Are American B-61 Nukes moving from Incirlik Turkey to Deveselu Romania?

On Thursday morning a friend of mine tipped me off to a story I hadn't seen yet in the news; reportedly the Americans were moving their B-61 tactical nuclear bombs from Incirlik Turkey to
Deveselu Romania due to unrest in Turkey.  Without knowing any more facts about this story, it is absolutely ridiculous for several reasons which I will explain, and unlike the "anonymous sources" that were originally quoted as saying the move was taking place, I will explain to you why it is laughable and appalling journalism to report and amplify this blatant fabrication.

Who the hell are you? Why should I trust you over a news outlet?

Good question.  I'm the guy who for the past 4 years has been researching Cold War era nuclear weapons storage facilities, and conventional ammunition storage facilities, in Canada.  Unrelated?  Well, things really haven't changed much.  Some of the weapons delivery systems are even the same.  Interestingly, my research has also brought me to information about weapons storage facilities internationally, since the United States built all of their nuclear weapons storage facilities to the same specifications, improving them incrementally over the years, but keeping to some basic tenants.  Do I have a PhD in Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaties? ...Architecture of Weapons Storage Areas?  ...History of Nuclear Weapons? No. I'm just a guy with a history hobby who gets really pissed off when the public is taken for a bunch of idiots by wild lies which can be disproven if you're familiar with the topic.

1) American policy has been, and continues to be, to not confirm or deny where their nuclear weapons are stored, which is coy, but not useful when you're trying to figure out the historical record.  Therefore, any news outlet which reports they have contacted the US Government, Department of Defence, or Department of State, or whoever, and have received to response or confirmation to the presence or movements of nuclear weapons should not frame this in a suspicious manner or make it seem like an admission of guilt.  They never say where any nuclear weapons are stored, ever.  They're not starting now; it's not suspicious.

2) American standards for physical security at locations where nuclear weapons are stored are the highest of any facility anywhere.  Building standards for weapons storage areas show the fences are higher and cemented into the ground, so you can't dig under them.  There are multiple fences, with barbed wire, and a defoliated area around the storage area, so the guard towers, armed with machine guns, can take out any potential threats.  Recently, B61 nuclear weapons specifically, are stored in underground vaults that pop up inside hardened airplane hangers designed specifically for F-15E Strike Eagles, F-16s, or other European allied aircraft capable of being used as nuclear weapon delivery vehicles.  The American military takes their custodial duties of their state's nuclear weapons very seriously.

In 2005 the following locations had facilities capable of storing B-61 nuclear weapons to the physical security standards required:

- Kleine Brogel AB, Belgium
- Büchel AB, Germany
- Nörvenich AB, Germany
- Ramstein AB, Germany
- Araxos AB, Greece
- Aviano AB, Italy
- Ghedi Torre AB, Italy
- Volkel AB, Netherlands
- Akinci AB, Turkey
- Balikesir AB, Turkey
- Incirlik AB, Turkey
- RAF Lakenheath, United Kingdom

There is no reason for the American military to take 50 B-61 tactical nuclear weapons to Romania, when there are several other bases in Europe which do have the proper physical security, and some already have nuclear weapons in storage.

3) Nuclear agreements must be in place at a political level for the storage of those weapons in other countries; in 2005 the nations with which the US had agreements were

- Belgium
- Germany
- Italy
- Netherlands
- Turkey
- United Kingdom
   (NB: not Greece)

(source: https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/euro.pdf)

4) It isn't just physical security; a Munitions Support Squadron would need to be present in Deveselu Romania to handle the weapons, which is not the case.

5) They're gravity-bombs, Deveselu Air Base no longer has a full runway (not sure how many feet are left); the ballistic missile defence facility is built on top of part of it.

6) Additionally, how would the B-61s be transported there?  Normally the Americans do not ship nuclear weapons by ground, they are flown in by heavy transport (C-5/C-17); but without an air strip capable of handling those planes, no such transit would be possible. @natehale notes that McChord AFB has the only nuclear airlift unit capable of moving the B-61 nuclear weapons from Incirlik, and there have been no reports of any movements of heavy transport from McChord.  Plane-spotters are very diligent; someone would have seen something.

