To modernize the US nuclear arsenal, the Pentagon needs to focus on developing improved warheads instead of the usual doctrine of modernizing delivery systems. This was stated by Peter Fante, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Issues at a nuclear deterrence summit.

According to the official, the Pentagon and the Ministry of Energy of the United States should coordinate their efforts to develop a production base for the development of "universal, improved nuclear warheads" by 2040. Otherwise, warns Peter Fant, Washington will lag behind the level of technological development of its potential adversaries, Defense News portal quoted him as saying.

“At a time when the B-2 bomber could just fly in and drop a free-fall bomb, the bomb itself could be far from ideal,” said Fant at the annual nuclear deterrence conference held February 12 at the Pentagon.

But in the context of modern air defense and missile defense systems, “when the achievement of a target by means of delivery through missile and air defense systems may not be guaranteed, it may be necessary to look again at free-fall bombs and how they achieve the goal,” the Pentagon official added.

The current program of modernizing the nuclear arsenal of the Pentagon should last until 2092, but given the rapid pace of development of modern technologies, it is impossible to predict what level of development the enemy will be at, Fent notes. At the same time, the United States cannot modernize its nuclear infrastructure on an annual basis.

New concept

Reorientation to improve missile warheads will require closer Pentagon cooperation with the US National Nuclear Security Administration. This agency is part of the Department of Energy and is engaged in the development and maintenance of US nuclear warheads. Fanta also noted that the technological characteristics and capabilities of each new ammunition should be jointly agreed by the Ministries of Defense and Energy at all stages of the production cycle.

“We need to think about the internal elements of weapons and means of delivery. Meditate on detonators, shells, and outer shells of warheads. We are thinking about how to make them sturdy and flexible by default, with the possibility of using them in the new system, when it becomes known that it will be like that, ”Defense News quotes Peter Fant.

Given the general trend of US nuclear rearmament within the framework of the Trump nuclear doctrine adopted by the administration, it is to be expected that the new warheads will be less powerful. About this RT told the chief editor of the magazine "Arsenal of the Fatherland" Viktor Murakhovsky.

“In the US, there is a tendency to reduce power. For example, there is a replacement of warheads on Trident ballistic missiles with less powerful ones. So an increase in power can hardly be expected. The nuclear warhead technology remains the same, ”the expert explained in an interview with RT.

  • Trident II rocket launch
  • Reuters
  • © US Navy / Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Ronald Gutridge

Along with the development of new warheads, the Pentagon will also modernize its means of delivering nuclear ammunition, said Yury Rogulev, director of the Franklin Roosevelt Foundation for the Study of the US State University at Moscow State University, in an interview with RT.

“It is not difficult to guess that nuclear warheads are manufactured for the respective carriers. The fact that they are going to modernize the warheads indicates that they are considering various carriers, existing or prospective, ”the expert explained.

Rogulev stressed that the Pentagon’s policy of modernizing its nuclear arsenal can be interpreted as an attempt to “catch up” with Russia, which is actively developing hypersonic weapons.

Cost expectations

At the end of January of this year, the Congressional Budget Office issued a report in which it was reported that $ 494 billion would be required for the modernization of American nuclear forces in 2019-2028.

The modernization and development of weapons carriers will require $ 234 billion. Improving nuclear submarines will cost $ 107 billion, ground launchers - $ 61 billion, long-range bombers - $ 49 billion, for other carriers - $ 16 billion.

Another $ 106 billion is expected to be spent on the development of nuclear infrastructure, this item includes, among other things, the costs of weapons manufacturing and scientific research.

The issue of upgrading nuclear infrastructure in the United States has been raised repeatedly. Thus, in 2016, the report of the American Accounting Chamber indicated that the main component of the Strategic Automatic Command and Control System (SACCS) is the IBM Series / 1 computer, released in the late 1970s.

  • IBM Series / 1 as a component of the Strategic Automatic Command and Control System
  • © Wikimedia commons / US General Accountability Office

The SACCS, which controls US nuclear forces, was controlled by 8-inch floppy disks. The report noted that it is almost impossible to get spare parts for the system and it is necessary to make them to order in single copies.

According to Rogulyov, high defense spending is a common situation for the Pentagon and the US military industry, but it is possible that additional funds will be required during the implementation of the project to modernize nuclear warheads.

“Excess budget is a typical picture for the United States. It is difficult to imagine a new type of weapon that would fit within the stated framework. There are egregious cases - for example, the F-35 fighter has exceeded all possible means allocated for its development, and still needs modernization, ”explained Yuri Rogulev.

In pursuit of hypersound

The technological task of the United States is to establish parity with Russia, given its superiority in the field of hypersonic weapons, said political scientist Alexander Asafov in a conversation with RT. To this end, the Pentagon will develop missiles with shared warheads, similar to Russian systems.

“If we proceed from this logic, their task is to create new types of weapons or improve old ones. These weapons should be similar to Russian Sarmat-type missiles, the expert noted.

The Trump administration has decided to lift all restrictions on the deployment of nuclear weapons from the United States, and it can be expected that denunciation of other agreements on nuclear weapons will follow the exit from the INF Treaty, he explained.

“Taking into account Trump’s statements that START III is the worst deal for America, his goal is to withdraw from this treaty by 2021. I think that after we begin to live in a new reality, when the development of conventional and non-conventional weapons will hold back almost nothing, if there are no new restrictive treaties, then the United States, of course, will try to take a leading position in this world. They are preparing drafts of serious weapons that will not fall under START III, and are preparing to exit START III, ”Asafov said.

In addition, the expert notes, the Pentagon needs to justify huge budgets to US citizens and at the same time promise new injections to military industrialists.

“For Trump, the injection of money into the US defense industry, whose representatives supported him in the elections, is an opportunity to enlist their support in future elections, as well as an attempt to restart the economy. The goal is to show that America is not weaker than Russia, that it is not at all afraid of either “Poseidon” or “Dagger”. The United States seeks to show that they are developing their own, perhaps more serious, than the Russian ones. The US National Security strategy spells opposition to a revanchist power, Russia, and they follow this logic in defending their defense budgets, ”concluded Alexander Asafov.