Skip to main content

Uranium for the Russian Bomb


From the series Atom and industrialisation of science


It was only after Hiroshima and Nagasaki, in August 1945, that the Soviet Union became fully committed to the project of acquiring the atomic bomb.

The alliance of the US, the UK, and the USSR

Producing U-235 accounted for 64% of the total cost of the Manhattan Project, while plutonium production made up another 20%; in total, 84% of the expense went toward producing material for the atomic bombs, as against only 4% spent on research and development [Lotta Comunista, July-August 2018]. In 1945, the most urgent problems to be resolved for Russian imperialism were not tied to the scientific knowledge required for the atomic bomb, but to uranium and its processing.

During the Second World War, under the Lend-Lease Act passed on March 11th, 1941, the United States gave its allies food, oil, and supplies worth $46 billion in 1940s dollars. More than one-fifth of the total, $11 billion (about $200-250 billion in today's currency), went to the Soviet Union in the form of $9.5 billion in ammunition, more than 400,000 vehicles, 14,000 aircraft, 13,000 tanks, millions of tons of food and petroleum products, great quantities of raw materials such as cotton, steel, and aluminium, medical supplies, radar equipment, and even a tyre factory [Richard Rhodes, Dark Sun. The Making of the Hydrogen Bomb, 1996; National WWII Museum of New Orleans].

Military aid to the USSR cost five times the $2 billion of the Manhattan Project. In the war against German imperialism, each country put forward what it had at its disposal: American imperialism supplied technology and capital, and Russian imperialism its demography.

With Operation Barbarossa, the invasion of Russia which began in 1941, the German strategy of Blitzkrieg, which aimed at a rapid victory, turned into a long, exhausting war of attrition on the Eastern front, characterised by huge human losses on both sides. The decision to attack Russia was fatal for Berlin. Until the Anglo-American landings in Normandy in June 1944, the Soviet Union had been alone in the war against Germany on the European continent. The interests of the Anglo-Americans and of Stalin's government coincided: a Soviet defeat would have allowed the shift of German forces to the Western front. The Russian victory at Stalingrad in February 1943 was one of the conditions for the Normandy landings in June 1944.

In October 1941, Averell Harriman, the US president's special envoy to Europe, clarified the American position on aid to the USSR: Whatever the cost may be for keeping the war far from our coasts will be a small price to pay. In the agreement between American and Russian imperialism, the US paid with arms and food, the USSR with human lives. There is no doubt, Rhodes writes, that this was to the advantage of the US.

From the Soviet viewpoint, Lend-Lease was the least the US could do while Russians were dying. According to the National WWII Museum of New Orleans, the USSR suffered 24 million casualties (8-10 million military), the US 418,000 (417,000 military), Germany 8.8 million (5.5 million military), Great Britain 450,000 (383,000 military), Japan about 3 million (2 million military), and China 20 million (3-4 million military). In the war on the European continent, the US had 170,000 casualties, a human cost equal to 0.7% of the Soviet toll.

It was the deaths of millions of Russians that wore Germany down and made the following partition of Europe among the victors possible. Sometimes imperialists speak clearly amongst themselves. In Moscow in October 1944, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill proposed to Stalin to settle our business in the Balkans: Let’s not quarrel over small things. As regards Great Britain and Russia, for us 90% of supremacy in Romania, for us 90% in Greece, and 50-50% in Yugoslavia. Churchill wrote these percentages down and added Hungary 50-50%, then offered Stalin 75% of Bulgaria and passed the slip of paper under the table. Stalin passed it back to Churchill, and things seemed to be settled in a short time. The document, quoted by Rhodes, is now in the British National Archives.

For American imperialism, the Second World War was big business. While the conflict was destroying the European continent, between 1939 and 1944, the 75% increase in the US's Gross National Product bankrolled both the war and the Manhattan Project. The USSR had no such means, and the head of the Soviet atomic project, Igor Kurchatov [1903-1960], found himself without resources. At the end of the war, one-tenth of the Soviet population was dead and 1,700 cities, 70,000 villages, and 31,000 industrial enterprises had been destroyed. While the war had doubled American industrial production, it had halved Soviet production. With the USSR seriously wounded by the war, before Hiroshima [August 6th, 1945], the Soviet government did not consider nuclear development a priority compared with the reconstruction of the country's economy.

