--- title: "MIRVs: The Individual Missiles that Contain Multiple Nuclear Bombs" description: "In 2023, 32 years since the end of the Cold War, it would be nice to think that the chaos of a nuclear arms race was long behind us. Unfortunately, though, in February, tensions between Russia and the U.S. over Ukraine had Vladimir Putin withdrawing from arms agreements and waving his monster Satan 2 MIRVed missile about.\n\nIt's been called an \"engineering miracle\" and \"a crowning achievement in rocket technology,\" and Putin has described it as the \"next generation of nuclear missile.\" It can fly across both the North and South poles and penetrate all current anti-ballistic missile defences, rendering it invincible.\n\nIn response to Putin's alarming change of rhetoric, U.S. President Biden reminded the world that \"A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.\" We've avoided the apocalypse so far with a guarantee of mutually assured destruction, but MIRVs threaten to tip the scales. And it's not just Russia we have to worry about anymore.\n\n## What is a MIRV?\n\nMIRV stands for \"multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles,\" which essentially means it's a missile that can carry several warheads that can be aimed at different targets. The term is usually applied to intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) carrying thermonuclear warheads, allowing for the horrifying possibility of a targeted nuclear cluster bombing.\n\nIn a typical MIRV launch sequence, the missile is ejected from its silo and taken to altitude in three boost stages. Then, 180 seconds after launch, the missile reaches suborbital height, and the post-boost vehicle, known as a bus, breaks away. This bus, which houses the warheads, then manoeuvres itself to prepare for deployment. Finally, the warheads are released, and a flight computer guides each to its target.\n\n## What are the Advantages of MIRVs?\n\nStuffing a missile with multiple warheads provides four clear offensive advantages.\n\nFirstly, more warheads do more damage. I mean, obviously, seven nuclear warheads will do more damage than one of the same size. But several small ones can also cause much more destruction than a single large one. This is because radiation and pressure from a nuclear blast falls steeply with distance. For example, blast pressure at 4km is only 1/64th of the pressure at 1km. This means that MIRVs can achieve the desired destruction levels with fewer expensive missiles, launches and launch facilities.\n\nSecondly, MIRVs are excellent at overwhelming anti-ballistic missile defenses (ABMs), which are often designed to bring down just one warhead at a time.\n\nThirdly, MIRVs have enough room to carry penetration aids. These are devices that increase the likelihood of the warheads evading ABMs and hitting their target. The most common choice are decoys. These are inexpensive, unarmed, optically identical copies of the warheads, which are launched at the same time. Some also emit noise and light to increase the likelihood of attracting the attention of the ABMs. Another option is chaff. This is a cloud of aluminium, metallized glass fibre, or plastic that can confuse radar-guided missile defences.\n\nEvading ABMs dramatically increases the probability of a successful attack. For example, a typical, single warhead ICBM might have a 50% chance of destroying its target. A MIRV can send two warheads and two decoys to that same target, virtually guaranteeing success. And it'll still have enough left over to destroy two or three more.\n\nWhich brings us to our final advantage. MIRVs can attack multiple targets simultaneously up to 1,500km apart. This means that one successful launch could result in the destruction of five or more high-value targets. Launching multiple MIRVs could wipe out the enemy's entire land-based arsenal in one go.\n\n## Invention and Development\n\nMany people attribute the development of MIRVs to the invention of anti-ballistic missile systems. After all, reducing the effectiveness of ABM is one of their key features. The timing was also pretty coincidental.\n\nYou see, in 1962, America announced that its Minuteman had entered service. This was an ICBM which used solid fuel, allowing it to stand ready for long periods without the need to fuel before launch. The name was a nod to the Minutemen of the American Revolutionary War, famed for being ready to fight at short notice.\n\nThe weapon was branded as a nuclear deterrent, with the ability to reach Soviet cities if the U.S. was ever attacked. Naturally, the Soviets responded by initiating work on a defence system capable of shooting the Minutemen down and came up with the A-350 anti-ballistic missile launcher, which NATO would call Galosh.\n\nSo here's where the coincidence comes in, while Galosh wasn't operational until 1978, the U.S. heard about it long before. So when in 1968 they conducted the test launch of the Minuteman III, the world's first MIRV, armed with three W62 Mk-12 warheads, many assumed it was developed in an effort to evade Galosh. This would've made America responsible for the nuclear escalation that followed.