Confusing collision: Interpretation of the USS "Connecticut" nuclear submarine collision accident

What is behind the confusing "collision"——Military experts interpret the USS "Connecticut" nuclear submarine collision accident

　　Xinhua News Agency, Beijing, November 4 -

　　Xinhua News Agency reporters Zhang Ruijie and Guo Mingzhi

　　Recently, a spokesperson for the US Navy’s Seventh Fleet stated that the investigation into the "Connecticut" nuclear submarine collision incident has ended. The result of the investigation is that the nuclear submarine hit "an unknown undersea mountain."

Earlier, the US media also disclosed satellite photos of the "Connecticut" nuclear submarine docking at the Guam base after the collision accident. The photos only showed the portion of the "Connecticut" nuclear submarine above the waterline.

As for the important issues that the international community is most concerned about, the United States has never given a detailed explanation.

Why did the United States cover up and say nothing about the nuclear submarine collision accident?

What is hidden and exposed behind the confusing "collision"?

Recently, a reporter from Xinhua News Agency interviewed military experts Zhou Weizheng and Luo Xi, and analyzed relevant issues.

Reporter: Why is the US accident investigation lacking sincerity and disappointing?

　　Zhou Weizheng: The US investigation into the nuclear submarine collision accident is unprofessional and opaque, and it has not responded to the concerns and doubts of the international community.

A collision between a nuclear submarine and a seamount is to some extent more dangerous than a collision with other ships.

The mass and volume of the seamount are larger, and the impact intensity will be correspondingly greater. The hull of the nuclear submarine may be severely deformed or even broken, or the missiles or torpedoes carried on the nuclear submarine may explode.

The most serious consequence is that the working nuclear reactor is too late to shut down. It may be unable to cool down or the control system may be damaged, which will eventually lead to a nuclear explosion.

Even if a nuclear explosion is not triggered, nuclear fuel or nuclear waste water may leak due to damage to the hull, which will cause devastating damage to the ecology of the entire South China Sea.

Reporter: Why is the operation of the US military uncharacteristically uncharacteristic?

　　Luo Xi: Up to now, the US military has been deliberately delaying and concealing the details of the "Connecticut" collision in the South China Sea.

This obscure attitude has already aroused more questions in the international community.

The satellite images currently exposed only show the part above the waterline of the "Connecticut". Whether there is any damage below the waterline, especially the location of the nuclear reactor, has not been announced so far, and the risk of nuclear leakage cannot be ruled out.

　　Zhou Weizheng: On the one hand, the US military kept saying that there was no nuclear leak. On the other hand, after the nuclear submarine collision accident, it sent a WC-135 nuclear material reconnaissance plane to the South China Sea to carry out flight activities.

The purpose of this reconnaissance plane is to collect atmospheric samples and detect the presence of radioactive materials.

Its appearance shows that the United States itself is very guilty, and the accident has been serious enough to cause it to worry.

Reporter: The United States has maintained a high-density military presence in the South China Sea for a long time and frequently causes troubles. What does it intend to do?

What impact and harm will it bring to the regional security situation?

　　Zhou Weizheng: The South China Sea was originally calm and the cooperation and exchange mechanism of the countries in the region worked well. The United States sent ships frequently to cause troubles in the South China Sea to deliberately provoke problems and contradictions, artificially create tensions, and undermine the upward development of the region, and achieve deterrence. The purpose of national development and maintenance of hegemony.

　　The United States maintains a high-density military presence in the South China Sea, which has become a source of risk for maritime traffic safety, seriously threatening the peace and stability of the South China Sea region and the safety of international shipping routes.

As long as the United States persists in the so-called zero-sum game and the Cold War mentality of deterrence, its military operations in the South China Sea will not converge, and the regional situation will be difficult to calm. Security incidents such as the "Connecticut" collision accident will naturally return. Will happen again.

Reporter: The nuclear submarine collision accident and the recent support of the United States and Britain to build nuclear submarines in Australia, etc., reflect what changes in the United States' "nuclear policy"?

　　Luo Xi: From a series of recent incidents, we can see that the status of nuclear weapons systems in the overall strategic deployment of the US military is increasing day by day.

This will result in the lowering of the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons will become "available, usable, and easy to use" weapons. The risk of nuclear proliferation will increase and the risk of nuclear conflict will increase. The possibility of conflicts between countries escalating to nuclear conflicts will further increase.

　　The United States has always claimed to be the founder and defender of the current international nuclear security order, but driven by competition among major powers, the principles of "absolute priority" and "power supremacy" have once again become the dominant thinking of the US nuclear arsenal construction and nuclear arms control diplomacy. The international nuclear security order and the international nuclear non-proliferation regime, which should have demonstrated the principles of safety, fairness, and morality, are gradually showing the drawbacks of fragmentation, instrumentalization, and tacticalization.

Reporter: How to understand the essence of the US nuclear non-proliferation policy is "selective nuclear proliferation"?

What impact will this have on the international nuclear safety order?

　　Luo Xi: In recent years, the focus of US foreign strategy has shifted from cooperation among major powers to competition among major powers. The focus of its nuclear policy issues has shifted from nuclear security to nuclear weapons modernization, and nuclear arms control diplomacy has more of a tendency toward “instrumentalism” and “pragmatism”.

On the one hand, willfully withdraw from international multilateral arms control treaties such as the Intermediate-Range-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, the Open Skies Treaty, the Arms Trade Treaty, and the Iran Nuclear Agreement; On the issue of non-proliferation, a "two-sided" policy with "selective" support and "discriminatory" suppression as the content is pursued.

Aiming at opponents or "unfriendly" countries, the United States routinely uses powerful means such as political isolation, economic sanctions, and military suppression to "extreme pressure."

As for allies or partner countries, the United States often adopts a "selective" support policy, using political commitment, forward deployment, nuclear material and nuclear technology sharing, and nuclear consultations to provide extended deterrence protection to allies or partner countries.

For many years, the United States, Britain and Australia have regarded themselves as leaders and defenders of the international nuclear non-proliferation system, but the nuclear submarine cooperation between the three countries has fully exposed the hypocrisy and "double standards" of these three countries on the issue of nuclear non-proliferation. .

　　The United States has not assumed its due responsibility to promote the world's nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation process. Instead, it has carried out selective nuclear proliferation, planned nuclear research and development, and premeditated nuclear deployment. On the one hand, the international nuclear non-proliferation regime is facing the danger of collapse. On the other hand, the risk of regional nuclear arms race and nuclear crisis escalation has risen sharply.

The United States’ pursuit of actual nuclear concepts, a nuclear policy full of Cold War mentality, and leaky nuclear management have made it the greatest source of danger to the international nuclear security order.