Tea with plutonium

Sergey Medvedev: We will start a conversation not from the future, but from the past, because the shadows of the past suddenly came to the pages of newspapers and television screens. The ghost of the nuclear threat, nuclear winter, in connection with the latest statements by the Russian leadership about the withdrawal from the Agreement on the disposal of weapons of Plutonium, and, accordingly, all this spiral of fear about the nuclear war, turned out to be closely close. Let's talk about what is happening with nuclear weapons in general, to what extent this heritage of the twentieth century has passed with us to the 21st century and whether it will remain in it. My interlocutor is Sergey Oznobishchev , director of the Institute of Strategic Objects.

The shadows of the past unexpectedly rushed to the pages of newspapers and television screens

Let's start with Plutonium. We have tea at the table - I hope that it is not with polonium and not with plutonium, but ordinary. Plutonium is, as many experts say now, a symbolic thing that does not affect the strategic balance, or are there any consequences?

Sergey Oznobishchev: In many ways, symbolic. Judging by the initial calculation, which was when concluding an agreement in 2000 (more recently, it would seem, a whole era has already passed), there were 125 tons of plutonium in Russia and, in my opinion, 100 of the United States. They thought that they were bombarded, in the end they considered their needs and decided to highlight 34 in order to destroy. Inertia, convertible thinking, that we will overwhelm the swords to the oral, was also strong. They tried to bite them in the 80s, 90s of the last century, and it turned out that it was sometimes more expensive to refer, than to leave-let him decay, dissolve somewhere.

But here it is impossible to dissolve - this is all very harmful and dangerous, so they decided to process. Even the methods of this processing were determined. I took the 2010 protocol with me. As always, documents of this kind are easily memorable names: "The disposal of plutonium, declared as plutonium, which is not more necessary for defense purposes, treating it, cooperation in this area." It says that the US government program will be based on the irradiation of utilized plutonium and the completion of the construction of the installation for the manufacture of mixed active fuel. The beginning of operation was scheduled for 2016, the start of disposal is for 2018.

Then it did not work out, they began to count the money. We decided that you can agree on a change in the method of disposal. From the very beginning, they said that we would dilute, we will hide somewhere, fold, as our president says. But they could no longer agree, because other political times came.

I remember the mood of the 80-90s, when they literally walked and thought how to agree on the destruction of weapons, on a safer world

In many ways, this is a typical product of the time when we decided to get rid of the Heritage of the Cold War: let's destroy nuclear weapons, let's do it together, let's do it transparently, let's look for new elements where we can destroy something, and at the same time make the world safer. I remember the mood among diplomats, experts, journalists of the 80-90s, when they literally went and thought where to pick up some idea and agree on the destruction of weapons, on a safer world.

Sergey Medvedev: It is not clear what is happening with all this infrastructure of trust, which has been created for the past 25 years. After all, in atomic weapons a chain reaction. Something can stretch out of Plutonium, or it will be such disposable things, a certain hysterical cry of Russia, and will this have no long-term consequences?

We cooperation on the peaceful use of atomic energy also allowed the side

Sergey Oznobishchev: You know, now it’s like a competition for our people who work in this area: where to find something in order to wound America, to find a belibo in the eye. This, unfortunately, is not a single thing. Prior to this, there was destruction, also for a foreign account (by the way, as well as with plutonium) - Congress allocated money for this. We also launched the side of the peaceful use of atomic energy. Before that, we had an agreement on ordinary armed forces. There is generally a very interesting formula - that we suspend it. It was 2007, and in 2015 we decided that this was not enough, we said that we “finally suspend it” (it is completely incomprehensible what this formula means). There was a whole era that was calculated by the generations of diplomats, weighed, as the Minister of Foreign Affairs Gromyko at one time, as on pharmaceutical scales, said. We must pay tribute and worship those diplomats, specialists who did this.

Sergey Medvedev: And what about the rest, what with the START, strategic offensive weapons - are they not at risk?

Sergey Oznobishchev: It is unique every time, but we now have been living at the most unique time since the time of even the acceleration of the Cold War. Remember, in 1972, in Moscow, near the Intourist Hotel, part of the ceremonial actions related to the signing of the OSV and the Pro anesty agreement took place. I was aimed at providing this whole case with a young student, and it was terribly interesting. I remember what rise all this happened, how Leonid Zamyatin spoke words that seemed natural then, that we would reduce weapons and continue to follow this path.

Since then, and in fact, even earlier, from the 60s (an agreement on non-proliferation of nuclear weapons is 1968), we pledged that the participants in the contract, that is, nuclear powers, will negotiate and completely reduce nuclear weapons. Almost 50 years have passed since then, and this is all the time to poke the developing countries that we discourage walking along the nuclear path. They are worried about their safety, and worry about unreasonably, as they see: anything can happen to them without nuclear weapons.

