Illustrative Image
The aim of the measure would be to increase the sense of “security” of European allies which have adhered to American anti-Russian paranoia.
Written by Lucas Leiroz, researcher in Social Sciences at the Rural Federal University of Rio de Janeiro; geopolitical consultant.
According to recent reports in the American media, the US is planning to deploy new nuclear weapons in Europe. The decision would apparently be “justified” by the current emergence of new tensions on the continent, but such an action would undoubtedly undermine local security and escalate NATO-Russia friction to higher levels. However, Washington really seems resolute in insisting on an interventionist foreign policy and, unfortunately, European states are willing to collaborate with such plans.
On October 26, Politico reported, citing sources, that a B61-12 atomic bomb was being prepared by US forces to be transported to NATO bases in Europe. According to information, this modern version of the nuclear equipment was meant to be announced in the spring of 2023, however the American authorities speeded the project to December of this year. As evidence, the newspaper mentions telegrams that would have been sent by American officials to their European counterparts, as well as secret meetings.
The newspaper believes that the move to “quicken” the program is related to current events in Ukraine and the increasing use of nuclear rhetoric by the parties involved in the conflict. Pentagon’s sources interviewed by the journalists, however, are cautious in linking the two cases and claim that the American plans succeeded exactly as expected, with no “rush” or direct influence of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict in the situation.
For example, the Pentagon spokesman Brig. Gen. Patrick Ryder told Politico: “While we aren’t going to discuss details of our nuclear arsenal, modernization of US B61 nuclear weapons has been underway for years and plans to safely and responsibly swap out older weapons for the upgraded B61-12 versions is part of a long-planned and scheduled modernization effort. It is in no way linked to current events in Ukraine and was not sped up in any way”.
In fact, the plan to modernize the B61-12 weapons is not so recent. In December 2021, the Pentagon received reports from representatives of some companies linked to the US military-industrial complex with a number of technical proposals for the bomb upgrade and the procedures have been operated continuously since then. This bomb was initially developed in 1968 and has already undergone several upgrades. The objective now would be to make it capable of being launched by B2 and B21 strategic bombers, as well as F-15, F-16, F-35 and Tornado fighter jets, which would significantly boost the combat capability of this type of equipment.
However, the fact that the projects were already underway before the start of the Russian special military operation in Ukraine does not mean that the decision to send such weapons to Europe in a shorter period of time is not related in any way to the conflict. Some other sources claim that it is more likely that the American objective is really related to the Ukrainian crisis, but not in the sense of “deterring” Russia, but of helping the Europeans, who would be feeling “threatened” by Moscow.
For example, Tom Collina, director of policy at the disarmament group Ploughshares Fund, said: “My guess is it is aimed more towards NATO than Russia (…) There are [older] B61s already there. The Russians know that. They work just fine. The new ones will be newer, but it’s not really that much of a difference. But it may be a way to assure the allies when they are feeling particularly threatened by Russia”.
This assessment seems consistent with the facts. Europe is the part most affected by American anti-Russian paranoia and has taken extremely anti-strategic decisions to deal with the supposed “Russian threat”. European leaders have been irresponsibly encouraging the escalation of tensions against Moscow, pledging to increase NATO’s military strength in Eastern Europe and even promising to “annihilate the Russian army” if Moscow reacts to the Ukrainian nuclear provocations.
In this sense, it is very likely that European authorities have actually required “nuclear protection” from the US, leading Washington to accelerate the program in a few months and deploy recent weapons on the European continent. However, from a strategic point of view, this type of measure sounds absolutely irrational.
The more American nuclear weapons in Europe, the more NATO’s plans to “encircle” Russia will be met and, consequently, the more Moscow will seek to strengthen its defensive forces. The simplest way to guarantee European security is through the sovereignty of the European States, which must disassociate themselves from NATO’s war plans and seek friendly relations with Moscow instead of fomenting foreign interventionism on the continent.
