When President Barack Obama came to power, the United States military-political line was corrected;
above all the tactics to achieve the American goals were refined. Allegedly, Washington has begun to
demonstrate the conception of irreversibility in forming of the multipolar world.
However, the strategic goal of the USA is still aimed to keep the dominating position in the world.
Today, the accomplishment of the goal is provided by continuous building up of its military-economy
potential and military power of the Armed Forces as well as by conducting the policy of containment
towards breakaway regimes. Furthermore, the accomplishment of the goal, and it is a new trend, is
furnished by using the resources and facilities of the Russian Federation.
The brought-back-to-life Strategic Defense Initiative project, nowadays earmarked as Anti-Ballistic
Missile Treaty, is used as a vehicle for the US political purposes.
By the end of seventies of the last century the US leadership came to a conclusion that the quantitive
and qualitive build-up of the strategic nuclear arms could shatter not only the USSR economy but also
the American one. They should arrive to another solution. And the solution was found. It was based on a
military approach that is used by a commander during the decision making process – simulative
deception. In his particular case the United States of America forced the Soviet Union to lay out money
in response to the creation of purely defensive system against the Evil Empire with its huge number of
missiles that were aimed to destroy USA and afterwards, for sure, Europe.
In the beginning of 80s the plans of the Strategic Defense Initiative got into print. The Initiative was
based on the development of anti-missile satellite systems. In March, 1983 President Ronald Reagan
declared the new plans of the United States in the framework of the Strategic Defense Initiative.
Admittedly, the plans were only on paper. However they were largely advertised and were failed to be
accomplished in a century due to the technical reasons.
The Soviet Union was in earnest about these plans and it reacted with all-out efforts despite difficult
economic and political situation. That was exactly what US wanted from the USSR. Simply stated, the
Soviet Union took the bait.
In March 11, 1985 Mikhail Gorbachev came to power and facilitated the collapse of the Soviet Union
and global socialist system by pursuing the Perestroika policy. Along with the country the Soviet
Strategic Nuclear Forces and Aerospace Defense System were terminated. The United States of America
received the quantitive and qualitive nuclear arms advantage over the USSR.
Afterwards the allegedly initiated developments of energetic weapon systems were ended due to the
lack of success and huge spendings.
The development of military-political environment as well as changes in economy situation in the world
in addition to lack of judgement on the part of the United States led to the undermining of America’s
prestige. Some real candidates upon world-beater role emerged; one of them is European Union.
The United States of America can hedge the possibilities of Europe only via NATO in case of EU’s
excessive independence in seeking to resolve military-political issues, to build up industrial and military
potential. The long-term goal congruence of the US and leading European countries in military-political
environment is assessed as a strong basis for control over Europe and extending of cooperation on
behalf of the United States of America.
One of these long-term goals is an imposed by the US Anti-Ballistic Defense for Europe against Iran, in
perspective against North Korea and of course, from China. However, as far as the latter is concerned,
Washington keeps silence so far. The fact that the threat from the mentioned countries unable to come
in a short term (10-15 years) as well as in a long term (25-30 years) is passed over in silence.
If one looks attentively to the map of Europe, the location of the proposed ABM elements in Poland and
the Czech Republic as well as American combat ships armed with the AEGIS combat system and SM-3
missiles seem to be not suitable to protect Europe from the Iranian future strategic nuclear missiles.
Much wiser to locate the ABM elements in Turkey and Georgia, Bulgaria is also suitable for this task, at
worst Romania can be selected, but not Poland and the Czech Republic for sure.
However, in case to control the Russian aerospace activities in the European part of the country,
including Plesetsk spaceport as well as water areas of the Barents, White and Kara seas (the operational
zone of the Russian Northern Fleet), Poland and the Czech Republic and also the above-mentioned
American combat ships are most suitable places to deploy ABM elements.
The problem of defense for Europe, Israel and itself against Iranian missiles can be solved by the United
States of America in another way, how it has been done already in Iraq, former Yugoslavia and now in
Afghanistan – to inflict damage upon real military nuclear facilities on the territory of Iran. Of course at
the beginning the international community will boil over the fact of attack upon the independent
country, but all in all the peoples will be thankful for the ease of headache even it was done surgically.
