Transcripts For DW DocFilm 20240713 : vimarsana.com

This soviet era submarine was once a military threat today its a tourist attraction. In the 1980 s. Millions of people protested against new Nuclear Weapons and entire generation lived in fear. At the end of the cold war thousands of Nuclear Weapons were withdrawn from europe and today top secret bases in Storage Facilities lie abandoned. These bunkers in a former american missile base in germany once housed Cruise Missiles this site now hosts a popular open air electronic Music Festival. The danger of Nuclear Conflict appears to have passed. But now new Nuclear Weapons destined for europe are being tested in the u. S. Nuclear war is more likely now than it was at the height of the current world. And the Nuclear Problem has not gone away its its changed its become something new and different some analysts call this the 2nd nuclear age. And we need to you shell use his own were facing the most dangerous military and especially Nuclear Security situation in europe today since the collapse of the soviet union and that is what were doing. As well in tartly theres talk of both the german and of a European Nuclear weapon if you ask me a german bomb would be dangerous nonsense but we may find ourselves discussing a european one in the next few years or so theyve got. And. This is the village of michel in western germany nearby is a German Air Force base where some 20 b. 61 American Nuclear bombs are said to be stored as part of a nato weapons sharing arrangement. With. Nuclear weapons expert tons christensen works for the federation of american scientists and the Stockholm International Peace Research institute. Christensen is convinced the devices are stored here devices that could be deployed against enemy forces. There are still tactical Nuclear Weapons yes. Only gravity of off site delivered by fighter jet aircraft they are the last remnant of a what used to be an. Enormous inventory of about 7000. 00 tactical Nuclear Weapons but theyre still here and about 150. 00 of them but only that one time. If a conflict arose these weapons could also be delivered by German Air Force planes. Merican have bases in europe but there are also 4 countries in europe that have host base arrangement us like call it call it a Nuclear Sharing Arrangements germany the netherlands belgium italy and possibly turkey so those countries are the ones who sort of serve a soto Nuclear Strike role where their aircraft would be equipped and handed over Nuclear Weapons in times of war. Until just a few years ago all Political Parties in the german one is talk had been calling for the Nuclear Weapons to be removed. These nato fighter jets are on patrol over the Baltic States their mission is to intercept any Russian Military aircraft that approached nato air space without warning. A number of participants of the annual Munich Security Conference are concerned about growing tensions between east and west. The conference chairman is professor wolfgang ischinger. In few yons id him since the ukraine crisis that is since 20146 where weve seen a massive increase in but say incidents. And fortunately these of not lead to a real confrontation so far. For these incidents have taken place over the north sea the baltic sea and the blacks if theyve involved western and russian warships and really terry aircraft basically he knew and was ition military. Means russian aircraft over the north sea were filmed by the brit. Air force. More and more nato aircraft are taking part in interception Missions Including going to spare planes. Germany is making a substantial contribution to nato is program to help protect the Baltic States. But such busy skies are not without risk. That. Were still uses more fool by snows imagine what would happen if for example a Russian Military aircraft crossed the border there by accident or deliberately and was shot down by a western or American Forces like. That theres a big danger such an incident could lead to an escalation that quickly spirals out of control. So the tensions present here in europe today are a major cause for concern. Good to. See a bidding cliff. These u. S. B. 52 bombers are preparing to take part in a Training Exercise in the Baltic States. Many see this deployment as a message to russia. And it isnt the only message. Weve seen and types of exercises that we havent seen since the cold war where american be 52 bombers to fly up over the north pole to the launch point for Nuclear Cruise missiles and then return to their bases in the United States those kind of strike exercises were not done since that i mean 1008. It seems as though weve returned to the old game of cat and mouse that was common during the cold war. This situation reminds us trillion antinuclear activist and author Helen Caldicott of a time when the u. S. And the soviet union stood on the brink of nuclear confrontation. Well i got Robert Mcnamara will whos the 60th faints and was in the oval office with jack kennedy during the cuban missile crisis he said to me hello. You dont know how close we came to within 3 minutes quote unquote. I think the situation could well be compatible with that. Decisions to launch a Nuclear Strike need to be made quickly and then there are the crews who would actually launch the missiles caldicott has heard some alarming reports. The man in the missile silos in america. Is to have minutes to decide they were aged 18 to 26 like pavlovian dogs just so nervous or press the button. There with the pistol one shoot if one shows signs of deviant behavior but the deviant one much the other one recently its been determined that many of those men taking l. S. D. Not in their missiles beforehand and having wild socket lunch breaks perience is allowing it that taking marijuana cocaine and the like. Caldicott things a Nuclear Strike could be launched by mistake. Going issuing a meets dimitri train in a former senior soviet army officer who took part in disarmament negotiations with the u. S. Both experts are concerned a new cold war may be in the