#4
Nezavisimoye Voennoye Obozreniye
No. 23
July 2002
[translation from RIA Novosti for personal use only]
HOW WILL RUSSIA SPEND THE $20 BILLION PROMISED IN CANADA?

The recent G8 summit in the Canadian town of Kananaskis decided to allocate substantial funds to the programme for eliminating Russian stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction. Deputy chairman of the State Duma Defense Committee Alexei ARBATOV talks with Salavat SULEIMANOV about weapons elimination and appropriation of the money.

Question: The G8 summit in Canada gave its principal consent to the world powers' appropriation of $20 billion to Russia within 10 years for eliminating weapons of mass destruction. What is your assessment of the agreements?

Answer: The details have not been disclosed, but the sum itself - $20 billion - is quite impressive. If the money is used sensibly and purposefully, we will certainly solve most of our problems in eliminating weapons of mass destruction.

Question: What kinds of these weapons, in your opinion, are to be destroyed, biological (bacteriological), chemical or nuclear?

Answer: I don't think biological weapons are at issue. We are supposed to have eliminated them quite long ago. The corresponding convention was signed as early as in the beginning of the 1970s. Russia definitely has some materials for producing vaccines, including those for counteracting biological weapons.

But this information is top secret, as in any other country. And it is absolutely clear that we do not have many of these weapons and thus do not need foreign help in destroying them.

The situation is quite different with chemical weapons. Russia has already applied for a 5-year extension for fulfilling the convention on chemical weapons elimination. In compliance with the convention, the states have a right for this extension, provided they have objective reasons for this. Although the West is interested in our eliminating chemical weapons without ecological catastrophes and consequences, we are even more interested in it. Our chemical ammunition and tanks have rusted.

Thus, the elimination of chemical weapons of mass destruction is above all the question of this country's ecological safety. And we should be thankful to the West for its help and use the means efficiently and purposefully.

As to nuclear weapons, the situation is a little different here. These weapons, even scrapped ones, do not pose a direct threat to the environment. But they require substantial funds for permanent protection and storage. Their transportation to the places of utilization will also be expensive, as it will be large in scale and number, while we do not have enough high-tech safe containers and special carriages.

Thus, the main part of the financial help from the West will be used for eliminating chemical weapons, where the situation is bordering on a crisis, and the rest will be spent on utilizing nuclear weapons.

As to tactical nuclear weapons, there are at present no serious agreements binding on Russia.

It is clear, though, that large amounts of tactical nuclear weapons are becoming obsolete. They must be transported to specialized enterprises, where their "filling" can be utilized.

Thus, we will face the same problems, that is, storage and maintenance, transportation and utilization. But for the help, we would have had to find the means for these purposes in the Russian budget, cutting down the salaries of teachers, doctors and servicemen or refraining from raising pensions.

Question: What about the nuclear submarines utilization?

Answer: This is really a colossal problem. It is still not clear whether the West will allocate money for utilizing nuclear submarines, as they are not directly included in the class of weapons of mass destruction, but I hope the programme will embrace them as well.

The Northern and Pacific fleets have about 150 scrapped nuclear submarines. More than 100 of them still have unloaded nuclear reactors and fuel on board, as there is no place to store them. Building nuclear waste repositories in places of submarines' deployment requires large funds. I hope that both Europe and Japan will show their interest in the matter, as the problem concerns them directly.

Question: The defense minister and the nuclear industry minister have recently visited the nuclear test ground on the Novaya Zemlya. Do you think it is Russia's response to the recent information of the US plans to resume nuclear tests or does it intend to store nuclear waste there?

Answer: I don't think so. As far as I know, the USA does not plan to conduct new nuclear tests. At least, the decision on their resumption has not been taken. The Americans just keep their testing ground ready in case such a decision is adopted. In response we decided to check the state of the Russian testing ground in case we might need it in the future.

Building a nuclear waste storage on the Novaya Zemlya would be irrational. It would be extremely expensive, as besides construction, it will need maintenance, control and protection.

Instead, the Russian government has decided to build a storage in the Chelyabinsk region, near the Mayak enterprise.

BACK TO THE TOP    #216 CONTENTS    NEXT ARTICLE