The attack will be considered as an illustration for other offenders.
Today the leadership of the United States has speeded up the activities aimed at deployment of the
Anti-Ballistic Missile Defense elements. No doubt, as soon as Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty START-III
comes into effect, the above-mentioned activities gain full speed under the slogan “to protect troops and
the Americans against the growing threat of ballistic missiles with ABC warheads”. But there is nothing
to it; they are able to protect only Americans, not Europeans, as one cannot protect everybody.
In accordance with the National Missile Defense Act Washington pays much attention to deploy as soon
as is technologically possible an effective National Missile Defense system capable of defending the
territory of the United States. In other words to create non-strategic ABM defense (according to the
American terminology Theater Missile Defense) to protect American forward deployed and
expeditionary forces as well as to reinforce the Allies’ Air Defense forces and facilities.
However, the American way of the subdivision of Ant-Missile Defense facilities into “strategic” and
“non-strategic” is factitious and corresponds the misinformation action with the aim to empress
Americans and affect internal and external policy of the European countries.
The main goal of the Strategic missile defense is to target long-range ICBMs equipped with means that
impede interception. There’s a great number of light and heavy deception targets, maneuvering
warheads, variety of jamming systems including high-altitude nuclear explosions. Today only Russia and
America possess the Strategic Missile Defense Systems. However these systems can protect in case of
limited strike (several missiles), moreover in case of bounded path. In foreseeable future there will be
no systems that can provide the defense against massive strike of strategic missiles.
The development of Theater Missile Defense (European Theatre) is conducted in the framework of
deployment the in-depth-dispose global anti-ballistic missile defense aimed to target different missiles
attacks both from Russia and, in the Far East region in conjunction with Japan, from China.
To increase the integration level of the American ABM defense system, the coordination between the
elements of the ABM defense and to decrease time for anti-missile operations, the “Operations Groups
Engagement” concept is applied. Each group (Poland, the Check Republic nowadays, in a short term
some other European countries, Japan – in the Far East) will constitute a complex of fire, information
and intelligence means.
Taking into account NATO’s military-political hierarchy in the framework of the new NATO concept, the
United States of America is a leader, the second role is given to Great Britain and Canada, the third role
granted for the key European countries as France, Germany and Italy. It means that the mentioned
European countries can count only on US’s grant to participate in some insignificant activities regarding
the development of the ABM defense. In this regard, the modernization of the American-German-Italy
Anti-Aircraft system “MEDES” can be exemplified. There is no slightest hope for any deeper cooperation
between America and Europe in this context.
However, one should not be mistaken regarding the future of the ABM defense. The mankind has
scientific and economic potentials and it continues the researches in this field. For instance, such
scientific and technical researches have been on the way in the United States of America, even despite
false start over the Strategic Defense Initiative.
Today the creation and development of strategic aerospace assault and defense weapons are limited by
three factors: economic facilities, technical implementation and political decisions. As far as the future
of these weapons is concerned, it should be reckoned for decades. It is also important to understand the
necessity to consider different aerospace adversaries (Iran, China, North Korea). All these can be
achieved in case of the creation of a European ABM Defense Unified System that meets the current and
future requirements. The unified system should combine the containment and retaliation means which
should be corrected during the development of the system.
The creation of such European ABM Defense Unified System, both operational and organizational,
aimed at different aerospace adversaries, is impossible without the Russian Federation’s participation
due to the same three factors.
A thesis about military, social and economic weakness of Russia is a myth that was imposed pro domo
sua by the United States of America for others. But even weak Russia is capable to invest more than 200
million Euros for ten years to create real Russia-Euro NATO combined ABM Defense System. But the
same ridiculous amount was imposed by the US to Europe that approves once again the fact that
Washington does not want to defend Europe.
Partially, the elements of the Strategic ABM Defense are technically realized only in Russia and USA. The
technical implementation of Russia-Euro NATO ABM Defense does not start from scratch. The elements
of ABM Defense system, which are located on the territory of the Russian Federation, are capable to
repulse an attack from the South. Of course, joint research work should be done to answer the question
how many and what missiles and radars are needed as well as how much does it cost to build Russia-
Euro NATO ABM Defense.