works. For conflict may arise out of the military collision and places like syria and all the way to the Nuclear Level that. Could affect your us the election of donald trump further complicated the situation the president has sharply criticized nato and even threatened to pull the u. S. Out of the alliance. Shortly after trump was elected Security Policy experts in germany began reviewing the possible consequences of the us defense umbrella becoming less reliable. Some have said that if washington is no longer willing to defend europe then perhaps germany should develop its own Nuclear Weapons. Its happening i was surprised when that debate came up in germany because here Nuclear Options have been strictly taboo and that. Back in the 1980 s. Millions of germans took to the streets to protest nato preparations for deploying new Nuclear Missiles in europe to counter a soviet threat. Is a Prominent German political scientist. He has written an essay arguing that the country should lift a nuclear temper. It needs to be made clear that germany as a Nuclear Power would help strengthen the free western world it would support makes one liberal democracies and we need to explain that this would not be directed against any other states it would be purely defensive a deterrent that would enhance our security which is essential. Its not just about war and peace its also about protecting our country from blackmail in crisis situations like these. Nuclear weapons really provide more security for germany so far the government is not debating this question. But has ideas on how a German Nuclear deterrent might function. Might could. We could develop mobile Medium Range Missiles that have Nuclear Warheads that would provide low level to terence at a relatively low cost. Another option would be to use Nuclear Capable aircraft. The 3rd option would be to use conventional submarines equipped with Nuclear Weapons. Could do. To be nuclear. And as well if germany were to build such weapons it would create huge Security Problems in europe. The russians would feel seriously threatened not least because of their experience in world war 2 we must see for the world does big gun safety trade really like to emphasize that a German Nuclear option would not be directed against russia it would be part of an all round defensive strategy the minds of in. A german Nuclear Weapons program would cost taxpayers several 1000000000. 00 euros per year. And it would create legal problems. Germany renounced the development of Nuclear Weapons as part of the 1994 power treaty that led to unification. As they have for schools it would be a violation of our obligations and if germany were to have its finger on a Nuclear Trigger trigger. That would be completely gone except about us need that no one would trust germany with the bomb anyway it was germanys history. But what about the future of the u. S. Nuclear program this is the facility in the nevada desert at which the pentagon develops and test weapons. Right now experts are working on the b. 61 mod 12 the latest version of a tactical and strategic Nuclear Weapon but. Its an expensive project. The budget for 2911. 00 is estimated to be about 254000000. 00. The 61 can be deployed with a number of military aircraft including german tornado fighter bombers adaptation of those aircraft was scheduled for 2019 ph 200 integration refers to the a 200. In about 58 years there will be a new type of weapon more advanced thats going to be coming back to germany and be deployed here at google. But aircraft have to be configured for that type of aircraft for the for that too. Weapon its called a b. 6112. The tornado is right now undergoing flight test in the United States to be able to deliver this with. German tornadoes on a u. S. Facility but your main military aircraft being outfitted with new u. S. Nuclear weapons could have far reaching consequences. Maxwell downman works for the london based think tank basic which supports Nuclear Disarmament he warns of possible dangers the last place russian missiles would go would be the b. 61 sites are there are also many hurdles for these things getting off the ground you would need to let the planes with the bombs because the bombs the planes in the bombs on together these would need to take off then this is all presuming that russian missiles are coming and then once theyre flying you would need to refuel them in air and then you would need to fly them into russian aspace plus past russian Ballistic Missile defense before dropping freefall bombs compared the how its too firing a missile there is a huge risks with these things and they realistically would never get off the ground. And some experts say that the aircraft could be easily targeted while they are refueling. So why would germanys air force one to use Nuclear Weapons at all. Those highest. On the one hand we have to make an appropriate conventional contribution so that we can continue to have an influence on policy. But we must also be prepared to bear the burden and it is a burden of having Nuclear Weapons stationed on our territory or if necessary delivered by our aircraft. I think is. But its extremely important to understand the situation as part of our overall Nuclear Strategy. And our ability to help shape policy within the Nato Alliance this is. In short germany can continue to have a say in nato as Nuclear Strategy only if its prepared to use these weapons. This also applies to Nuclear Weapons Modernization Programs there are several nato Member States that say existing stocks of weapons are outdated need to be replaced. Kinds christensen points out this process is already underway. As far as we can figure out the increased accuracy is about 3 times better than than it is with the existing weapons now what that means is that not only can you strike targets facilities much more effectively but you can also choose lower explosive yield settings for an attack that today requires a much higher yield sitting so thats more useable its less radioactive fallout so its a concern that