What New Russian Arms Systems Mean
During the Russian-Georgian war of August 2008, the actions of the 58-th Army of Russia were defined as "coercion to peace". This is a suitable term, if you remember what actually was at stake. The Russians won that war and, indeed, forced Georgia to tune in to a much more peaceful way. In terms of Clausewitz, the Russians achieved the main goal of the war, forcing the enemy to fulfill the will of Russia. Russians, as the events of the last 19 years have shown, no longer have any illusions about the possibility that the collective West will behave to some extent reasonable. This is especially true of the United States, which is still in its shell, which isolates it from the external voices of reason and the world. The US global track record for the last several decades does not require any special clarification - it is a track record of military and humanitarian catastrophes.
The message of Vladimir Putin to the Federal Assembly from 1 March had nothing to do with the upcoming presidential elections - in spite of what many in the West claim to have gone crazy in the elections. Putin's speech was related to forcing the elites of America if not to the world, then, at least, to some form of reasonableness, since they are now completely cut off from the geopolitical, military and economic realities of the new emerging world. As it was with Georgia in 2008, compulsion and this time is based on military power. The Russian army, up to Shoigu, with all its real and imaginary flaws, ended up with armed and partially armed the United States armed forces of Georgia in five days - the technology, personnel and operational art of the Russian army were simply better. Obviously, such a scenario is impossible in the case of the US - unless the myth of American technological production bursts like a soap bubble.
American power elite simply can not comprehend the complexity, nature and use of military force. Most members of these elites have not served in the armed forces for a day and have never studied in serious military educational institutions and whose knowledge on serious military-technological and geopolitical issues is limited to a couple of nuclear weapons workshops and, at best, to the materials of the Congressional Research Service. They simply do not have control points, landmarks. Nevertheless, as a product of the American military pop culture, also known as military pornography and propaganda, these people-a bunch of lawyers, "political scientists", sociologists and journalists dominating the American strategic kitchen, which is constantly preparing delusional geopolitical and military doctrines- understand only one thing - when and if they, the poor fellow, have their targets on their backs and foreheads.
Putin's message to the United States was very simple - he reminded America of its lenient refusal to take into account Russia's position on the ABM Treaty. As in a surprising moment of sobering-up, Jeffrey Lewis wrote in Foreign Policy magazine: "The true genesis of Russia's new generation of strange nuclear weapons lies not in the recent Nuclear Strategy Review, but in the decision of the George W. Bush administration to withdraw from the ABM Treaty and the inability of the Bush administrations and Obama is meaningful to conduct a dialogue with the Russians on their concern about US missile defense. In his speech, Putin said: "All these years after the unilateral withdrawal of the US from the ABM Treaty, we worked hard on advanced technology and weapons. This allowed us to make a rapid, big step in creating new models of strategic weapons. " Here it is, this technological step, a breakthrough. It's sad, but there were no diplomatic breakthroughs we needed. "
Putin's message was clear: "No one really wanted to talk to us. Nobody listened to us. Listen now. " After that, he proceeded to what can only be described as a combination of Pearl Harbor and Stalingrad. The strategic implications of adopting the systems presented by Putin are enormous. In fact, by their nature they have a historical character. Of course, many American clever men - as might be expected - dismissed this as an empty threat. This is expected from the military "expert" community of the United States. Others so easily dismissed this did not. And some were really, deeply shocked.
Today, the general impression of Putin's speech can be described in such a simple way: "lag in missiles" * is real and, in fact, it is not a gap, but a technological abyss. "Paradoxically, this abyss is not where many really recognize it, for example, in the case with the ballistic missile RS-28 "Sarmat", the existence and exemplary characteristics of which are more or less known for a number of years.It can not be denied that the possession of a ballistic missile, which not only has an almost unlimited range, but also and the trajectory making useless any missile defense is an impressive technological achievement.After all, an attack from the South Pole, through South America, is not the scenario the US military is able to cope with. many years.
