In an interview with TASS, he noted that the possible deployment of nuclear weapons looks strange in conditions when the British continue to have, according to their own assessments, “reliable and sufficient” carriers of nuclear weapons in the form of submarines, which “are distinguished by a high degree of survivability.”
“A reasonable question arises: aren’t these weapons viewed rather as a contribution to a potential collection of disparate forces and capabilities of NATO countries for use against Russia in some kind of crazy “first strike”?” - said the diplomat.
He recalled that there are already six US nuclear weapons sites in Europe, and the Russian military will take into account such a provocative step on the part of Great Britain and the United States.
Any “ranting” about the need in the 21st century to defend island Great Britain from Russia by placing nuclear weapons there for bomber aircraft does not stand up to criticism, the interlocutor emphasized.
“If in London they want to show in this way that they see us as a real military threat to themselves, then it is simply absurd to try to stop it by creating a compact and stationary object from their island, which will only add to the list of priority targets for destruction in the event of a serious conflict,” Ermakov added.
On January 26, the British newspaper The Telegraph, citing the Pentagon Papers, reported that the United States was planning to deploy nuclear weapons in Great Britain for the first time in 15 years. According to the publication, the warheads are planned to be placed at the Royal Air Force Lakenheath airbase. The Pentagon subsequently refused to confirm or deny such plans.