were making Nuclear Weapons more useable dhamma is a sign of off this weapon can be employed in ways its predecessor could not be. And russia will see that and say fine if the west is doing this then we also want to modernize and improve our weapons thats a license to. Create a new arms race which in turn could lead to a new cold war. Several experts think this is now a distinct possibility. U. S. President donald trump announced his plans regarding Nuclear Policy at his 2018 state of the Union Address as part of our defense we must modernize and rebuild our Nuclear Arsenal hopefully never having 2 years it but making it so strong and so powerful that it. Will deter any acts of aggression by any other nation or anyone else thank. Me clear that the u. S. Reserves the right to launch a Deterrent Nuclear 1st strike. The United States in the early phase of a complete overhaul of its Nuclear Arsenal and were talking about everything were talking about all delivery systems. Nuclear infrastructure the factorise Nuclear Command and control system so its the shoot taking. In fact its one of the largest projects of its kind. Compiled by the Congressional Budget Office puts the total cost at 1. 00 trillion dollars as a 2017. But it seems likely that the pentagons weapons Modernization Program will be even more expensive than that. By comparison in 28 germany spent just over 38000000000 euros on defense. The u. S. Plans to modernize Nuclear Attack submarines command and control centers for land based Nuclear Missiles and Nuclear Capable aircraft and Cruise Missiles why is the us spending all this money. This is the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in california. Dr brad roberts is director of the Laboratory Center for Global Security research. Was also a Deputy Assistant secretary of defense in the obama administration. He explains why the pentagon wants to upgrade its weapons. To modernization because. We have postponed. Any decision because theyre costly and politically very divisive weve postponed any decision about the modernization of our Nuclear Forces for decades the newest u. S. Nuclear weapon in the arsenal when in 1901. There is no weapon that was designed intended to have a shelf life of more than 20 or 25 years. The us is not only developing new kinds of Nuclear Weapons its also devising new strategies in which those weapons might be used. To some that is a frightening proposition. So is war again thinkable it was not thinkable in the 1960 seventies and eighties when the one nuclear war became the problem of armageddon the problem of the end of human history. And its possible the today we have one or 2 or 3 actors who believe that a nuclear war can be won. Because it can be kept women good because we will back down when they employ Nuclear Weapons<\/a> and entire generation lived in fear. At the end of the cold war thousands of Nuclear Weapons<\/a> were withdrawn from europe and today top secret bases in Storage Facilities<\/a> lie abandoned. These bunkers in a former american missile base in germany once housed Cruise Missile<\/a>s this site now hosts a popular open air electronic Music Festival<\/a>. The danger of Nuclear Conflict<\/a> appears to have passed. But now new Nuclear Weapons<\/a> destined for europe are being tested in the u. S. Nuclear war is more likely now than it was at the height of the current world. And the Nuclear Problem<\/a> has not gone away its its changed its become something new and different some analysts call this the 2nd nuclear age. And we need to you shell use his own were facing the most dangerous military and especially Nuclear Security<\/a> situation in europe today since the collapse of the soviet union and that is what were doing. As well in tartly theres talk of both the german and of a European Nuclear<\/a> weapon if you ask me a german bomb would be dangerous nonsense but we may find ourselves discussing a european one in the next few years or so theyve got. And. This is the village of michel in western germany nearby is a German Air Force<\/a> base where some 20 b. 61 American Nuclear<\/a> bombs are said to be stored as part of a nato weapons sharing arrangement. With. Nuclear weapons expert tons christensen works for the federation of american scientists and the Stockholm International<\/a> Peace Research<\/a> institute. Christensen is convinced the devices are stored here devices that could be deployed against enemy forces. There are still tactical Nuclear Weapons<\/a> yes. Only gravity of off site delivered by fighter jet aircraft they are the last remnant of a what used to be an. Enormous inventory of about 7000. 00 tactical Nuclear Weapons<\/a> but theyre still here and about 150. 00 of them but only that one time. If a conflict arose these weapons could also be delivered by German Air Force<\/a> planes. Merican have bases in europe but there are also 4 countries in europe that have host base arrangement us like call it call it a Nuclear Sharing Arrangements<\/a> germany the netherlands belgium italy and possibly turkey so those countries are the ones who sort of serve a soto Nuclear Strike<\/a> role where their aircraft would be equipped and handed over Nuclear Weapons<\/a> in times of war. Until just a few years ago all Political Parties<\/a> in the german one is talk had been calling for the Nuclear Weapons<\/a> to be removed. These nato fighter jets are on patrol over the Baltic States<\/a> their mission is to intercept any Russian Military<\/a> aircraft that approached nato air space without warning. A number of participants of the annual Munich Security Conference<\/a> are concerned about growing tensions between east and west. The conference chairman is professor wolfgang ischinger. In few yons id him since the ukraine crisis that is since 20146 where weve seen a massive increase in but say incidents. And fortunately these of not lead to a real confrontation so far. For these incidents have taken place over the north sea the baltic sea and the blacks if theyve involved western and russian warships and really