Ukraine gave nuclear weapons - lost Crimea

Sergey Medvedev: As with Ukraine: gave nuclear weapons - lost Crimea.

Sergey Oznobishchev: Yes, here is an example for you, although the former president of Ukraine said that at that time it looked like a monkey with a grenade. I remember the time when Ukraine, as it were, could not launch the rockets that were on its territory. Ukraine got up from the knees, it began to talk almost on equal terms with Washington, there was increased attention to it, the conditions for export, destruction of weapons were discussed, it was in the center of world politics. Kazakhstan, Belarus - a little smaller, and Ukraine tried to make a semi -core power to itself.

Sergey Medvedev: Maybe as international instability increases, renaissance of interest in nuclear weapons awaits us, and we crawl into a new era of quasi -heading war?

Sergey Oznobishchev: In fact, this is right, but for me, as a person who is not alien to culture, the word "Renaissance" is too beautiful for a nuclear mushroom that did not arise on our planet so often, but still there were such moments. Interest is huge, the third world countries look, think, strive to somehow cling to these peaceful programs. After all, we are well aware that a peaceful nuclear program is specialists, and tomorrow it can be turned into a half -nuclear and military.

Sergey Medvedev: Russian energy, reactors ... Russian fuel, first of all, enriched for this, for warheads?

A peaceful nuclear program is specialists, and tomorrow it can be turned into a half -war and military

Sergey Oznobishchev: The entire filling of the atomic bomb is the product of the development of a peaceful nuclear program.

Sergey Medvedev: I think this is some kind of global mistake of mankind, because it is not clear what to do with this plutonium now. And to the sun they offered to launch on missiles, and in Utah to pump in some salt caves ...

Sergey Oznobishchev: Nuclear physicists decided that burning was needed: MOX is made fuel , then it is burned, but after a while you can remove all this again from scorched fuel. There are even restrictions on this extraction, but this is considered more reliable than how the Americans simply bury it in ceramic cassettes.

Sergey Medvedev: Do they mix with something, and does it become worthless for further use?

Sergey Oznobishchev: Yes, with active material, the secret of which is unknown, it is called harmoniously-Space Sand-they mix some kind of cosmic sand and hide. Where - it is unknown, all this is not checked. And under the contract, verification measures begin only after the destruction of plutonium begins.

The main thing, as Mikhail Gorbachev said, start the process

But I would say that this is not the main thing. And most importantly, as Mikhail Gorbachev said, who, he must give him his due, started this whole process of destroying nuclear weapons, which has not yet been crowned with success, to begin the process. And this process should be started in human heads. And now, in the heads of politicians, I see only very dangerous ambitions and unwillingness, inability to take a step back. No government wants to show their slack, and the retreat back is a slack. Save your face is the most important thing. If you take an analogy with the animal world, then this is an ostrich policy - not only because you hide your head in the sand, but also because the ostrich does not know how to retreat, this is one of the animals that cannot take a step back.

Sergey Medvedev: As a result, the role of nuclear weapons increases in the 21st century? That is, this is a large cycle, which began since the 70s, it is almost 50 years old. For 30 years they lived in the active phase of the nuclear cycle, 50 years - in the disarmament phase, and now this phase of disarmament in his eyes begins to sag.

The entire filling of the atomic bomb is the product of the development of a peaceful nuclear program

Sergey Oznobishchev: Judging by my sensations, according to observations of the walking discussions and points of view that politicians adhere to, today is like a whole century for most people. I would call it a clopina psychology: "We are very small, and what is happening now is forever."

But this is not forever. We found the time when there was a completely different political thinking, a completely different attitude to the world, attempts to make the world better and safer from nuclear weapons. One program "World without nuclear weapons" in 1986 Gorbachev costs a lot.

By the way, after many years, you are surprised to understand that this program was not just a propaganda thesis. It was a program deeply worked out with the military - this is evident from the memoirs of Marshal Akhromeev and other people - worked out almost by the hour: how we will all move together.

Not took place. Now another situation. It seems to me that we are now in a state of a certain Farso Cold War, and ultimately it can be very dangerous, can go to the hot phase. We have one ideology, we will confront with the countries in which the same state structure and the same ideology - capitalist. Around capitalism and imperialism, and we participate in all this, so we are in the same river, in one channel we rush down, waving our hands, try to hit the neighbor’s head, make it painful.

We found the time when there was a completely different political thinking, there were attempts to make the world better and safer

But we do not see the end of this path. Maybe we will see a waterfall, or maybe we will jump out into calm water and we will swim at them majestically, and then we will be able to negotiate. But the probability that we will further and further leave the idea of a nuclear world will loom ahead like a horizon, and, no matter how much you go, everything will be a horizon.

Today there is a possibility that a nuclear horizon will be ahead, and we will plunge into the spontaneous spread of nuclear weapons. And with the factor of ISIS prohibited in Russia, all this is becoming more and more dangerous. A powerful organization that has huge resources and a very effective ideology appears. It is already recognized that there are already several thousand of our compatriots, and we can assume that among them there are several specialists who can understand these matters.

Sergey Medvedev: Plutonium theoretically can get to ISIS?

Sergey Oznobishchev: Theoretically, everything can be. But the storage methods, the safety of nuclear weapons, fuel, waste in the five nuclear powers at all times are the highest degree of effectiveness. There are so many degrees of protection ...

Sergey Medvedev: I would like to hope.

We are now in a state of a certain Farso Cold War, and ultimately it can go to a hot phase

Sergey Oznobishchev: I want to hope. This is a fact that is recognized by all specialists. But there are so -called unrecognized members of the nuclear club.

Sergey Medvedev: Pakistan, India, Israel.

Sergey Oznobishchev: They didn’t share something-again territorial disputes. After all, it is important not only the presence of nuclear potential, but also the civilization of leaders. Not so long ago, we have heard absolutely wild statements from our close associate of Iran, there the leaders said that they want to drop Israel into the sea and all that other. In combination with the political factor, this immediately gives a high level of danger.

And the same thing now in the DPRK is a country geographically close to us, we are trying to negotiate with them, but we cannot exclude the degeneration of the North Korean regime in a complete outcast. And what to do with it if this outcast with a nuclear club and with nuclear missiles?

Sergey Medvedev: Does the global system not track all these unauthorized launches?

Today there is a chance that we will plunge into the spontaneous spread of nuclear weapons

Sergey Oznobishchev: Of course, it tracks, although no defense and protection system can be absolutely effective. But it is one thing if you have a highly effective system-80-85%, but at least 90%... If it concerns the usual armed forces, then you will intercept 90 missiles. Very effective about are working on Israel, intercept missiles, this is an iron dome, and some are still falling.

Sergey Medvedev: And with a nuclear missile, this is an unacceptable risk.

Sergey Oznobishchev: One, two - and already enough, you do not have a couple of cities, a pair of objects. If it gets "successfully" - to where the public administration system, then chaos begins in your country. There cannot be one hundred percent protection, it can only be highly effective. With North Korea, this, in theory, should work because it is designed for single launches, but all sorts of mistakes are also possible here. It is believed that you can expand this in South Korea, somehow start intercepting, but still the problem remains.

There is an organization of united nations, the General Assembly, the Security Council, all our usual mechanisms are like in a car: you rush and twitch all the usual levers, but nothing happens, management does not work out.

Sergey Medvedev: A scary metaphor. If you return to Russia in its current political state, then under the current ideology, there will be more and more rely on nuclear weapons. What is happening now with Russian nuclear weapons - is it modernized? There are some new plans for the development of new species or, nevertheless, Russia is limited by these one and a half thousand warheads on START-2, and there will be nothing above this ceiling, no new types of nuclear weapons?

Sergey Oznobishchev: Based on our today's vision, there will be no. And thank God for Russia that it will not happen, because we do not fill the ceilings of the Prague SNA to go to 1550. We are now producing excessively according to the product nomenclature, we spend a lot of excess funds - this is quite obvious. But our defense capacity is at a high level. However, the problem is that we live in a unique time when no negotiations are being held regarding the next steps in the field of reduction and restrictions on weapons, I'm not talking about their destruction.

We live in a unique time when no negotiations are being held regarding the next steps in the field of reduction and restrictions on weapons

Unique time! This process has been going on for 60 years ... And all sorts of peaceful initiatives of the Soviet Union in the 40s are generally destroying, a world without nuclear weapons ... The developed civilization has long wanted to fight this. But the situation is unique, since there are no negotiations now.

We say: let's first fulfill the Prague SNA, and then we will see, in 2020, maybe we will extend. But our woe-experts say: no, we are unprofitable to extend it, we have nothing to talk to them. They write large articles, works on this subject, claim that this will affect our defense capabilities. We now have a very definite angle that the United States wants to limit the development of our nuclear weapons through agreements. And then - Olbrait Okhota before our Siberia, will we take our Siberia from us? Our society, our expert political community, unfortunately, are in a state of military hysteria.

Sergey Medvedev: Nuclear weapons are the forefront here. You draw a terrible picture.

The archaization of public relations in the field of nuclear weapons is truly scared

Preparing for this program, I began to look for what was happening in recent years in the field of disarmament, and I found practically nothing. Last links-2007, 2005, 2002. Я понял, что последние пять-семь лет нет никаких телодвижений по части разоружения.

Это одна из тех немногих тем, когда мы не с оптимизмом, а со страхом смотрим в будущее, потому что это то наследие ХХ века, которое мы не только вынесли в XXI век, но еще и пытаемся на нем куда-то выехать. Эта ретроградность, архаизация общественных отношений в области ядерного оружия поистине пугает.