International

Ukrainian Regulator Accuses Russia of Committing ‘Act of Nuclear Terrorism’

Published

5 years ago

March 11, 2022

Joe Klamar / AFP/Getty A Ukrainian regulator says Russia has committed "act of nuclear terrorism" by bombing the research facility at Kharkiv Institute of Physics and Technology. In this photo, Rafael Grossi, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), points on a map of the Ukrainian Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant as he informs the press about the situation of nuclear powerplants in Ukraine during a special press conference at the IAEA headquarters in Vienna, Austria on March 4, 2022.

A Ukrainian nuclear regulator is accusing Russia of bombing a research facility containing a reactor and fuel cells, an action it considers “an act of nuclear terrorism.”

The Thursday rocket attack against the Kharkiv Institute of Physics and Technology, which occurred around 8:20 p.m. local time, marks at least the third time that Russian forces have attacked Ukraine’s nuclear sites. Observers worry that such attacks could hint at Russia’s willingness to use nuclear retaliation to gain an upper hand in its invasion.

“Once again, the Russian Federation has committed an act of nuclear terrorism!!!” the State Inspectorate for Nuclear Regulation of Ukraine announced in a March 10 press release, according to Google Translate.

The regulator said that it is still surveying the full damage from the attack, which resulted in a fire. Prior to Russia’s invasion, the reactor’s core was loaded with fresh nuclear fuel cells, the regulator added in a report.

However, even though locals fear a potential “large-scale ecological disaster” from the attack, according to The Independent, a large nuclear accident at the institute is unlikely because the institute’s reactor lacks the neutrons needed to activate the fuel cells as well as any highly enriched uranium onsite, nuclear analyst Matthew Bunn told Physics Today.

The Ukrainian regulator added that a March 6 Russian attack on the institute damaged its air conditioner cooling systems and left surface damage on the institute’s main installation as well as its pump and cooling tower building.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) confirmed that the March 6 attack resulted in no increased radiation levels though, Newsweek reported.

On March 3, Russia attacked the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant, Europe’s largest nuclear power plant. The attack hit a building adjacent to six reactors, resulting in a fire that was soon extinguished. None of the plant’s security or safety systems were compromised, and no reactors were hit.

Soon after the attack, Russian forces surrounded the plant, and the plant eventually resumed normal functioning. Russia later blamed Ukrainian saboteurs for starting the fire at the plant.

READ ALSO:

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said that Russia resorted to “nuclear terror” in attacking the plant. Ukraine’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Dmytro Kuleba tweeted that if the plant blew up, it would be 10 times worse than the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster. He urged the Russian military to cease fire immediately.

However, one nuclear researcher was doubtful that a fire at a nuclear plant could set off a radioactive disaster.

“A single fire located somewhere on the same site as a nuclear power plant cannot feasibly trigger a meltdown,” Edward Obbard, a senior lecturer and nuclear engineering program coordinator at The University of New South Wales in Australia, told the Australian Science Media Centre.

Obbard and other nuclear experts said that a greater risk would be a direct explosion upon a reactor or spent fuel pool by explosive ordnance, which could release radioactive material.

Similarly, damage to a nuclear plant’s cooling systems could result in the nuclear reactor fuel getting so hot that it burns through its containment chamber, causing a nuclear meltdown and a widespread release of radiation, Newsweek reported.

Though U.S. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said there was no indication of elevated radiation levels at the plant, the U.S. Department of State announced that it was “assessing” whether the attack constituted a war crime. The United Nations also convened an emergency meeting after the Zaporizhzhia attack to discuss its implications.

After its invasion, Russian forces also took control of Chernobyl, the site of the 1986 nuclear disaster that killed 31 people and left radioactive pollution in the region.

Near the beginning of the invasion, Russian President Vladimir Putin also commanded his military to raise the readiness level of his nation’s nuclear forces. The vague command alarmed international observers, but others have doubted that Russia will risk any sort of nuclear attack.

Olga Oliker—the European program director for the International Crisis Group, a think tank on global crises—believes that Russia would only use a nuclear weapon if it found itself in a direct war with NATO forces. Oliker said it was “unlikely” that Russia would use one against Ukraine.

Other experts have doubted that Putin would deploy nuclear weapons because of their toxic effect on the region.

U.S. President Joe Biden has said that Americans shouldn’t worry about the possibility of a nuclear war with Russia. Both the U.S. and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) have said there is no need to change their own nuclear alert levels, despite Putin’s command.

