In the next decade, the United States will need billions of dollars to modernize nuclear weapons, said Pentagon assistant chief Madeleine Cridon.
Cridon said this at a hearing in the Committee on the Affairs of the Armed Forces of the US House of Representatives, ITAR-TASS.
“Modernization of this kind is expensive, but there is no doubt about its necessity,” she emphasized, explaining that the development and production of new weapons and their carriers are necessary in connection with the obsolescence of the nuclear arsenal.
Madeleine Cridon also indicated that the creation of more reliable nuclear forces would allow the United States to carry out their further quantitative reduction.
She did not specify the amount required to implement the program. However, according to estimates of the Henry Stimson Center, the modernization will cost the United States approximately 400 billion dollars.
In turn, commenting on the state of affairs, General Robert Keiler, head of the US Strategic Command, noted that the United States had just begun "efforts to reorganize the structure of its nuclear deterrent forces and related infrastructure."
According to him, this process will take "several decades."
Independent experts have already criticized the approach of the US administration to the problem, pointing to the possibility of extending the duration of the warheads, which does not require such financial injections. In their opinion, a less costly approach would become more rational in the face of cuts in funding for some US military programs.
Recall that in June of this year, US President Barack Obama appealed to Russia with a call to reduce by one third the nuclear arsenals of both countries.
Russian President Vladimir Putin, responding to Obama's words, said that Moscow agrees on the need to reduce strategic weapons, but believes that all members of the nuclear club should do this. According to him, now not only the United States, but also other states are actively improving their offensive weapons.
Meanwhile, according to some analysts, Obama is unlikely to go into history as a person who has achieved a marked reduction in nuclear weapons.