terry aircraft basically he knew and was ition military. Means russian aircraft over the north sea were filmed by the brit. Air force. More and more nato aircraft are taking part in interception Missions Including<\/a> going to spare planes. Germany is making a substantial contribution to nato is program to help protect the Baltic States<\/a>. But such busy skies are not without risk. That. Were still uses more fool by snows imagine what would happen if for example a Russian Military<\/a> aircraft crossed the border there by accident or deliberately and was shot down by a western or American Forces<\/a> like. That theres a big danger such an incident could lead to an escalation that quickly spirals out of control. So the tensions present here in europe today are a major cause for concern. Good to. See a bidding cliff. These u. S. B. 52 bombers are preparing to take part in a Training Exercise<\/a> in the Baltic States<\/a>. Many see this deployment as a message to russia. And it isnt the only message. Weve seen and types of exercises that we havent seen since the cold war where american be 52 bombers to fly up over the north pole to the launch point for Nuclear Cruise<\/a> missiles and then return to their bases in the United States<\/a> those kind of strike exercises were not done since that i mean 1008. It seems as though weve returned to the old game of cat and mouse that was common during the cold war. This situation reminds us trillion antinuclear activist and author Helen Caldicott<\/a> of a time when the u. S. And the soviet union stood on the brink of nuclear confrontation. Well i got Robert Mcnamara<\/a> will whos the 60th faints and was in the oval office with jack kennedy during the cuban missile crisis he said to me hello. You dont know how close we came to within 3 minutes quote unquote. I think the situation could well be compatible with that. Decisions to launch a Nuclear Strike<\/a> need to be made quickly and then there are the crews who would actually launch the missiles caldicott has heard some alarming reports. The man in the missile silos in america. Is to have minutes to decide they were aged 18 to 26 like pavlovian dogs just so nervous or press the button. There with the pistol one shoot if one shows signs of deviant behavior but the deviant one much the other one recently its been determined that many of those men taking l. S. D. Not in their missiles beforehand and having wild socket lunch breaks perience is allowing it that taking marijuana cocaine and the like. Caldicott things a Nuclear Strike<\/a> could be launched by mistake. Going issuing a meets dimitri train in a former senior soviet army officer who took part in disarmament negotiations with the u. S. Both experts are concerned a new cold war may be in the works. For conflict may arise out of the military collision and places like syria and all the way to the Nuclear Level<\/a> that. Could affect your us the election of donald trump further complicated the situation the president has sharply criticized nato and even threatened to pull the u. S. Out of the alliance. Shortly after trump was elected Security Policy<\/a> experts in germany began reviewing the possible consequences of the us defense umbrella becoming less reliable. Some have said that if washington is no longer willing to defend europe then perhaps germany should develop its own Nuclear Weapons<\/a>. Its happening i was surprised when that debate came up in germany because here Nuclear Options<\/a> have been strictly taboo and that. Back in the 1980 s. Millions of germans took to the streets to protest nato preparations for deploying new Nuclear Missiles<\/a> in europe to counter a soviet threat. Is a Prominent German<\/a> political scientist. He has written an essay arguing that the country should lift a nuclear temper. It needs to be made clear that germany as a Nuclear Power<\/a> would help strengthen the free western world it would support makes one liberal democracies and we need to explain that this would not be directed against any other states it would be purely defensive a deterrent that would enhance our security which is essential. Its not just about war and peace its also about protecting our country from blackmail in crisis situations like these. Nuclear weapons really provide more security for germany so far the government is not debating this question. But has ideas on how a German Nuclear<\/a> deterrent might function. Might could. We could develop mobile Medium Range Missiles<\/a> that have Nuclear Warheads<\/a> that would provide low level to terence at a relatively low cost. Another option would be to use Nuclear Capable<\/a> aircraft. The 3rd option would be to use conventional submarines equipped with Nuclear Weapons<\/a>. Could do. To be nuclear. And as well if germany were to build such weapons it would create huge Security Problems<\/a> in europe. The russians would feel seriously threatened not least because of their experience in world war 2 we must see for the world does big gun safety trade really like to emphasize that a German Nuclear<\/a> option would not be directed against russia it would be part of an all round defensive strategy the minds of in. A german Nuclear Weapons<\/a> program would cost taxpayers several 1000000000. 00 euros per year. And it would create legal problems. Germany renounced the development of Nuclear Weapons<\/a> as part of the 1994 power treaty that led to unification. As they have for schools it would be a violation of our obligations and if germany were to have its finger on a Nuclear Trigger<\/a> trigger. That would be completely gone except about us need that no one would trust germany with the bomb anyway it was germanys history. But what about the future of the u. S. Nuclear program this is the facility in the nevada desert at which the pentagon develops and test weapons. Right now experts are working on the b. 61 mod 12 the latest version of a tactical and strategic Nuclear Weapon<\/a> but. Its an expensive project. The budget for 2911. 00 is estimated to be about 254000000. 00. The 61 can be deployed with a number of military aircraft including german tornado fighter bombers adaptation of those aircraft was scheduled for 2019 ph 200 integration refers to the a 200. In about 58 years there will be a new type of weapon more advanced thats going to be coming back to germany and be deployed here at google. But aircraft have to be configured for that type of aircraft for the for that too. Weapon its called a b. 6112. The tornado is right now undergoing flight test in the United States<\/a> to be able to deliver this with. German tornadoes on a u. S. Facility but your main military aircraft being outfitted with new u. S. Nuclear weapons could have far reaching consequences. Maxwell downman works for the london based think tank basic which supports Nuclear Disarmament<\/a> he warns of possible dangers the last place russian missiles would go would be the b. 61 sites are there are also many hurdles for these things getting off the ground you would need to let the planes with the bombs because the bombs the planes in the bombs on together these would need to take off then this is all presuming that russian missiles are coming and then once theyre flying you would need to refuel them in air and then you would need to fly them into russian aspace plus past russian Ballistic Missile<\/a> defense before dropping freefall bombs compared the how its too firing a missile there is a huge risks with these things and they realistically would never get off the ground. And some experts say that the aircraft could be easily targeted while they are refueling. So why would germanys air force one to use Nuclear Weapons<\/a> at all. Those highest. On the one hand we have to make an appropriate conventional contribution so that we can continue to have an influence on policy. But we must also be prepared to bear the burden and it is a burden of having Nuclear Weapons<\/a> stationed on our territory or if necessary delivered by our aircraft. I think is. But its extremely important to understand the situation as part of our overall Nuclear Strategy<\/a>. And our ability to help shape policy within the Nato Alliance<\/a> this is. In short germany can continue to have a say in nato as Nuclear Strategy<\/a> only if its prepared to use these weapons. This also applies to Nuclear Weapons<\/a> Modernization Program<\/a>s there are several nato Member States<\/a> that say existing stocks of weapons are outdated need to be replaced. Kinds christensen points out this process is already underway. As far as we can figure out the increased accuracy is about 3 times better than than it is with the existing weapons now what that means is that not only can you strike targets facilities much more effectively but you can also choose lower explosive yield settings for an attack that today requires a much higher yield sitting so thats more useable its less radioactive fallout so its a concern that were making Nuclear Weapons<\/a> more useable dhamma is a sign of off this weapon can be employed in ways its predecessor could not be. And russia will see that and say fine if the west is doing this then we also want to modernize and improve our weapons thats a license to. Create a new arms race which in turn could lead to a new cold war. Several experts think this is now a distinct possibility. U. S. President donald trump announced his plans regarding Nuclear Policy<\/a> at his 2018 state of the Union Address<\/a> as part of our defense we must modernize and rebuild our Nuclear Arsenal<\/a> hopefully never having 2 years it but making it so strong and so powerful that it. Will deter any acts of aggression by any other nation or anyone else thank. Me clear that the u. S. Reserves the right to launch a Deterrent Nuclear<\/a> 1st strike. The United States<\/a> in the early phase of a complete overhaul of its Nuclear Arsenal<\/a> and were talking about everything were talking about all delivery systems. Nuclear infrastructure the factorise Nuclear Command<\/a> and control system so its the shoot taking. In fact its one of the largest projects of its kind. Compiled by the Congressional Budget Office<\/a> puts the total cost at 1. 00 trillion dollars as a 2017. But it seems likely that the pentagons weapons Modernization Program<\/a> will be even more expensive than that. By comparison in 28 germany spent just over 38000000000 euros on defense. The u. S. Plans to modernize Nuclear Attack<\/a> submarines command and control centers for land based Nuclear Missiles<\/a> and Nuclear Capable<\/a> aircraft and Cruise Missile<\/a>s why is the us spending all this money. This is the Lawrence Livermore<\/a> National Laboratory<\/a> in california. Dr brad roberts is director of the Laboratory Center<\/a> for Global Security<\/a> research. Was also a Deputy Assistant<\/a> secretary of defense in the obama administration. He explains why the pentagon wants to upgrade its weapons. To modernization because. We have postponed. Any decision because theyre costly and politically very divisive weve postponed any decision about the modernization of our Nuclear Forces<\/a> for decades the newest u. S. Nuclear weapon in the arsenal when in 1901. There is no weapon that was designed intended to have a shelf life of more than 20 or 25 years. The us is not only developing new kinds of Nuclear Weapons<\/a> its also devising new strategies in which those weapons might be used. To some that is a frightening proposition. So is war again thinkable it was not thinkable in the 1960 seventies and eighties when the one nuclear war became the problem of armageddon the problem of the end of human history. And its possible the today we have one or 2 or 3 actors who believe that a nuclear war can be won. Because it can be kept women good because we will back down when they employ Nuclear Weapons<\/a> on a limited basis and if they believe it can be kept women and can be won then it can be fought. But high yield Nuclear Weapons<\/a> are not appropriate for those limited sorts of conflicts. So the u. S. Is designing a range of less powerful short range weapons. These are also part of the Modernization Program<\/a>. In part the answer is yes we do need some new weapons some of the targets we might want to hit in this kind of environment can be destroyed with small Nuclear Weapons<\/a> that would minimize damage to other things what we call Collateral Damage<\/a> we could significantly reduce. Nato has deployed these kinds of weapons before until 992 Nuclear Artillery<\/a> shells were stored at this facility envoys time in central germany. These former bundeswehr officers were stationed at the storage site. There to pick money was commander of a guard unit again kind of no germans were allowed inside that was strictly forbidden and we really didnt know what was going on in there it truly was top secret of your job i guess was to be ready if the soviet army would come across right it was about Nuclear Battle<\/a> in europe just how. We explain to our troops again and again that germany was the enemys target. If a war were to break out germany would be annihilated. So the better prepared we were to defend ourselves the greater the chance that we never have to use those weapons on the saddam in the pool thats called deterrence and it worked. Any soldier can understand that concept. And thats how we explained it to them you know if youre going to be given them is in. Until the 1990 s. There were 120 similar storage sites throughout germany and the artillery shells were intended to stop soviet tank forces. The shells had a range of 20 to 30 kilometers so they would have been fired only on german soil this footage shows one such Small Nuclear<\/a> explosion. There were nuclear antiaircraft missiles and even nuclear mines. There were all sorts of crazy weapons during the cold war period if you look back at that today youd think the world are gone insane because those weapons represented absolute self destruction. That there were Nuclear Landmines<\/a> on the border between east and west germany and the nike hercules air Defense Missile<\/a> system equipped with Nuclear Warheads<\/a> nuclear. And. If nato Nuclear Artillery<\/a> had been used against soviet tank units it would almost certainly have caused serious damage to the surrounding german countryside. But times changed and nato commanders eventually decided to revise their strategy. They have largely moved away from tactical Nuclear Weapons<\/a> and the reason they moved the ways because the military didnt need them to solve their military. Objectives they could use at vance conventional weapons for this instead so now were hearing recommendations that the us needs to enter reintroduce tactical or tactical like Nuclear Weapons<\/a> with low yield. This museum in the town of damon in the state of mecklenburg for pullman is dedicated to troops of the east german rocket forces. Christensen stops by to inspect some of the equipment. And hes given details about how the missiles were deployed and even he didnt know. The museum was set up by former members of the 5th rocket brigade. Theyve restored some of the old cold war era transport vehicles which looked like trucks and he had the short range Ballistic Missile<\/a>s perfectly. Christensen points out that today tactical that is short range weapons are still a key component of russias Nuclear Arsenal<\/a>. Its very much a difference in tactics the point is that the Russian Military<\/a> relies more on tactical Nuclear Weapons<\/a> because they are conventional forces consider far less capable so russia has a conventional inferiority if you will and so they use new tactical Nuclear Weapons<\/a> to compensate for that so we see in the russian navy a large use of of tactical Nuclear Weapons<\/a> for and size ship Cruise Missile<\/a>s torpedoes depth charges you name it. The u. S. Military has completely phased out those types of weapons it doesnt need them anymore because it has better conventional forces. Some experts say that the fact that russia is economically weaker than the u. S. Is part of why moscow continues to rely on tactical Nuclear Weapons<\/a> so has the risk of a limited Nuclear Conflict<\/a> in europe increased. We have. Many many statements from Russian Military<\/a> and political leaders that they are prepared to employ Nuclear Weapons<\/a> on a limited basis in a war against nato is war between russia and nato why clee i dont think so is it completely out of the question i wish that it were but its not. So how likely the risk of women to nuclear war is today is very difficult to calibrate but relative to the peaceful period we lived in on the 1990 s. Im a decade afterwards its hard. Nato is actively preparing to deal with the threat of a low yield Nuclear Attack<\/a> we asked professor issuing what he thinks of tactical Nuclear Weapons<\/a>. And so i decided not much because theyre nothing more than a rehash of proposals put forward during the cold war. At that time there was also talk about miniature rawest Nuclear Weapons<\/a>. And portable Nuclear Weapons<\/a> which a soldier could carry half a kilometer across the border could set up and then detonated by remote control. Good. Fences exploded they could all these things could do more to promote to escalate conflicts than to prevent a clique for he. Has repeatedly expressed its concern about moscows recent deployment of mobile short range Nuclear Capable<\/a> missiles in the kaliningrad region. A strip of russian territory between poland and lithuania. The missiles range extends almost to berlin. In june 2800 nato held a Training Exercise<\/a> in the Baltic States<\/a> and poland 19 nato states and partners including friends took part. From a military standpoint it would be extremely difficult if not impossible to defend the Baltic States<\/a> against a russian attack involving armored divisions and tens of thousands of troops so that is the one. German soldiers also took part. The need to exercise. Here read units defend themselves against an attack by blue units. The. It strategically better to wait than to fire blindly and give away your position. But thats