This describes the Multipurpose Oceanic System Status-6, a Russian nuclear weapon under development that worries the United States.
In its Review of the Nuclear Posture (NPR) released on February 2, the Department of Defense included it as one of the threats for which the United States he must modernize his atomic arsenal.
The NPR, which marks the government road map on deterrent weapons, characterizes it as “a new autonomous and submarine intercontinental torpedo, fuel and nuclear weapons.”
Rossikaya Gazeta, the official newspaper of the Russian government, named it the “judgment day device” .
The Status-6 is conceived as an autonomous vehicle capable of crossing the Pacific Ocean and launching a deadly radioactive attack on the west coast of the United States.
Equipped for dives so deep that it is invisible to detection systems, the Status-6 charge would be made up of high-powered nuclear warheads.
“Its detonation would cause a huge radioactive cloud , ” says Pavel Podvig, author of the blog Russian Forces.
The Russian plan is to have what experts define as a “final third wave weapon”.
When both terrestrial and submarine ballistic missiles had been neutralized by a hypothetical enemy attack, read American, Status-6 would have the ability to strike an atomic replica on rival ground.
It must be launched from a submarine suitable for it.
Hans Kristensen, of the Federation of American Scientists, points out that “the United States has the capacity to hunt enemy submersibles, but once the torpedo is launched, the story is different.”
“If such a weapon were to be completed, it would certainly cause enormous damage,” says Podvig.
The doubt is that, if Status-6 will ever be a reality.
Despite being officially recognized as a threat by the Pentagon, experts find many reasons for skepticism.
” It is not clear that it will ever be operational,” says Podvig.
The United States and its allies learned of Russian plans to develop the weapon during a meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his generals in the city of Sochi.
In images broadcast by channels controlled by the Kremlin, a confidential document that one of the soldiers showed to Putin could be seen briefly. The sheet contained drawings and details of the Status-6, designed by Rubin, a builder of nuclear submarines in St. Petersburg.
Soon speculation arose about whether the dissemination of images had been accidental or the result of Moscow’s desire to intimidate rival powers.
Kristensen recalls that “Russians often do these things for years to keep programs from which then nothing comes out.”
Podvig says: “I do not think it will ever be operational in the way it has been described.”
So, why have Pentagon strategists included it in an official document as a real threat to national security?
“Status-6 is technically possible and in the intelligence community they think it’s better to be prepared for something like that,” says Podvig.
Kristensen dismisses the fact that this developing arms system has been one of the reasons for the revision of Washington’s nuclear policy.
“They have used it as one of the frightening examples that the Russians are bad and can get their own weapons to back the argument that the United States needs to upgrade its nuclear weapons.”
According to Bloomberg news agency recently, Trump expects Congress to approve a 7.2% increase in the Defense budget for next year.
In his Address on the State of the Union, he called for building a nuclear arsenal “so strong and powerful that it will prevent any act of aggression from another nation.”
Although the NPR cited in addition to Status-6, “at least two other systems of intercontinental scope,” experts qualify Trump’s arguments about the deterioration of US capabilities.
“The fact that for some time Russia was modernizing its equipment does not mean that the US did not do it, but that it had done it many years before,” says Povdig.
Now, after years of nonproliferation policy in Washington, the race seems about to re-launch.
“Already at the time of the Cold War always mentioned the weapons of the great power to justify their own; that’s how it always works. ”
Source: La Opinion