However, in 2018, the Pentagon warned in its nuclear posture review that Russia could use a battlefield nuclear weapon to “‘de-escalate’ a conflict on terms favorable to Russia.” That is, it could feasibly use a small-range nuclear weapon to get its enemy to stop fighting back.

Putin could also launch a nuclear weapon if his military received a false alarm about another nation deploying a nuclear assault, Jeffrey Lewis, a senior scholar at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, told NPR.

Newsweek contacted the IAEA for comment.

Newsweek

Related Topics:Featured nuclear Regulator Russia terrorism Ukrainian

Up Next

Russia strikes western Ukraine targets, renews push toward Kyiv

Don't Miss

Russian economy in ‘shock’ from unprecedented economic war – Kremlin

International

Nine Killed as Learjet Crashes Into Florida Residential Area, Erupts in Flames

Published

2 hours ago

November 2, 2026

Trends Admin

Nine Killed as Learjet Crashes Into Florida Residential Area, Erupts in Flames

Nine people have been killed after a private Learjet 60 aircraft crashed into a residential area in Palm Beach County, Florida, United States, and burst into flames, triggering an emergency response and the evacuation of hundreds of residents.

The aircraft, which was travelling from Texas to the Bahamas, crashed at approximately 12:50 p.m. local time on Sunday, November 1, 2026, near Military Trail, between Cresthaven Boulevard and 10th Avenue North.

US Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy confirmed that all nine people aboard the aircraft died in the crash, describing the incident as a horrific tragedy.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) said the Learjet 60 departed from Austin-Bergstrom International Airport in Texas and was heading to North Eleuthera Airport in the Bahamas when the accident occurred.

Videos recorded by motorists and other witnesses showed the aircraft descending rapidly before plunging towards the ground and exploding into a massive fireball. Thick black smoke subsequently billowed above the neighbourhood as emergency responders rushed to the scene.

The impact created a large crater beside the roadway, scattering aircraft debris across the surrounding area and damaging nearby infrastructure.

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, who visited the crash scene, described the incident as a catastrophic accident.

He said the aircraft appeared to have plunged towards the ground like a missile, leaving a large crater along the road.

DeSantis added that there were no immediate reports of deaths or injuries among people on the ground, apart from those aboard the aircraft.

However, the crash prompted authorities to evacuate approximately 600 residents from a nearby mobile home community as emergency teams secured the area and assessed possible dangers.

READ ALSO:

Palm Beach County Commissioner Joel Flores said the affected residents were being assisted with temporary shelter and other emergency support at two designated locations.

The evacuation was necessary to protect residents while investigators and emergency personnel worked around the crash site.

Preliminary information from air traffic control recordings has provided some insight into the aircraft’s final moments before it crashed.

According to recordings of communications between the pilots and air traffic controllers, the crew reported ice accumulating on the aircraft while encountering moderate turbulence at high altitude.

The pilot initially described the icing as manageable but later reported worsening weather conditions and requested permission to climb to a higher altitude.

The situation deteriorated shortly afterwards as the aircraft began losing altitude rapidly.

In one of the final communications, the pilot declared an emergency and reported that the aircraft was descending at an alarming rate.

The crew initially reported a descent of about 10,000 feet per minute before indicating that the rate had increased to approximately 20,000 feet per minute.

The pilot eventually issued a distress warning, saying the aircraft was going to crash into the ground.

Flight-tracking information indicated that the jet lost approximately 27,000 feet in altitude within about a minute before tracking data stopped.

However, investigators have not established whether ice accumulation, turbulence, thunderstorms, mechanical failure or another factor caused the aircraft to lose control.

The Federal Aviation Administration and the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) have launched investigations to determine the circumstances surrounding the disaster.

The NTSB is leading the investigation, with support from the FAA. Investigators are expected to examine the wreckage, flight records, aircraft systems, weather conditions and communications between the crew and air traffic controllers.

The investigation will also seek to establish whether the aircraft experienced a technical malfunction or encountered conditions that affected its ability to maintain controlled flight.

The aircraft’s manufacturer, Bombardier, has indicated its willingness to cooperate with investigators.

Authorities had not publicly released the identities of the nine victims or provided a detailed breakdown of the passengers and crew as of the latest reports.

The crash site remained subject to emergency restrictions, with authorities closing sections of Military Trail and advising motorists to avoid the area.

The Florida accident has been described as one of the deadliest aviation disasters in the United States in 2026.