Soviet nuclear science

David Holloway writes in Stalin and the Bomb [1994] that between November 20th and 26th, 1940, a conference of Soviet nuclear physicists was held, with the participation of 200 scientists. Kurchatov presented a document on fission and the possibility of a chain reaction, demonstrating that the Soviet Union's scientific level was not inferior to that of the West. He maintained that the chain reaction could be obtained with a mixture of water and U-235 or a mixture of natural uranium and heavy water. Holloway observes that, on the evidence of the documents made available after the collapse of the Soviet Union, it is striking how similar these results were to those of the Frisch-Peierls memorandum written at the University of Birmingham in March 1940, even though this report had not been published. The Soviets had also calculated the critical mass of fissile material needed to achieve a chain reaction.

The level of Soviet science did not escape the notice of Danish physicist Niels Bohr [1885-1962]. His evaluation of its capabilities, and not a generic pacifism, probably motivated his proposals for international cooperation to avoid a global nuclear arms race. Bohr knew that once the war was over the USSR would have been able to produce the atomic bomb, but the American and British leaders thought otherwise. Robert Jungk writes in Brighter Than a Thousand Suns [1956] that in the opinion of the head of the Manhattan Project, General Leslie Groves [1896-1970], it would take ten, twenty, or even 60 years before the Soviets could build the atomic bomb.

Kurchatov put together a group of young talents to study the feasibility of the nuclear project: the theoretical physicists Georgy Flerov [1913-1990], Yulii Khariton [1904-1996], and Yakov Zeldovich [1914-1987]; the experimental physicists Isaac Konstantinovich Kikoin [1908-1984] and Abram Alikhanov [1904-1970]. The oldest, at 40 years old, was Kurchatov himself and the youngest was 29. In April 1944, in Laboratory No. 2, the initial core group of the Soviet nuclear project was composed of 25 scientists: in the miserable living conditions of the war, Kurchatov's first concern was to give them food, clothing, and lodgings.

Russian-American contention for uranium

According to Holloway, information about the Anglo-American nuclear project gained through espionage saved the Soviet scientists a year, though they would still have been able to build the atomic bomb without it. Their main problem was getting the raw material and developing the industry to produce it. The most serious problem for Kurchatov was to obtain uranium and graphite, and only at the end of the summer of 1945 did pure graphite begin to be available, produced by the Moscow Electrode Plant.

The uranium of Central Europe was part of Russian imperialism's spoils of war. At the end of March 1945, the Czech government in exile, under the command of President Edvard Beneš [1884-1948], moved from London to Moscow. There, it signed a secret agreement which gave the USSR the right to exploit the Jáchymov (Joachimsthal) uranium mine, which had supplied Maria Curie with the raw material for the discovery of radium. The Beneš government was probably unaware of the importance of uranium. Other supplies came from the occupation of East Germany.

In May, a special Soviet mission went to Germany to study the German nuclear project, but it soon discovered it had little to learn from German science. During the war, Germany had been unable to build the atomic bomb, undoubtedly for the same reasons as the USSR — the huge war effort for Operation Barbarossa. The Soviets were more interested in German uranium than in German scientists. The Americans, too, were focused on Germany's deposits of natural uranium and semi-finished metal — and preventing them from ending up in Soviet hands.

General Groves asked the American Air Force to bomb the Auer factory in Oranienburg, north of Berlin. The site had thorium and uranium in metallic form and had already been occupied by the Soviets. The bombing — a military operation against an ally and not against an enemy — took place on March 15th; twelve Flying Fortresses dropped 150 tons of explosives on the Auer plant and destroyed it. However, the Russians had already taken 100 tons of fairly pure uranium oxide, and Kurchatov's deputy, Khariton, said that the uranium they found saved the USSR about a year in its atomic bomb project.

According to a CIA estimate, at the end of 1945, 45% of Soviet uranium came from East Germany, 33% from the USSR, 15% from Czechoslovakia, 4% from Bulgaria, and 1% from Poland. Again, according to the CIA, the Soviet and East European mines produced 70-110 tons of uranium a year in 1946 and 1947.

