In 1971 the Soviet Union decided to end the droughts. So he started throwing nuclear bombs into the rivers

The story took place in the 1970s, when the Soviet Union launched one of the most ambitious and far -fetched engineering projects in its history: diverting the course of the great Siberian rivers so that, instead of flowing towards the Arctic, they would transport its waters to the arid regions of the south, such as Central Asia and the south of Russia. The problem was the solution to achieve it: they turned to “Pacific” nuclear explosions To dig colossal channels.

The impossible epic. As we said, to carry out such a plan, Soviet planners did not spare in extreme methods. The most emblematic episode was the experiment called Like “Taiga” of 1971, in which three equivalent nuclear devices To the Hiroshima bombs They triggered simultaneously underground to create a channel that connected the basins of the Ríos Pchora and Kama.

What happened? That the only thing was the known today Like Nuclear Lakea body of still radioactive water in the middle of the boreal forest, and an ambitious dream that ended up being a monumental failure. Despite the use of low -fission explosives, The detonations They were detected until In Sweden and the United Statesunleashing international convictions for violate the treaty of partial prohibition of nuclear tests.

Soviet logic. The idea of redirect rivers It was not really new: already at the end of the 19th century, thinkers as Igor Demchenko They dreamed of flooding the depressions of the Caspian and the Aral to improve the climate. Under Stalin and, later, during the Cold War, the project acquired A new impulse. For the Soviets, the immense water flow that flowed to the uninhabited north was an intolerable waste.

On the other hand, taking it to the south could make Central Asia an agricultural vergel, save the dying Aral Sea and, incidentally, affirm the Soviet power over the Central Asian republics. With the support of almost 200 scientific institutes and dozens of thousands of peoplechannels of up to 1,500 km were planned to divert 10% of the water from the OB and Irtish rivers to Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan. Inspired by feats like Roman aqueducts and convinced that man had submit to naturethe leaders planned to complete the titanic work For the year 2000.

The fall of the hydraulic myth. However, the magnitude of the project caused an unprecedented reaction. During the 80s, the opposition of scientists, writers and intellectuals became one of the First environmental campaigns massive in the history of the USSR. Figures like the hydrologist Serguéi Zalyguin They denounced not only the exorbitant cost and the low scientific support of the plan, but also the iEcological mpactos Catastrophic that would bring: climatic alterations, loss of unique habitats, flooding of cultural sites, and even possible changes in Siberian ice formation.

The final blow came with the sadly famous Chernobyl disaster In 1986. The tragedy, which evidenced the risks of nuclear power Badly managed, he diverted resources and political attention, and just four months later, Mikhail Gorbachov formally canceled the river investment plan. For some, it was a response to environmental pressurebut for others, simply the recognition that the USSR already I couldn’t pay for it.

Zombie idea. Although the project seemed buried together with the Soviet Union itself, The BBC counted that his spirit has persisted. Throughout the decades, figures such as former Moscow Yuri Luzhkov have advocated for retaking it. And in February 2025, two Russian scientists returned to Defend the idea In a National Journal, arguing that the current technical advances and the geopolitical reorientation of Moscow made Asia more viable.

Some have even suggested that reducing the discharge of warm water to the Arctic could mitigate climate change, although studies such as The Oceanographer Tom Rippeth They warn otherwise: altering the flow of rivers could destabilize the stratification of the Arctic Ocean and accelerate the thaw.

Resource as identity. If you want also, beyond its technical or ecological justifications, the river reversion project represents a vision deeply imperial: Russia as a power that dominates not only territories, but vital resources. The possibility of transferring water Towards Chinafor example, would fit with the extractivist model that has defined the country for centuries.

As Historian Paul Josephson pointed outit was a form of internal colonization, to “modernize” Central Asia through public works and Slavic settlements, imposing the seal of the Soviet state into the landscape. That mentality lasts and, for some, Siberian water remains an underutilized treasure that must one day channel towards economic development and political power.

Radioactive legacy. It is the last of the legs to analyze for the events that took place. Today, The nuclear lake It remains one of the few visible vestiges of this colossal hydraulic fantasy. Although radiation levels have decreased, some areas remain dangerous. The lake, surrounded by mounds of earth and oxidized warning signs, is visited by curious Like blogger Andrei Fadeevwhich described the BBC as “a beautiful place, apparently quiet, but with invisible scars.”

As allegory, the landscape encapsulates the ambition out of context of the project: transform rivers with atomic pumps, fold the will of nature with underground explosions and turn water into a geopolitical domain tool.

Surprisingly, half a century later, the idea has not died at all.

Image | Dmitry TerekhovSentinel

In Xataka | In 1958, the US wanted to simulate a nuclear attack against the USSR: he ended up releasing a bomb on the coast of one of his own cities

In Xataka | In the 50s United Kingdom he had an idea to bend the pulse to the USSR: a nuclear bomb with live chickens