This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Project Sapphire article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations
This text is written as if it was in the best interest of Kazahstan to loose this material without any consideration that it could have been given back to Russia and without any mention of any compensation for the high value of such material. The apparent blackmail (loose your uranium or you will not be able to trade with the West) is glossed over. It is also not explained why such action had to be done in secrecy if it was in the interest of the Kazah government. In total I remain with the impression that the entire report here is painted in very strong pro-US colors without any regard for alternatives or fairness as if it was not actually the West that gained and the East that lost in this case.
Just to avoid any misunderstanding: I'm happy that such material did not get in the hands of terrorists. Still I think this report is not even close to being unbiased. And by the way America is not the same as the USA. That might be acceptable in everyday talk, but in an encyclopedia I would recommend to use the proper term. JB. --92.195.14.79 (talk) 16:53, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There's something oddly naive about the article. The operation is described as clandestine, but the details obviously weren't *that* secret because it was coordinated with the Kazakhstan government and required US technicians to be on-site for almost a month. The article on Alfa-class submarine implies that it was spun as a humanitarian mission - one of the recovery aircraft carried "30,000 pounds of supplies Tennesseans had donated for Ust-Kamenogorsk area orphanages" - but this article doesn't mention it. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 20:42, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've added some material to the article explaining the reason for secrecy and the compensation that Kazakhstan received. While the US and Kazakh governments collaborated on the operation and the Russian government did not object, it was done secretly to avoid any other countries trying to steal the uranium. Kassenova's book (which I've added to the article as a source) suggests that US officials were particularly worried about Iran obtaining some of the uranium.
Kassenova's book has a lot more information about the negotiations and broader geopolitical considerations; it's worth reading for anyone interested in the topic. —Mx. Granger (talk·contribs) 14:52, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