financial name finds we engage the enemy infantry and took out quite a few of us can from as i read deployed my men in a stream bed which is a good defensive position and right now were waiting for the next enemy attack for the. Which they are probably preparing right now to find as good of an all star says the dr no according yet. Germany is leading a nato force in lithuania that involves 1200 troops from 10 Member States<\/a>. The units were sent to strengthen the alliances defenses along europes border with russia. We trained together with the Nato Battle Group<\/a> and of course with our lithuanian allies minds on just how much territory can you actually defend here. Because. Right now a strip of land about 10 kilometers wide. 10 kilometers is not much in the grand scheme of things find the only enemy probably a platoon strength attackers driven back. But what is the true purpose of these nato exercises. There more to reassure the balts that the threat the russians and if if the current status is maintained i dont think a lot of people in russia will be losing sleep over a few battalions of nato forces in the Baltic States<\/a>. I think that many of the predictions about what could happen in the baltics are exaggerated. I dont believe lattimer putin is waiting for the opportunity to bring the region back to russia in some sort of glorious battle. Because if he were then honestly the uncertainty donald trump introduced into the western alliance would have been the moment for russia to strike. But they didnt so i dont think theres any serious danger of war in the Baltic States<\/a> at the present time a critical fall anaesthetise in by. In the 1970 s. The soviet union deployed s. S. 20 intermediate range Nuclear Missiles<\/a> in european russia these weapons were capable of hitting targets in most of western europe. European politicians demanded a response. And nato proposed stationing Nuclear Capable<\/a> pershing 2 and ground launched Cruise Missile<\/a>s in western europe. The soviet union feared that this deployment could lead to a nato 1st strike. Millions of people across europe demonstrated against what appeared to be a new round in the arms race. The protests in germany were the largest since the end of world war 2. In the end instead of a strike there was a handshake in october 1906 u. S. President Ronald Reagan<\/a> and soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev<\/a> met in reykjavik to sign a treaty that would eliminate all u. S. And soviet land based short range an intermediate range missiles. This was the socalled i. N. F. Treaty. By 991. 00 the 2 sides had eliminated a total of nearly 2700. 00 missiles. Some of the Cruise Missile<\/a>s that were eliminated under terms of the agreement had been stored at facilities like this in germany. Christensen says the treaty was unprecedented in its scope. It was the 1st class agreement that simply eradicated an entire class of missiles what was also important was that it had a very strong verification regime with on site inspections both at the sites but all the launch sites but all sort of you know factories and what have you so so it was a really important new way of doing on control many saw about sort of later as a 1st step toward elimination of Nuclear Weapons<\/a> globally. This is nature one and open air electronic Music Festival<\/a> held every august at the site of a decommissioned u. S. Cruise missile base near the town of custom our own in western germany. But the missiles removed from this base are once again causing tensions you know over 28000 President Trump<\/a> said russia had been cheating on the i. N. F. Treaty. Russia has violated the agreement theyve been violating it for many years and i dont know why president obama didnt negotiate for full out that were not going to let them violate a Nuclear Agreement<\/a> when they go out and do weapons and were not allowed to were the ones that have stayed in the agreement and we wanted the agreement but russia is not one fortunately on to the agreement so were going to terminate their grave and were going to pull out that. Yeah yeah you know. President term statement shocked the world and for every 2019 russia announced it would also suspend the i. M. F. Pact. But even before that washington was concerned that russia had been testing a new ground launch Cruise Missile<\/a> and a new Ballistic Missile<\/a> similar to these. 2. Was im concerned that on both the american now the russian side the hard liners could prevail. These are people who believe the best course of action is to out arm the other side. And there are military experts in russia who believe that given the overall strategic balance of power russia has no choice but to increase its reliance on Nuclear Weapons<\/a>. Because of the bargain that of nuclear. Or does the movie here was it good for conflict you perhaps. Using Nuclear Weapons<\/a> early on forced the west to desist and such a conflict. Which is a very high Risk Strategy<\/a> in my opinion thats in my nose its a good feel if you were legal. Some experts say that the u. S. Decided to suspend its practice a patient in the i. N. F. Treaty so that it could deal with an increasingly aggressive china. I think it has less to do with nato. Frankly speaking i think it has more to do with china because china has a lot of. Intermediate range forces. And russia has a lot of other forces in this part of. Europe that they can use to target anything they want in europe anyway so it doesnt really make militarily sense here. At the same time russia says nato is cheating on the i n f agreement by deploying Missile Defense<\/a> systems in romania and poland. U. S. Navy ships outfitted with anti missile interceptors are on duty in the mediterranean sea. Washington says all of these systems are intended to protect against missile attacks from iran. Human head of was issue with the russians say that the u. S. Missile Defense Systems<\/a> in Eastern Europe<\/a> robbed by relation of the i. N. F. Treaty experts disagree on whether thats true but in any case