Nuclear Strength Compared

Press, Volume CX, Issue 32394, 5 September 1970, Page 13

Nuclear Strength Compared

(N.Z.P.A.-Reuter— Copyright) LONDON, Sept. 4.; The Soviet Union has surged ahead of the United States in the deployment of land-based inter-continental nuclear missiles, the Institute for Strategic Studies (1.5.5.) reported today. But China was lagging far behind in the mass destruction weapons race, with her ability to deliver nuclear weapons still limited to elderly bombers. In its annual publication “The Military Balance 1970-71” the London-based independent research institute said that the Russians could now deploy 1300 inter-con-tinental ballistic missiles (1.C.8.M.)—246 more than the Americans. But the United States had

gone into a new technical era | with a three-warhead system i on its 8000-mile range Minuteman 3 rocket and was con- | verting submarines to take the 10-warhead Poseidon missile.

“It thus promises to increase its warhead lead over the Soviet Union,” the institute said, although the Russians have been testing their own three-warhead system.

The United States was also in the lead in submarinelaunched ballastic missiles with 656 compared with the Russians’ 280. The institute estimated that the United States had more than 6000 nuclear warheads fitted to missiles capable in theory of reaching Soviet territory, while only some 2000 Soviet warheads were associated with missiles with the range to hit the continental United States.

Each country had more than three million men under arms, but while the United

States had been cutting its defence spending, that of the Soviet Union had slowly gone up. The Russians had moved another five divisions into Europe since 1968 and in the last year had put nine more divisions in the Chinese border area where China has also strengthened its forces. However, the Chinese were heavily outnumbered by tanks, artillery, missiles and all forms of equipment, and ; the Russians also had an overwhelmingly superior : force of tactical nuclear weai pons near the border. ; Despite the launching of i an artifical satellite in April, : 1970, Chinese operational ab- : ility to deliver nuclear wea- ■ pons was still limited to agei ing bombers, although she ■ may now be giving priority to development on an 1.C.8.M. On the military balance in ’ Europe, the institute reported that tjie forces of the North.

Atlantic Treaty Organisation bad a two-to-one superiority over the Communist Warsaw Pact powers in nuclear warheads which could be delivered by planes, shortrange missiles and artillery. N.A.T.O. had about 7000 nuclear warheads compared with an estimated 3500 Soviet ones available to the Pact forces, the institute said. There was little significant difference in manpower strengths, but N.A.T.O. was heavily out-numbered in armour and tactical aircraft. In Northern Central and Southern Europe, N.A.T.O. had only 7600 tanks against a force of 19,000 (including 9400 Soviet tanks) which the Pact powers could muster. The numerical weakness was offset to some extent by i N.A.T.O.’s superiority in antitank weapons. In air power, N.A.T.O.’s force of 3156 tactical aircraft was nearly 2000 less than that of the Warsaw forces.