Russia already has nuclear warheads on its own soil that are close to Ukraine and NATO countries, but by basing some in Belarus, the Kremlin appears to be trying to accentuate its nuclear threat and bolster its nuclear deterrent.
Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin, made reference to such a site early last year, saying Russia would soon be completing the construction of “special storage for tactical nuclear weapons” in Belarus.
The New York Times analyzed satellite imagery and photos, and spoke with nuclear weapons and arms control experts, to track the new construction, which started in March 2023.
The site is 120 miles north of the Ukrainian border at a military depot next to the town of Asipovichy. Some of the recently built structures there have features that are unique to nuclear storage facilities at bases inside Russia. For example, a new, highly secure area is surrounded by three layers of fencing, in addition to the existing security perimeter of the entire base. Another telltale sign is a covered loading area connected to what appears to be a concealed Soviet-era underground bunker.
Turns out Ukraine should never have given up their nuclear weapons. Russia broke the deal anyway. And expecting a ‘we won’t invade you’ deal to last in perpetuity after they gave up their leverage was silly anyway.
Ukraine neither had control of those nuclear weapons, nor the ability to maintain them. It is probably for the best for humanity that they were removed. This is acknowledged by ICANW.
Nah, fuck that. That was likely the final dumb decision that Ukraine will ever make if they learned from history. There is a reason nukes work well to deter bullies: you can respond back with disproportionate force to make them regret their decisions.
Did you just not read anything in my post? A nuke you can’t use isn’t a deterrent. It’s a risk to yourself.
Where Ukraine messed up was getting a security agreement and not a security guarantee in the Budapest Memorandum.
Shhhh! Don’t tell anyone!
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The New York Times analyzed satellite imagery and photos, and spoke with nuclear weapons and arms control experts, to track the new construction, which started in March 2023.
Hans Kristensen of the Federation of American Scientists, who has analyzed the site, said that the nuclear developments in Belarus “appear designed to unnerve NATO’s easternmost member states, but will not give Russia a significant new military advantage in the region.”
On Tuesday, the Belarusian defense minister told state media that an inspection had begun of the Iskander forces and other nuclear weapons delivery systems.
William Moon, an independent consultant and former official with the Pentagon’s Defense Threat Reduction Agency, told The Times that the design of the Asipovichy upgrades, with triple fencing, one main entry and an emergency exit, resembles the Russian nuclear warhead storage sites he has seen in person.
The Soviet Union began basing nuclear missile brigades in and around the town in the 1960s, according to William Alberque, who has been a director at the think tank International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) and a Pentagon and NATO official.
In a separate, tree-covered northern section, four bunkers are visible, with a walled compound farther north — the exact spot where the current construction can be seen.
The original article contains 1,321 words, the summary contains 208 words. Saved 84%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Why publicize this instead of handing it to government officials? The NYT is really doing some weird shit recently.
A U.S. State Department spokesperson would not say if the United States was monitoring any particular site in Belarus, but said the department is keeping a close eye on the situation in order “to ensure Russia maintains control of its weapons in the event of any deployment to Belarus and upholds its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.” An April 2024 State Department report said that the U.S. would not change its nuclear posture in response to the developments in Belarus.
What in the article makes you think that governments don’t know about this? I’d gamble that there’s about a 0% chance that this is news to military intelligence.
What in the article makes you think that governments don’t know about this?
What about my comment makes you think that I thought that?
You suggested that they should have given this info to the government instead of publishing it. That implies you thought the government didn’t know about it.
It implies that there’s no way for us to know for sure but that we should rather inform governments instead of the public about those kind of information.
Well now the government knows? That’s assuming they didn’t know and / or haven’t been informed ahead of publication. I don’t see where the danger in having this information available publicly is?
Because now Belarus / Russia knows that they know.
I imagine if the NY Times is putting it out there it’s probably something the US government wants out there.
That’s not how a free press works.
Yeah it isn’t. But we’re talking about the NY Times
It is if they want access to breaking news ahead of other news organizations.
Why not? It’s not like it matters. If they actually try to use nukes every is likely to die anyway. It doesn’t really matter if NATO knows exactly where they are and of course they know, and of course Russia knows that NATO knows.
But it’s interesting from a political stance that Russia has nukes in Belarus.
Would be very interesting if they manage to defenestrate Lukashenko and come up with an actual democracy…Vlad waking up to a neighbor with his nukes might give them pause
If Lukashenko were to be assassinated, Russia would likely just formally annex the territory. Lukashenko already lost an election to the opposition, and Putin just kept him there anyways. No chance the opposition could take over without first defeating the Russian military.
Wouldn’t matter a nuke is nothing without precision control.