According to records cited by CNN, it was the second-deadliest US plane crash of the year, following a skydiving aircraft crash in Butler, Missouri, in June that killed 12 people.

The Learjet 60 accident was also reported as the deadliest crash involving the aircraft model.

The tragedy has renewed attention on aviation safety, particularly the risks associated with severe weather conditions and the importance of determining what happened during the aircraft’s final moments.

For families of the nine victims, the immediate concern remains the confirmation of identities and the circumstances surrounding the deaths, while investigators work to establish the cause of the disaster.

Nine Killed as Learjet Crashes Into Florida Residential Area, Erupts in Flames

International

Christians Still Under Attack in Nigeria, US Lawmaker Tells Trump

Published

3 hours ago

November 2, 2026

Trends Admin

US lawmaker Riley Moore

Christians Still Under Attack in Nigeria, US Lawmaker Tells Trump

United States Congressman Riley Moore has said Christians in Nigeria continue to face severe violence and persecution, calling for renewed international efforts to protect religious communities one year after President Donald Trump redesignated Nigeria as a Country of Particular Concern (CPC).

Moore made the remarks in a statement posted on his X account to mark the anniversary of the designation, which was announced by Trump in November 2025 over concerns about religious freedom and attacks on Christian communities.

“Christians in Nigeria, and around the world, continue to face unspeakable violence. On this anniversary, we must rededicate our efforts to defend Christians in Nigeria and anywhere they face persecution,” the US lawmaker said.

He also defended Trump’s decision to place Nigeria on the CPC list, describing it as the right move and praising efforts by Republican lawmakers and faith-based organisations to press for stronger action against religious persecution.

In his post, Moore credited Trump’s leadership, alongside work by Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee, for what he described as progress in addressing attacks on Christians in Nigeria.

He specifically praised efforts by House Appropriations Republicans to introduce conditions on US assistance to Nigeria, including requirements for the Nigerian government to demonstrate concrete steps towards protecting Christian communities.

According to the congressman, pressure from the US government and advocacy by religious organisations had begun to produce results.

He claimed that Nigeria experienced its first Christmas without a massacre of Christians in recent memory, although he acknowledged that much more needed to be done to address the security challenges.

Moore also commended the Nigerian government, saying it had shown signs of willingness to confront violence against Christian communities.

READ ALSO:

His latest comments are part of an ongoing campaign by some US lawmakers to draw international attention to attacks on Christians in Nigeria and push for stronger measures against those responsible.

Nigeria’s Country of Particular Concern designation

Nigeria was first designated a Country of Particular Concern by the United States in December 2020 under Trump’s first administration over concerns about violations of religious freedom.

However, the administration of former US President Joe Biden removed Nigeria from the list in 2021, a decision that attracted criticism from some American lawmakers and religious organisations.

Trump restored the designation in November 2025 after returning to the White House, citing concerns over attacks on Christian communities, particularly in parts of northern and central Nigeria.

The CPC classification is provided under the US International Religious Freedom Act and allows Washington to consider diplomatic and policy measures, including sanctions and restrictions on certain forms of assistance, against countries identified as engaging in or tolerating particularly severe violations of religious freedom.

The renewed designation has also intensified discussions between Nigerian and American authorities over insecurity, religious freedom and the protection of vulnerable communities.

US-Nigeria disagreement over religious persecution

The Nigerian government has repeatedly rejected the characterisation of the country’s security crisis as a campaign of religious persecution targeted exclusively at Christians.

The Federal Government maintains that insecurity in Nigeria is complex and involves terrorism, banditry, kidnapping, communal violence and farmer-herder conflicts, which have affected both Christians and Muslims.

It has also pointed to ongoing security operations, cooperation with international partners and efforts to protect vulnerable communities in states including Benue, Plateau and Kaduna.

Moore’s latest statement comes amid continuing international scrutiny of Nigeria’s response to insecurity and growing pressure on the government to strengthen the protection of religious communities.

The congressman, who has previously visited Nigeria as part of a US congressional investigation into religious freedom concerns, has continued to advocate stronger American involvement in addressing the violence.

In February 2026, Moore and fellow US Congressman Chris Smith introduced the Nigeria Religious Freedom and Accountability Act of 2026, seeking a comprehensive report on US efforts to address alleged religious persecution and mass atrocities against Christians in Nigeria.

The proposed legislation reflects continuing efforts by some members of the US Congress to make religious freedom and accountability central to Washington’s engagement with Nigeria.

