Star Wars tested for Eastern Europe; US space weapons "unofficial declaration of war"; "soft assassinations" planned for last weekend's EU election winners.
Seek truth from facts with Gladio, NATO's Dagger at the Heart of Europe author and former European MP Richard Cottrell; Stop NATO newslist's Rick Rozoff; and Bruce Gagnon of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space.
Live tactical missile firing touted by Russia’s Western Command.
RT.com June 02, 2014 14:13
Russia’s most advanced missile complexes for precision firing exercises have been announced by the country’s Western Command. Training includes locking on top-priority targets, with air-based and ballistic ground-based missile complexes.
The Russian Air Force’s strategic long-range aviation is engaging surface targets with cruise missiles, while training is being undertaken on deployment at Iskander-M nuclear-capable mobile theater ballistic missile complexes. The drills focus on the elimination of hard-to-destroy targets with a high-impact precision weaponry.
The war games started on May 27 and will last till June 5.
“In the course of the maneuvers, we carry out integrated damage attacks on the critically important installations of a hypothetical aggressor’s infrastructure, using high-precision ground-and-air-based weapons,” reported the press-service of Russia’s Defense Ministry.
Iskander-M (NATO reporting name SS-26 Stone), a quasi-ballistic missile complex with an officially declared range of 400 kilometers, is currently limited by the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) agreement signed between the United States and the Soviet Union back in 1987. The INF treaty prohibited development and deployment of all medium-range ballistic and cruise missiles, and eliminated already existing ones with a range of between 500 and 5,500 kilometers.
In case the INF is terminated, the range of an Iskander complex could easily be extended to a greater, yet unspecified range.
Iskander-M has a wide range of warheads, from conventional and powerful thermobaric, cluster and bunker buster warheads, to tactical nuclear warhead.
Russian authorities have repeatedly warned NATO leadership that in case of further deployment of US anti-ballistic missile complexes in Europe, Moscow reserves the right to deploy Iskander-M missile complexes in the Kaliningrad region, Russia’s enclave in Europe. In this case, all of Poland, where the US plans to station its ABM bases, will be covered for a potential launch-through-attack strike.
The threat of having modern missile complexes on its borders, which practically cannot be intercepted, sparked hot opposition from the Baltic States and Poland, which called on Washington to increase US military presence in the region.
In December 2013, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin stated that so far the decision about deployment of Iskander-M missiles to Kaliningrad had not yet been taken, whereas Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov maintained the matter of deployment is fully in the hands of the Russian military, saying that “when there’s a need – the military will make the decision.”
The press-service of the Russian Defense Ministry stressed that deployment of Iskander complexes is not limited with any international agreements.
Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu finalized the discussion, saying that “on the territory of the Russian Federation we deploy whatever we want, wherever we want.”
The current maneuvers, as the previous ones, are being conducted against the background of the new Ukrainian authorities’ military operation against the the primarily Russian-populated rebellious eastern regions of Ukraine, which are demanding federalization of the country.
Post by TsarSamuil on Jun 10, 2014 18:34:15 GMT -5
India-Russia Missile Successfully Test Fired from Indian Warship.
MOSCOW, June 9 (RIA Novosti) – India’s armed forces successfully test launched a BrahMos supersonic anti-ship cruise missile, developed jointly with Russia, from the country’s newest warship INS Kolkata, the PTI news agency reported Monday quoting Indian defense officials.
The missile-launch took place earlier this morning off the west coast of India near the Karwar military base in Karnataka. During the test all the requirements were met, the officials said.
The missile was created by the Indo-Russian joint venture BrahMos Aerospace founded in 1998 by the Indian Defense Research and Development Organization and Russian rocket design bureau Mashinostroyeniya. The venture was named after two rivers, the Brahmaputra in India and Russia’s Moskva.
Deliveries of BrahMos missiles to the Indian Armed Forces started in 2005. BrahMos, which is the world’s fastest cruise missile in operation, can travel at speeds of up to Mach 3. The missile has a maximum range of 290 km and can carry a warhead of up to 300 kg.
Ground and sea trials of the missile have already been successful. The BrahMos is expected to be deployed with Su-30MKI fighter-bombers jointly developed by Russia’s Sukhoi Design Bureau and India’s Hindustan Aeronautics Limited for the Indian Air Force.
Post by TsarSamuil on Jun 18, 2014 15:50:12 GMT -5
US missile defense system proves to be useless after $40 bln spent.
RT.com June 17, 2014 16:52
Despite a decade of testing and tens of billions of dollars’ worth of research, a major missile defense program in the United States has proven to be anything but successful, a new investigation suggests.
Nevertheless, the Missile Defense Agency, or MDA, plans on conducting next week its ninth exercise of that costly system since 2004, and the outcome of the drill is expected to influence whether or not more than a dozen new interceptors are added to the United States’ arsenal.
According to a recent investigation by the Los Angeles Times, however, that system has so far been marred by mistakes that raise questions about its ability to thwart any major attack and the cost incurred during the last decade.
The results of the Times probe, published by the paper on Sunday this week, show that Pentagon officials with inside knowledge of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system, or GMD, say the program has suffered from mishaps more often than the US government would have expected.
“[ A ] decade after it was declared operational, and after $40 billion in spending, the missile shield cannot be relied on, even in carefully scripted tests that are much less challenging than an actual attack would be,” David Willman wrote for the Times over the weekend.
“Official pronouncements about the GMD system, The Times found, have overstated its reliability.”