The ABM Defense System is effective only in case when it is capable to destroy a target on different
parts of the trajectory of a missile and warheads. The Russian elements of ABM Defense are capable to
destroy targets even on ascending parts of the trajectory far from the territory of Europe.
In future the cooperation between European manufacturers and particular with leading French ones,
and Russian companies in the framework of developing analogues of S-300, S-400 and S-500 AA Missile
Systems is possible.
In order to develop military-technical cooperation with Russia it is necessary to push aside all obstacles
like different limitations and discriminatory restrictions (antidumping customs, complicated procedure
of certification for imported details and tools, tax and customs regulations). To gain success it is
necessary to organize on regular basis meetings of Russian-French Committee on Military-Technical
cooperation. Moreover it is very important to expand projects on joint ABM Defense development.
It is worth to mention that political decisions regarding European defense and, God forbid, retaliation
should be taken in Europe as wreckage of missiles will fall down on the European territory. That is why
President Medvedev expressed surprise when he figured out that Europe still had not agreed on what
ABM system it needed.
The outcome was formulated by Russian President in his annual message: “If within 10 years Russia and
NATO are failed to come to agreement regarding ABM defense the world will face a new arms race…
and we’ll have to take the decision to deploy new strike systems”. This message is addressed not to
Europe but to those who accelerate the development of its military nuclear forces as well as to those
who want to gain winning nuclear superiority over Russia using the development of defense means, in
particular the development of ABM Defense.
If Europe delays the decision of joint ABM defense, the United States of America will start the
deployment of some ABM Defense elements in Europe closer to the Russian border not late than 2011
without coordination with NATO. In this case the future Russia-NATO cooperation will tumble down.
By Vladimir Milishkevich, expert in ABM matters, Eduard Voitenko, Political Writer and Anton Chernov,
Political Writer
Link to the original article http://www.iris-france.org/docs/kfm_docs/docs/observatoire-russie/2011-04-abm---04-04-11---eng.pdf
above all the tactics to achieve the American goals were refined. Allegedly, Washington has begun to
demonstrate the conception of irreversibility in forming of the multipolar world.
However, the strategic goal of the USA is still aimed to keep the dominating position in the world.
Today, the accomplishment of the goal is provided by continuous building up of its military-economy
potential and military power of the Armed Forces as well as by conducting the policy of containment
towards breakaway regimes. Furthermore, the accomplishment of the goal, and it is a new trend, is
furnished by using the resources and facilities of the Russian Federation.
The brought-back-to-life Strategic Defense Initiative project, nowadays earmarked as Anti-Ballistic
Missile Treaty, is used as a vehicle for the US political purposes.
By the end of seventies of the last century the US leadership came to a conclusion that the quantitive
and qualitive build-up of the strategic nuclear arms could shatter not only the USSR economy but also
the American one. They should arrive to another solution. And the solution was found. It was based on a
military approach that is used by a commander during the decision making process – simulative
deception. In his particular case the United States of America forced the Soviet Union to lay out money
in response to the creation of purely defensive system against the Evil Empire with its huge number of
missiles that were aimed to destroy USA and afterwards, for sure, Europe.
In the beginning of 80s the plans of the Strategic Defense Initiative got into print. The Initiative was
based on the development of anti-missile satellite systems. In March, 1983 President Ronald Reagan
declared the new plans of the United States in the framework of the Strategic Defense Initiative.
Admittedly, the plans were only on paper. However they were largely advertised and were failed to be
accomplished in a century due to the technical reasons.
The Soviet Union was in earnest about these plans and it reacted with all-out efforts despite difficult
economic and political situation. That was exactly what US wanted from the USSR. Simply stated, the
Soviet Union took the bait.
In March 11, 1985 Mikhail Gorbachev came to power and facilitated the collapse of the Soviet Union
and global socialist system by pursuing the Perestroika policy. Along with the country the Soviet
Strategic Nuclear Forces and Aerospace Defense System were terminated. The United States of America
received the quantitive and qualitive nuclear arms advantage over the USSR.
