Who Believes in Missile Defense? Russia.

Posted: May 20, 2011 in Songs of Space and Nuclear War
Tags: , , ,

Russia believes in missile defense.  They say so right here:

"Our analysis has shown that the initial phases of the U.S. system do not pose a threat to Russian strategic nuclear weapons," [Russian General Staff operations head Lt. Gen. Andrei] Tretiak said in remarks carried by Interfax. "This will change by the third and fourth phases, that is by 2015."

Once completed, the missile shield would "directly threaten the Russian nuclear potential," the general asserted.

Wow.  Are we talking assured survival provided by missile defense?

No, not assured. 

Improved?  Certainly. 

Greatly improved?  That seems to be what the Russians think.

What about the missile defense haters who said missile defense would never work?  Crickets. 

Maybe the haters can question the Russian analysis?  Or (begin sarcasm font) it could be a disinformation ploy; the Russians don’t really think missile defense will work but their actions will encourage the U.S. to fund and develop ineffective systems, causing a loss of military and economic power (close sarcasm font)?

Now, Russia is forced to employ step three of the arms control script: “it’ll destabilize international relations.”

Tretiak said the number of interceptors Washington intends to deploy no later than 2015 would give it the ability to eliminate a significant quantity of Russia’s sea- and land-based missiles. Such a capability would jeopardize nuclear parity between the two one-time Cold War antagonists, he said.

And this:

…Russian President Dmitry Medvedev warned that his nation would undertake a new nuclear weapons buildup if the two sides could not reach agreement on missile defense.

So how much bluff is in Medvedev’s statement?  I’m not sure but it’s all aimed at Russia trying to posture itself towards a no-lose position. 

Said no-lose position would give Russia an out to build more nuclear weapons capability if they want (or even proliferate); preserves the option of not building more if they decide they don’t want (or can’t afford it); gives them significant intrusion into missile defense and know-how (or maybe even provides  a veto over U.S.-provided missile defense in Europe).

If they look ridiculous in the process—which they do—but still get what they want, that’s a price Russia will gladly pay.

  1. TheRoccoHeadedObserver says:

    Few Relevant Thoughts:

    Ballistic Missile Industry-
    Moscow: $500m/3 yrs – – Washington: $45.7b/5 yrs

    This is without a doubt in response to the PAA plan proposed by the current US administration, however I also believe the Kremlin has to balance how much it spends because it is also pursuing a ballistic missile defense-like system similar to that of the PAA plan, in Kazakhstan. Moscow stated the system will be ready and “impenetrable” by 2020.

    The Russian General Staff chief Gen. Nikolai Makarov stated in January this year “The state will have an umbrella over it which will defend it against ballistic missile attacks, against medium-range missiles, air-based cruise missiles, sea-based cruise missiles and ground-based cruise missiles, including missiles flying at extremely low altitudes, at any time and in any situation,”

    Russia is sending over to Kazakhstan s-300s, which I provided a link for:

    as well as Kazakhstan would like to purchase the s-400 Triumphs:

    There are doubts on the economic and technological feasibility of a Russian missile shield with Kazakhstan, but the country will stay loyal to the program no matter what happens.

  2. TheRoccoHeadedObserver says:

    Russia, as always, are the ones issuing statements of bluster. Henry Kissinger always remarked, no evening with the Soviets could be complete without some bluster….

    Given the numbers, Russia is financially unable to do anything to the extent to which the claim to the world. What’s more, on top of the contrast of investment into the industry, the Russian army has been draining billions of Rubles of military investment….

    The PAA is a good strategy and should be endlessly pursued by the United States and her European allies.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s