Results have been mixed to say the least since as far as 1999 when GMD testing first began — half of the first 16 tests of the system's ability to intercept a mock enemy warhead failed, the Times acknowledged. The system was finally upgraded to “operational” in 2004, but five of the eight tests held in the last decade have failed as well.
The GMD system is expected to intercept incoming missiles, like hypothetical attacks waged by adversaries such as Iran or North Korea. Even when US officials have scripted test drills to try out this ability, however, the GMD program has hardly acted as expected. The last successful intercept occurred five-and-a-half years ago, and the last three attempts — two in 2010 and one last July — all were unsuccessful.
"The tests are scripted for success," Philip E. Coyle III, a former director of operational testing and evaluation for the Pentagon, told the Times. "What's amazing to me is that they still fail."
Because of this tainted track record, all eyes are expected to be on a drill later this month on June 22. MDA Director Navy Vice Adm. James Syring told Congress recently that the upcoming intercept flight test remains his “highest priority,” and with good reason:14 new intercepts could be added to a MDA system currently composed of 30 if the upcoming test is a success, but Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel hinted that failure would mean a halt in funding.
Speaking before Congress, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Illinois) said “not just friends of the United States but even our enemies” will monitor the next round of testing in order to gauge the current abilities of the MDA program.
“I’m also optimistic we have identified the cause of the intercept failure involving our first-generation EKV last July when the CE-1 failed to separate from the booster’s third stage,” Syring said. “We have accounted for this issue in the upcoming flight test and we are working toward a correction for the entire fleet before the end of the year.”
Regardless, Syring is appealing to Congress for $99.5 million to begin what he described Wednesday to the Times as "redesign improvement" that would stop short of a complete overhaul, sources familiar with the matter told the paper.
Last Edit: Jun 18, 2014 15:50:34 GMT -5 by TsarSamuil
Post by TsarSamuil on Jul 16, 2014 16:04:46 GMT -5
Russia to reopen Cuban mega-base to spy on America – report.
RT.com July 16, 2014 07:51
Moscow and Havana have reportedly reached an agreement on reopening the SIGINT facility in Lourdes, Cuba - once Russia’s largest foreign base of this kind - which was shut down in 2001 due to financial problems and under US pressure.
When operational, the facility was manned by thousands of military and intelligence personnel, whose task was to intercept signals coming from and to the US territory and to provide communication for the Russian vessels in the western hemisphere.
Russia considered reopening the Lourdes base since 2004 and has sealed a deal with Cuba last week during the visit of the Russian President Vladimir Putin to the island nation, reports Kommersant business daily citing multiple sources.
“I can say one thing: at last!” one of the sources commented on the news to the paper, adding that the significance of the move is hard to overestimate.
The facility in Lourdes, a suburb of Havana located just 250km from continental USA, was opened in 1967. At the peak of the cold war it was the largest signal intelligence center Moscow operated in a foreign nation, with 3,000 personnel manning it.
From the base Russia could intercept communications in most part of the US including the classified exchanges between space facilities in Florida and American spacecraft. Raoul Castro, then-Defense Minister of Cuba, bragged in 1993 that Russia received 75 percent of signal intelligence on America through Lourdes, with was probably an overstatement, but not by a large amount.
Following the collapse of the Soviet Union the base was downscaled, but continued operation. After Russia was hit the 1998 economic crisis, it found it difficult to maintain many of its old assets, including the Lourdes facility. In Soviet times Cuba hosted it rent-free, but starting 1992 Moscow had to pay Havana hundreds of millions dollars each year in addition to operational costs to keep the facility open.
An additional blow came in July 2000, when the US House passed the Russian-American Trust and Cooperation Act, a bill that would ban Washington from rescheduling or forgiving any Russian debt to the US, unless the facility in Lourdes is shut down.
Moscow did so in 2001 and also closed its military base in Vietnam’s Cam Ranh, with both moves reported as major steps to address Americans’ concerns. But, in the words of a military source cited by Kommersant, the US “did not appreciate our gesture of goodwill.”
No detail of schedule for the reopening the facility, which currently hosts a branch of Cuba’s University of Information Science, was immediately available. One of the principle news during Putin’s visit to Havana was Moscow’s writing off of the majority of the old Cuban debt to Russia. The facility is expected to require fewer personnel than it used to, because modern surveillance equipment can do many functions now automatically.
With the Lourdes facility operational again, Russia would have a much better signal intelligence capability in the western hemisphere.
“Returning to Lourdes now is more than justified," military expert Viktor Murakhovsky, a retired colonel, told Kommersant. “The capability of the Russian military signal intelligence satellite constellation has significantly downgraded. With an outpost this close to the US will allow the military to do their job with little consideration for the space-based SIGINT echelon.”
Last Edit: Aug 9, 2014 11:42:29 GMT -5 by TsarSamuil
Russia: US claims on nuclear missiles treaty unfounded, we have questions too
July 30, 2014 17:40
Moscow has slammed Washington’s allegations that Russia breached the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, calling the claims unsubstantiated. It added Russia also has complaints about the US’s fulfillment of their obligations under the treaty.
US claims that Russia violated the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF Treaty) are “just as unsubstantiated as everything that has recently been heard by Moscow coming from Washington, including other issues. There is absolutely no evidence provided to support [these allegations],” Russia’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement Wednesday.
Moscow’s statement comes in response to US President Obama’s letter to Russia’s Vladimir Putin on Tuesday, informing him that the US has determined that Russia has breached the treaty.
The ministry said that the problems regarding the obligations under the treaty by both sides are not new.
“They are well-known by both sides” and need to be worked on continuously, with both countries refraining from loud accusations, the ministry said.
