Last week, Minsk confirmed its participation in nuclear exercises launched by Russia. “Now more than ever, we are determined to respond to any threat to both our country and the State of the Union” [c’est à dire la Russie et la Biélorussie, ndlr] “, declared General Viktor Khrenin, the Belarusian Minister of Defense.
This announcement was not surprising given that, in accordance with an agreement sealed in 2022, Russia said it had sent tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus. According to Alexander Lukashenko, the Belarusian president, last May, these weapons would be implemented by Iskander ballistic missiles and Su-25 “Frogfoot” attack aircraft. The conditional is appropriate because, to date, no conclusive evidence has been put forward to confirm such statements.
This is also what the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute underlines [SIPRI] in its annual assessment of the world’s nuclear arsenals. Generally speaking, this study highlights that there is “less and less transparency” about American and Russian strategic forces, particularly since the start of the war in Ukraine. And also note that, at the same time, “public announcements around nuclear sharing agreements have gained in importance”.
This lack of transparency is mainly explained by the fact that the main disarmament agreements have become obsolete. In recent years, the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty [FNI] was denounced by the United States and Russia and the New Start treaty [Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty]which limited the size of the nuclear arsenals of these two countries, is in bad shape, Moscow having decided to suspend its participation, on the grounds that Russian inspectors could no longer go to American military sites, due to lack of visas.
Regardless, according to SIPRI, there were 12,121 nuclear warheads in the world as of January 2024, of which 9,585 were stored for “potential use.” And added: “Approximately 3,904 of these warheads were deployed with missiles and aircraft,” which is 60 more than in January 2023. In addition, “approximately 2,100 deployed warheads were maintained on high operational alert on ballistic missiles.
The United States and Russia alone hold 10,624 nuclear warheads, with the Russian arsenal being the largest [5580 ogives contre 5044]. This number is decreasing [- 429] compared to the previous SIPRI assessment.
However, it is argued in the latter, “the number and types of nuclear weapons under development increase as States rely more on nuclear deterrence”.
“As the total number of global nuclear warheads continued to decline as Cold War-era weapons were gradually dismantled, we see
unfortunately an increase from year to year in the number of operational nuclear warheads,” said Dan Smith, director of the Swedish institute.
“We have never seen nuclear weapons play such a dominant role in international relations since the Cold War. It’s hard to believe that just two years ago the leaders of the five largest nuclear-armed states [P5] jointly reaffirmed ‘that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought,'” added Wilfred Wan, director of SIPRI’s Weapons of Mass Destruction program.
This increase is mainly due to China which, for around five years, has significantly strengthened its nuclear arsenal and the strategic forces of the People’s Liberation Army. [APL].
In 2019, it was estimated that China possessed 290 nuclear weapons, almost as many as France. In 2024, it would field 500, or 90 more compared to January 2023.
“For the first time, China could also deploy a small number of nuclear warheads on missiles in peacetime. Depending on how it decides to structure its forces, China could potentially possess at least as many intercontinental ballistic missiles as Russia or the United States by the end of the decade, although its stockpile of nuclear warheads is expected to remain much more restricted than the stock of either of these two countries,” estimated SIPRI.
Having never been constrained by nuclear disarmament agreements, China is thus developing its nuclear arsenal at a forced pace. As a reminder, its deterrence doctrine is based on three concepts: strict sufficiency, effective defense and counterattack against the adversary’s strategic sites. Should we expect a change?
For its part, even if Pakistan has not increased its nuclear potential over the past year, India could be tempted to significantly increase its own, due to the evolution of the Chinese arsenal. . According to SIPRI, Indian forces currently have 172 nuclear warheads, 8 more than in January 2023.
“While Pakistan remains the primary focus of India’s nuclear deterrent, India appears to be placing increasing emphasis on longer-range weapons, including those capable of hitting targets across China,” he said. noted by SIPRI.
As for North Korea, it emphasizes the “development of its arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons”, which suggests that it would “intend to use early” such weapons in a conflict , said Matt Korda, research associate in SIPRI’s Weapons of Mass Destruction program and senior scientist at the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists. [FAS].
Among the other equipped countries, the priority goes mainly to the modernization of the means used to implement their nuclear weapons. This is the case in France, with the SNLE 3G programs [sous-marin nucléaire lanceurs d’engins de 3e génération]M51.3 or even ASN4G [Air-Sol Nucléaire de 4e génération]. The Military Programming Law [LPM] 2024-30 provides for an investment of 50 billion euros for nuclear deterrence.
The United Kingdom follows the same logic, with the construction of Dreadnought-class SSBNs. Note that, after announcing its intention to increase its nuclear arsenal, the British government announced that it would no longer communicate on the number of nuclear weapons and missiles deployed.