the treaty is in a pretty sorry state right now in kind them wouldnt that well their mutual accusations from the United States<\/a> and russia about the other side violating the treaty the best way of course would be for both sides to sit down and discuss here that exploits would need no more than a couple of weeks. To fix the whole thing but in the current political crisis in the current political situation between the United States<\/a> and russia it looks like all virtually impossible which is which is very sad because we may be losing the treaty within a year. In 2018 the trumpet ministration released the latest version of the Nuclear Posture<\/a> review which outlines the pentagons plans for modernizing americas Nuclear Arsenal<\/a> as a deterrent to both nuclear and nonnuclear aggression. The plan in part calls for the deployment of new or updated versions of Cruise Missile<\/a>s to be based on submarines. The u. S. Could deploy the missiles without having to ask its nato allies. And some experts say that this could cause political friction. This past heated is that whats tricky about the plan is that if the u. S. Were to deploy its own Cruise Missile<\/a>s on its own submarines it would circumvent getting nato approval. That is precisely because the u. S. Knows full well that such a one sided move would have set the other nato partners but uses tiamat that always. Looked out for me and it causes or im quite concerned. That u. S. Policy may end up in the hands of those who believe that russian violations of the i. N. F. Treaty suite mean washington they must now also develop new intermediate range Nuclear Weapons<\/a> these that would be the depth of the agreement and if. They hadnt thought so if the i. N. F. Treaty collapses you will have no treaty or system governing medium range Ballistic Missile<\/a>s and Nuclear Missiles<\/a> im Cruise Missile<\/a>s in europe these weapons are specifically a danger and risk to european to your to europeans because the. Range holds european cities and capitals risk so while this treaty is between the u. S. And russia it really affects europeans. President terms frequent verbal attacks on nato have raised grave concern. Some experts are no longer certain that the Us Nuclear Umbrella<\/a> is still committed to protecting europe or if america would come 1st in a crisis. Here a nato delegation is inspecting a French Nuclear<\/a> submarine. Could Alliance Members<\/a> strengthen Nuclear Policy<\/a> cooperation so as to reduce their reliance on the us. Would it be possible for europe to develop its own Nuclear Weapons<\/a>. There is a loophole that might allow for that. And went to sleep in the hot. In 1900 the new west german chancellor simon nonproliferation treaty talks to it all. But he did so with the caviar that a future european Political Alliance<\/a> might be allowed to consider the development of Nuclear Weapons<\/a> because. If friends were in that alliance it might be possible at least in theory for germany to become a Nuclear Power<\/a>. As its made as neat i dont want to completely rule out the possibility that i do for European Defense<\/a> union were to be developed along the lines where you have proposed. That organization mart also have Nuclear Power<\/a> and thanks largely to French Nuclear<\/a> capability. Used the phone service or fish god. But recent polls indicate that more than 70 percent of germans are opposed to the development possession deployment and use of Nuclear Weapons<\/a>. And some experts agree with those sentiments. That would be a massive mistake to try to reintroduce such a weapon in europe because they were truly back in sort of the dynamic of the cold war. The clique i think the cold war made it clear that an increase in Nuclear Weapons<\/a> does not enhance security but ultimately increases in security on both sides sides and. Im call it seems at least in the sides dont trust each other and i think i know its a tremendously dangerous situation to be and considering the destructive power of these thousands and thousands of Weapons Systems<\/a> with those informed enough insisted. Nuclear weapons are once again making headlines in europe whether its low yield devices or Cruise Missile<\/a>s on submarines if the hardliners on all sides gain the upper hand it could mean the end of a relatively peaceful period in modern european history. The point of strong opinions clear positions international perspectives. As u. N. Climate negotiations and who they just sysiphus a spy activist demand that World Leaders<\/a> get serious with evidence of catastrophic effects mounting is the. Current climate anxiety too little too late thats our topic on the trip to the point the top 90 minutes on w. D t you know that 77 percent took off because younger than 60. Cuts me and me and you. And you know what its time all voices got part. Of the 77 percent speech obama be to shoot stuff. This is where you cut the 77 percent this weekend on d. W. I. In the current climate change. To 6 place. To. Play one on t. V. Is today the future. Cut. D. W. Dot com for closer to the making. Clear cut. The flood plain. Clothes play. This is g. W. News live from berlin Boris Johnson<\/a> and his conservatives when a resoundingly jordi in the u. K. Election. With this bad day and this majority we will at last be able to do all. The time johnson celebrates at Party Headquarters<\/a> before heading to downing street where he now plans to push breadsticks through parliament will have full analysis and look at what this means for the u. K. Meanwhile European Union<\/a> leaders are processing the conservative victor","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"archive.org","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","width":"800","height":"600","url":"\/\/ia803100.us.archive.org\/4\/items\/DW_20191213_091500_DocFilm\/DW_20191213_091500_DocFilm.thumbs\/DW_20191213_091500_DocFilm_000001.jpg"}},"autauthor":{"@type":"Organization"},"author":{"sameAs":"archive.org","name":"archive.org"}}],"coverageEndTime":"20240716T12:35:10+00:00"}