“This cooperation is all the more important, as we have accumulated a considerable amount of complaints to [be addressed to] the US in the framework of the treaty. In particular, on target missile defense tests similar in characteristics to the short- and intermediate-range missiles and the manufacturing of armed drones, which meet the treaty's definition of ground-launched cruise missiles,” the ministry said.
Moscow added that recently the MK 41 Vertical Launching System has come into the spotlight, as the US is planning to deploy those launchers in Poland and Romania as part of its global missile defense shield plan.
"These systems can launch intermediate-range cruise missiles and their land-based version can be regarded as a direct violation of the INF Treaty,” the ministry said.
The ministry reiterated that Washington was refusing to listen to Moscow’s calls, instead “only listening to themselves.”
Russia hopes to receive answers to these “pertinent questions” and to see that the US is ready to work on ensuring the observance of the treaty, the ministry said.
The INF Treaty – a key agreement between the United States and the Soviet Union which put a seal on the Cold-war era – was signed by US President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1987.
It eliminated nuclear and conventional ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with intermediate ranges, defined as between 500-5,500 kilometers (300-3,400 miles). The two countries agreed to reduce their nuclear arsenals, eliminate an entire category of nuclear weapons, and conduct extensive on-site verification inspections. As a result, the United States and the Soviet Union destroyed a total of 2,692 missiles.
US accuses Russia of nuke treaty breach... but has it?
RT.com July 30, 2014 23:53
The US accuses Moscow of violating a 1987 INF Treaty banning short- and medium-range ballistic and cruise missiles. Experts ponder if Washington is nudging Moscow to pull out of a treaty to create a new ‘nuke bogey’ while extending protection to the EU.
Washington says Russia has tested a prohibited ground-launched cruise missile thus breaching the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty signed by the US and the Soviet Union nearly 30 years ago, banning all ground-based nuclear-capable missiles with range from 500 to 5,500km, the New York Times cited.
But has Russia really violated the letter of the INF Treaty?
The situation in the world has greatly changed over the years since the INF Treaty was signed.
By May 1991, the INF Treaty was fulfilled. The USSR eliminated 1,752 missiles of five types, some of them fired unarmed at special test grounds, with infrastructure and production lines also destroyed.
The US deactivated a total of 859 of three kinds of Pershing missiles, but kept the launch platforms, transforming the missiles into targets for future ABM tests - and still use them.
Today Moscow and Washington remain the world’s only capitals that imposed restrictions on themselves in the regard of short- and medium-range missile possession. Meanwhile, Russia has several nuclear states in imminent proximity to its borders that already have such medium-range missiles (China, India, Pakistan and probably Iran and North Korea) that can potentially strike Russian territory. The US has no such neighbors.
An expert of the Institute of International Security Problems, Valery Fenenko told RIA Novosti that the INF Treaty does not prohibit development of short and medium range missiles so both Russia and the US never stopped research in this area. Yet while Russia is doing the job all alone, the US has a helping hand of NATO allies.
“Americans are in a much easier situation in this regard. They have allies France and the UK that haven’t signed the INF Treaty. These countries have cruise missile projects of their own that could be easily be transformed into surface-to-surface missiles,” Fenenko said.
Russia could try to impose a moratorium on the Treaty until France and UK sign the document, “but there is no chance they would sign, so that would be the end of the treaty,” Fenenko concluded.
Though no Western media outlet has mentioned the name of the missile, there are probably only two candidates for the role of the “peace breaker.”
The first is Russia’s cutting edge ICBM RS-26 Rubezh (Frontier) complex dubbed 'ABM-killer', reportedly made on the basis of ICBM RS-24 Yars land-based mobile missile system. According to a top military official, it was tested several times at short distances of about 2,000km, RBC Daily reports.
However, Rubezh is technically beyond suspicion, according to member of the Academy of Sciences, Aleksey Arbatov, as under the treaty the ballistic missile’s range is estimated as the maximum range it was tested at, which is a respectable 5,700km for RS-26 Rubezh.
The second candidate is the R-500, a cruise missile which can be used with ground-based 9K720 Iskander launcher. Its range is a delicate issue, said Arbatov as cited by RBC Daily. Though it has an officially announced range below 500km, its exact characteristics remain top-secret and could be argued.
According to military experts, the R-500 is a modification of the old Soviet 3M10 Granat with an estimated range of 2,600km that was initially designed for submarine launch. All land-based Granat missiles were destroyed under the INP Treaty. However, the treaty did not apply to naval missiles.
The US has previously complained about suspected Russian treaty violations, presumably about the R-500 and its land-based tests that reportedly had to be conducted due to lack of funding. Moscow’s explanations did not satisfy Washington, noted Arbatov, adding that such decisions and arguments are usually discussed during the meeting of working groups – while now the issue has reached the presidential level.
At the same time, the Russian Air Force possesses a unique X-101 strategic cruise missile – which could potentially be adopted for surface launch – with some reports indicating its maximum range to be well over 5,500km. In that case this missile would not fall under conditions of the INF Treaty either - if adapted for ground launch from the Iskander complex.
Timing is everything?
The New York Times broke to the world on Monday that President Barack Obama sent a letter to Vladimir Putin, in which Russia is accused of testing a surface-to-surface cruise missile with an excessive range.
The first tests of those missiles were conducted back in 2008, the report suggests, and it took the Obama administration three years to conclude that they were a compliance concern. But the question of possible treaty violation was raised by the State Department’s arms control officials only in 2013.
When reports of Russia’s ground-based tests re-emerged in January 2014, the US administration wasn’t ready to comment on the issue or draw any conclusions and media attention to the issue at that particular time.