Afterwards the allegedly initiated developments of energetic weapon systems were ended due to the
lack of success and huge spendings.
The development of military-political environment as well as changes in economy situation in the world
in addition to lack of judgement on the part of the United States led to the undermining of America’s
prestige. Some real candidates upon world-beater role emerged; one of them is European Union.
The United States of America can hedge the possibilities of Europe only via NATO in case of EU’s
excessive independence in seeking to resolve military-political issues, to build up industrial and military
potential. The long-term goal congruence of the US and leading European countries in military-political
environment is assessed as a strong basis for control over Europe and extending of cooperation on
behalf of the United States of America.
One of these long-term goals is an imposed by the US Anti-Ballistic Defense for Europe against Iran, in
perspective against North Korea and of course, from China. However, as far as the latter is concerned,
Washington keeps silence so far. The fact that the threat from the mentioned countries unable to come
in a short term (10-15 years) as well as in a long term (25-30 years) is passed over in silence.
If one looks attentively to the map of Europe, the location of the proposed ABM elements in Poland and
the Czech Republic as well as American combat ships armed with the AEGIS combat system and SM-3
missiles seem to be not suitable to protect Europe from the Iranian future strategic nuclear missiles.
Much wiser to locate the ABM elements in Turkey and Georgia, Bulgaria is also suitable for this task, at
worst Romania can be selected, but not Poland and the Czech Republic for sure.
However, in case to control the Russian aerospace activities in the European part of the country,
including Plesetsk spaceport as well as water areas of the Barents, White and Kara seas (the operational
zone of the Russian Northern Fleet), Poland and the Czech Republic and also the above-mentioned
American combat ships are most suitable places to deploy ABM elements.
The problem of defense for Europe, Israel and itself against Iranian missiles can be solved by the United
States of America in another way, how it has been done already in Iraq, former Yugoslavia and now in
Afghanistan – to inflict damage upon real military nuclear facilities on the territory of Iran. Of course at
the beginning the international community will boil over the fact of attack upon the independent
country, but all in all the peoples will be thankful for the ease of headache even it was done surgically.
The attack will be considered as an illustration for other offenders.
Today the leadership of the United States has speeded up the activities aimed at deployment of the
Anti-Ballistic Missile Defense elements. No doubt, as soon as Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty START-III
comes into effect, the above-mentioned activities gain full speed under the slogan “to protect troops and
the Americans against the growing threat of ballistic missiles with ABC warheads”. But there is nothing
to it; they are able to protect only Americans, not Europeans, as one cannot protect everybody.
In accordance with the National Missile Defense Act Washington pays much attention to deploy as soon
as is technologically possible an effective National Missile Defense system capable of defending the
territory of the United States. In other words to create non-strategic ABM defense (according to the
American terminology Theater Missile Defense) to protect American forward deployed and
expeditionary forces as well as to reinforce the Allies’ Air Defense forces and facilities.
However, the American way of the subdivision of Ant-Missile Defense facilities into “strategic” and
“non-strategic” is factitious and corresponds the misinformation action with the aim to empress
Americans and affect internal and external policy of the European countries.
The main goal of the Strategic missile defense is to target long-range ICBMs equipped with means that
impede interception. There’s a great number of light and heavy deception targets, maneuvering
warheads, variety of jamming systems including high-altitude nuclear explosions. Today only Russia and
America possess the Strategic Missile Defense Systems. However these systems can protect in case of
limited strike (several missiles), moreover in case of bounded path. In foreseeable future there will be
no systems that can provide the defense against massive strike of strategic missiles.
The development of Theater Missile Defense (European Theatre) is conducted in the framework of
deployment the in-depth-dispose global anti-ballistic missile defense aimed to target different missiles
attacks both from Russia and, in the Far East region in conjunction with Japan, from China.
To increase the integration level of the American ABM defense system, the coordination between the
elements of the ABM defense and to decrease time for anti-missile operations, the “Operations Groups
Engagement” concept is applied. Each group (Poland, the Check Republic nowadays, in a short term
some other European countries, Japan – in the Far East) will constitute a complex of fire, information
and intelligence means.
