Putin's decision to suspend the agreement to ship weapons-grade plutonium to the US was based on more than politics
This post first appeared on Russia Insider
There has been much ado in western media about one of the latest examples of Putin's "aggression" - suspending the agreement with the United States on disposal of weapons-grade plutonium. Under the agreement, Russian weapons-grade plutonium was shipped to the US.
Although the direct cause of the suspension is an asymmetrical response to US aggression and obstruction of the fight against terrorists in Syria, it also makes sense from the point of view that Russia is actually capable of recycling the plutonium itself - something the US has no current capability to do.
Russia was able to construct their plutonium reprocessing plant in 2 1/2 years, while the US failed to build one in 8 years after spending $7 billion, and has now delayed the project indefinitely - a perfect example of the gargantuan waste and corruption in the US government.
Instead, the US proposes to fulfill its obligations by mixing plutonium with waste and storing it somewhere. The Russian nuclear engineer in the video explains that this is not a legitimate means of disposing of plutonium. The United States agreed to destroy Russian plutonium, but was simply storing it in a manner that leaves future weapons use a possibility.
Now Russia will begin recycling its own plutonium to fuel its own reactors - leaving the US nuclear fuel industry - and American propaganda - in the dust.
This post first appeared on Russia Insider
Anyone is free to republish, copy, and redistribute the text in this content (but not the images or videos) in any medium or format, with the right to remix, transform, and build upon it, even commercially, as long as they provide a backlink and credit to Russia Insider. It is not necessary to notify Russia Insider. Licensed Creative Commons
Our commenting rules: You can say pretty much anything except the F word. If you are abusive, obscene, or a paid troll, we will ban you. Full statement from the Editor, Charles Bausman.