Threatwatch is your early warning system for global dangers, from nuclear peril to deadly viral outbreaks. Debora MacKenzie highlights the threats to civilisation 鈥� and suggests solutions
Is Russia trying to develop a weapon straight out of the classic Cold War era movie Dr. Strangelove? A secret military document leaked on Russian TV this month for a long-distance underwater drone carrying a nuclear bomb designed to dump high levels of radioactive contamination onshore.
Advertisement
Weapons experts suspect the leak was deliberate 鈥� and aimed at US efforts to develop missile defences, something Russia has been worried about for years. On the basis of this leak, it is not possible to determine whether Russia is developing the system, or merely threatening to, never mind whether it can build one as ambitious as the specs suggest.
But the experts are alarmed that Russia鈥檚 highest command is even talking about such a weapon 鈥� and, apparently, letting us know about it. They say it is high time the US addressed Russian fears that missile defence will upend the nuclear balance.
鈥淚f it鈥檚 a deliberate leak, it鈥檚 extraordinarily provocative,鈥� says Daryl Kimball, head of the in Washington DC. 鈥淚 am deeply concerned about who is in charge and whether they have any sense of restraint.鈥�
On 9 November, Russian president Vladimir Putin met with generals to discuss the defence industry and ran on Russian television network NTV. At 1:45 minutes, the camera lingers on one general鈥檚 briefing book, which details an underwater drone called Status-6, due for delivery in 2025 by the Rubin submarine design bureau in St. Petersburg.
of the Program on Science and Global Security at Princeton University says it describes a submarine-launched, nuclear-powered drone that could travel under remote control up to 10,000 kilometres, enter harbours undetected, and detonate its payload 鈥� a megaton thermonuclear device.
Intentional leak
Putin鈥檚 spokesman admitted the leak, and the video was taken off the NTV website. Its clumsiness, and technical errors in the drawing, says Podvig, make many weapons experts believe the leak was intentional.
Just would cause massive economic damage. But this bomb would also inflict 鈥渦nacceptable damage to a country鈥檚 territory by creating areas of wide radioactive contamination that would be unsuitable for military, economic or other activity for long periods of time鈥�.
鈥淭he payload looks like a massive dirty bomb,鈥� says Podvig. Its details aren鈥檛 visible in the video, but in Monterey, California, thinks it would most likely be a nuclear bomb 鈥渟alted鈥� with a metal, such as cobalt, that captures neutrons from the explosion to create large amounts of long-lasting fallout. Detonated in shallow water, it would hit nearby cities with a 鈥渟hower of radioactive slurry鈥�.
This technique for enhancing fallout was the basis of the imagined in the 1964 movie Dr. Strangelove, which gave the salting ingredient the more impressive name 鈥渃obalt thorium G鈥�.
But is the project real? citing unnamed Pentagon sources claims that Russia is building a nuclear-armed drone. 鈥淎s I understand, some elements of this programme do exist,鈥� says Podvig.
Veiled threat
Why leak it? In the NTV report, Putin talks about the need for weapons to circumvent planned US missile defences, which Russia has long feared could neutralise its nuclear deterrent. Status-6 would do that.
鈥淭he nightmare for the Russians is if the US destroys most of their nuclear ballistic missiles with a high-precision conventional weapons strike, then mops up anything left for a counter-strike with missile defence,鈥� says Current US missile defence is not very effective, he says, but Russian strategists have to assume that it will be.
鈥淓ither they are saying they are going to develop this capability, or that they will if the US doesn鈥檛 address their concerns,鈥� says Acton. 鈥淎s Dr. Strangelove said, for a weapon to work as a deterrent you have to reveal that it exists.鈥�
鈥淚 think it is a threat, and clearly intended as such,鈥� says , head of arms control think tank The Ploughshares Fund. All agree that the weapon is unthinkable.
鈥淥rdinary nuclear weapons can at least be used on purely military targets. This has no conceivable purpose other than killing civilians,鈥� says Acton. 鈥淲hether the weapon is real or not,鈥� says 鈥渢he Russian government must distance itself from this.鈥�
There are other ways to address Russia鈥檚 concerns. 鈥淏oth sides could have a serious discussion about measures to make each side more confident in the survivability of its nuclear forces,鈥� says Acton. But lately, he says, Russia has shown little interest in arms control.
Image credit: Russian State TV
