#12
BBC Monitoring
Russian expert says USA mulling use of small nuclear
weapons
Source: Strana.Ru web site, Moscow, in Russian 10 Jan 02
The USA wants to resume nuclear testing because it plans to deploy nuclear
devices in conjunction with its National Missile Defence programme and,
additionally, is preparing world public opinion for the use of battlefield
nuclear weapons in the developing world, according to Russian defence
expert and former senior Defence Ministry official Leonid Ivashov. The
regional use of tactical nuclear weapons fits in with the USA's strategy
for tackling the global problem of dwindling resources and overpopulation.
According to Ivashov, these plans must be countered by a strong and
regenerated Russia. The following is the text of the interview, conducted
by Viktor Sokolov and published by the Russian Strana.Ru web site on 10
January under the headline "Leonid Ivashov: 'USA planning to shoot down
missiles with nuclear weapons'". The subheadings have been added
editorially:
Col Gen Leonid Ivashov, vice-president of the Academy of Geopolitical
Problems and former chief of the Defence Ministry's main administration for
international military cooperation, believes that Washington is being
prompted to resume underground nuclear tests by the National Missile
Defence [NMD] plans and a desire to accustom the world to the use of
tactical battlefield nuclear weapons in its own interests.
[Viktor Sokolov] The US press reports that the USA could resume underground
nuclear tests. What do you think will come of this and how will Russia
respond to it?
Missile defence tests
[Ivashov] America wants to withdraw from the moratorium which the two
presidents declared on nuclear tests. The reason for this is that the USA's
NMD programme has been launched, its initial stages have been funded and it
is under way. Withdrawal from the ABM treaty was, in fact, an element of
the programme. However, the tests conducted by the Americans have been both
successful and unsuccessful. Moreover, the successful tests of antimissiles
using real targets have demonstrated that there is no guarantee that the
antimissiles will hit ballistic missiles. These successful tests were more
political in nature, because the missile was almost directed towards the
antimissile; the target was directed towards the weapon.
[Sokolov] Not the other way around? Do you mean that the tests were not
technically successful?
[Ivashov] That's right; it was just that a result was needed in order to
preserve political prestige in this situation. As for the technology, it is
far from perfection. And it should be borne in mind that, even if they
achieve a hit rate of 0.7-0.8, this will not provide a total guarantee of
protection. Second, it should be borne in mind that, in this situation, NMD
as a whole must be looked at slightly differently. Other sides, including
Russia and China, will definitely work on the problem of overcoming
antimissile defence. Such experience exists in Russia. Pretty successful
experience. So the Americans are evidently coming to the conclusion that,
in order to provide a stronger guarantee that the target - ICBMs - will be
hit, small nuclear weapons must be used. But, in order to launch into this
process now, tests are needed, not just using modelling but also actual
explosions. This is one reason why the USA wants to withdraw from the
moratorium.
Battlefield weapons
The second reason, it seems to me, is along the lines that the Americans
are striving to get the world used to the idea of the necessity or
possibility of their using battlefield nuclear weapons, which will also
have a colossal effect and lead to a rejection of nuclear war against the
USA. It is envisaged that they could be used in such situations as Tora
Bora, in caves and so on. But the possibility of such weapons being used in
other local conflicts cannot be ruled out.
[Sokolov] Are we now entering an era when powerful nuclear weapons will
recede into the background and perhaps disappear altogether, while tactical
nuclear weapons will become the usual form of weapons and will pollute the
earth to such an extent that we will all eventually disappear from it?
Population worries
[Ivashov] That is a bigger question, you know. But if we consider the US
national security strategy in the next century, the Americans regard the
exhaustion of Planet Earth's resources and rapid population growth as two
of the prime problems. They predict that the earth's population will
increase by 1.1bn by 2015. On the one hand, resources are being exhausted;
on the other, the population is growing! Moreover, it is envisaged that the
population will grow in the East and South, but not in the West. So what
the USA is now doing in various regions of the world is evidently intended
to direct countries in these regions along a course of regressive
development. In this way, perhaps, they hope at a stroke to resolve both
the problem of reducing consumption and the problem of population. If my
conclusion is correct, and I am sure that it is, these nuclear weapons will
indeed become battlefield weapons. This is what they are trying to get us
used to.
[Sokolov] Do you think that everyone will get used to it?
Genocidal policy
[Ivashov] The world community is surprisingly easily getting used to
actions that would have seemed barbaric a few decades ago, to the US
genocidal policy. Remember how strikes were conducted in the Balkans, and
how the Near East situation developed. A similar situation is now being
promoted in the Afghanistan region and in the conflict between India and
Pakistan. And the world perceives this as an ordinary phenomenon. Virtually
without the consent of the UN Security Council, which used to be
impossible, military force is used, whole territories are occupied, whole
states are subjected to strikes and whole regions subjected to actions. The
world is getting used to this. The world seems to have bent down under this
military might - US military pressure.
[Sokolov] What response could Russia make in this situation and can it
respond at all?
Regenerated Russia
[Ivashov] Russia has great potential to counteract this policy. First,
Russia should have a policy, above all a foreign policy in the following
areas: West, East, South. Work must be done in all directions, as they say.
This should be an autonomous policy based on the national interests of the
Russian state. These interests are that we should be friends and cooperate
with India, Pakistan, Iran, the Arab world and, of course, the West. Above
all, this should be a strategy or model for Russia's geopolitical behaviour.
Second, Russia should have an economic development strategy. And we must
not change this economic strategy - which Russia does not have yet but will
do - for the sake of loans or any instantaneous tactical success.
Furthermore, Russia should have a spiritual regeneration strategy. This
should be a comprehensive strategic plan for the regeneration of a powerful
great Russian state. This will be our response.
Next Issue
January 13, 2002:
#6020
- Back to the Top -