To give an order of magnitude, the Fat Man bomb dropped on Nagasaki contained 6.2 kg of plutonium, which required 25 tons of natural uranium to be produced [figures from the US Department of Energy]. In the early postwar years, there was enough Soviet and East European uranium to potentially produce three plutonium bombs each year. Before Hiroshima, Soviet leaders doubted the veracity of espionage reports, fearing that the information was false. These doubts were swept away by Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The destruction of a city with a single bomb showed Stalin the real power of this new weapon, and on August 20th, 1945, the Defence Committee made the Soviet nuclear program a priority. Stalin entrusted the responsibility for the project to Lavrentiy Beria, the people's commissar for internal affairs.

On December 25th, 1946, the Soviets created their first chain reaction in a graphite atomic pile, similar to the one built by Fermi in Chicago. The scientists detonated their first atomic bomb on August 29th, 1949.

Lotta Comunista, October 2025

Popular posts from this blog

Armed Negotiations between the Gulf and the Mediterranean

David Petraeus, Commander of the US forces in Iraq and the Gulf in 2007-2008, then director of the CIA in 2011-12, described the elimination of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani on January 3 rd in Baghdad as a defensive action , with which the Trump presidency restored a US deterrence , which was weakened by recent Iranian actions . This is a reference to the attacks conducted indirectly, unclaimed by Tehran, against the Saudi oil infrastructures on September 14 th 2019. In March 2008, when the forces under Petraeus’ command supported the Iraqi Army in the fight against local Shite militias, Soleimani sent a message to the American general: informing him that he was the person in charge for Iranian policies in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Gaza therefore the channel through which to define an agreement to resolve the various issues with Tehran. Petraeus holds the advisors of the Quds Force, the spearhead of the Pasdaran asymmetric operations, responsible for the killing of around 600 ...

India’s Weaknesses in the Global Spotlight

Farmers’ protests around New Delhi have been going on for four months now. A controversial intervention by the Supreme Court has suspended the implementation of the new agticultural laws, but has raised questions about the dynamics between the judiciary and the executive, and has failed to unblock the negotiations between government and peasant organisations. The assault by Sikh farmers on the Red Fort during the Republic Day parade as India was displaying its military might to the outside world — the Chinese Global Times maliciously noted — paradoxically widened the protest in the huge state of Uttar Pradesh. The Modi government has been trying to revive India’s image with the 2021 Union Budget: it announced one hundred privatisations and approved the increase to 75% of the limit on direct foreign investment in insurance companies. For The Indian Express ( IEX ) this is a sign of the commitment to push ahead with reforms despite the backlash from rural India. Also for The Economi...

In the Depth of Our Class

The pandemic of the century is a storm that does not subside; it returns to its rampage after 40 million infections and more than a million official victims, perhaps two million according to estimates on the excess deaths. In the contention between powers, China stands as the winner: it seems to have tamed the virus, and industry and services are up and running; the USA and Europe, on the other hand, are moving towards a new wave of infections that casts yet more shadows on the economic cycle. Political structures and health systems are at the height of tension. In America, the elections have judged Donald Trump’s rash demagogy on the basis of the opposite reasons for containing the pandemic and the intolerance of small and large producers; in Europe the executives are attempting to steer between the surge in infections, increasingly stringent confinement measures and the threats of fiscal jacquerie in the tourism and catering sectors. Almost everywhere, in the Old Continent, governm...

Democratic Defeat in the Urban Vote

Internationalism No. 71, January 2025 Page 2 From the series Elections in the USA A careful analysis of the 2022 mid-term elections revealed the symptoms of a Democratic Party malaise which subsequently fully manifested itself in the latest presidential election, with the heavy loss of support in its traditional strongholds of the metropolitan areas of New York City and Chicago, and the State of California. A defeat foretold Republican votes rose from 51 million in the previous 2018 midterms to 54 million in 2022, a gain of 3 million. The Democrat vote fell from 61 to 51 million, a loss of 10 million. The Republicans gained only three votes for every ten lost by the Democrats, while the other seven became abstentions. In 2022, we analysed the elections in New York City by borough, the governmental districts whose names are well known through movies and TV series. In The Bronx, where the average yearly household income is $35,000, the Democrats lost 52,00...