The US is obviously trying to force Russia out of the INF Treaty to have a pretext for further augmentation of its military presence in Europe, Fenenko shared with RIA Novosti.
“A lukewarm conflict between Russia and the US has been drawing on since 2007. In my opinion, Americans are pushing Russia to step out of the treaty,” Fenenko said.
He believes that the accusations of the INF Treaty violation is a part of American strategy of spreading its anti-ballistic missile defense shield in Europe.
“Some American and Russian analysts expected Russia to respond to the imposed sanctions with threatening rhetoric towards the EU, and an obvious and harsh step of quitting the INF Treaty but that never happened,” explained Fenenko, adding that now Washington wants to fulfill the aim in a different manner.
“If Russia re-deploys medium and short range missiles that would be a direct threat to EU member states, both Eastern and Western European countries,” he concluded.
Washington uses the alleged INF Treaty violation to boost global tensions in the background of the Ukrainian crisis and sanctions imposed on Russia, Andrey Koshkin told RT, military political analyst at Plekhanov Academy in Moscow.
“This is interconnected with the crisis situation being created by the Americans themselves,” estimated Koshkin, adding that Washington is launching a political assault on Moscow from every direction “to hype up the tensions.”
“They try to blame Russia every morning, every evening, every night – this is a salvo of accusations. They try to get [the] Western public accustomed to blaming Russia,” Willy Wimmer, the former State Secretary of the German Ministry of Defense, told RT.
The medium-range RSD-10 Pioneer (SS-20) missile system (RIA Novosti / Anton Denisov)
Russia rebuffs NATO over nuclear missile treaty.
RT.com July 31, 2014 17:30
The Russian Foreign Ministry has sharply criticized NATO’s Secretary General for intervening in the row over the INF nuclear missile treaty, pointing out that NATO was not a signatory, but that the alliance’s member states could always join.
Moscow’s rebuff came after a statement on Wednesday by NATO Secretary General perplexed Russian diplomats.
“The United States has briefed the North Atlantic Council on its determination that the Russian Federation is in violation of its obligations under the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty,” Rasmussen’s statement said.
Rasmussen stressed that the treaty “has a special place in history” and that Russia “should work constructively to resolve this critical treaty issue” and preserve its viability “by returning to full compliance in a verifiable manner.”
“Continuing to uphold the treaty strengthens the security of all, including Russia,” Rasmussen said.
In reply, Russia’s Foreign Ministry “not without a bit of surprise” questioned why Rasmussen was commenting on a treaty NATO was not a party to.
"We hope that Secretary-General is not going to dispute the fact that this Treaty was signed in December 1987 between the USSR and the US, not between the USSR and NATO or Russia and NATO,” the ministry said in a statement.
If NATO’s chief is truly concerned with meeting the obligations this treaty imply, he should better “address a NATO member state that signed this treaty,” the ministry said, referring to the US.
Diplomats in Moscow pointed out that all major problems with implementation of the INF Treaty are primarily caused by the US, such as the launches of target missiles, development of armed UAVs, and deployment of Naval Mk-41 platforms capable of launching medium-range cruise missiles.
“We will pursue further elimination of the aforementioned concerns,” Russian diplomats said, calling on Rasmussen to help to make other NATO member states join the treaty to give it a truly multilateral status.
The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty signed by US President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1987 obliged the two sides “not to possess, produce, or flight-test a ground-launched cruise missile with a range capability of 500 to 5,500 kilometers, or to possess or produce launchers of such missiles,” Rasmussen said in his statement.
Russia’s General Staff chief, Gen. Valery Gerasimov, said Thursday that Moscow is strictly implementing the INF treaty with the US. He discussed the situation around the agreement during a phone conversation with US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin Dempsey.
“Gerasimov reaffirmed Russia’s adherence to strict implementation of the INF treaty,” the Russian Defense Ministry said in a statement.
On Tuesday, US President Barack Obama accused Russia of violating the nuclear weapons reduction treaty.
The exchange of accusations between Moscow and Washington is taking place against the background of worsening bilateral relations, primarily over Ukraine.
The US and EU have introduced several stages of economic sanctions against Moscow, including those against whole sectors of the Russian economy.
Moscow have promised that the US will feel “tangible losses” from what it called “destructive, myopic” sanctions and expressed its disappointment with the EU’s inability to act independently from Washington in the international arena.
‘Lies, hypocrisy, propaganda’: Russia slams US over claims of nuclear treaty violations.
RT.com August 02, 2014 00:36
Moscow has upped the ante in its growing confrontation with Washington after releasing an incendiary statement, accusing the US of spinning and distorting facts to allege that Russia is testing a new cruise missile, banned by a landmark Cold War treaty.
“Once again the US is trying (and again rather clumsily) to act as a mentor, for some reason pretending to possesses the truth in the last instance and have the right to judge others. Claims are made with little to no evidence and based on warped logic, in other words presented not with further experts’ analyses in mind,” opens the lengthy tirade by the Russian Foreign Ministry, in response to the allegations detailed in the State Department report released on Tuesday.
“The purpose seems to be to create a wall of information noise to incite other countries, and to boil up a propagandist brew for the media. Or does the US administration still sincerely deceive itself that the world can take Washington’s word?”
The US report never specified how exactly Russia violated the treaty, instead offering a vague finding that: “The United States has determined that the Russian Federation is in violation of its obligations under the INF Treaty not to possess, produce, or flight-test a ground-launched cruise missile (GLCM) with a range capability of 500 km to 5,500 km, or to possess or produce launchers of such missiles.”