But hey, don't believe me; follow the foremost the experts in the field and make up your own mind.

Hans Kristensen (@nukestrat) is the Director of the Federation of American Scientists Nuclear Information Project, and foremost expert in this field globally.

Jeffrey Lewis (@ArmsControlWonk jlewis@miis.edu) is the Director of the East Asia Nonproliferation Program, at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies and columnist for Foreign Policy Magazine.

Late breaking, Georgi Gotev (@GeorgiGotev) the Senior Editor of the original news outlet to run with this story explains his decision to run with the fake news here.  Thanks.  Your ignorance on the topic clearly absolves you of any fault in being party of distributing misinformation from the Russian media propaganda machine.  You were targeted by Russian intelligence to distribute this story, that paints Romania in a poor light, and furthers the Russian narrative that Romania is a threat to Russia.  First the ballistic missile shield facility, now nukes? This paints the picture that Romania is the enemy and will be a target of future Russian aggression.  Well done.

Senate bill calls for restrictions on Russian Open Skies Treaty overflights of the US

On July 14th 2016 a Simple Resolution was passed in the Senate. The sponsor of this bill was Tom Cotton, Junior Senator from Arkansas (R). Being a Canadian, the term Simple Resolution was foreign to me, but it doesn't seem to be a law, but more of a finger-wagging statement, which says:

S.Res. 544: A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate regarding compliance enforcement of Russian violations of the Open Skies Treaty.

"... it is the sense of the Senate that— (1) restrictions upon the ability of Open Skies Treaty aircraft to overfly all portions of the territory of a State Party impede openness and transparency of military forces and activities and undermine mutual understanding and confidence, especially when coupled with an ongoing refusal to address compliance concerns raised by other States Party subject to such restrictions; (2) it is essential to the accomplishment of the purpose of the Open Skies Treaty that Open Skies Treaty aircraft be able to observe the entire territory of a State Party in a timely and reciprocal manner as provided for under the Open Skies Treaty; (3) the Russian Federation’s restrictions upon the ability of Open Skies Treaty aircraft to overfly all portions of the territory of the Russian Federation constitute violations of the Open Skies Treaty; and (4) for so long as the Russian Federation remains in noncompliance with the Open Skies Treaty, the United States should take such measures as are necessary to bring about the Russian Federation’s return to full compliance with its treaty obligations, including, as appropriate, through the imposition of restrictions upon Russian overflights of the United States." (ref here and here)

This Bill is a politically motivated punitive measure spurned on by lobbyists for the defence industry, under-informed politicians looking to score points riding the Red Scare wave, political appointees, and the head of the DIA, who I've written about before (cited below). For a host of reasons, like desperate caged animals, the these people have been rabbidly spreading the narrative of a renewed Red Scare of Russia, and trying to convince the American people that Russians are spying over the US with these "treaty overflights". Further, they state these overflights have now become "vital tools" for Russia's intelligence collection, even though the plane's cameras produce 30cm resolution photos, which are similar in resolution to commercial satellite photos.

Opponents of the Open Skies Treaty need Americans to be afraid of the Russians, as they were of the Soviet Union. It seems the only way the American military can get more funding is by having a nefarious super-power to duel with. Repeated statements about Russian "RESTRICTIONS" on overflights of Russia have been parroted by the media, with no fact-checking or elaboration regarding what "restrictions" they are talking about. The impression given is that Russia is *blocking* overflights of large pieces of Russia, hiding invasion forces, and obstructing arms inspections of the country at every turn.

This is somewhere between fantasy, wishful thinking, and an extreme stretch of the facts. Almost none of it is true. Almost. The restrictions put in place by the Russians are mostly in contravention of the agreement as it is written; TRUE. However, the restrictions do not impede the inspection of the entire territory of the Russian Federation, very small portions of Russia have had any restriction at all, and nothing is "hidden" by any of the restrictions.  I've already covered the misinformation these factions are trying to spread here, here and here.

