In Germany, the dispute on the advisability of further accommodation in the country nuclear weapons of the United States. Prominent members of the Social democratic party (SPD) demand to withdraw it, but their partners in the ruling coalition of the Christian democratic Union (CDU) opposed. The discussion involved and external actors: the Secretary General of the Alliance Jens Stoltenberg said that the United States give the Europeans a “nuclear umbrella”; the American Ambassador in Berlin Richard Grenell urged Germans “not to undermine the solidarity that underpins the nuclear deterrence of NATO.” Russia has long insisted on the withdrawal of nuclear arsenals of the United States from Europe, however, in the case of the relocation of the bomb Germany, they could be even closer to the Russian borders, in Poland.A discussion on American tactical nuclear weapons erupted in Germany after it became known that the defense Minister Annegret Kramp-of Karrenbauer (CDU) agreed with the Pentagon mark Esper on the acquisition of 30 fighter-bombers F/A-18F production of Boeing. Along with buying 93 Eurofighter from Airbus they are designed to replace the obsolete Tornado and in the event of a conflict involving nuclear forces can carry American bombs B61.American nuclear weapons stored in West Germany since 1950-ies, at the peak of the confrontation between the USA and the USSR the size of the Arsenal reached 5 thousand charges. Today we are talking about much more modest numbers — only about 20 bombs, but it seems the representatives of some political forces in Germany are unnecessary. In 2010, the Parliament has instructed the Federal government to secure the withdrawal of U.S. nuclear weapons. More active than others on the export of bombs and ending Germany’s participation in the so-called nuclear sharing NATO missions insist green and left. The social Democrats then solidaritywith with them, then oppose the change, but it is now prominent members of the SPD initiated the discussion about the need to abandon the deployment of American bombs on German territory.He recalled that the U.S. government has revised its approach to nuclear weapons and made it clear that “it is necessary not only for deterrence, but for waging wars.”In the past year, the Pentagon has indeed adopted a new Doctrine on nuclear operations, but reserved the right to use nuclear weapons on a limited scale to deflect the course of conflicts using conventional weapons. In addition, in recent years for the United States once again became a topical issue of containment of Russian tactical nuclear capabilities. Practical steps in this direction have already been taken: for example, on submarines of the Ohio class commenced placement of ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads of low power W76-2. American AVI��bombs, located on the German military base in Büchel (in their latest modification of the B61-12), unable to bear the charges of variable-output. Russian officials in this regard said “lowering of the nuclear threshold.” Rolf Muetzenich called Washington’s actions “unpredictable”, to doubt that in the event of a crisis, the U.S. government will listen to any arguments of Germany. He was supported by co-Chairman of the SPD, Norbert Walter-Borjans. He urged to abandon the replacement of the Tornado aircraft that can be equipped with nuclear weapons, and exit the program “nuclear missions” of the Alliance.But they sided not all the prominent social Democrats. So, the call to abandon the us nuclear weapons did not support the SPD representing the Minister for foreign Affairs of Germany Heiko Maas. He said that Germany should not in this matter to go “special way”, it “would undermine the credibility of Berlin from its closest allies”. According to the head of German diplomacy, the presence on the territory of the country of nuclear weapons the United States gives Germany additional weight in the negotiations on security issues within NATO.Even more categorically against the non-participation of Germany in a “joint nuclear missions of NATO” were made by the representatives of the Christian Democrats Angela Merkel (SPD is with them in the coalition). Expert on defense of the CDU/CSU Henning Otta told the media that “the naivety of some members of the leadership of the SPD harmful to the security of Germany.” His colleague Patrick Sensburg suggested that the social Democrats “have fallen into some kind of Nirvana”. “They don’t realize that U.S. nuclear weapons serve primarily our protection”, he added. The official speaker of the German government Steffen Seibert said that Germany remains committed to its obligations within the framework of preservation of the nuclear potential of NATO. Thus, according to the published newspaper Handelsblatt survey, for the removal of American nuclear bombs from the territory of the country were 86% of Germans.The Secretary General of the Alliance Jens Stoltenberg in an interview with German media said that allies appreciate the “clear commitment” of Germany its obligations. “Agreement within NATO about nuclear weapons today is as important as it always was and still is. They guarantee to European allies for nuclear protection”,— he stressed. The US Ambassador in Berlin Richard Grenell was less diplomatic. “Instead of trying to undermine the solidarity which forms the basis of nuclear deterrence, NATO, it’s time for Germany to fulfill its obligations to allies and to constantly invest in collective nuclear potential of the Alliance”,— he wrote in an article for Die Welt. The U.S. Ambassador warned that Europe was still threatened by the danger from Russia, China, North Korea and other countries. “If Hermaniya wants to contribute to the preservation of peace, according to its leadership, now is the time to show this through solidarity. Whether Germany will take on this responsibility or rejected, reaping the economic rewards of security that guarantee other allies?” he asked.Moscow has long criticized the concept of “joint nuclear missions”. Russian officials say it’s illegal, and practices located in Europe, us bombs, violates the first two articles of the Treaty on the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons (NPT). According to them, the nuclear powers undertook not to transfer either directly or indirectly, nuclear weapons to non-nuclear States. And the latter undertook not to make such a weapon — again, either directly or indirectly. Meanwhile, during the “joint nuclear operations” non-nuclear NATO countries place nuclear bombs on its territory, and the pilots learn the skills of handling and use of nuclear weapons. USA to this criticism say that about any violation of the NPT it is not because the weapon is under constant control of the Americans and are not physically transferred.Anyway, the current discussion in Germany, Russia yet does not promise anything good. Even if you imagine that you will defeat the supporters of non-deployment of U.S. tactical nuclear weapons, which is better and this Russia will not. USA probably just peredoziruet weapons in other NATO countries (now their nuclear weapons stored in Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium and Turkey). While in Warsaw the nuclear issue is ambiguous. On the one hand, five years ago, the then Deputy defence Minister (and current Ambassador to NATO) tomáš Stachowski already declared desire to join the North Atlantic Alliance on the joint use of nuclear weapons, but it was in the Wake of events in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine in 2014. In the past year, the Minister of foreign Affairs Jacek Czaputowicz to the question of Der Spiegel magazine about the possibility of placing nuclear weapons said diametrically opposed: “We do not want.” But in any case Poland recognizes nuclear guarantee from NATO and the U.S. as a basic element of European security, as well as the right of NATO to determine the placement of nuclear weapons in the future, pledging to consistently fulfill its Alliance commitments.On Friday evening to debate the fate of U.S. nuclear weapons in Germany unexpectedly joined the U.S. Embassy in Warsaw. Ambassador Georgetta of Mosbacher wrote on Twitter: “If Germany wants to reduce nuclear capabilities, and to weaken NATO, it is possible that Poland — which pays their fair share, are aware of the risks and is situated on the Eastern flank of NATO — could size��to shift the appropriate forces and means at its territory.”The advent of nuclear weapons the United States in Poland, clearly would be inconsistent with the Fundamental act of the Russia—NATO from 1997. However, the sides have long accused each other of violating it.Elena Chernenko