\n\nHowever, the Department of Defence gave testimony to Congress between 1968 and 1969, which disputes this assumption. Dr John Foster, then Director of Defence, Research, and Engineering explained that MIRV was designed to \"increase targeting capability rather than penetrate ABM defences\" as when they'd been planning their targets for Minuteman II, they'd discovered that the number of desired aim points exceeded the number of Minuteman missiles.\n\nDefence Secretary Laird also commented, explaining that MIRV was a \"normal outgrowth of regular research and development,\" which had been \"under consideration for several years even prior to the time that we knew of the development of Galosh.\"\n\nDr Richard Garwin would later say, \"the military wanted MIRVs simply because more warheads are better; you can destroy more targets with them.\"\n\n## First Strike\n\nThe reason the motives behind MIRVs are so important is that their invention significantly raised the risk of nuclear war and escalated the arms race. The exact opposite of the \"stabilising effect\" they were meant to achieve.\n\nThis is because they massively increased the incentive for both sides to strike first, and they did this in two ways.\n\nFirstly, they upset the balance of warheads and silos. Before MIRVs, the first country to strike with single-warhead missiles could hit a few silos but had no chance to destroy them all. This would virtually guarantee a nuclear counterstrike and mutually assured destruction. Therefore, nobody wanted to go first.\n\nMIRVs upset the delicate balance by massively increasing the number of missiles per silo. So theoretically, one strike from an arsenal of MIRVed missiles could destroy every silo of their opponents, leaving them unable to retaliate. In fact, it would be feasible to have enough missiles left over for a counterstrike if needed.\n\nIn this situation, it's clear that achieving first-strike would all but guarantee victory, switching the incentive from holding back to going first. This massively increased the temptation for one side to trigger a nuclear war in a time of tension or crisis.\n\nSecondly, one of the advantages of MIRVs, the fact that they require fewer silos and launchers, was also a bad thing. It concentrated firepower into relatively few targets, increasing the likelihood of an enemy wiping out the entire arsenal. This created a \"use 'em or lose 'em\" scenario and, again, incentivised the first strike.\n\nThe only exception to this is MIRVed Submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs). These are considered invulnerable to attack, so they don't raise the same issues as their land-based counterparts.\n\n## Escalation\n\nOf course, this only matters if both sides have MIRVed weapons. But as they were in an arms race, the Soviets were quick to catch up, and in 1970, they began development of a fourth version of their R-36 missile to allow it to carry multiple warheads.\n\nIronically, their rush to MIRV their missiles was largely influenced by the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) conducted in 1969 to curb the arms race, not speed it up. Unfortunately, as it was difficult to verify warhead numbers, SALT settled on limiting the number of launchers instead and MIRVs became the only way to increase firepower without violating the agreement. SALT was a huge misstep, and Henry Kissinger would later reflect, saying, \"I wish I had thought through the implications of a MIRVed world more thoughtfully in 1969 and 1970 than I did.\"\n\nUnfortunately for the US, the Soviet missiles had a greater throw weight than their Minutemen and could therefore carry more warheads. Plus, America's bombers couldn't be MIRVed. This meant that while MIRVing increased America's warhead per missile count by a factor of between 3 and 6, the Soviets increased theirs by a factor of 10.\n\nBy 1975, they'd closed the gap, and both sides had roughly 2,200 warheads. This was making everyone nervous, and it would have been a good time to stop, but, as former Defense Secretary Harold Brown put it, \"When we build, they build; when we stop building, they build.\"\n\nSo by 1980, America's arsenal had remained unchanged, but the Soviets had increased theirs to 5,630, a huge number of which were fitted to their monster 10 warhead missiles, the SS-18s, named Satan I by NATO. This meant that, if the Soviets had first strike, they'd be able to wipe out 65 to 80% of America's silos and still have 1000 warheads left over for a counterstrike.\n\n## New Start\n\nFortunately, both sides were as nervous as each other about the prospect of nuclear war and the costs of producing ever more warheads. So as a continuation of SALT, SALT II talks were held between 1972 and 1979 with the aim of limiting the number of MIRVed missiles and banning new missile programs. Unfortunately, just 6 months after the agreement was signed, the US discovered a Soviet combat brigade in Cuba and withdrew from the treaty.