Nuclear Energy and the Power Grid

Internationalism No. 85, March 2026 Page 8 From the series The world energy battle Electricity is at the heart of modern economies and the demand for electricity is growing much faster than the overall consumption of energy in every scenario [ Electricity 2025 , International Energy Agency report]. Overproduction and power grid bottlenecks Electricity represents just 21% of energy consumption at a global level, but it is the main source for the sectors which represent more than 40% of the economy. A fundamental issue for the security of the electricity system is the modernisation of the power grid, which is currently lagging behind the expansion of production capacity. Although global investment in the production of electricity has increased by almost 70% since 2015, reaching $1,000 billion a year, annual spending on the grid has increased at less than half this rate, reaching $400 billion. This is also a European problem. Accordin...

The Defeat in Afghanistan — a Watershed in the Cycle of Atlantic Decline

In crises and wars there are events which leave their mark on history because of how they make a decisive impact on the power contention, or because of how, almost like a chemical precipitate, they suddenly make deep trends that have been at work for some time coalesce. This is the case of the defeat of the United States and NATO in Afghanistan, which is taking the shape of a real watershed in the cycle of Atlantic decline. For the moment, through various comments in the international press, it is possible to consider its consequences on three levels: America’s position as a power and the connection with its internal crisis; the repercussions on Atlantic relations and Europe’s dilemmas regarding its strategic autonomy; and the relationship between the Afghan crisis and power relations in Asia, especially as regards India’s role in the Indo-Pacific strategy. Repercussions in the United States Richard Haass is the president of the CFR, the Council on Foreign Relations; despite having ...

The Unstoppable Force: Capital’s Demand for Migrant Labour

Internationalism No. 78-79, August-September 2025 Page 16 “Before Giorgia Meloni became Italy’s prime minister, she pledged to cut immigration. Since she has been in government the number of non-EU work visas issued by Italy has increased”. This is how The Economist of April 26th summarises the schizophrenia of their politics; and this is not only true in Italy: “Net migration also surged in post-Brexit Britain”. The needs of the economic system do not coincide with the rhetoric of parliamentarism. And vice versa. Schizophrenia and imbalances in their politics Returning to Italy, the Bank of Italy has pointed out that by 2040, in just fifteen years, there will be a shortage of five million people of working age, which could lead to an estimated 11% contraction in GDP. This is why even Italy’s “sovereignist” government is preparing to widen the net of its Immigration Flow Decree. The latest update, approved on June 30th, provides for the entry of almost ...

‘Two Hands’ and ‘Two Roads’

From the series News from the Silk Road The international tensions which China will face on the seas in the next fifteen years could find a buffer in the expansion of China’s influence on land in Central, Southern and Western Asia. Wang Jisi is the dean of the School of International Studies at the University of Beijing and a major figure of the American party in China. His unexpected foray into ‘geopolitics’ has reignited the old clash between different American currents — a phenomenon we analysed more than twenty years ago. At the time, Robert Manning, the author of The Asian Energy Factor and adviser to the State Department in 1991, viewed Asia’s growing dependence on the Persian Gulf for its energy requirements in the light of geoeconomics and geostrategy and foresaw a possible convergence between the USA and China. From a geoeconomic standpoint, both trade and the funding and development of the infrastructure necessary for Asia’s energy needs were more important than terri...

Indo-African Opposition at the WTO

Since March 1 st , the Nigerian economist Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala has been the new director general of the World Trade Organization. Like a coach hired by a team languishing at the bottom of its league — writes Larry Elliott of The Guardian — Okonjo finds herself in the happy position of taking over at the WTO when the only way is up , This historic international institution is unlikely to experience extinction or irrelevance. However, the appointment of Okonjo does not in itself remedy WTO’s deep troubles. An alternative in plurilateralism The negotiating function of the WTO has been lacking for twenty years now. The latest ambitious goal of liberalising trade in goods and services, announced in Doha in November 2001, became bogged down by the impossibility of a general compromise between old powers and large emerging economies. In 2015 Michael Froman, President Barack Obama’s Trade Representative (USTR), officially called for the abandonment of the Doha Round. Froman’s alternative p...