Will nuclear weapons be returned to Belarus? Will nuclear weapons return to Belarus? Belarus is thinking about creating nuclear weapons.
IN last years secrecy was removed from several documents containing plans for a US attack on the Soviet Union using nuclear weapons. They meticulously calculated how many bombs needed to be dropped on each city in order to destroy the population and industry. Belarusian cities also came under attack. the site looked at declassified plans for nuclear strikes that could end the history of our country.
List of apocalypse
From the list of targets for nuclear strikes on the territory of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, declassified by the American National Archives and Records Administration, it became known that a number of Belarusian cities were targeted. The document was compiled by the US Strategic Air Command in 1956 and contained 800 targets.
The list included “population” as one of the goals for each city. The primary task was to destroy the infrastructure air force enemy, including 1,100 airfields in Soviet bloc countries. And here many cities came under attack. Two of which - Bykhov and Orsha - were number one and two on the list.
The top twenty list also included objects in Bobruisk, Minsk (Machulishchi), Gomel (Pribytki). Belarusian airfields, according to the CIA report, were used to base M-4 and Tu-16 strategic bombers. These planes could not reach the territory of the United States, but they could strike NATO member countries.
SM-62 Snark. Photo: wikimedia.org B-47 Stratojet jet bombers based in Great Britain, Morocco and Spain, as well as heavy ultra-long-range intercontinental strategic bombers B-52 Stratofortress, stationed in the United States, and strategic intercontinental bombers were to take part in the destruction of the USSR ballistic missiles SM-62 Snark.
Optimal 204 nuclear bombs
According to a secret document dated September 15, 1945, the Pentagon envisioned destroying the Soviet Union with a coordinated nuclear attack aimed at large urban areas, BusinessInsider reported.
A document was published on the website, from which the classification of secrecy was removed. The list of the largest cities in the USSR included 66 strategic targets. The Americans calculated the area of each city and the number of bombs needed to destroy it. For example, one atomic bomb was allocated to Minsk, six bombs were planned to be dropped on Moscow and the same number on Kyiv.
The Pentagon believed that 204 atomic bombs were enough to erase the USSR from the world map. But it was considered “optimal” to drop 466 atomic bombs on the Soviet state.
Is it a lot or a little? For example, one atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima caused the immediate death of 100,000 people in the first seven seconds.
The USSR bombing plan document was released in September 1945, a month after the bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and two years before the onset of the Cold War.
Directive 59, if the President decides
In December 1978, the Americans unilaterally curtailed negotiations on restrictions on the arms trade, and in June 1979 they refused to resume dialogue on anti-satellite systems. Tensions in the confrontation between the USSR and the USA increased. In November 1979, President Jimmy Carter issued a directive allowing the country to enter into a long conflict with the USSR.
One of the main authors of Directive No. 59 was General William Odom, who in 1980 served as assistant to Presidential National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski. Photo: nsarchive2.gwu.edu However, the most dangerous was another document signed on July 25, 1980 by Carter - Directive No. 59 (PD-59). The document was so secret that its full contents at the time of its creation were not known even to many members of the Carter government.
Directive No. 59 is, in some way, a set of rules and principles providing for the procedure for entry and conduct nuclear war, the result of which was to cause significant damage to the economic power of the USSR, up to its complete destruction. This document also significantly expanded the powers American President under the threat of a nuclear conflict.
And although some members of the US National Security Council expressed their opposition to the inclusion in the directive of a provision on a pre-emptive nuclear strike on Soviet Union, it was also included in the final version of the document.
Millions could have died
According to one of the American plans for an attack on the USSR, 1,154 targets were subject to destruction, including on the territory of allied countries. Based on data declassified by the US National Archives and Records Administration two years ago, American physicist Max Tagmark and historian Alex Wallerstein created an interactive map that allows you to assess the consequences of the atomic bombing.
Users can select the power of a nuclear charge in the range from 50 Kt to 10 Mt and assess the extent of radioactive contamination and casualties. For example, if a 1Mt warhead struck Polotsk, 53.2 thousand people would be killed, and 38.3 thousand would be injured of varying degrees of severity.
The radius of destruction of a 1 Mt warhead during an attack on Vitebsk.
In a strike on Bobruisk, the losses would have been 58.7 thousand dead and 76.3 thousand wounded, in Slutsk - 46.3 thousand dead and 18 thousand wounded, in Kobrin - 42.5 thousand dead and 10.9 thousand wounded, in Orsha - 1.9 thousand dead and 22.2 thousand wounded.
Wallerstein noted that if all warheads had a power of 1 Mt and were launched in the air, then the casualties in the USSR and allied countries would be 111 million people: in the USSR - 55 million, in the Warsaw Pact countries - about 10 million, and in China and North Korea- about 46 million. In addition, 239 million people would be injured and receive radiation exposure of varying severity.
Nuclear forces may be deployed in Belarus.
During the visit of the head of the Ministry of Defense Russian Federation to Belarus, Sergei Shoigu and Andrei Ravkov touched upon the topic of strategic military partnership between the two countries. It was mainly about the implementation of the Joint Action Plan to ensure military security Union State.
The main issue concerned the deployment of American military personnel in Poland, in connection with which Belarus and Russia should take appropriate measures to ensure security.
“The Polish government’s plans to permanently station a division of the US Armed Forces on its territory are counterproductive and do not contribute to maintaining stability and strengthening regional security. In these conditions, we are forced to take retaliatory measures and must be ready to neutralize possible military threats in all directions.” - said Sergei Shoigu.
However, according to experts, tension at the Belarusian border, as well as at the border of the Union State, will continue to grow, and therefore, nuclear weapons may be deployed on the territory of Belarus, however, such a measure is an extreme measure, and it will only be implemented if subject to strong military pressure from the West.
“The answer could be the transfer to Belarus of one or more brigades of Iskander operational-tactical missile systems, which are armed with the Russian ground forces in the Western Military District, and perhaps in the Central Military District. At a speed of 70 kilometers per hour with a power reserve of a thousand kilometers, in 12-15 hours, Iskander complexes from the territory of the Western Military District can arrive on the territory of Belarus under their own power and can be prepared for firing within a few tens of minutes.<…>If this is not a temporary raid, but placement on a permanent basis, then hangars will be needed to accommodate military equipment, repair areas will be needed, and most importantly, a barracks fund to accommodate personnel. The rest of the infrastructure is present in Belarus, which provides ample room for maneuver.” , said military expert Alexander Alesin.
However, the likelihood that Belarus will take such measures remains almost unrealistic, which is due to the intentions of this state to maintain partnerships not only with Russia, but also with the West.
“Belarus is a peace-loving state that tries to remain aloof, exclusively within the limits of its interests. The authorities of this country understand perfectly well that if nuclear weapons appear on the territory of Belarus, and the Iskanders have the ability to use nuclear warheads, then western weapons will be aimed not only at Russia, but also at Belarus" , - the site analyst emphasizes.
On Monday Russian ambassador in Belarus, Alexander Surikov, when asked by Interfax whether Russia will deploy new military facilities in Belarus in connection with the deployment of the American missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic, answered completely unexpectedly:
This already depends on the level of our political integration. And also from the points of view of experts, diplomats, and military personnel: necessary, possible, when, how. I mean objects related to nuclear weapons.
Quite a diplomatic answer right down to the last sentence. But no one pulled the ambassador’s tongue, and the information nuclear bomb exploded.
The next day, Alexander Surikov hastened to correct the situation. He told ITAR-TASS that his position regarding military cooperation "has been completely misinterpreted." At the time of writing, official Minsk and Moscow refrained from commenting. But on both sides of the ocean there is a discussion of prospects. American senators are outraged, the Lithuanian Defense Minister calls for prudence.
The entire military infrastructure of the Belarusians is in perfect condition, this also applies to missile launchers with nuclear warheads, which were taken to Russia after the collapse of the USSR. Returning missiles to silos is much faster than building a radar in Poland, says Assistant Secretary of State of the Union State of Russia and Belarus Ivan MAKUSHOK.
He is echoed by some Russian generals. For example, the President of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, Colonel General Leonid Ivashov, believes that Russia should deploy tactical nuclear weapons (with a range of less than 5,500 km) on the territory of Belarus.
The deployment of Russian nuclear weapons on the territory of Belarus does not make Minsk nuclear power and doesn't violate it international obligations, Interfax quotes Ivashov as saying. - Just as US nuclear weapons stationed on German territory do not make Germany a nuclear power.
In general, the military is already making plans.
FROM THE HOURS
Stanislav SHUSHKEVICH, initiator of the withdrawal of nuclear weapons from Belarus: I understood what a threat this was to the country
Stop defending Russia with Belarusian lives,” Stanislav Shushkevich responded to the statement, during which nuclear weapons began to be withdrawn from Belarus. - Remember the Second world war. Belarusians suffered millions of losses that cannot be compared with any other nation. Do they want to set up Belarus again and turn it into a nuclear test site, which will be the first strike in the event of a conflict? Why is this necessary?
- But perhaps the Belarusian side will receive financial benefits?
You can't trade lives.
- But in the event of a nuclear war, will there be a difference where the missiles are located - in Lida or Smolensk?
This is a very big difference. When there were nuclear weapons in our country, we had so many missiles that Belarus was the first to be destroyed.
- How did the withdrawal process begin?
From the Bialowieza Agreement. I immediately said that without any preconditions or compensation, we are ready to remove nuclear weapons from our territory. The operation was also beneficial for Russia - it received weapons without compensation.
- What were you guided by when making such a decision?
- I headed the Department of Nuclear Physics for 20 years. and understood the threat these weapons pose to Belarus. I managed to convince the government of this very easily.
P.S. Stanislav Shushkevich nominated for Nobel Prize peace. The initiative comes from former president Poland Lech Walesa. Shushkevich is nominated for his main peaceful achievement - the withdrawal of nuclear missiles from Belarus.
HOW IT WAS
In 1996, the last strategic missile was withdrawn from Belarus.
Our country voluntarily renounced nuclear weapons.
Since Soviet times, Belarus inherited 81 intercontinental ballistic missiles (flight range of more than 10 thousand km) and 725 tactical warheads. An army with such an arsenal could destroy a target at any point globe. On the other hand, enemy missiles were also aimed at Belarus.
In April 1992, the government voluntarily gave up nuclear weapons. And in February 1993, the Supreme Council decided to join the Republic of Belarus to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
Gradual withdrawal has begun nuclear weapons in Russia. The last echelon with RS-12M Topol missiles was withdrawn on November 27, 1996.
BY THE WAY
Russian bombers are counting on the airfield in Baranovichi
Russian strategic bombers Tu-160 and Tu-95 have resumed flights to the shores of the United States. In order to fly to the destination, so-called jump airfields are used - areas where aircraft can be provided with technical assistance, refueling is carried out, and crews are provided with rest. One of these airfields is located in Baranovichi. Russian generals said the bombers are now flying without nuclear weapons on board.
TOLD
I think there will be no such situation and conditions for tactical nuclear weapons to be delivered here... If there is a threat to our peoples, nothing needs to be ruled out, we must ensure our security by all means and means. (Alexander LUKASHENKO during the Union Shield 2006 exercises.)
Experts regarded the negotiations held in Minsk by Deputy Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation Grigory Karasin as a hint at the return of nuclear weapons to our country.
Tut.by drew attention to the visit of a high-ranking Russian diplomat to Belarus. The portal noted that in Minsk Grigory Karasin was expected not only at the Foreign Ministry, but also at the presidential administration. The Russian deputy minister was received by its leader, Vladimir Makei. At this meeting, according to the head of the department foreign policy presidential administration of Maxim Ryzhenkov, was discussed big circle“specific sensitive issues,” writes “Salidarnasts”.
“With a high degree of probability, it can be assumed that one of the “specific sensitive issues” concerned cooperation in the military sphere,” the portal writes. - It is worth recalling that all last year there were difficult negotiations between Russia and the United States on the terms of placement American system Missile defense in Europe. These negotiations were never successful."
In this regard, it is mentioned that in November 2011, a military-diplomatic source in Moscow told Interfax that the Russian Federation could deploy missile systems“Iskander” and on the territory of Belarus: “This will allow us to fend off threats to strategic nuclear forces Russia in the event of the deployment of US missile defense elements near our borders.”
“It is quite possible that in the current situation things may go beyond anonymous statements from military-diplomatic sources,” the portal concluded
“The introduction of missiles is contrary to the highest law of the state”
Former judge of the Constitutional Court of Belarus Mikhail Pastukhov considers possible placement atomic weapons Illegal on the territory of our country:
– Article 18 of the Constitution declares Belarus a nuclear-free zone and a neutral state. Therefore, the introduction of missiles, both offensive and defensive, is contrary to the highest law of the state.
A military columnist for the newspaper “Belorusy i Rynok”, Alexander Alesin, has a different opinion. He believes the option of placing atomic weapons on the territory of Belarus is quite possible.
– We will talk about Russian bases and Russian weapons, says the expert. - It will be under the jurisdiction of Russia, and will be formalized accordingly from the point of view of international treaties.
Alexander Alesin reminds that the practice of placing such bases is widespread in the North Atlantic Alliance:
– NATO countries have storage facilities for American bombs, which were recently used to store tactical nuclear warheads.
However, this scenario is fraught with extremely unpleasant consequences for our country.
– Belarus will automatically turn into a target and become the primary target of preventive nuclear strike, - explained Alesin.
The expert considers accommodation in Belarus a more realistic option Russian complexes"Iskander-M":
– Judging by the fact that Russia and the United States cannot agree on missile defense, if events pass the “point of return”, then the removal Russian weapons beyond the territory of the Russian Federation is quite possible.
“No one will cross the red line”
In turn, senior analyst of the Belarusian Institute of Strategic Studies Denis Melyantsov considers it impossible to deploy nuclear weapons in our country.
“This is prohibited by international law, as is the option of deploying Russian interceptor missiles,” the expert noted. - Belarus declared itself a neutral state and committed itself not to deploy anti-missile missiles and other weapons that would significantly change the balance of power in the region.
According to the analyst, through the mouth of Grigory Karasin, Russia is coordinating not the prospects for deployment, but the “nuclear rhetoric” that is effective in international treaty processes.
“I’m not sure that Russia will ultimately decide to deploy missiles, because the negotiation process on missile defense is still underway,” emphasizes Denis Melyantsov. - The Obama administration is ready to make concessions. If we recall how the issue of Belarus’s participation in the missile defense system was discussed at the Munich Security Conference, escalation is not possible, but only rhetoric, which is very effective.
The expert believes that Russia is exploring all options when it comes to “flexing its muscles.”
“Most likely, the negotiations between the distinguished Russian guest and Vladimir Makei concerned precisely the coordination of rhetoric on the issue of weapons deployment,” notes the interlocutor of Salidarnastsi. - Official Minsk, in turn, competently plays along. We are monitoring the situation in relations with Russia and can state: over the past six months, there have been virtually no negative statements from official Minsk regarding Moscow.
– There is no need for atomic weapons and missile defenses. This will worsen the West’s relations with Russia and certainly with Belarus. The imperative for the survival of the Belarusian government is the possibility of balance. No one will cross the red line...
Nuclear weapons in Belarus: no secrets?
The secrecy surrounding nuclear weapons gives rise to many rumors. There are also a lot of them in relation to Belarus. IN Soviet times in the Belarusian Military District (by the way, it was the only district in the USSR whose borders completely coincided with the borders of the republic) there was a powerful military group, possessed nuclear weapons. In reputable publications I have read about supposedly testing low-power nuclear weapons in Polesie, and in silly detective novels - about some secret bases for storing nuclear weapons in this region.
Vasily Semashko, www.naviny.by
To figure out what is truth and what is fiction about nuclear weapons in Belarus, I talked with Pavel Kozlovsky, once the chief of staff of the Belarusian Military District, and then the first Minister of Defense of Belarus. He said that nuclear weapons appeared in Belarus in the 1960s.
Nuclear explosive devices are placed: on intercontinental ballistic missiles, on operational-tactical, tactical missiles, in artillery shells, aerial bombs, torpedoes, and in the form of portable explosive devices.
Let's look at each of these media. Intercontinental ballistic missiles are the most formidable weapons. The President of the USSR could give a command for the right to use these missiles using the well-known “nuclear suitcase”. Intercontinental missiles, entering outer space, are capable of hitting a target anywhere in the world within 40 minutes. Military units with intercontinental ballistic missiles (hereinafter ICBMs) reported directly to Moscow, headquarters missile forces strategic purpose(Strategic Missile Forces). The commander of the Belarusian Military District had no right to interfere in the affairs of the Strategic Missile Forces and did not receive any information from them. Even housing for the families of Strategic Missile Forces officers was built by construction units belonging to these troops.
The first intercontinental missiles, due to their size, were only silo-based. According to Kozlovsky, in Belarus in the 1960s there were several such silos for, so to speak, primitive missiles. These mines have long been abandoned or destroyed during Soviet times. With the reduction in the size of ICBMs, it became possible to place them on automobile chassis. The mobility of missiles makes them significantly less vulnerable to an enemy first strike. The chassis for the Topol type ICBM was made by the Minsk Wheel Tractor Plant. People call them "centipedes" because a large number of wheels
From the mid-1970s to the end of the 1980s, medium-range missiles - RSD-10 ("Pioneers"), capable of hitting targets in Western Europe. The missiles were placed on automobile chassis and most of the time were kept in concrete hangars. Under the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty between the United States and the USSR of 1987, these missiles were destroyed. The last Pioneers were destroyed in May 1991. Their place, in much smaller numbers, was taken by the more powerful Topol intercontinental missiles. They are several meters longer. Because of this, they were not placed in the hangars left over from the Pioneers, and the launchers were constantly located in the open air.
In the last few years of the existence of the USSR, there were 3 headquarters of Strategic Missile Forces units in Belarus: in Lida, Pruzhany and Mozyr. Within a radius of several tens of kilometers from these places they were based on a car chassis rocket launchers ICBM "Topol". Each of these installations had at least three concrete launch pads (concrete thickness - 1.5 m) with side dimensions of several tens of meters. The launch pads had precisely measured coordinates, which, before the creation of the Glonass satellite navigation system, ensured the necessary hit accuracy. It is also possible to launch from unprepared positions, but in this case, preparing the rocket for launch takes longer. During the exercises, huge tractors, mostly at night, periodically moved to starting positions. There were 81 launch sites in Belarus. According to the arms reduction agreement with the United States, all sites were to be destroyed. Funds were allocated for this. But only 3 sites were destroyed, and at this point all work was suspended due to the deterioration of relations between Minsk and Washington.
After the collapse of the USSR, all units of the Strategic Missile Forces remained subordinate to Russia, but were withdrawn from Belarus only in 1996, when Russia prepared the necessary conditions for their deployment.
Nuclear weapons in the form of operational-tactical, tactical missiles, artillery shells and aerial bombs went to independent Belarus in 1991. Perhaps there were still small quantities of small portable nuclear mines for saboteurs.
Operational-tactical missiles have a range of up to 400 kilometers, tactical ones - up to 120, and nuclear artillery shells with a caliber of 120 mm and above have a firing range of approximately 10 to 30 kilometers.
The charges for the above-mentioned carriers were stored separately on special mobile missile technical bases (PRTB), and a very limited circle of military personnel directly involved in servicing these charges had the opportunity to enter such storage facilities. Before use, they were transported in special containers to the carrier locations (airfields, missile and artillery bases).
Having assumed the position of chief of staff of the Belarusian Military District, Pavel Kozlovsky visited the nuclear warhead storage base for the first time. The storage facility itself, according to him, was located on the territory of a military unit, in a concrete bunker underground at a depth of 1.5 meters, and had protective systems, including a high-voltage barbed wire fence. The security of the storage facility was carried out by conscript soldiers of this unit. The storage facility maintained a certain temperature and humidity regime. The charges were located on several racks: missile warheads on one side, artillery warheads on the other.