This would be a direct violation of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) signed by Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev in 1987, which banned missiles that could carry nuclear warheads in the range of 500-5,500 km. The White House described the supposed transgression as a “very serious matter” of which it has been aware since 2008, again not naming the suspect.
The media in the meantime were quick to allege the missile in question was the R-500 cruise missile with an officially stated range of 500km, which some believe can be easily modified for greater ranges.
Russia previously issued a brief response to the allegations that was dismissive, but called for further dialogue. The latest diatribe, however, makes no attempt to seek common ground, and takes pot shots at the entirety of the US approach to international treaties – repeatedly accusing Washington of duplicity and bad faith.
“American officials cite classified intelligence, when questioned about their findings. The value of such intelligence has been amply proven by the ‘Iraqi weapons of mass destruction’ myth. Such undercover research becomes even less trustworthy, with regular leaks of obviously untrue and provocative pieces of information about the conflict in eastern Ukraine, while data coming from sources beyond US control gets ignored. Years pass, but the Americans have learned nothing.”
The statement then exposes US hypocrisy, who themselves are developing “target practice missiles” similar to missiles in question, as well as drones, which violate the spirit of the INF Treaty.
The American report claims that “all US activities during the reporting period were consistent with the obligations set forth in the INF Treaty. Russia did not raise any new INF Treaty compliance issues during the reporting period.”
But the Russian Foreign Ministry said that Russia repeatedly raised concerns with US short range missiles for target practice, drones and the MK 41 Vertical Launching Systems which the US is planning to deploy in Poland and Romania.
It seems that the current unsubstantiated accusations against Russia are just a “tendentious and provocative’” attempt to create a smokescreen and draw attention away from the Pentagon’s own transgressions, Russia says, going beyond identifying a single specific area of disagreement.
“Washington is systematically carrying out a plan to dismantle the global strategic stability system,” says the ministry, mentioning the global US missile defense system, which will give it a military edge over even other nuclear powers.
“Americans started this process in 2001, by unilaterally withdrawing from the ABM treaty. Now it is aggravated by a rapid and unlimited build-up of US global missile defense system, unwillingness to clean up the territory of other states from the US tactical nuclear arsenal deployed there, elaboration of a provocative strategy of Prompt Global Strike, and an excessive build-up of conventional weapons, including their offensive components,” the statement says.
Russia also highlighted another “paradox” in American policy regarding arms control and non-proliferation.
“Washington initiated the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), but it is the United States who has not yet ratified this important agreement,” Russia’s statement says, adding that American nuclear laboratories seem to be actively lobbying for maintaining US nuclear test sites in the state of preparedness for new full-scale nuclear explosions.
Russia also resented insinuations about possible non-compliance with the terms of the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC) and the Chemical Weapons Convention, where Washington has chided Moscow of engaging in dual-use biological activities and providing “incomplete” data about such facilities’ operations.
“They obviously bet on the ignorance of the general public about the fact that the United States has the highest in the world number (up to 5,000) of biosafety level 3 laboratories (BSL-3), of which, according to the US Government Accountability Office, at least 1,356 had a license for work with selected (highly dangerous) pathogenic agents. All of those facilities are dual-use, while selected pathogens are directly relevant to the BTWC,” Moscow said.
Almost one-third of the US report was devoted to the America claims to the implementation by other states of multilateral agreements, including the Open Sky Treaty.
“The report's authors are tripping over themselves to "prove" that Russia has somehow created obstacles to the implementation of the Treaty,” Moscow says, adding that most of the issues presented, of purely “technical” nature, were long ago referred to. The ministry however still rebuffed a couple of further examples, to demonstrate how the facts are “distorted” in the US report.
Finishing off its litany of complaints Russian Foreign Ministry’s document wholly rejects all US objections to Russia’s commitment to international treaties.
“The US report is a catalogue of cooked-up quibbles about others, without a single attempt to look at their own reflection in the mirror.”
US nuke accusations ‘part of infowar set to discredit Russia’ over Ukraine crisis.
RT.com August 13, 2014 18:36
US claims and allegations, including the accusation that Russia violated the INF nuclear weapons treaty, are part of an anti-Russian campaign launched amid the Ukraine crisis, Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov told RT.
The campaign is aimed at discrediting Russia and the US is ready to “exploit any means” in the information war, Antonov said.
Diplomatic tensions between Moscow and Washington have been growing as the bloody confrontation between Kiev forces and self-defense groups continues in east Ukraine. Adding fuel to the fire, the White House recently accused Russia of breaching the 1987 INF Treaty that bans the intermediate-range and shorter-range ballistic and cruise missiles. Moscow slammed the allegations as unfounded adding that there were questions regarding the US’s fulfillment of the agreement.
RT met with Russia’s Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov to discuss the situation, NATO’s attempt to meddle in the INF Treaty dispute and the way the story was presented in the Western media – where Moscow’s position was sometimes misinterpreted.
RT: What’s your comment on these media reports?
AA: The INF Treaty is of unlimited duration. The treaty clearly provides for specific procedures to consider any non-compliance issues. In an earlier period, when the missiles that fall under the Treaty were destroyed in large quantities, a special commission was in place that convened on a regular basis.
Any non-compliance issues were supposed to be raised during the sessions of the commission. This procedure proved to be highly effective – despite the complexity of the goals set out by the Treaty, not a single matter remained unresolved. And complete elimination by Russia and the US of two classes of the most dangerous missiles is the best illustration of the point.
