Russian dictator Putin once again began to scare the world with a “nuclear club”. Today, February 23, giving a speech in honor of the so-called. “Defender of the Fatherland Day”, he recalled the “nuclear potential of Russia”, supposedly updated by 95%. Somewhat earlier, information appeared about the Russian Federation’s desire to transfer its nuclear power even into space.
A wave of interest in the launch of nuclear warheads into orbit was raised on February 14, 2024 by American Congressman Mike Turner, who demanded that US President Joe Biden declassify information on this threat.. Bloomberg published even more alarming data on February 20: The United States notified its allies that Russia could deploy nuclear anti-satellite weapons or “dummy” warheads in space as early as 2024.
A nuclear explosion in space would create a series of devastating effects: a massive energy wave, radiation and a cloud of debris that would circle the Earth and disable all satellites.. Some orbits will become dangerous or unusable for decades. This will damage global communications systems and the global economy.
The Kremlin hastened to assure that it is not planning such a thing.. Russian President Vladimir Putin said on February 20 that Russia is “categorically against the deployment of nuclear weapons in space”. And Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu suggested that the US authorities raised the topic of launching anti-satellite weapons into orbit in order to scare American congressmen and convince them to allocate funds to Ukraine to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia.
Experts point out that the idea of placing warheads in space was studied and rejected back in the 1960s. In those distant times, the USA and the USSR tested nuclear explosions at high altitudes and concluded that such powerful weapons had no place in orbit for several reasons. First, it can make space unusable. Secondly, nuclear warheads left in orbit without adequate protection and human supervision could fall uncontrollably to Earth.. In 1967, the USSR and the USA signed an agreement in which they pledged not to put objects with nuclear weapons into orbit.
Why is Russia again scaring the world with this dangerous idea? The Federation of American Scientists (FAS), which specializes in nuclear safety issues, offers three plausible explanations.
Explanation 1: “asymmetric arms race” with the US
John Wolfsthal, director of global risk at FAS, suggests Russia has been building a “nuclear satellite killer” since the 2000s. At that time, Russia's conventional weapons were weak compared to the military power of the United States, and Vladimir Putin threw a lot of money into the Russian nuclear complex.
“This funding has led to several very innovative developments, including the Poseidon long-range underwater nuclear torpedo, as well as the Burevestnik nuclear-powered cruise missile, capable of flying for many days and attacking targets from unexpected angles.”. Both of these programs were conceived decades ago during the Cold War.. After the collapse of the USSR they were frozen. But both systems have gained new support under Putin, who has touted Poseidon and Burevestnik in many of his speeches, writes John Wolfsthal.
The expert believes that the “nuclear satellite killer” was gathering dust in the archives of the USSR along with “Poseidon” and “Burevestnik” and at the same time was revived by Putin to eliminate the significant imbalance of military forces with the United States. Since US military operations rely heavily on satellites, having a nuclear bomb in space would increase Russia's chances of repelling Western attacks.
Details of this project have recently surfaced as it nears completion.. Therefore, according to John Wolfsthal, Russia is unlikely to be planning to blow up anything in space. Historically, Moscow, Washington and Beijing pursue nuclear programs because they can, and only then figure out how to apply the resulting developments.
Explanation 2: Nuclear “ Insurance Policy “
The second probable motive for placing a bomb in orbit could be the fear that the United States will accumulate enough nuclear deterrents and attack Russia first. Fearing such an outcome, the Putin regime, according to FAS analysts, has adopted the Orwellian strategy of “de-escalation by escalation.”
“Russian fear also seems to be driving the development of Poseidon and Burevestnik, since both of these systems are more suitable for delivering a retaliatory strike rather than a first strike. None of these weapons are capable of disarming the United States. Therefore, in Russia they are probably considered nuclear insurance policies in case Washington decides to launch a disarming first strike. Unable to prevent this, Russia made sure that it retained enough nuclear weapons for a retaliatory strike,” FAS argues.
Explanation 3: Economic hit to the US
Putin’s third motive is the desire to gain the opportunity to paralyze the US economy at the start of a direct conflict with Moscow. A nuclear bomb in space is a logical step in the sequence of measures and countermeasures used by the United States and Russia in the arms race and deterrence.
“The US has invested in creating constellations of many small military satellites. This could increase Russian interest in systems capable of disabling large swarms of spacecraft, rather than kinetic ASAT weapons,” FAS concludes.
With the threat of an explosion in space, Putin may try to force the United States to withdraw troops in the event of a conflict.. Also, a nuclear bomb in orbit is suitable for delivering a preventive strike if Russia and China decide to launch military aggression against NATO or the United States.
The appearance of powerful weapons of aggression in orbit can cause alarm in the United States and calls for urgent increases in the protection of space assets from attacks. This may require an astronomical amount of money, since, according to FAS, the United States will only be completely safe from an in-orbit nuclear explosion if it demonstrates its ability to quickly launch and replace all critical satellites.
The United States now spends $900 billion a year on defense in general and $50 billion on nuclear weapons, mostly on those that experts consider obsolete and unnecessary.. In particular, from 2015 to 2022, almost $70 billion was pumped into the dubious Sentinel ground-launched intercontinental missile program.