Opinion: Neutron Weapons in Syria

An independent look on the oingoing situation in Syria

Written by Miroslav Lazanski; published at BalkanBreakingNews, translated by Mario Andrijasevic exclusively for SouthFront

 What did the president of Russia Vladimir Putin had in mind when he said that he “hopes that Russian army won´t need to use nuclear weapons against the terrorist”? He probably thought on neutron bomb which can wipe out the people but does not have a destructive effect like a “classic” atom bomb. Apropos, the neutron bomb keeps the military equipment and buildings intact, but it destroys the enemy’s soldiers.

This type of atomic weapon was first tested in the spring of 1963 in the Nevada desert and it became a part of US military weapons in the late seventies, during the Cold War. So, first was made by the Americans, then later by the Soviets, then by the French and the Chinese and later probably also by the Israelis. Neutron bomb was created as NATO’s response due to fear of a surprise attack by Warsaw Pact forces to the ​​Western Europe at a time when US generals assessed that NATO has no more than 48 hours warning before a massive attack of 90 Divisions of the Warsaw Pact and that in such situation reliability of any nuclear reaction, on strategic or tactical level, is also in serious crisis. According to Western strategists defense of heavily populated central Europe would be most effective with the usage of neutron bombs which would spare the cities and local residents hidden in cellars and shelters, and kill the military crew inside Soviet tanks while advancing toward Paris.

The Americans back then were saying that the neutron weapons are “humane”. Of course they are “humane”, but to the buildings. It kills people and leaves bridges, houses, factories, tanks and planes intact. Promoting the “advantages” of neutron weapons, the United States convinced the public of Western Europe to more easily and with less resistance accept the possibility of applying this weapon, because it just stops manpower of the enemy. In fact, neutron weapons are based on the principle of fusion of the thermonuclear explosives, which develop a very high temperature and it basically starts a thermonuclear reaction – explosion. If it would be technically possible that by developing thermonuclear weapons the use of nuclear detonator, made of uranium-235 or plutonium-239, in order to create the necessary temperature for the start of thermonuclear fusion reactions would not be necessary, thermonuclear weapons would be “clean”, with relatively little matter of radioactive waste in comparison with conventional nuclear weapons. Therefore, the neutron bomb explosions produce an enormous amount of fast neutrons with high energy, able to break through concrete, iron, earth, lead, man’s body …etc.

Neutron nuclear missile with force of two to three kilotons cause initial radiation equivalent to the explosion of the classic nuclear missile with strength of 20 to 30 kilotons. Radioactivity of the neutron bomb is direct and induced. Neutron bomb was only the beginning of the era of extermination of people and the preservation of property. By adopting the weapons the West reduced the “nuclear threshold” and the Soviets did not want to be left behind. Moscow’s stance was presented forward in 1978 by the Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev, saying that “the Soviet Union is against the production of neutron weapons, but if the West produces such weapons, the Soviet Union will not remain a passive observer.” So the Soviet Union soon after also developed its neutron weapons. Neutrons have become a battle agent.

If there was an explosion of a neutron bomb than has strength of a kiloton at a height of 100 to 150 meters, its devastating effects on buildings and industrial facilities would be limited to an area with a diameter of about 200 meters, but lethal doses of radiation would be effective on the surface diameter of about 1.200 meters. For crews inside armored vehicles, deadly radius would be lower for 20 to 30 percent compared to people outside of the armor. Protection could provide only the thick walls of paraffin, wet soil or reinforced concrete.

No matter how you wish it would be, the world neutron scenario is not just an intellectual game nor is it just a Hollywood scenario. Nuclear bat is constantly present, because international relations today are determined exclusively by the syndrome of force and power. Pentagon is deploying, or have long held, about 200 nuclear weapons in the EU countries and Turkey. Nuclear arsenals are getting more and more modern, the US have recently modernized their nuclear bomb B-61-12 while the British are modernizing their submarine missile nuclear potential.

And then we come to the statements of Vladimir Putin. Few years ago Russia has in the new military doctrine indicated that it can as first resort to the use of nuclear weapons in the event of conventional war and the negative development. The latest version of the military doctrine of “nuclear threshold” has been lowered even more and the terrorists in Syria should take Putin’s statement as a serious warning. While the Islamic State has control over the sparsely populated parts of Syria, mainly in the east of the country, and if they continue to support the terrorist organization, whose branches also threaten Russia, I would not rule out a possibility that the area would get hit by a neutron bomb. Terrorists are killed, the area is quickly decontaminated, other objects preserved and all other “interested” warned on time.

After all, there have been reports that Saudi Arabia has already dropped neutron bomb in Yemen.