With this in mind, it’s only natural that we were very much surprised when our American counterparts ignored the dispute resolution procedures provided in the Treaty and chose to simply leak their ungrounded accusations to the press. Why draw NATO’s Secretary General into the issue? The alliance is not a party to the Treaty.
The answer is simple: a massive wave of US claims and allegations is part of the anti-Russian campaign unleashed by Washington in connection with the Ukraine crisis. And the US is ready to exploit any means to discredit Russia.
It is hard to escape the conclusion that amid a deterioration of US-Russian relations over the Ukraine crisis Washington is planning a new propaganda move that is supposed to cast a shadow on Russia. The White House wants to launch a new offensive in the information war, accuse Moscow of non-compliance with its international commitments and demonstrate so-called ‘Russia’s international isolation’.
If the US had other goals in mind, it would have relied on time-tested procedures set out in the INF Treaty as well as other formats of negotiations. I have never heard of a single case when disputes arising from an international treaty have been resolved via the mass media. This can only lead to yet another escalation and a complete stalemate.
RT: What has Russian-US dialogue on the INF treaty been like in the past couple of years?
AA: The commission has not convened since 2003. Instead, we’ve used other formats of negotiations to discuss its implementation.
The last time the INF Treaty was brought up was in late 2013. The issues on the agenda were the same as the ones that the US officials referred to recently. We have looked into the US concerns and the Russian side provided detailed explanations which seemed to have satisfied our American counterparts at the time, at least that’s what they told us. The points that we had laid out were deemed a definitive answer and, as far as we know, were presented by the Obama administration to the US Congress.
For its part, Russia laid out a list with its own concerns to the US that includes:
- the use of target missiles in development testing of missile defense systems whose performance is very much similar to the missile types banned by the INF Treaty;
- the use of combat drones;
- the MK 41 launching systems that are planned for deployment in Poland and Romania.
Some of the questions have remained unanswered because our partners need time to analyze them. It’s standard practice and we are ready to wait for a substantiated reply.
However, we were surprised that the annual report on international compliance with arms control agreements says that Russia never raised any concerns over Washington’s compliance with the INF Treaty in 2013. Such a statement is a distortion of the real state of affairs, at the very least.
RT: What role does the INF Treaty play in the legal framework of the global security system?
AA: The INF Treaty was, effectively, the first international agreement on nuclear disarmament. In line with the Treaty, the USSR and the US destroyed all missiles with a range from 500 to 5,500 km. The biggest benefit for the USSR was that the US removed its missiles from Europe that had the shortest silo-to-target flying time to Soviet sites. The elimination of intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles significantly reduced the level of military confrontation, contributing to a calmer military and political situation in Europe and the world in general.
The positive outcome of the INF Treaty paved the way for further productive negotiations on arms reduction, and the experience was later used in the succeeding agreements on nuclear disarmament. First and foremost, this applies to START I.
RT: The decision to ratify the INF Treaty was reportedly regarded as a controversial one in the USSR. Is this true?
AA: Indeed, the decision to sign the INF Treaty raised some controversies back home. Some groups supported the treaty, but others pointed to what they thought were concessions on the part of the Soviet Union. They believed it was an act of betrayal of national security interests. The main reason for this was the fact that the USSR agreed to eliminate the state-of-the-art Oka missile (NATO designation SS-23 Spider) whose range was less than 500km. Also, the number of missiles to be eliminated by the US and the USSR was different.
Nevertheless, despite certain downsides, the INF Treaty clearly has an important historical significance.
RT: So what is Russia’s current stance on the Treaty?
AA: During his meeting with the defense industry leaders in 2013, President Putin admitted that Mikhail Gorbachev’s decision to sign the INF Treaty was ‘debatable, to say the least’, but added that Russia would abide by its provisions.
At the same time, it’s undeniable that the military and political situation in Europe and the world has changed drastically in the last 30 years.
First of all, the Warsaw Pact that ensured the parity in forces between the USSR and NATO ceased to exist.
Secondly, Russia doesn’t have the military capabilities that the USSR enjoyed during the Cold War.
Thirdly, in 1987 the only states that had intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles besides the USSR and the US were France and China. Today, the number of such countries is nearly 30, and most of them are in close proximity to Russia.
We can’t overlook the fact that the US and NATO are actively building a global missile defense system. Its European segment features anti-ballistic missiles launched from MK 41 launching systems that the US Navy usually uses for Tomahawk long-range cruise missiles.
For the US, almost nothing has changed in terms of national security since the INF Treaty came into effect. All the conflict zones in the world that the US had a hand in creating are located far from American borders.
RT: How did Russia try to handle challenges to its own security under the INF Treaty restrictions?
AA: We have voiced our concerns regarding the INF Treaty binding only two super-powers at different international platforms. We have urged all the countries of the world to use the potential of the Treaty to contribute to the disarmament process in a continuous and timely way. We underscored the importance of ridding the world of two types of deadly missiles.
In 2007, following a proposal by President Putin, Russia put forward a draft resolution to the UN to adjust the treaty to modern realities and make it open and universal by urging all the states in possession of intermediate- and shorter-range missiles to join. We believed that this would improve the security of all countries and bolster the international missile non-proliferation regime.
Unfortunately, the proposal didn’t find much support. NATO member states were indifferent, and the countries that had acquired intermediate- and shorter-range missiles in recent years don’t want to relinquish them, considering them a reliable means of deterrence. The US didn’t offer much assistance, either, and only issued a joint statement with Russia on the issue in 2007 at the 62nd session of the UN General Assembly.
RT: What’s to be done in this situation?
