a Monday statement.
"The combination of strikes on nuclear-related military infrastructure and third-party disinformation risked turning a conventional conflict into a nuclear crisis," Korda said. "This should act as a stark warning for states seeking to increase their reliance on nuclear weapons."
"It is critical to remember that nuclear weapons do not guarantee security," said Korda. "As the recent flare-up of hostilities in India and Pakistan amply demonstrated, nuclear weapons do not prevent conflict. They also come with immense risks of escalation and catastrophic miscalculation—particularly when disinformation is rife—and may end up making a country’s population less safe, not more."
Highlighting signs of a new nuclear arms race "gearing up," the publication warns that "compared to the last one, the risks are likely to be more diverse and more serious. Among the key points of competition will be technological capacities in cyberspace, outer space, and ocean space. Thus, the arms race may be more qualitative rather than quantitative, and the idea of who is ahead in the race will be even more elusive and intangible than it was last time round. In this context, the old largely numerical formulas of arms control will no longer suffice."
The report asserts that "there needs to be a new, general understanding that nuclear weapons do not buy security and their existence demands balanced behavior by political leaders. There also needs to be more training for diplomats in matters of nuclear arms control. This can make possible initial small steps towards reducing risk: hotlines, transparency, even informal understandings and formal agreements, such as no first use of nuclear weapons and nuclear weapon free zones."
"These will form guardrails against disaster," SIPRI stressed. "Together with the voices of an informed public, they could also be part of building the pressure for the three great powers to take the next steps in reducing their nuclear arsenals."
The publication was released after the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) reported last week that "in 2024, the nine nuclear-armed states spent more than $100 billion or $190,151 per minute—on their nuclear arsenals—an increase of 11% from the previous year."
SIPRI's report also comes as Israel faced global criticism for targeting Iranian nuclear power facilities and scientists.
Trump—who sabotaged the Iran nuclear deal during his first term—suggested Sunday that American forces "could get involved" to support Israel in the conflict, which has killed civilians in both countries. U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) on Monday introduced a war powers resolution intended to prevent the president from attacking Iran without congressional debate and authorization.
Meanwhile, the Iranian Foreign Ministry said Monday that the nation's legislative body is now drafting a bill to withdraw from the landmark 1968 Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Operation Spider Web': Ukraine Executes Large-Scale Sneak Drone Attack on Russian Warplanes
At least some of the unmanned drones were reportedly concealed in the false roofs of small houses earlier shipped to Siberia and possibly elsewhere in the country.
Jun 01, 2025
Ukraine on Sunday launched a clandestine attack, code-named "Spider Web," on Russian military airfields on Sunday in what observers are calling one of the most sophisticated and "spectacular" operations of the war between the two nations, now in its fourth year since Russia's 2022 invasion.
While a fleet of Ukraine drones, which appeared to have been smuggled into Russia ahead of the surprise attack, reportedly took out dozens of aircraft deep inside Russian territory, a Russian bombing of a Ukraine base claimed the lives of a dozen soldiers.
- YouTubewww.youtube.com
According to the Guardian:
On the eve of peace talks, the drone attack on four separate airfields was part of a sharp ramping up of the three-year war, with Russia launching waves of drones at Ukraine, while Moscow said sabotage was to blame for two train derailments that left seven people dead.
Video from several military airfields across Russia showed destroyed aircraft and planes engulfed in flames, though the full extent of the damage remained unclear.
The military operations came ahead of the peace negotiations set to take place in Istanbul, Turkey on Monday.
Politico, citing an unnamed official within Ukraine's secret service known as the SBU, reports the operation was authorized and carried out at the highest levels:
The SBU official said that to prepare for the operation, called "Pavutyna" [or "spider web"), Ukrainian operatives delivered FPV drones to Russia territory along with mobile wooden housings.
"Later, in the Russian Federation, the drones were hidden under the roofs of housings, already placed on trucks. At the right moment, the roofs of the housings were opened remotely, and the drones flew to strike the Russian bombers," the official said.
The Ukraine-based Kyiv Independentadds:
Unconfirmed videos posted on social media show FPV drones being launched from trucks parked near the airfields.
Irkutsk Oblast Governor Igor Kobzev later confirmed "a drone attack on a military unit in the village of Sredny" and said the "source" of the drones was a "truck."
Murmansk Governor Andrey Chibis later confirmed that "enemy drones have attacked the territory of the Murmansk region" but gave no further details.
"According to witnesses on the ground and local officials, these drones were launched from sites near the airbases," said Al Jazeera's Dorsa Jabbari, reporting from Moscow. "That means this was an elaborate operation, most likely by the Ukrainians, that involved a number of people inside Russia."
If the extent of the damage is confirmed, the Guardian noted in its reporting, "the attacks in Siberia would mark Ukraine's most damaging drone strike of the war to date, amid an escalation in cross-border incursions before planned peace talks in Istanbul on Monday. Among the aircraft reportedly hit were Tu-95 and Tu-22 strategic bombers, which Russia uses to fire long-range missiles at Ukrainian cities."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Frozen Frog Embryos Could Deport Kseniia Petrova to Russia
Vermont Federal District Court orders ICE to free a Harvard scientist in the “most valued and needed field in current medical research,” but her fate remains uncertain.
