If one day you suddenly want to split up, you inexplicably get a huge share of the family property, ranking third in the world's richest list, what is the first thing you have to do...
I'll wake up the first time anyway!
But 30 years ago, this really happened...
On December 25, 1991, the Soviet Union, one of the two powers of the Cold War, fell apart, leaving a huge nuclear arsenal divided into four, as one of the largest heirs, Ukraine suddenly became the world's third largest nuclear power, conventional weapons and equipment also squeezed into the forefront of the world. Real estate alone is already worth a lot, including the Black Sea Shipyard, known as the "cradle of aircraft carriers"; the Antonov Design Bureau, which manufactures An-225 transport aircraft; two intercontinental missile production plants; and the Morof Design Bureau, which manufactures main battle tanks; and the Madasic Company, which houses Chinese pigeons, and there are as many as 3594 military enterprises! In addition to military enterprises, it also inherited 350 warships, 1500 combat aircraft, 6500 tanks, 7150 armored vehicles, 170 nuclear bomb silos, 1272 intercontinental missile nuclear warheads, and 2500 tactical nuclear weapons. But who would have thought that 20 years later, it would become the poorest country in All of Europe!
(Ukrainian people in "shock therapy")
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the strategic balance of the world was broken. Ukraine sits on a huge number of nuclear weapons, not only has not gained a foothold but has become the target of public criticism, once the mismanagement of nuclear weapons is used by terrorists, it will pose a major threat to world peace! Therefore, Western countries surrounded and blocked, forcing Ukraine to "scrap its weapons.". So is Ukraine willing to self-destruct the Great Wall?
Of course not! Ukraine is not stupid, naturally know that nuclear weapons are the weapon of the town and the state, once there is no protection of nuclear weapons, anyone can threaten you, but with nuclear weapons, they are not afraid of threats? These war weapons are not real money and silver, and they cannot be eaten as food, and they still need to spend a lot of silver to maintain, and they can't eat food. So Ukraine sells weapons for food, but weapons you can sell if you want? Russia was the first to jump out to intervene, and Ukraine had to give it to Russia 8 Tu 160s as a offset against energy export costs. But worse than Russia is the United States, because the preset strike coordinates of the nuclear warhead deployed by the former Soviet Union in Ukraine are all aimed at the United States, but the launch code is not in Ukraine, but in the hands of Russia, so the United States has to shoot!
(Missile Silo)
Ukraine's nuclear weapons are deaf ears, not only no password, but even the next silo has to rely on foot, because the elevator is not homegrown, and it cannot be moved without related supporting facilities. The 19 Tu-160 strategic bombers that were divided into families were given to Russia 8 in order to pay off the debt, but even if there were 11 more, he could not play with them. Because this thing is too expensive, a take-off and landing cost of 60,000-80,000 US dollars, not to mention the need to replace the engine regularly. Wanting to sell and sell, wanting to destroy no money to build, and at this time the United States and Russia hollowed out a "write-off agreement", which just allowed Ukraine to breathe. The United States promised to pay 175 million yuan in "destruction funds" and 155 million yuan in economic assistance, and russia also agreed to share the proceeds from the sale of enriched uranium to Ukraine. Overall, the United States spent $340 million to lay down the world's third nuclear power!
Afterwards, many people laughed at Ukraine for being too stupid, and if they retained some weapons, they would not end up where they are today, but even if history repeats itself, Ukraine probably has no second way! So the question is, is it easy to destroy nuclear weapons? Is the 175 million given by the United States enough?
Nuclear weapons do not only refer to nuclear warheads, but also include means of delivery and launchers, compared with nuclear warheads and launchers, the destruction of delivery vehicles is the most thrilling, from strategic nuclear submarines, bombers, small to intercontinental missiles, what method should be used to destroy the fastest and most economical?
The destruction of nuclear weapons is not as simple as digging a pit and burying some soil, it is an extremely complex, costly, and extremely dangerous system engineering. For nuclear submarine bombers, it is generally a cutting method, that is to say, a cutting machine can be solved, and the remaining scrap copper and rotten iron can also sell for some money. But the missile can be complicated, a little careless may wipe the gun and go wrong, a Martian missile launched will be troublesome! Isn't it just destroyed when launched, it is true, but there is a limit to the number of missiles destroyed by the launch method. The INF Treaty stipulates that no more than 100 missiles shall be destroyed in this manner, and the interval between launches shall not be less than 6 hours, and data should not be collected for research and development. So Ukraine's more than 3,000 missiles, only 100 can be launched and destroyed, and the rest can not be 10 bundles to blow up, right?
Missile explosions are not fireworks, but the destruction of missile detonation methods is one of them. The method of concentrating several missile projectiles with the launcher and then detonating the bomb to blow them up has a significant effect on the damage of solid fuel and missile engines. However, the most commonly used method for destroying missiles is the cutting method, in order to effectively achieve the purpose of destruction, the two sides must also formulate the specific parts of the missile to be cut, which should be cut into several sections to prevent re-welding after returning to the furnace. It is reasonable to say that the missiles are gone, and those launch facilities are useless, and it is of little significance to destroy them. However, in order to sleep soundly, the United States still has to let these facilities "disappear". The launchers of aircraft submarines are usually destroyed along with the main body. The launch vehicles on the ground and the erection facilities are also cut, cutting from the non-interface to completely scrap. But how do you destroy an underground silo? You can't fill it out directly!
Of course not, it is usually necessary to blow up the upper 6 meters of the silo, or dig up at least 8 meters of facilities, so that the silo can permanently lose its launch capacity!
Having done all the above, are nuclear weapons officially destroyed? The answer is that it's still early! It should be known that the deterrent effect of nuclear weapons depends on nuclear warheads, and nuclear warheads cannot be destroyed in the above way, because there are a large number of radioactive elements in the warheads, and the TNT equivalent can reach millions of tons, and once improperly handled, it is likely to cause major nuclear leakage accidents. Therefore, the destruction of nuclear warheads is the top priority!
For the destruction of nuclear charge, it is often used to use the deep burial method, the nuclear charge is mixed with other radioactive waste, cured in a container with radiation-proof properties, and then put into a special ceramic jar, and then put into a high-density steel box, and finally buried deep underground, so that it is isolated from the organism for at least 300 years!
But nuclear warheads can also be "turned into treasure", and huge amounts of enriched uranium can be specially processed into low-enriched uranium for fuel in nuclear power plants. However, whether it is recycling or direct destruction, it requires huge funds, and the United States spent 400 million US dollars to destroy some plutonium elements that year, while Russia spent nearly 3.5 billion US dollars only because of different destruction methods. Think about whether the 175 million compensation given by the United States is really enough? How did Ukraine become the poorest country...