John Wolfstal (Jon Wolfsthal), who worked as a special assistant to Barack Obama on arms control and non-proliferation, said that the Pentagon is "Review of the composition and quantity of nuclear weapons" provides for the creation of a modified version of the missiles, "Trident" D5 (Trident D5) submarine launch only a small part of the original warhead. The purpose of this design is to keep Russia from using operational-tactical nuclear warheads in case of conflict in Eastern Europe.
The new nuclear policy is much more aggressive that conducted the Obama administration sought to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in the defense of the United States.
Supporters of arms control has expressed concern about the new proposals on the creation of more "practical" nuclear warheads less power. They argue that this will increase the likelihood of nuclear war, especially in light of the unstable behavior of Donald trump and his willingness to rattle the American military Arsenal in competition with the enemies of America.
In the "Review of the composition and quantity of nuclear weapons" also expanded the list of circumstances in which the United States could use its nuclear Arsenal. Among the new provisions of the retaliatory strike on non-nuclear attack that caused mass casualties or aimed at the destruction of critical infrastructure, and control centers nuclear weapons.
It is expected that the new "Review of the composition and quantity of nuclear weapons" (the first in eight years) will be published after the annual message of Donald trump's Congress in late January.
Wolfsthal, analyzed the final, he took it that the draft Review noted that according to this document, the United States will begin work on re-adopting the nuclear cruise missiles of sea basing, which should be a response to a new cruise land-based missiles, developed by Russia in violation of the prisoner in the 1987 Treaty on the elimination of intermediate-range and shorter-range (according to the US charges).
Wolfsthal said previous versions of the draft "Review of the composition and quantity of nuclear weapons" was even more militant. In the final version no proposal for the development of a hypersonic glide nuclear weapon, and left assurances address non-nuclear States that the US will not use them against its nuclear Arsenal.
"In my opinion, the developers of the Review still refused radical provisions laid down in the beginning. There is the terrible sentences that were present in the text originally said Wolfsthal. And still, it's a bad Review".
"The people who wrote this stuff told me that they tried to send a strong signal awesome Russians, North Koreans and Chinese. In this document gently and moderately, but clearly, and quite clearly indicates that any attempt by Russia or North Korea to use nuclear weapons will lead to very serious consequences for them. It seems to me that this is a very moderate, balanced and, perhaps, much-needed document."
"But in one point they go too far, saying that for the credibility of the United States should create two new types of nuclear weapons," added Wolfsthal.
According to him, the modified warhead missiles, "Trident", with only the charge of the initiator, "absolutely not necessary" because the United States already have nuclear weapons low power, gravity bombs B61 aircraft and cruise missiles.
© flickr.com Tim Menzies.
The head of the rocket "Trident"
He stressed that "pretty stupid" to install tactical nuclear weapons low power, a new nuclear rocket underwater cruisers "Columbia", because any launch of such a missile will give the location of the submarine.
"We spend five billion dollars to make the boat invisible, and then put on every variety of warheads. What they want to do is get one missile, set it on a small warhead and launch it. But so this boat will be vulnerable to Russian attack, said Wolfsthal. — From the point of view of naval strategy, it seems unreasonable."
The development of warheads small capacity for sea-based missiles based on the belief that in the event of a conflict with Russia on the Eastern flank of NATO and Russian is required at the very beginning will use tactical nuclear weapons, thus making up for its shortcomings in conventional arms. According to this reasoning, the Russians are betting on the reluctance of Americans to use powerful warheads installed on existing samples of their nuclear weapons, and believe that Washington will back down.
The Director of the nuclear information project Federation of American scientists Hans Christensen (Hans Kristensen) stated that the rationale for the development of new weapons suffer from inconsistency.
"They come from the assessments of the intelligence community, which came to the following conclusion. One or more US adversaries are betting that America will abstain from the use of ballistic missiles, as they have a large capacity. But it's not. About it nobody spoke," said Christensen.
"I think that none of the enemy, and primarily Russia, will not make risky bets that America will not respond if they do something with its nuclear weapon of low power. This is absolutely ridiculous, he added. — I think we are talking about some laboratory research and development, not about real practical work."
Daryl Kimball (Daryl Kimball), who heads the Association for arms control, said that the creation of new weapons for the US nuclear Arsenal "dangerous" and is "thinking of the cold war".
"The United States already have diverse nuclear Arsenal, and there is no evidence that more practical weapons will help to deter a potential enemy or force him to change their approaches to their own Arsenal," wrote Kimball in the pages of the website, "Arms Control Today" (Arms Control Today).
He also warned against expanding the list of circumstances in which it may be applied to nuclear weapons.
"The use of even small amounts of such weapons would be a disaster, noted Kimball. To threaten a nuclear attack in response to a new "asymmetric" threats — this is not necessary. This will increase the risk of use of nuclear weapons and other countries will be easier and easier to justify increasing the role of nuclear weapons in its defense policy."
- 06-12-2017That can make science 600 billion dollars?
- 02-12-2017More small space?
- 10-08-2017Hiroshima and Nagasaki destroyed atomic bombs of Hitler?
- 17-02-2017Planet Labs launched into space hundreds of tiny satellites around the clock to remove the entire surface of the Earth. Why is it important?
- 04-12-2016Nuclear flying monster. As in the Soviet Union was building nuclear aircraft
- 12-09-2010Many experts believe the best tank Merkava main battle tank in the world