“Like young piglets in stalls,” this is how Pavel Kozlovsky describes his impressions of his first visit to the storage facility. - Smooth, clean, standing in even rows nuclear warheads. It is often described in books that if you put your hand on a nuclear charge, you will feel the heat from the slow decay of plutonium or uranium. I also put my hand on the smooth side. I didn’t feel the warmth - cold steel very durable body. While in the vault, I felt the enormous power hidden in the steel “pigs.”
All nuclear explosive devices have reliable protection systems. To bring a nuclear explosive device into combat readiness it is necessary to perform a series of sequential operations that are divided between several specialists. Each specialist knows only a certain part of the operations. The safety automation of nuclear explosive devices evaluates the surrounding conditions and detonates the charge only after meeting the necessary conditions that arise when delivering the charge to a specific target. When an unauthorized detonation or disassembly is attempted, complex electronic devices are rendered inoperable.
There are nuclear charges based on plutonium and uranium. Even if an explosion fails, simply dispersing uranium or plutonium can cause persistent radioactive contamination of the area - a disaster similar to Chernobyl. However, for this purpose it is much easier to use cesium, which is used in industrial devices. For terrorists, uranium is the most in demand due to the ease of making a nuclear explosive device from it.
According to Pavel Kozlovsky, in the early 1990s, a trained group of terrorists like the Chechens could, if they wanted, seize one of the nuclear weapons storage facilities in Belarus. The possibility of a surprise attack by trained terrorists was not seriously considered at that time. Of course, the army conducted exercises to protect important military installations from possible sabotage groups. During such exercises, the security of protected objects increased sharply, and after that it weakened again.
Some Belarusian politicians, including the president, have repeatedly expressed regret that Belarus has lost its nuclear weapons.
“For Belarus, nuclear weapons are an unaffordable luxury,” says Pavel Kozlovsky. - Even storing nuclear weapons is a very expensive business. Nuclear weapons require regular inspection and maintenance. Belarus does not have its own service specialists, and no country is willing to assist in their training. We will have to regularly invite specialists from Russian nuclear centers. Often preventive work with ammunition can only be carried out in the manufacturing plant. Transporting nuclear weapons to a manufacturing plant in Russia is not cheap. Nuclear weapons have a shelf life after which they must be disposed of. To do this, you will again have to contact Russian specialists and return ammunition to the manufacturer. Not only nuclear weapons are becoming obsolete, but also the storage sites themselves. By the beginning of the 1990s, the security and alarm systems, air conditioning, and utility systems of warehouses became outdated and required replacement. Replacing all of this is a huge expense.”
According to Pavel Kozlovsky, the main reason why our authorities decided to get rid of nuclear weapons in the early 1990s is economic: poor Belarus cannot afford to maintain nuclear weapons.
Among the places where nuclear weapons storage facilities were located, the former Minister of Defense named the environs of Lepel, Shchuchin, Osipovichi, airfields near Minsk and Baranovichi, where the strategic aviation. I wanted to see for myself the conditions in which nuclear weapons were stored.
Of the places where nuclear weapons were stored, I chose to visit the military unit near Lepel, in the Vitebsk region. Now in this part, located in the area of beautiful lakes, there is a sanatorium of the Ministry of Defense of Belarus and a military forestry. Many former military personnel work here.
Where I once stood military equipment, now desolation. The premises are occupied by small wood processing and car repair businesses. Based on the preserved earthen rampart encircling an area the size of a football field, which protected objects located on it from direct shots, and the remains of several rows of barriers, I found the location of a mobile missile and technical battery. There were several firing points nearby for security. PTB at military bases is traditionally the most protected facility. Later local residents confirmed that I had indeed found the location of the PTB.
The buildings that were once located there are now completely destroyed. In conversations with me, local residents were surprised when I mentioned the nuclear weapons stored near them. This is not surprising: even among the military personnel who served here, only a few knew what was stored behind a powerful earthen rampart surrounded by several fences.
I also discovered several dozen abandoned dummies of anti-tank mines, containing low-quality concrete instead of explosives. I measure the radioactive background. Everything is absolutely normal. It's hard to believe that terrible nuclear weapons were once located here.