AA: We are willing to continue our dialogue with the US, including the issues regarding the INF Treaty. We expect Russia’s so-called ‘violations’ to be substantiated with hard data rather than ‘evidence from social media’ and blurry images made by commercial satellites that have no clear geographical references.
We also hope that our American counterparts will not use trumped up legal pretexts to avoid uncomfortable questions put forward by the Russian Federation.
Last Edit: Aug 14, 2014 16:29:30 GMT -5 by TsarSamuil
W/S RT-2UTTKh Topol-M (NATO reporting name: SS-27 "Sickle B") mobile launcher C/U Tires M/S RT-2UTTKh Topol-M W/S RT-2UTTKh Topol-M mobile launcher W/S Crew prepare for launch M/S Officer at desk C/U Control panel M/S Officer at control panel C/U Control panel W/S Officers in operating room C/U Control panel M/S Vantage point inside RT-2UTTKh MS Cadets M/S Cadets leaving RT-2UTTKh W/S RT-2UTTKh SOT Colonel Sergey Demeshko, Chief of Command and Engineering Faculty in the Strategic Missile Forces at Military Academy (Russian): "Besides Russia, not a single country has managed to create a similar rocket complex. That speaks volumes! Our country remains the only one that did it." M/S Topol-M mobile launcher SOT Colonel Sergey Demeshko, Chief of Command and Engineering Faculty in the Strategic Missile Forces at Military Academy (Russian): "There aren't any problems for our cadets that could prevent them in the future from working on the most modern hardware, which is coming into service with the Russian Strategic Rocket Forces." M/S Topol-M mobile launcher W/S Topol-M mobiel launcher
Russian officer cadets were trained to use one of the most powerful weapons on the planet, the RT-2UTTKh missile complex (NATO reporting name: SS-27 "Sickle B"), in the Kaluga region of Russia on Friday.
Better known as the Topol-M, the trainees were given a run-through on how to launch the intercontinental ballistic missiles in the event of a nuclear war. They were shown all the technical specs, both inside and out.
The cadets were all from the 'Peter the Great Military Academy of Strategic Missiles' in Moscow.
Post by TsarSamuil on Aug 21, 2014 13:37:40 GMT -5
R-7 Intercontinental Ballistic Missile.
MOSCOW, August 21 (RIA Novosti) - On August 21, 1957, the USSR successfully launched the R-7/SS-6 Sapwood intercontinental ballistic missile, which was developed by experts from Special Design Bureau (OKB) No. 1, under the supervision of Chief Designer Sergei Korolev.
The two-stage R-7 ICBM could deliver one thermonuclear warhead to just about any region of a theoretical enemy’s territory. This new formidable weapons system also became a prototype launch vehicle for various space satellites and manned spacecraft.
The R-7 was also known as the Semyorka and Item No. 8K71 in technical documents.
Soviet experts began developing the R-7 in the late 1940s and early 1950s, long before its first launch. At that time, Korolev was overseeing the development of single-stage R-1, R-2, R-3 and R-5 ballistic missiles. After assessing the results of these research and development projects, experts realized that a much more powerful composite (multi-stage) missile was needed to reach a theoretical enemy’s territory on another continent. The concept of this missile was suggested by Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, the father of space travel.
In 1947, Mikhail Tikhonravov established a group for conducting systematic research projects at the Research Institute of Artillery Sciences. Members of this group were instructed to study the possibility of developing composite (multi-stage) ballistic missiles. After analyzing the group’s findings, Korolev decided to create a rough sketch of a powerful composite missile. On May 20, 1954, the Soviet Government issued a resolution instructing the above-mentioned OKB-1 to develop an intercontinental and thermonuclear-capable missile. Special Design Bureau No. 456 headed by Valentin Glushko developed powerful new engines for the R-7 missile. The R-7’s guidance system was designed by Nikolai Pilyugin and Boris Petrov, and Vladimir Barmin designed the launch facility. Several other organizations were also involved in this project.
At the same time, the decision was made to establish a new ICBM testing site. In February 1955, the Council of Ministers of the USSR (Soviet Government) adopted a resolution on starting the construction of a testing site called the Fifth Research and Testing Site of the Soviet Defense Ministry (NIIP-5). The decision was made to build the testing site near the village of Baikonur and the Tyura-Tam double-track railway section in Kazakhstan. This space center was considered a top-secret facility, and the R-7 launch facility was completed in April 1957.
The design of the R-7 missile was completed in July 1954, and the Soviet Government approved its creation on November 20, 1954. The missile was ready for testing in early 1957. Starting mid-May 1957, the first tests of the missile were conducted, revealing major drawbacks in its design.
The first missile lifted off on May 15, 1957. Visual observations showed the flight pattern to be normal, but changes in the composition of missile engine gases were subsequently detected in its tail section. An assessment of telemetry data showed that the missile had become unstable, after one of side sections fell off. The accident was caused by a ruptured fuel pipeline.
The next launch was scheduled for June 11, 1957, but it never took place due to defective engines in the missile’s central section. The missile lifted off once again on July 12, 1957, but lost its in-flight stability in the 33rd second of flight and started deviating from its preset trajectory. This particular malfunction was caused by a short-circuited integrator responsible for the missile’s revolution.
The fourth R-7 launch (August 21, 1957) finally proved successful, and the missile hit a preset target area for the first time. This missile, also known as Item No. 8K718, with an M1-9 warhead, lifted off from the Baikonur space center (Tyura-Tam testing site), completed its active trajectory leg and released its warhead, which then hit a preset area of the Kamchatka Peninsula. But this launch had one major drawback: the warhead disintegrated during reentry.
On August 27, 1957, Soviet newspapers reported the successful test of a multi-stage missile with an enhanced range in the USSR.
