For the first time since at least 2008, U.S. nuclear weapons have reportedly returned to British soil, with multiple sources indicating that a number of B61-12 thermonuclear gravity bombs were transferred this week to RAF Lakenheath in Suffolk.

The weapons are believed to have been flown from the U.S. Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center at Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico to a newly constructed secure storage facility at the UK site.

The U.S. Department of Defense has not publicly confirmed the movement, and the Ministry of Defence typically does not comment on the presence or absence of nuclear weapons at specific locations.

The B61-12 is a modernised low-yield tactical nuclear bomb capable of variable explosive power and precision guidance. It is designed to be compatible with a range of delivery platforms, including the F-35A Lightning II. The 48th Fighter Wing at RAF Lakenheath operates both the 493rd and 495th Fighter Squadrons, which fly the F-35A and are among the first in Europe to do so.

RAF Lakenheath previously hosted U.S. nuclear weapons during the Cold War, but the last known removal took place in 2008 following years of disarmament-related reductions across Europe. The reported return of such weapons would represent a significant shift in the nuclear posture of NATO in the European theatre amid deteriorating relations with Russia and increased emphasis on deterrence.

The re-establishment of nuclear storage capability at Lakenheath was first signalled in 2022 through U.S. budget documents, which listed infrastructure upgrades consistent with nuclear mission readiness.

Neither the U.S. Air Force nor UK officials have issued comment on this week’s reported deployment.

12 COMMENTS

  1. If true then this perhaps a sensible time to do so.

    The Russians have reportably raised the threat of the use of nuclear weapons in Western Europe again and this aludes to the potential response that NATO would produce. They have no other use in Europe. It warns Russia that America will not stand by and will back up other NATO members as per article 5.

    Obviously European NATO members still need to boost their capabilities until such time as they are on a par with the US.

      • The Kiel Institute has analysis to show that Europe has been ahead of USA for a while..
        Unintended consequences will include a pivot from US MIC to European suppliers though not all US products have a European equivalent.
        However the theme is greater independence from USA supply and control.
        Ukraine already looks like a credible supplier of terrorist state beating products. Further collaboration is inevitable.

  2. Wonder whether it would be feasible to relocate RAF F-35As to Lakenheath during a future crisis? Might save the RAF some nuke surety infrastructure funds. 🤔

    • Lakenheath and Marham are close by, flying time must be going up, into circuit to come down.
      There’s a SSA at Marham, the nukes cloud be trucked there early days of crisis.
      Ideally we wouldn’t be using your bombs at all.

      • The shared tactical nuclear weapons scheme enables European NATO countries to share B61 access with USAF and so demonstrate to the terrorist state that it gains no advantage of its own possession and threats to use tactical nuclear weapons. That’s all its for, no ambition to nuke anyone else in Europe, despite Orban and Fizo being tempting client states of muscovy..

  3. Not necessary in my book. Clearly it’s been planned for some time as well, if the secure storage has already been constructed.

    • The Peace Dividend delusion is over and we are not safe.
      Time to pay the insurance premium for freedom or learn ruzzian. They’ve been running hybrid war for decades…

  4. Our own nuclear deterrence is already hanging on by a thread, and fundementally undermined by US leverage. Apparently, our solution to this issue is to subsidise the American nuclear deterrence.

    All this shows is the defeatist attitude of our leadership and an astute lack of ambition and faith in our industry to provide a credible nuclear deterrence of our own. I understand the political pressure to appease the disgrace that is the USA at present, but these decisions will have lasting impacts. Much in the way that taking the difficult decision of rebuilding a serious, home grown nuclear deterrence now, would have a lasting impact.

    If you want to see a credible, multi-layered nuclear deterrence that even our declining, dictatorial ally is obliged to respect, look no further than France…

    • The Uk is rebuilding its strategic nuclear deterrent, its building new SSBNs and new warheads. But the UK does not have a sub strategic warhead for a gravity bomb or cruise missile, that will take a lot of effort and time and likely could not be started until the modernisation of the strategic warheads is completed.

  5. I can’t see No point in waiting for around 5 years for RAF F-35A’s to deploy W61’s. If the UK is to have them, they are needed
    very soon, in sync with the other European nations tactical Nuke deterrent. Will the UK be offered Canada’s allocation of F-35A’s, which first deliveries begin in 2026, or be offered some U.S ANG airframes?

    of Co

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here