Christians Still Under Attack in Nigeria, US Lawmaker Tells Trump

International

Badenoch Rejects Slave Trade Apology, Says African Kingdoms Also Profited From Slavery

Published

4 hours ago

November 2, 2026

Trends Admin

Britain’s Conservative Party leader, Kemi Badenoch

Badenoch Rejects Slave Trade Apology, Says African Kingdoms Also Profited From Slavery

Britain’s Conservative Party leader, Kemi Badenoch, has rejected calls for the United Kingdom to issue a fresh formal apology for its role in the transatlantic slave trade, arguing that African kingdoms, rulers and merchants also participated in and profited from the trade.

Badenoch said it would be unfair to focus exclusively on Britain’s involvement while overlooking the role played by African authorities and traders who captured, sold and supplied enslaved people.

Her comments have reignited debate over Britain’s historical responsibility for slavery, following renewed calls for an official apology ahead of the forthcoming Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Antigua and Barbuda.

In a statement published on her X account on Saturday, October 31, the Conservative Party leader argued that slavery was a global evil involving people from different continents, insisting that Britain’s role in abolishing the transatlantic slave trade should also be recognised.

She challenged Caribbean countries demanding a formal apology from Britain to consider whether similar demands should be directed at descendants of African kingdoms, rulers and merchants who participated in capturing and selling enslaved Africans.

“If Caribbean countries are asking Britain for a formal apology for Britain’s role in the transatlantic slave trade, will they also be asking the same of the descendants of African kingdoms, rulers and merchants who captured, sold and profited from the trade?” she asked.

Badenoch also rejected demands for slavery reparations, whether through direct financial compensation or debt relief, arguing that present-day British taxpayers should not be held financially responsible for events that occurred generations ago.

She described the renewed push for an apology as a distraction from more pressing economic and security challenges facing Commonwealth countries.

READ ALSO:

According to her, the Commonwealth should concentrate on strengthening economic partnerships, improving prosperity and deepening military and security cooperation rather than repeatedly revisiting historical grievances.

Badenoch also questioned whether British leaders should continue attending Commonwealth summits if such meetings increasingly became platforms for demands for financial compensation.

She maintained that Britain had already expressed regret over its historical involvement in the slave trade, referring to comments made by former Prime Minister Tony Blair nearly two decades ago.

However, the distinction between an expression of regret and a formal state apology remains central to the current debate. The Associated Press reported that Britain has never formally apologised for its role in the transatlantic slave trade.

The debate intensified after British Prime Minister Andy Burnham indicated that his government was open to discussing a formal apology ahead of the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting scheduled to take place in Antigua and Barbuda.

In an article published in The Guardian, Burnham described the slave trade as a grave historical injustice and argued that Britain needed to confront both its involvement in human trafficking and its subsequent role in abolition.

He, however, ruled out direct financial reparations, proposing instead that Britain could work with other wealthy countries and investors to help poorer Commonwealth nations restructure their debts on more favourable terms.

Burnham also indicated that former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown would assist with the proposed debt-restructuring initiative.

The proposal received a cautious welcome from Caribbean leaders, who have long demanded acknowledgement, reparatory justice and compensation for the consequences of slavery.

The Caribbean Community, known as CARICOM, said an apology would represent an important first step but warned that an apology without meaningful reparative measures would remain incomplete.

Philip J. Pierre, Prime Minister of Saint Lucia and CARICOM chairman, welcomed Burnham’s willingness to discuss the issue but maintained that Caribbean countries were seeking a broader response.

Their demands include investment in education and healthcare, development programmes for Indigenous communities, debt cancellation, repatriation and financial compensation.

King Charles III, who is currently visiting the Caribbean, has also acknowledged the suffering and injustices associated with the region’s history of slavery, although he has not announced a formal apology or reparations.

Historically, Britain became involved in the transatlantic slave trade in the 16th century and eventually emerged as one of its largest operators. According to the Associated Press, British traders transported more than three million Africans across the Atlantic.

The British Parliament outlawed the slave trade in 1807, while slavery was abolished across most of the British Empire in 1833.

Although British abolitionists played a significant role in the campaign against slavery, Britain’s earlier participation in the trade and the economic benefits derived from it remain central to demands for historical accountability.

The disagreement between Badenoch and Burnham therefore reflects a wider debate over whether Britain’s historical acknowledgement of slavery should extend to a formal apology and what responsibilities, if any, should follow such an apology.