\n\nIt took until 1991 and the dissolution of the Soviet Union, for the US and Russia to agree a new treaty, known as the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or START I, which limited nuclear warhead numbers to 6,000.\n\nNext came START II, which aimed to ban MIRVs entirely but never came into force. Instead, it was replaced by the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty, SORT, also known as the de-MIRVing agreement, in which both sides agreed to reduce their number of warheads to between 1,700 and 2,200.\n\nThen, in 2011, SORT was replaced by New START. This limits the number of warheads on both sides to 1,550 and the number of launchers to 800. It also allows for satellite and remote monitoring, as well as 18 site inspections per year, to verify compliance and build trust.\n\nSo far, so good, right? Well, roll on 2023…\n\n## Satan II\n\nTechnically, New Start is still in effect, but on the 21st of February, 2023, Vladimir Putin delivered a presidential address in which he announced the suspension of Russia's participation in the agreement. The root of the issue stems from Russia's invasion of Ukraine, in which the U.S. has taken the side of Ukraine and is providing them with \"lethal aid.\"\n\nSo, Russia no longer wants to allow the U.S. access to its nuclear facilities for the required inspections. Especially as one site, Engels Air Base is used to launch bombers and missile strikes into Ukraine. Putin also claims that the U.S. has blocked Russian inspectors at their own sites, an accusation that's strongly denied.\n\nWhat makes Putin's announcement particularly terrifying is that Russia is edging ever closer to a successful test of the RS-28 Sarmat ICBM. A new missile that Putin has described as \"a truly unique weapon that will force those who are trying to threaten our country in the heat of frenzied rhetoric to think twice.\" And, unfortunately, he's not exaggerating. If they can work out the kinks, the Sarmat, nicknamed Satan II by NATO, will be capable of delivering 10 to 16 nuclear warheads to any point on the globe. Just one missile would have a yield 50 times more powerful than the Little Boy Bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945.\n\nVladimir Degtyar, the CEO of JSC Makeyev, the company behind the Sarmat, describes it as \"unique in terms of its unsurpassed speed, record-breaking range, the highest accuracy, and complete invulnerability while penetrating anti-missile defence systems.\"\n\nPutin's recent speeches also hint at a terrifying change in attitude. In them, he has emphasised his intention to focus on \"strengthening Russia's nuclear triad\" and uncovering the true extent of NATO's strategic arsenals. \"If Russia feels its territorial integrity is threatened, we will use all defence methods at our disposal, and this is not a bluff,\" he said.\n\nFortunately, Satan II failed its most recent test conducted, symbolically, on the 18th of February, 2023, just 2 days before U.S. president Biden arrived in Ukraine. Putin has also agreed to abide by the numerical limits of New START until it expires in 2026.\n\nUnfortunately, this only gives the U.S. 3 years to negotiate a new nuclear arms agreement to supersede it, and, with current tensions, that seems next to impossible. According to Daryl Kimball, the executive director of the Arms control Association, \"it makes it more likely that after New START expires, there will not be limits on the world's two largest arsenals for the first time since 1972.\"\n\n## The Next Nuclear Arms Race\n\nSo, are we standing at the precipice of the next bilateral nuclear arms race between the U.S. and Russia? Unfortunately not. And I say, unfortunately, not because I have any desire to experience a nuclear winter but because the next arms race won't be bilateral. Since the Cold War, new players have entered the scene, players who currently lack any agreements or restrictions on their use of MIRVs.\n\nCurrently, China, which is urging the U.S. and Russia to renew their commitments to New START, is racing towards nuclear parity with both nations. Their most powerful MIRVed missile is the DF-41. DF stands for DongFeng, meaning \"East Wind,\" a name that's poetic and terrifying in equal measure when you consider that it's radioactive. It can carry 10 warheads, has a top speed of Mach 25, and has a wheeled chassis, allowing it to move and potentially evade a first strike. With a range of 12-15,000km, it can also strike anywhere in India, Europe, or the U.S.\n\nSupposedly in response to China's growing arsenal, India has also been focusing on strengthening its deterrent nuclear triad. Their MIRV offering is the Agni-V missile. It has a smaller payload than the DF-41 and a shorter range of up to 8,000km. But as it has solid-fuel technology, it's capable of striking China with exceptional speed.\n\nPakistan is the 3rd point of the triangle of nuclear competition in Asia. With fewer resources, they've been slower to develop their arsenal. But, they can now boast the Ababeel ballistic missile. It's thought to be able to carry 3 nuclear warheads and has a range of 2,200km.\n\nOf course, we can't forget about North Korea. In January 2021, Kim Jong-Un announced his desire to \"perfect the guidance technology for a multi-warhead rocket.\" This has caused concerns for Japan and South Korea, whose anti-missile defences are currently designed to deal with just one warhead. North Korea still seems a fair way off success, as their current missiles rely on liquid rather than solid fuel, leaving them open to being spotted and destroyed. However, it has forced Japan to reconsider its pacifist stance and look into developing its own \"counterstrike capability.\"\n\nSo despite MIRVs being a bad idea from the outset and proven as a tool for destabilisation in the nuclear arena, here we are, staring down the barrel of an arms race involving multiple nations, completely ungoverned by any treaties. Well done, humanity.\n\n## Key Takeaways\n\n- MIRVs, or multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles, can carry several warheads aimed at different targets.\n- MIRVs increase damage potential, overwhelm anti-ballistic defenses, and can attack multiple targets simultaneously.\n- The development of MIRVs raised the risk of nuclear war by incentivizing first strikes.\n- Russia's withdrawal from the New START treaty in 2023 escalates nuclear tensions, with Putin showcasing the Satan II missile.\n- Multiple nations, including China, India, Pakistan, and North Korea, are advancing their MIRV capabilities, increasing global nuclear risks.\n\n## Frequently Asked Questions\n\n### What does MIRV stand for?\n\nMIRV stands for 'multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles,' which means it's a missile that can carry several warheads that can be aimed at different targets.\n\n### What are the advantages of MIRVs?\n\nMIRVs provide four clear offensive advantages: more warheads do more damage, they are excellent at overwhelming anti-ballistic missile defenses, they can carry penetration aids to evade defenses, and they can attack multiple targets simultaneously.\n\n### What is the Satan 2 missile?\n\nThe Satan 2 missile, also known as the RS-28 Sarmat ICBM, is a Russian missile described as 'a truly unique weapon' by Vladimir Putin. It is capable of delivering 10 to 16 nuclear warheads to any point on the globe.\n\n### What is the New START treaty?\n\nThe New START treaty is an agreement between the U.S. and Russia that limits the number of warheads on both sides to 1,550 and the number of launchers to 800. It also allows for satellite and remote monitoring, as well as site inspections to verify compliance.\n\n### Why did the U.S. develop the Minuteman III?\n\nThe Minuteman III was developed to increase targeting capability rather than to penetrate ABM defenses. The U.S. discovered that the number of desired aim points exceeded the number of Minuteman missiles, leading to the development of MIRVs.\n\n### What is the DF-41 missile?\n\nThe DF-41 is China's most powerful MIRVed missile. It can carry 10 warheads, has a top speed of Mach 25, and a range of 12-15,000km, allowing it to strike anywhere in India, Europe, or the U.S.\n\n### What is the Agni-V missile?\n\nThe Agni-V is India's MIRVed missile. It has a smaller payload than the DF-41 and a shorter range of up to 8,000km. It is capable of striking China with exceptional speed due to its solid-fuel technology.\n\n### What is the Ababeel missile?\n\nThe Ababeel is Pakistan's MIRVed missile. It is thought to be able to carry 3 nuclear warheads and has a range of 2,200km.\n\n### What is the significance of the Satan II missile's recent test failure?\n\nThe Satan II missile's recent test failure is significant because it occurred just days before U.S. President Biden's visit to Ukraine, and it highlights the ongoing tensions and the potential for nuclear escalation between Russia and the U.S.\n\n### What is the current status of the New START treaty?\n\nAs of February 2023, Russia has suspended its participation in the New START treaty due to tensions over Ukraine. However, Putin has agreed to abide by the numerical limits of the treaty until it expires in 2026.\n\n## Sources\n\n- [Original Into the Shadows video: MIRVs: The Individual Missiles that Contain Multiple Nuclear Bombs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqbUG5dKjYo)\n- [Hero image source](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fc/Poroschenko_Merkel_and_Biden_Security_Conference_February_2015.jpg) by Marc Müller / openverse, by.\n\n## Related Coverage" url: https://intotheshadows.pub/article/mirvs-multiple-independently-targetable-reentry-vehicles-nuclear-missiles.md canonical: https://intotheshadows.pub/article/mirvs-multiple-independently-targetable-reentry-vehicles-nuclear-missiles datePublished: 2026-06-28 dateModified: 2026-06-28 author: - name: Simon Whistler url: https://intotheshadows.pub/author/simon-whistler publisher: Into the Shadows image: "https://media.intotheshadows.pub/cdn-cgi/image/width=1600,height=900,fit=cover,quality=80,format=auto/articles/zqbUG5dKjYo/hero.jpg" type: Article contentHash: 199f1c48709d32d65130606323cdebefe18b28cd25201298b986097c84290c65 tokens: 4842 summaryUrl: https://intotheshadows.pub/article/mirvs-multiple-independently-targetable-reentry-vehicles-nuclear-missiles.md.summary.md --- In 2023, 32 years since the end of the Cold War, it would be nice to think that the chaos of a nuclear arms race was long behind us. Unfortunately, though, in February, tensions between Russia and the U.S. over Ukraine had Vladimir Putin withdrawing from arms agreements and waving his monster Satan 2 MIRVed missile about. It's been called an "engineering miracle" and "a crowning achievement in rocket technology," and Putin has described it as the "next generation of nuclear missile." It can fly across both the North and South poles and penetrate all current anti-ballistic missile defences, rendering it invincible. In response to Putin's alarming change of rhetoric, U.S. President Biden reminded the world that "A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought." We've avoided the apocalypse so far with a guarantee of mutually assured destruction, but MIRVs threaten to tip the scales. And it's not just Russia we have to worry about anymore. ## What is a MIRV? MIRV stands for "multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles," which essentially means it's a missile that can carry several warheads that can be aimed at different targets. The term is usually applied to intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) carrying thermonuclear warheads, allowing for the horrifying possibility of a targeted nuclear cluster bombing. In a typical MIRV launch sequence, the missile is ejected from its silo and taken to altitude in three boost stages. Then, 180 seconds after launch, the missile reaches suborbital height, and the post-boost vehicle, known as a bus, breaks away. This bus, which houses the warheads, then manoeuvres itself to prepare for deployment. Finally, the warheads are released, and a flight computer guides each to its target. ## What are the Advantages of MIRVs? Stuffing a missile with multiple warheads provides four clear offensive advantages. Firstly, more warheads do more damage. I mean, obviously, seven nuclear warheads will do more damage than one of the same size. But several small ones can also cause much more destruction than a single large one. This is because radiation and pressure from a nuclear blast falls steeply with distance. For example, blast pressure at 4km is only 1/64th of the pressure at 1km. This means that MIRVs can achieve the desired destruction levels with fewer expensive missiles, launches and launch facilities. Secondly, MIRVs are excellent at overwhelming anti-ballistic missile defenses (ABMs), which are often designed to bring down just one warhead at a time. Thirdly, MIRVs have enough room to carry penetration aids. These are devices that increase the likelihood of the warheads evading ABMs and hitting their target. The most common choice are decoys. These are inexpensive, unarmed, optically identical copies of the warheads, which are launched at the same time. Some also emit noise and light to increase the likelihood of attracting the attention of the ABMs. Another option is chaff. This is a cloud of aluminium, metallized glass fibre, or plastic that can confuse radar-guided missile defences. Evading ABMs dramatically increases the probability of a successful attack. For example, a typical, single warhead ICBM might have a 50% chance of destroying its target. A MIRV can send two warheads and two decoys to that same target, virtually guaranteeing success. And it'll still have enough left over to destroy two or three more. Which brings us to our final advantage. MIRVs can attack multiple targets simultaneously up to 1,500km apart. This means that one successful launch could result in the destruction of five or more high-value targets. Launching multiple MIRVs could wipe out the enemy's entire land-based arsenal in one go. ## Invention and Development Many people attribute the development of MIRVs to the invention of anti-ballistic missile systems. After all, reducing the effectiveness of ABM is one of their key features. The timing was also pretty coincidental. You see, in 1962, America announced that its Minuteman had entered service. This was an ICBM which used solid fuel, allowing it to stand ready for long periods without the need to fuel before launch. The name was a nod to the Minutemen of the American Revolutionary War, famed for being ready to fight at short notice. The weapon was branded as a nuclear deterrent, with the ability to reach Soviet cities if the U.S. was ever attacked. Naturally, the Soviets responded by initiating work on a defence system capable of shooting the Minutemen down and came up with the A-350 anti-ballistic missile launcher, which NATO would call Galosh. So here's where the coincidence comes in, while Galosh wasn't operational until 1978, the U.S. heard about it long before. So when in 1968 they conducted the test launch of the Minuteman III, the world's first MIRV, armed with three W62 Mk-12 warheads, many assumed it was developed in an effort to evade Galosh. This would've made America responsible for the nuclear escalation that followed. However, the Department of Defence gave testimony to Congress between 1968 and 1969, which disputes this assumption. Dr John Foster, then Director of Defence, Research, and Engineering explained that MIRV was designed to "increase targeting capability rather than penetrate ABM defences" as when they'd been planning their targets for Minuteman II, they'd discovered that the number of desired aim points exceeded the number of Minuteman missiles. Defence Secretary Laird also commented, explaining that MIRV was a "normal outgrowth of regular research and development," which had been "under consideration for several years even prior to the time that we knew of the development of Galosh." Dr Richard Garwin would later say, "the military wanted MIRVs simply because more warheads are better; you can destroy more targets with them." ## First Strike The reason the motives behind MIRVs are so important is that their invention significantly raised the risk of nuclear war and escalated the arms race. The exact opposite of the "stabilising effect" they were meant to achieve. This is because they massively increased the incentive for both sides to strike first, and they did this in two ways. Firstly, they upset the balance of warheads and silos. Before MIRVs, the first country to strike with single-warhead missiles could hit a few silos but had no chance to destroy them all. This would virtually guarantee a nuclear counterstrike and mutually assured destruction. Therefore, nobody wanted to go first. MIRVs upset the delicate balance by massively increasing the number of missiles per silo. So theoretically, one strike from an arsenal of MIRVed missiles could destroy every silo of their opponents, leaving them unable to retaliate. In fact, it would be feasible to have enough missiles left over for a counterstrike if needed. In this situation, it's clear that achieving first-strike would all but guarantee victory, switching the incentive from holding back to going first. This massively increased the temptation for one side to trigger a nuclear war in a time of tension or crisis. Secondly, one of the advantages of MIRVs, the fact that they require fewer silos and launchers, was also a bad thing. It concentrated firepower into relatively few targets, increasing the likelihood of an enemy wiping out the entire arsenal. This created a "use 'em or lose 'em" scenario and, again, incentivised the first strike. The only exception to this is MIRVed Submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs). These are considered invulnerable to attack, so they don't raise the same issues as their land-based counterparts. ## Escalation Of course, this only matters if both sides have MIRVed weapons. But as they were in an arms race, the Soviets were quick to catch up, and in 1970, they began development of a fourth version of their R-36 missile to allow it to carry multiple warheads. Ironically, their rush to MIRV their missiles was largely influenced by the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) conducted in 1969 to curb the arms race, not speed it up. Unfortunately, as it was difficult to verify warhead numbers, SALT settled on limiting the number of launchers instead and MIRVs became the only way to increase firepower without violating the agreement. SALT was a huge misstep, and Henry Kissinger would later reflect, saying, "I wish I had thought through the implications of a MIRVed world more thoughtfully in 1969 and 1970 than I did." Unfortunately for the US, the Soviet missiles had a greater throw weight than their Minutemen and could therefore carry more warheads. Plus, America's bombers couldn't be MIRVed. This meant that while MIRVing increased America's warhead per missile count by a factor of between 3 and 6, the Soviets increased theirs by a factor of 10. By 1975, they'd closed the gap, and both sides had roughly 2,200 warheads. This was making everyone nervous, and it would have been a good time to stop, but, as former Defense Secretary Harold Brown put it, "When we build, they build; when we stop building, they build." So by 1980, America's arsenal had remained unchanged, but the Soviets had increased theirs to 5,630, a huge number of which were fitted to their monster 10 warhead missiles, the SS-18s, named Satan I by NATO. This meant that, if the Soviets had first strike, they'd be able to wipe out 65 to 80% of America's silos and still have 1000 warheads left over for a counterstrike. ## New Start Fortunately, both sides were as nervous as each other about the prospect of nuclear war and the costs of producing ever more warheads. So as a continuation of SALT, SALT II talks were held between 1972 and 1979 with the aim of limiting the number of MIRVed missiles and banning new missile programs. Unfortunately, just 6 months after the agreement was signed, the US discovered a Soviet combat brigade in Cuba and withdrew from the treaty. It took until 1991 and the dissolution of the Soviet Union, for the US and Russia to agree a new treaty, known as the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or START I, which limited nuclear warhead numbers to 6,000. Next came START II, which aimed to ban MIRVs entirely but never came into force. Instead, it was replaced by the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty, SORT, also known as the de-MIRVing agreement, in which both sides agreed to reduce their number of warheads to between 1,700 and 2,200. Then, in 2011, SORT was replaced by New START. This limits the number of warheads on both sides to 1,550 and the number of launchers to 800. It also allows for satellite and remote monitoring, as well as 18 site inspections per year, to verify compliance and build trust. So far, so good, right? Well, roll on 2023… ## Satan II Technically, New Start is still in effect, but on the 21st of February, 2023, Vladimir Putin delivered a presidential address in which he announced the suspension of Russia's participation in the agreement. The root of the issue stems from Russia's invasion of Ukraine, in which the U.S. has taken the side of Ukraine and is providing them with "lethal aid." So, Russia no longer wants to allow the U.S. access to its nuclear facilities for the required inspections. Especially as one site, Engels Air Base is used to launch bombers and missile strikes into Ukraine. Putin also claims that the U.S. has blocked Russian inspectors at their own sites, an accusation that's strongly denied. What makes Putin's announcement particularly terrifying is that Russia is edging ever closer to a successful test of the RS-28 Sarmat ICBM. A new missile that Putin has described as "a truly unique weapon that will force those who are trying to threaten our country in the heat of frenzied rhetoric to think twice." And, unfortunately, he's not exaggerating. If they can work out the kinks, the Sarmat, nicknamed Satan II by NATO, will be capable of delivering 10 to 16 nuclear warheads to any point on the globe. Just one missile would have a yield 50 times more powerful than the Little Boy Bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945. Vladimir Degtyar, the CEO of JSC Makeyev, the company behind the Sarmat, describes it as "unique in terms of its unsurpassed speed, record-breaking range, the highest accuracy, and complete invulnerability while penetrating anti-missile defence systems." Putin's recent speeches also hint at a terrifying change in attitude. In them, he has emphasised his intention to focus on "strengthening Russia's nuclear triad" and uncovering the true extent of NATO's strategic arsenals. "If Russia feels its territorial integrity is threatened, we will use all defence methods at our disposal, and this is not a bluff," he said. Fortunately, Satan II failed its most recent test conducted, symbolically, on the 18th of February, 2023, just 2 days before U.S. president Biden arrived in Ukraine. Putin has also agreed to abide by the numerical limits of New START until it expires in 2026. Unfortunately, this only gives the U.S. 3 years to negotiate a new nuclear arms agreement to supersede it, and, with current tensions, that seems next to impossible. According to Daryl Kimball, the executive director of the Arms control Association, "it makes it more likely that after New START expires, there will not be limits on the world's two largest arsenals for the first time since 1972." ## The Next Nuclear Arms Race So, are we standing at the precipice of the next bilateral nuclear arms race between the U.S. and Russia? Unfortunately not. And I say, unfortunately, not because I have any desire to experience a nuclear winter but because the next arms race won't be bilateral. Since the Cold War, new players have entered the scene, players who currently lack any agreements or restrictions on their use of MIRVs. Currently, China, which is urging the U.S. and Russia to renew their commitments to New START, is racing towards nuclear parity with both nations. Their most powerful MIRVed missile is the DF-41. DF stands for DongFeng, meaning "East Wind," a name that's poetic and terrifying in equal measure when you consider that it's radioactive. It can carry 10 warheads, has a top speed of Mach 25, and has a wheeled chassis, allowing it to move and potentially evade a first strike. With a range of 12-15,000km, it can also strike anywhere in India, Europe, or the U.S. Supposedly in response to China's growing arsenal, India has also been focusing on strengthening its deterrent nuclear triad. Their MIRV offering is the Agni-V missile. It has a smaller payload than the DF-41 and a shorter range of up to 8,000km. But as it has solid-fuel technology, it's capable of striking China with exceptional speed. Pakistan is the 3rd point of the triangle of nuclear competition in Asia. With fewer resources, they've been slower to develop their arsenal. But, they can now boast the Ababeel ballistic missile. It's thought to be able to carry 3 nuclear warheads and has a range of 2,200km. Of course, we can't forget about North Korea. In January 2021, Kim Jong-Un announced his desire to "perfect the guidance technology for a multi-warhead rocket." This has caused concerns for Japan and South Korea, whose anti-missile defences are currently designed to deal with just one warhead. North Korea still seems a fair way off success, as their current missiles rely on liquid rather than solid fuel, leaving them open to being spotted and destroyed. However, it has forced Japan to reconsider its pacifist stance and look into developing its own "counterstrike capability." So despite MIRVs being a bad idea from the outset and proven as a tool for destabilisation in the nuclear arena, here we are, staring down the barrel of an arms race involving multiple nations, completely ungoverned by any treaties. Well done, humanity. ## Key Takeaways - MIRVs, or multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles, can carry several warheads aimed at different targets. - MIRVs increase damage potential, overwhelm anti-ballistic defenses, and can attack multiple targets simultaneously. - The development of MIRVs raised the risk of nuclear war by incentivizing first strikes. - Russia's withdrawal from the New START treaty in 2023 escalates nuclear tensions, with Putin showcasing the Satan II missile. - Multiple nations, including China, India, Pakistan, and North Korea, are advancing their MIRV capabilities, increasing global nuclear risks. ## Frequently Asked Questions ### What does MIRV stand for? MIRV stands for 'multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles,' which means it's a missile that can carry several warheads that can be aimed at different targets. ### What are the advantages of MIRVs? MIRVs provide four clear offensive advantages: more warheads do more damage, they are excellent at overwhelming anti-ballistic missile defenses, they can carry penetration aids to evade defenses, and they can attack multiple targets simultaneously. ### What is the Satan 2 missile? The Satan 2 missile, also known as the RS-28 Sarmat ICBM, is a Russian missile described as 'a truly unique weapon' by Vladimir Putin. It is capable of delivering 10 to 16 nuclear warheads to any point on the globe. ### What is the New START treaty? The New START treaty is an agreement between the U.S. and Russia that limits the number of warheads on both sides to 1,550 and the number of launchers to 800. It also allows for satellite and remote monitoring, as well as site inspections to verify compliance. ### Why did the U.S. develop the Minuteman III? The Minuteman III was developed to increase targeting capability rather than to penetrate ABM defenses. The U.S. discovered that the number of desired aim points exceeded the number of Minuteman missiles, leading to the development of MIRVs. ### What is the DF-41 missile? The DF-41 is China's most powerful MIRVed missile. It can carry 10 warheads, has a top speed of Mach 25, and a range of 12-15,000km, allowing it to strike anywhere in India, Europe, or the U.S. ### What is the Agni-V missile? The Agni-V is India's MIRVed missile. It has a smaller payload than the DF-41 and a shorter range of up to 8,000km. It is capable of striking China with exceptional speed due to its solid-fuel technology. ### What is the Ababeel missile? The Ababeel is Pakistan's MIRVed missile. It is thought to be able to carry 3 nuclear warheads and has a range of 2,200km. ### What is the significance of the Satan II missile's recent test failure? The Satan II missile's recent test failure is significant because it occurred just days before U.S. President Biden's visit to Ukraine, and it highlights the ongoing tensions and the potential for nuclear escalation between Russia and the U.S. ### What is the current status of the New START treaty? As of February 2023, Russia has suspended its participation in the New START treaty due to tensions over Ukraine. However, Putin has agreed to abide by the numerical limits of the treaty until it expires in 2026. ## Sources - [Original Into the Shadows video: MIRVs: The Individual Missiles that Contain Multiple Nuclear Bombs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqbUG5dKjYo) - [Hero image source](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fc/Poroschenko_Merkel_and_Biden_Security_Conference_February_2015.jpg) by Marc Müller / openverse, by. ## Related Coverage