May 30, 2025
Much more is at stake in Kseniia Petrova’s case than a handful of frozen French frog embryos. The latest scene in the drama played out Wednesday morning at Vermont District Court with 50 or so supporters. In contrast to the hundreds of signs for the Madhawi and Ozturk hearings, just one older woman held a small brown cardboard square she must have made herself: “Free Kseniia Petrova.”
“Do you have a connection to this case?” I asked her. Her faded T-shirt looked so different from the fashionable garb of the city scientists and allies.
“I’m just an American who’s fed up with what’s going on,” she said. She understood the importance of this moment, and so did District Judge Christina Reiss. Why were we in this Vermont courtroom again? Yet another person detained in Boston by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was whisked away and jailed in Vermont, where their attorney filed for habeas corpus, the process for challenging wrongful detention. Wednesday’s hearing was primarily on the question of whether bail would be granted.
At every stage, this case has been handled as if a neighbor who let his dog poop on someone’s lawn was put in jail for a month and charged with criminal trespassing and environmental endangerment.
Ten minutes before the hearing began, Petrova herself appeared on two big screens, a diminutive figure imprisoned in a small white room. Alone, not even an interpreter. Her dark brown hair and eyes stood out against her pale skin. She wore prison garb, an ill-fitting, short-sleeved khaki shirt with a white tee beneath it. Even so, she looked cold, holding herself.
By noon, the rule of law had won again in Vermont. Judge Reiss ruled that customs officers do not, in her words, have the power of the Secretary of State to revoke a visa on the spot. This was done to Petrova with no factual or legal basis. A customs violation is not a reason for being inadmissible to the United States. The judge brushed aside the government’s notion that there had been any undue delay in filing for habeas corpus. She ordered that Petrova be freed from ICE custody on bail, telling the government to propose release conditions by May 30. She did stop short of granting Petrova’s request that ICE be ordered not to rearrest her as soon as she is free, although her lawyer pointed out that there is strong reason to be apprehensive.
Kseniia Petrova did her boss a favor by agreeing to carry a package of frog embryos back from France for another lab leader. Perhaps she expected to be in the hands of a more rational system than she faced in Russia, which she fled after her arrest for opposing the war in Ukraine. Text exchanges after her plane landed in Boston show her light mood about the fertilized eggs: “I can’t swallow them!” she replied when asked what her plan was for getting the items through customs. But what should have been a light comedy of errors turned into a Chekovian plot with shocking escalations.
When a dog identified something unusual in Petrova’s suitcase, she was taken aside, and the scientific samples were revealed. The customs official said they had revoked her visa, meaning she was in the country illegally; she was told she could return to France and reapply to the U.S., or be sent to Russia. She chose France, an offer which was then revoked, and ICE locked her up in Vermont, then Louisiana. At every stage, this case has been handled as if a neighbor who let his dog poop on someone’s lawn was put in jail for a month and charged with criminal trespassing and environmental endangerment.
Just how serious was Petrova’s infraction? And is the person who committed it a danger to society? A flight risk?
In court Wednesday, the founder of the field of regenerative medicine, Dr. Michael West, testified that the samples were “inert, nontoxic, nonliving,” in no way a hazard. When he said they had no commercial value, Petrova visibly chuckled. He likened them to “shoe leather” as a source of potential biological hazards.
When asked about Petrova’s science, Dr. West said that she is doing excellent work in the “most valued and needed field in current medical research.”
“Would you hire her?” Dr. West was asked.
“In a heartbeat,” he replied. That got a big smile from Petrova—and a garbled objection from the government.
Prof. Marc Kirschner, Petrova’s ultimate boss, came personally to testify from the laboratory which bears his name at Harvard Medical School. He spoke of Petrova’s “significant impact” on his laboratory. Her absence is keenly felt. Her particular contribution was finding ways to quantify the “amazing pictures of tissues” from the lab’s newly invented microscope. Dr. Kirschner too was unable to imagine that she would be a danger to society. Petrova’s scientific peers also testified that she loves her job, and misses her work, her friends, and colleagues. Petrova wrote that the lab was a “paradise.” Is that the word of someone who wants to flee?
Would it have been better judgment for Petrova to submit paperwork for the preserved frog eggs? Of course. But has anyone who has ever crossed an international boundary not quietly carried at least one dubious item at some point? The government’s response to this minor offense has been Orwellian. Judge Reiss said, “The government is essentially saying, ‘We revoked your visa, now you have no documentation and now we’re going to place you in removal proceedings.’” Then the government detained her. When a bail hearing was scheduled that could result in Petrova’s release, the government only took two hours to trump up criminal charges against her. It was an obvious ploy to keep her in custody even if the judge released her.
Behavior which usually results in a small fine suddenly became criminal—subject to fines of up to $250,000 and up to 20 years in prison. Comparable cases involve boots made of endangered sea turtles or living birds smuggled in panty hose.
Do these twists and turns sound like the United States of America, or like Vladimir Putin’s Russia? At this point, Petrova will only go free if the Massachusetts Criminal Court also grants bail—and if ICE doesn’t snap her up again, or deport her to Russia. As Judge Reiss said, “Ms. Petrova’s life and well-being are in peril if she is deported to Russia,” and she is serving our national interests in research where answers are desperately needed.
So far, this drama has been something of a farce. Let’s not allow it to end in tragedy.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular