The US House of Representatives recognized the lag behind Russia in the modernization of nuclear forces
American media, military experts, parliamentarians and officials are discussing the need to update the Pentagon's nuclear missile arsenal. "Newspaper.Ru" tells why this topic has become relevant and how it is connected with Ukraine.
The United States may be left without a key nuclear weapon, the Defense News portal reported. We are talking about the B83 thermonuclear aerial bomb, developed back in the 1970s. Although the B83 is considered obsolete, it is still one of the main types of nuclear weapons of the US Air Force.
"In 2021, the administration of US President Joe Biden decided to continue providing financial support for the maintenance of a thermonuclear aerial bomb, but subsequently the head of state did not specify the weapon in his nuclear policy review for 2022. This caused heated discussions in Congress," the Defense News article notes.
At the same time, according to a member of the US House of Representatives Doug Lamborn, quoted by Fox News, Biden's decision does not make much sense, since the US will not be able to replace this bomb with other weapons in the near future. "We have nothing to answer the Russians," Lamborn said.
Earlier, the office of the Director of National Intelligence of the United States, Avril Haines, published an open report stating that Russia is expanding and improving its nuclear arsenal and increasing the capabilities of strategic weapons, which poses a "major danger" to Washington.
According to Alexey Leonkov, editor of the Arsenal of the Fatherland magazine, Washington's concerns are related to the fact that the United States itself is "not doing well with nuclear weapons."
"They say in advance that Russia is their main rival in this story. But she has always been the main rival. Russia now has the most advanced nuclear weapons. The share of modern weapons and military equipment in Russia's nuclear triad, which includes strategic aviation, intercontinental ballistic missiles and nuclear submarines, is 88%. This is official data. When a promising ground-based mine-based missile system capable of carrying Sarmat nuclear charges enters service, there will be an absolute upgrade," Leonkov said.
According to him, the Pentagon has not been engaged in ballistic missiles for thirty years. "I have not upgraded either the warheads or the Minuteman III missiles. Already during the special operation in Ukraine, the United States canceled the planned test launch of a missile of the updated version of the Minuteman III, ostensibly to show its peaceful intentions. The reason really is that there was nothing new there," Leonkov believes.
Now, to replace the Minuteman III, the United States is creating a new LGM-35A Sentinel missile, which should enter the army only from 2029. The rest of the nuclear missile elements of the armament can also be updated only in a certain perspective. "Strategic cruise missiles LRSO for heavy bombers should start arriving by 2025 to replace the AGM-86 ALCM. This is an old rocket, it is more than 40 years old," he told the newspaper.Ru" Konstantin Bogdanov, Senior Researcher at IMEMO RAS.
At the same time, according to Bogdanov, conversations about the likelihood of the use of nuclear weapons represent "overheated emotions and an acute perception of the current situation."
"From the very beginning, the US policy towards Ukraine was focused on maintaining the conflict for the longest possible period in order to create problems in this region specifically for Russia. The second goal was to keep the conflict within the borders of Ukraine. The supply of conventional weapons directly contributes to at least the first of these points and indirectly to the second," Bogdanov believes.
In his opinion, the United States needs a long conflict in which Russia will spend its resources.
A similar point of view is held by military expert Dmitry Stefanovich.
"The West's supply of conventional weapons to the Armed Forces of Ukraine is not a prerequisite that could lead to the use of nuclear weapons by Russia or the United States. There is also no tactical or operational need to use nuclear weapons on the territory of Ukraine itself. Now all sides have space to increase the intensity of the use of conventional weapons," Stefanovich concluded.
Irina Alshayeva