How can they not cope with the Russian system of hypersonic weapons (Max 20 +) "Avangard", which has already been launched into batch production. This is an unexpected development of events, since the US has its own, although so far unsuccessful, program to create this type of weapon. And such ideas have been wandering around the US since the middle of the 2000-ies in the framework of the "Rapid Global Impact." ** Yes, Russia achieved these striking achievements, which Geoffrey Lewis called "strange", which is a euphemism instead of the phrase "we have nothing "But the real shock is not even this: I have already had to write that the United States is more than behind Russia in such weapons as cruise missiles of all types." For many years I predicted that the true decline of the American armed forces will come from this side. its very clear that Russia has an absolute military and technological superiority of cruise missiles and aeroballistic, and that in this critical field, she is ahead of the United States for decades.
While Western clever men discussed all exotic and, no doubt, astounding weapons systems designed to deliver nuclear weapons to any point of the globe with very high accuracy, many true professionals swallowed the air when the Dagger was introduced. This system completely changes geopolitical, strategic, operational, tactical and psychological game. For some time it was known that the ships of the Russian Navy were carrying a revolutionary anti-ship missile 3M22 "Zircon" capable of speeding Max 8. No matter how impressive and practically invulnerable "Zircon", "Dagger" simply shocks with its capabilities. It is most likely built on the basis of the famous Iskander - an aeroballistic missile capable of Mach 10, highly maneuverable, with a range of 2 000 km. "Zircon", starting with MiG-31BM aircraft, has just copied all the books on naval operations. He made large surface fleets obsolete. You did not make a mistake reading this.
No missile defense and air defense systems in the world today (except, perhaps, C-500, specially designed to intercept hypersonic targets) can not do anything with the Dagger. And, most likely, it will take decades to invent an antidote. More precisely, no modern or prospective air defense systems deployed in any of the fleets of NATO countries are able to intercept at least one single missile with such characteristics. A volley from 5-6 of such missiles guarantees the destruction of any carrier-borne shock ship group or, for that matter, another other group of surface ships. And all this without the use of nuclear munitions.
The use of such weapons - especially since, as we now know, it is already deployed in the Southern Military District of Russia - will not cause difficulties. Most likely, they will be dropped from MiG-31 aircraft over the international waters of the Black Sea, which means the closure of the entire eastern Mediterranean for any surface ship or ship group. Russia, thus, completely closes also the Persian Gulf. The same creates a huge "forbidden zone" in the Pacific, where MiG-31, taking off from the aerodrome "Elizovo" in Kamchatka or from the base "Central Corner" in the Primorsky Territory, will be able to patrol vast ocean expanses. It is noteworthy that the current platform for the "Dagger" is MiG-31 - it is considered the best interceptor aircraft in history. Obviously, the ability of the MiG-31 to develop very high supersonic speeds (significantly higher than Max 2) is a key trigger factor. But whatever the procedures for launching these intimidating weapons, the immediate strategic implications of the operational deployment of the Dagger are:
It finally pushes aircraft carriers into a niche of pure power projection against weak and defenseless opponents - far from the remote sea zone of Russia, whether in the Mediterranean, the Pacific or the North Atlantic. This also means the establishment of a "restricted zone" for any of the 33 destroyers and cruisers of the US Navy equipped with the Aegis missile defense system; It makes the classic carrier-based strike groups - as the main strike force against ships of equal or approximately equal rank - completely obsolete and useless. This also makes any surface ship group defenseless, regardless of its capabilities in the field of air defense and missile defense. This completely nulls the hundreds of billions of dollars invested in these platforms and weapons, which immediately turned into nothing more than fat defenseless targets. The whole concept of the "air maritime battle", also known as the Joint Concept for Access and Maneuver in the Global Commons (JAM-GC), which is the cornerstone of US global domination, is simply meaningless - doctrinal and financial catastrophe. "Sea Control and Sea Denial" change their nature and merge.