Russia's "Restrictions" imposed on other states' overflights are as follows:

• Limited distance allowed for flights over Kaliningrad (not unreasonable)
• Treaty-defined 10km restriction from border with independent states (Breakaway republics of Georgia, dovetails into unrelated border dispute)
• Restricted airspace over some of Moscow forcing a higher overflight (not outrageous)
• Restricted airspace over Chechnya forcing a higher overflight (also not surprising)
• Declaring "Force majeure" on an unknown (2? 3?) overflights since 2011 due to VIP on the ground (certainly poor form)

I really don't see any of these are so bad that you'd want to start contravening an Arms Verification treaty to prove a point.  If the USA is going to arbitrarily impose restrictions on Russian overflights without getting the approval of the OSCC it will be as much in the wrong as Russia is.  If these are such egregious affronts to the treaty, why is no other country crying foul?  There are 32 other Nations, other than the United States and Russia, who have not voiced objections to these issues with the same fervour as the United States.  Why haven't the Americans convened a meeting regarding these issues and come up with a resolution put forth by the rest of the signatory parties to the Treaty?  Why is it the United States is doing these punitive measures alone and without any other country's support?  What measures are they even considering?  Will they be proportional to what Russia is imposing?  Tit-for-tat?

---

Not a misquote, they are his own written words from his own column here

Let me introduce you to Junior Senator from Arkansas USA Tom Cotton, a Republican; why?  Because I believe he routinely recklessly endangers the world, and is a horrible misogynist, despite graduating from Harvard and being a decorated former Army Captain, and veteran of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

He was also called a "mutinous" by a General over the letter he (and 46 others) sent to Iran which was against the US national interest and the narrative Obama was broadcasting during the nuclear deal negotiations.  You could read this.  He has also been routinely called out for taking money from hard-line Israeli lobbyists and significant donations from defence contractors.  This man is a one man war machine.

War is good for business.

If this man is advocating reprisals against Russia for minor infractions of the Open Skies Treaty, you should be wondering how this benefits the people who fund him; specifically the extremely arms industry and their deep pockets.

Peace isn't good for business.

---

Open Skies Treaty overflight OS-11-012; Russia over Canada in 2011

 Russian Open Skies Tu-154M-Lk-1
 Ottawa International Airport on 2013-10-27
Photo Credit: Colin Elliott

Indeed this is becoming repetitive, but here we have the 2011 Flight Plan for the Russian Open Skies treaty overflight of Canada.  Clearly this time the focus was on hitting all of the West Coast locations with any military interest.  The data I was provided from DND looked like it was printed, scanned, printed, scanned again, and altered in various programs along the way; so while legible to the human eye, it is causing problems with my OCR software.  If any of the data points aren't exactly where they should be, I apologize, but that's as good as it gets!

Open Skies Treaty overflight OS-12-018; Russia over Canada in 2012

Russian Open Skies Tu-154M-Lk-1
Ottawa International Airport on 2013-10-27
Photo Credit: Colin Elliott

I'm working backwards through the flight plans and mission reports of Russian overflights of Canada under the Open Skies Treaty, and I am noticing some similarities and trends.  Since they only have ~5000-6000km according to the treaty to use in one mission, they can't visit every since military facility; but they make a really good effort.  The Russians have a few favourite locations they like to visit as often as possible; CFAD Dundurn and CFB Suffield are two of those locations.  Former Pinetree Line Long Range Radar Stations are favourites; after all, why would we decommission them and not build something in the same spot?  Any and all military bases are obvious targets of areal photography as well; Cold Lake, Kingston, Borden (w/ CFAD Angus), etc...

Open Skies Treaty overflight OS-13-020; Russia over Canada in 2013

Russian Open Skies Tu-154M-Lk-1
Ottawa International Airport on 2013-10-27
Photo Credit: Colin Elliott

As a follow-on to my previous post and the one before that on Open Skies Treaty overflights of Canada, here are the 2013 coordinates where cameras were engaged and disengaged, and flight paths.  This mission was performed between 2013-06-15 and 2013-06-20.

Click the square bracketed icon at the top right of the map to blow it up full-screen so you can read it better.