Military Review

Updating nuclear arsenals

The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) under the Department of Energy of the United States intends to replace seven existing nuclear weapons with five new ones during 25 – 30 years. This is stated in the report, which promulgated on Thursday one of the most authoritative American public organizations - the Union of Concerned Scientists (SOU).

In the 92-page study "Making smart security decisions - the future of the US nuclear weapons complex," the authors urge the United States government to abandon plans to create new types of nuclear weapons. The concern of scientists, in particular, was caused by the intention of NNSA to build several new facilities of the nuclear military complex, as well as to increase the amount of tritium content in nuclear warheads in order to increase their combat and technical reliability. In the opinion of the JMA, the NNSA "should strongly prefer to upgrade or re-fabricate existing types of nuclear weapons" rather than construct new ones. “Creating new types of weapons, even if we are talking about using components of existing devices, will be considered by many as a violation of the Obama administration’s promise not to develop or deploy new nuclear warheads,” said Union experts, according to ITAR-TASS. In addition, the report's authors noted that such actions by the US authorities are capable of “generating concern about the reliability of weapons.”

Specialists from the JMA also suggested that the US government abandoned plans to build a new plutonium core production facility at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (New Mexico) and postponed plans to create a uranium processing plant in Oak Ridge (Tennessee). The estimated cost of the first project is 6 billion dollars, the second - about 7 billion.

The new strategy for the use of nuclear weapons by the United States, which entered into force in August 2013, also refers to other plans. According to her, in the light of financial uncertainty, the United States set the main goal of "maintaining a safe, secure and effective nuclear arsenal." In this regard, the modernization of the strategic nuclear triad, according to US Assistant Secretary of Defense for Global Security Affairs, Madeline Cridon, gives 12 billion dollars, which is less than 0,3 percent of the country's federal budget, less than 3 percent of the Pentagon’s 526 billion.

In particular, we are talking about upgrading intercontinental ballistic missiles Minuteman III, as well as Trident II D5 missiles, which are equipped with strategic Ohio-class submarines (they will be replaced by 12 prospective SSBNs, which are currently being developed). Also carried out the upgrade of strategic bombers direct B-2 and B-52H. A new bomber is being developed for an air defense breakthrough, new air-launched cruise missiles.

The United States will also continue upgrading nuclear warheads for ICBMs and SLBMs, developing new types of fuel for ICBMs, extending the service life of warheads for ICBMs, SLBMs and ALCMs, increasing the thrust of engines for ICBMs, improving the accuracy of targeting ICBMs and SLBMs and retooling strategic carriers under delivery of non-strategic high-precision and hyper-speed conventional warheads.

The document clearly states that the Pentagon will retain forward-based nuclear weapons, which in the US military include tactical nuclear weapons (TNWs) deployed in Europe and the Asia-Pacific Region as the basis of advanced nuclear deterrence. For example, US TNWs will remain on the European continent until NATO “determines the conditions” that will become the basis for changing the alliance’s nuclear policy.

Meanwhile, Pentagon chief Chuck Hagel, speaking at a press conference on the resumption of the federal government, said Thursday that the US Department of Defense still has limited opportunities to launch new weapons programs because it is funded on a temporary basis. According to the minister, the forced reduction of military spending inevitably affects the combat readiness of the American troops and may ultimately weaken the country's defense capability. “Continuing budget uncertainty will have a negative impact on our economy, our national security and America’s position in the world,” Hagel warned.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. a52333
    a52333 21 October 2013 11: 01
    in the course of 25 – 30 years, it intends to replace seven available types of nuclear weapons with five new ones.
    I would pose the question differently:
    Guys, do we have -25 - 30 years? Do you have them? sure?
    1. Siberian
      Siberian 21 October 2013 16: 12
      The question is correct. Do we have 25-30 years? Do you have them?
  2. Saharok
    Saharok 21 October 2013 11: 17
    So Americans are cunning, and all of them will burn for 100 years in death agony. =)
  3. Lazy cat
    Lazy cat 21 October 2013 13: 31
    There are a lot of debts, but there are money for warheads.
  4. pahom54
    pahom54 21 October 2013 15: 04
    Once again confirms that there is no need to swear at an increase in Russia's military spending. And we also need the latest weapons, especially in the nuclear triad.
  5. shinobi
    shinobi 21 October 2013 17: 14
    It seems that things are getting worse and worse with the Yankees. Why, and even in the nightmarish 90s on promising nuclear warheads, we even got red-hot but gave money. And here we are essentially talking about preserving what is.
    1. alone
      alone 21 October 2013 21: 01
      update is not conservation. seven species are updated with five new species.

      Recently, someone said that the Americans scored on their nuclear forces. And he said this with confidence.
      and it turns out that the Americans have not yet become as stupid as it seemed to us. and they won’t spare money for it.