Those who own the Dagger simply take possession of huge spaces, the limits of which are limited only by the range of the missile's flight and its carriers. From these spaces this weapon also removes absolutely any important surface ships and means of supporting submarines, substituting them for patrol and anti-submarine aircraft and surface ships. The effect of this is multiplicative and deep.
Russia has a large number of these carriers. The modernization program for MiG-31 in MiG-BM has been under way for several years already, and front-line aviation has already received a significant number of these aircraft. Now it is clear why this modernization was carried out - it turned MiGi-31BM into launch platforms for Dagger. Major General Corps of the Marine Corps James Jones officially declared in 1991 after the first Gulf War: "All that is required to panic a shock ship group is to see how someone tops a pair of 200-liter drums ".
"Dagger" virtually removes any surface water force that does not want to commit suicide, miles and miles away from the shores of Russia and makes all its possibilities worthless. In the language of ordinary people, this means only one thing: the entire surface component of the US Navy becomes an absolutely empty shell, suitable only for parades and demonstrating a flag near the coastal waters of weak and underdeveloped states. This was done for a tiny fraction of the astronomical costs incurred in the construction of American platforms and weapons.
At this stage it is difficult to fully predict what political consequences Putin's speech will have in the US. It is easy to predict, however, the use of the "asymmetric" cliché beaten to death. Use this cliché wrong. What happened on 1 March of this year, when the possibilities of the new Russian weapons were announced and demonstrated, is not "asymmetric". It was an official statement about the final advent of a completely new way of conducting war, military technologies and, as a result, a new strategy and new operational art. Old rules and approaches are no longer applicable. The US was not ready for this, despite the fact that many real professionals, including the US, warned about a new emerging military technology paradigm, full of American myopia and arrogance in everything that relates to the military sphere. As Colonel Daniel Davis was forced to admit: "No matter how justified pride at times, she quickly mutated into a hideous arrogance. This is a direct and open threat to the state. Perhaps nothing demonstrates this threat better than the failed Pentagon system of acquiring weapons, equipment and equipment. "
Today, under the current American approach to war, it would be prudent to predict that there will be no meaningful US response to Russia in the foreseeable future. The United States simply does not have other resources, except how to turn on the printing press and, therefore, completely bankrupt itself. But here, in fact, in what business. The Russians know that the purpose of Putin's speech was not to directly threaten the United States, which - regardless of whoever it was - was defenseless before the abundance of Russian hypersonic systems. Russia does not pursue the goal of destroying the United States. Russian actions are dictated only by one goal - to tear the pistol out of the hands of a drunken hooligan and make him listen to those who have something to say. In other words, Russia came with a pistol for stabbing. And, it seems that today this is the only way to do business with the US.
If warnings and demonstrations of Russian military-technological superiority will have an effect the way Russians initially assumed, meaningful negotiations on a new world order can begin between key geopolitical players. The world can no longer afford the presence of much of itself, a self-deprecating, self-praising, but empty brawler who himself does not know what he is doing and only threatens stability and peace throughout the world. With American self-proclaimed hegemony, it is over there where it really matters to any real and imaginary hegemon - in the military sphere. It was finished some time ago; just needed Putin's speech to demonstrate the good old triism of Al Capone that with a kind word and a pistol you will achieve more than with a single kind word. In the end, Russia really tried it only with a kind word. It did not work. So, the United States should only blame themselves.
Published with the permission of the publisher (unz.com). Translation of Sergei Dukhanov.
* The statement that the United States is lagging behind the USSR in the production of nuclear missiles was first made by John F. Kennedy at 1960 during the election campaign. It had an impact on Congress and public opinion and led in the early 60-ies. XX century. to the massive deployment of ground-based ballistic missiles
** A rapid global strike is an initiative of the US armed forces to develop a system that allows striking conventional weapons anywhere in the world for 1 hours, similar to nuclear strikes with ICBMs.