Taking into account NATO’s military-political hierarchy in the framework of the new NATO concept, the
United States of America is a leader, the second role is given to Great Britain and Canada, the third role
granted for the key European countries as France, Germany and Italy. It means that the mentioned
European countries can count only on US’s grant to participate in some insignificant activities regarding
the development of the ABM defense. In this regard, the modernization of the American-German-Italy
Anti-Aircraft system “MEDES” can be exemplified. There is no slightest hope for any deeper cooperation
between America and Europe in this context.
However, one should not be mistaken regarding the future of the ABM defense. The mankind has
scientific and economic potentials and it continues the researches in this field. For instance, such
scientific and technical researches have been on the way in the United States of America, even despite
false start over the Strategic Defense Initiative.
Today the creation and development of strategic aerospace assault and defense weapons are limited by
three factors: economic facilities, technical implementation and political decisions. As far as the future
of these weapons is concerned, it should be reckoned for decades. It is also important to understand the
necessity to consider different aerospace adversaries (Iran, China, North Korea). All these can be
achieved in case of the creation of a European ABM Defense Unified System that meets the current and
future requirements. The unified system should combine the containment and retaliation means which
should be corrected during the development of the system.
The creation of such European ABM Defense Unified System, both operational and organizational,
aimed at different aerospace adversaries, is impossible without the Russian Federation’s participation
due to the same three factors.
A thesis about military, social and economic weakness of Russia is a myth that was imposed pro domo
sua by the United States of America for others. But even weak Russia is capable to invest more than 200
million Euros for ten years to create real Russia-Euro NATO combined ABM Defense System. But the
same ridiculous amount was imposed by the US to Europe that approves once again the fact that
Washington does not want to defend Europe.
Partially, the elements of the Strategic ABM Defense are technically realized only in Russia and USA. The
technical implementation of Russia-Euro NATO ABM Defense does not start from scratch. The elements
of ABM Defense system, which are located on the territory of the Russian Federation, are capable to
repulse an attack from the South. Of course, joint research work should be done to answer the question
how many and what missiles and radars are needed as well as how much does it cost to build Russia-
Euro NATO ABM Defense.
The ABM Defense System is effective only in case when it is capable to destroy a target on different
parts of the trajectory of a missile and warheads. The Russian elements of ABM Defense are capable to
destroy targets even on ascending parts of the trajectory far from the territory of Europe.
In future the cooperation between European manufacturers and particular with leading French ones,
and Russian companies in the framework of developing analogues of S-300, S-400 and S-500 AA Missile
Systems is possible.
In order to develop military-technical cooperation with Russia it is necessary to push aside all obstacles
like different limitations and discriminatory restrictions (antidumping customs, complicated procedure
of certification for imported details and tools, tax and customs regulations). To gain success it is
necessary to organize on regular basis meetings of Russian-French Committee on Military-Technical
cooperation. Moreover it is very important to expand projects on joint ABM Defense development.
It is worth to mention that political decisions regarding European defense and, God forbid, retaliation
should be taken in Europe as wreckage of missiles will fall down on the European territory. That is why
President Medvedev expressed surprise when he figured out that Europe still had not agreed on what
ABM system it needed.
The outcome was formulated by Russian President in his annual message: “If within 10 years Russia and
NATO are failed to come to agreement regarding ABM defense the world will face a new arms race…
and we’ll have to take the decision to deploy new strike systems”. This message is addressed not to
Europe but to those who accelerate the development of its military nuclear forces as well as to those
who want to gain winning nuclear superiority over Russia using the development of defense means, in
particular the development of ABM Defense.
If Europe delays the decision of joint ABM defense, the United States of America will start the
deployment of some ABM Defense elements in Europe closer to the Russian border not late than 2011
without coordination with NATO. In this case the future Russia-NATO cooperation will tumble down.
By Vladimir Milishkevich, expert in ABM matters, Eduard Voitenko, Political Writer and Anton Chernov,
Political Writer
Link to the original article http://www.iris-france.org/docs/kfm_docs/docs/observatoire-russie/2011-04-abm---04-04-11---eng.pdf
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий