Three questions about the deployment of Russian tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus

Vladimir Putin strikes again Nuclear weapon In the context of the Ukrainian conflict. During an interview on Russian television broadcast on Saturday March 25, the head of state announced the deployment of tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus. “There is nothing unusual here: the US has been doing this for decades. It has long deployed its tactical nuclear weapons on the territory of its allies.”justified the Russian leader, adding that he had the Minsk agreement for the move. “From April 3, we start training groups. On July 1, we will finish the construction of a special warehouse for tactical nuclear weapons on the territory of Belarus”Detailed Vladimir Putin.

>> Follow Ukraine war news live with franceinfo

The Russian president made the decision in response to sending depleted uranium munitions To Ukraine By LondonBritish Under Secretary of Defense said March 20. What weapons exactly are we talking about? What will be the consequences of their position? Francinfo returns to this point in three questions.

1 What is a tactical nuclear weapon?

If this distinction seems a bit artificial to experts, one would object to the so-called strategic nuclear weapons being designed to destroy targets using specific ballistic missiles with tactical nuclear weapons. Their use is theoretically limited to the battlefield. A tactical nuclear weapon is a nuclear bomb of “reduced” power, used to target units of an opposing army, such as a column of tanks, for example.

In Belarus, it can be considered ‘Small’ weapons with a yield of around 10 to 50 kilotons will equip Belarusian Sukhoi bombers.“, advances to franceinfo, Stéphane Audrand, a consultant specializing in weapons. So this is a weak question: by comparison, the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945 had an energy of approximately 16 kilotons.

2 Why does Russia want to station these nuclear weapons in Belarus?

Vladimir Putin proposes the deployment of nuclear weapons in Belarus as a response to British announcements of delivery to Ukraine on March 20. In fact, the decision seems to have been prepared almost nine months in advance. “In the next few months, we will replace (…) Iskander-M tactical missile systems in their conventional and nuclear versions, which can use ballistic or cruise missiles”, The Russian president announced on June 25, 2022 after his meeting with Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko. “[Vladimir] Putin also said he would upgrade Belarusian attack aircraft capable of carrying tactical nuclear weapons. Remembers Stephen Autrand.

The deployment of nuclear weapons in Belarus is fortunately not necessarily synonymous with their imminent use. “The scenarios for the use of nuclear weapons are highly improbable, and their deployment would not really change the world situation very much.”, the weapons expert believes. On the other hand, the distribution of these weapons is a sign of a strong alliance between Minsk and Moscow. “The sharing of nuclear weapons is the greatest proof of trust between the two countries.Stéphane Audrand points out. Moscow will be the sole owner and decision-maker in the use of these weapons.However, he points out.

For Ukraine, the presence of Russian nuclear weapons in Belarus is proof “The Kremlin took over [le pays] “Nuclear Hostage”He wrote that day Twitter March 26 Oleksiy Danilov, Secretary of the Ukrainian Security Council, said the decision was a “A Step Towards Internal Destabilization” From Belarus.

3 What are the depleted uranium munitions that Moscow condemns for supplying Ukraine?

In a speech to the House of Lords on Monday, British Deputy Defense Secretary Annabel Goldie said the UK would supply depleted uranium bombs to Ukraine. These munitions are particularly effective against armored vehicles. “Depleted uranium is a by-product of the enrichment of nuclear fuel used for nuclear power plants. Stephen Autrand explains. It is a very dense metal with which we manufacture penetrators for anti-tank bombs.”

“Depleted uranium is highly radioactive, less so than natural uranium. ground”, continues the expert. As with other conventional weapons that disperse heavy metals, “His employment is not creating opportunities Only chemical pollution, not radioactivity”Emphasizes Stéphane Audrand.

However, the radiotoxicity of depleted uranium munitions remains a subject of debate. Several studies have concluded that there is no evidence of its harmful effects, but these results remain controversial. In fact, depleted uranium shells produce when they hit their target, Uranium dust and metal fragments. According to relevant studies by the International Atomic Energy Agency, “However, the radiological risk of exposure to the population and the environment is not significant, however, in cases where the presence of depleted uranium caused local contamination of the environment in the form of small particles released during the impact.”

On the other hand, the United Nations warns, “If fragments of depleted uranium munitions or complete munitions of this type are found, people who come into direct contact with these materials may experience the effects of radiation”. “Depleted uranium munitions are not considered to be purely nuclear weapons.”However, would like to point out the expert. For Stéphane Audrey, it is a matter of justifying the use of nuclear weapons by supplying depleted uranium, as Moscow does. “propaganda”. “These weapons have nothing in common or equivalent”He insists.