With no evidence to support the allegations, US DIA officials are accusing Russia of potentially having the capability of violating the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. Russia ratified this treaty in 2000, and the US has never done so.
There is a global system that would immediately detect a nuclear test,
which led Russian MP Vladimir Shamanov to mock the US military for
“failing professionalism” as he noted that nuclear tests cannot be
carried out secretly.
The State Department defended the DIA allegation, for which again no
evidence exists, on the grounds that the US believes Russia “routinely”
disregards its international obligations. That a major nuclear state
like Russia could conduct a test is not in question, of course, the
treaty simply forbids them from doing so, which again, they haven’t.
These allegations are potentially dangerous, as the US has in the past
started accusing Russia of a violation, and just kept repeated the claim
until they decide to launch some major diplomatic fight with Russia
over the allegation, on the grounds that they’ve repeated it so long
that everyone in the US just assumes its true.
The arrogance of US officials is embarrassing.
No, Trump et al want to get out of the test ban.
We aren’t in the test ban!
Translation: the US is working on low level nuclear weapons.
Ir more specifically, trying to catch up with Russia’s miniturized reactors, 100 times smaller then the reactor used in subs. The miniature is powering Poseidon ocean scouring probe/drone. The same one to be used for cruise missile of indefinite range. Russia did not need tests to do that. US is starting at a different place, and will need it. Low yield bombs are for what? To achieve devastation and poisoning of environment — in small way? What about retaliation — in a big way? Danger to our cities? Sounds like plans of mice and men.,
AFAIK there is a desire to extend the arsenal with low yield nukes , with lower threshold to use them, which would be fielded against china.
Reactors are not bombs.
I unerstand the difference. I was just speculating on the possible objective for testing — beyond the usual whining about others being bad.
I was only speculating on the current technological deficit — both on missile technoligy and submarine probes. I would think that bridging the gap would make sense.
But if I am wrong, and the ibjective is straight forward — produce a mini nuke — than this is a waste if time and money.
As if China or Russia would just take it — no response. The defence ststems are by far more developed today, and there is a reason countries like Turkey and India are risking US wrath to get better missile/aircraft defence.
What I am saying that use if such weapon would bring a response, and our cities are not defended. What is the point in developing a nuclear weapon — small or not — when retaliation is guaranteed?
The allegations are so serious they must be true. Especially since the USA would never abrogate any treaty.
Tell lies hundreds of times, and it becomes truth. At least, a noise in public perception. That is all that is needed. But this has become a norm. Big lies, all the time, 24x7x356.
This means US is planning nuclear test and needs excuse.
‘Believes’? Let’s call it ‘makes it up’.