Positive results of R-7 flights along the active trajectory leg made it possible to use the missile for launching the first two man-made satellites, on October 4 and November 3, 1957. Conceived as an ICBM, the R-7 possessed a sufficient thrust-to-weight ratio for sending a rather heavy payload into orbit, and this factor was used to full advantage during the launching of these two satellites.
After assessing the results of six R-7 launches, experts upgraded the missile warhead (they installed a new one). They also upgraded the warhead-separation systems and installed slot-type antennas (also called slot arrays) of the telemetry system. The first fully successful R-7 launch took place on March 29, 1958, and its warhead reached the target area intact.
Subsequent flight tests were conducted in 1958-1959, making it possible to upgrade the R-7 design still further.
The R-7 differed completely from all previously developed missiles in terms of its layout, frame configuration, dimensions, weight, rated engine power, the number of systems and their designation, and more.
The R-7 missile’s layout featured two stages with parallel separation and was, in fact, a multiple booster assembly. Its first stage comprised four strap-on boosters measuring 19 meters (62 feet) long each and with a maximum diameter of three meters (10 feet). They were attached symmetrically to the missile’s central section (second stage).
Strap-on boosters and the central section were similar to single-stage missiles with front-mounted oxidizer tanks. The fuel tanks of all sections served as load-bearing structures. During launch, the propulsion units of all five sections were activated simultaneously.
This layout made it possible to activate all engines on the ground, rather than during flight (in the vacuum of space). Each section was equipped with a four-chamber and open-layout liquid-propellant sustainer engine firing liquid oxygen and kerosene.
Hydrogen peroxide and liquid nitrogen were used to operate turbo-pump units of rocket engines and for supercharging fuel tanks, respectively.
The R-7 missile was 31.4 meters (103 feet) long and had a diameter of 11.2 meters (36.7 feet). It had a liftoff weight of 283 metric tons, including 250 metric tons of fuel, a range of 8,000 kilometers (4,971 miles) and a payload of 5.4 metric tons. It could carry a nuclear warhead with a yield of three to five megatons.
The nuclear warhead was attached to the instrument compartment of the central section using three ejection explosive charges. Using it, it was possible to destroy a large area through an air or ground burst.
The R-7 missile was equipped with a combined guidance system, the autonomous subsystem of which ensured angular stabilization and stabilization of the center of mass during the active trajectory leg. A radio-technical subsystem adjusted the sideways movement of the center of mass at the end of the active trajectory leg and shut off the engines for greater targeting accuracy. Reversible steering-engine chambers and rudders executed various commands of the guidance system.
The first R-7 missiles were manufactured at Plant No. 88, a pilot production facility of the OKB-1, in Kaliningrad, now Korolyov, near Moscow. Due to the pilot plant’s limited capacity, Dmitry Kozlov, the leading designer of the R-7 missile, was sent on a business trip to Kuibyshev, now Samara, in February 1958, with instructions to launch commercial production of these missiles at Aviation Plant No. 1, now the Progress State Research and Production Rocket Space Center, which manufactured bombers in the past. The first production missiles came off the assembly line already in December 1958.
Joint R-7 flight tests were conducted from December 1958 until November 1959. A total of 16 missiles were launched during these tests, including eight production versions. The tests made it possible to decide whether the Soviet Armed Forces could adopt the R-7 missile.
The R-7 ICBM was adopted for service on January 20, 1960.
In 1958, the decision was made to build a combat launch station, called the Angara facility, near the town of Plesetsk in Russia’s Arkhangelsk Region. This facility was completed on January 1, 1960, and it successfully launched two test missiles on July 16, 1960, for the first time in the history of the Soviet Armed Forces. Prior to launch, the missile was delivered from a technical position aboard a railway train with a transporter/erector, and placed on a massive launch facility. Pre-launch operations lasted over two hours.
Apart from the R-7, Soviet experts continued to develop the R-7A missile system with an even longer range of 12,000 kilometers (7,450 miles), an upgraded guidance system, more reliable engines and a lighter warhead. The R-7A missile featured more powerful engines and a somewhat larger fuel load, made possible by reducing the free volume of its fuel tanks. The R-7A ICBM was officially adopted for service on September 12, 1960.
The entire missile system proved to be cumbersome, vulnerable, expensive and hard to operate. A refueled missile could remain on the launch pad for no more than 30 days. An entire factory was needed to generate and replenish the required oxygen reserves for refueling deployed missiles. The targeting accuracy of these missiles was not very impressive either. It became obvious that only a few R-7 missiles and their modified versions could be placed on combat duty. A total of four launch pads were built, and both missile versions were discarded from service by late 1968.
The reliable design of the R-7 and R-7A missiles made it possible to develop an entire family of Vostok, Voskhod, Molniya and Soyuz launch vehicles, as well as modified versions of them, for launching the first man-made satellites, and lunar and interplanetary probes. These rockets also launched numerous manned missions, and they continue to be used to this day.
Post by TsarSamuil on Aug 21, 2014 13:41:56 GMT -5
Russian troops put advanced anti-aircraft systems to the test.
RT.com August 20, 2014 01:25
Russian aerospace defense forces have test-fired S-300 and S-400 anti-aircraft missile systems at a large military drill in the country’s southern Astrakhan Region.
“Three armed regiments carried out test fires of S-400 ‘Triumph’ and S-300 ‘Favorit’ surface-to-air missiles,” Russian Defense Ministry spokesman Col. Igor Klimov said on Tuesday.
Target missiles Kaban and Pischal were used to simulate the high-speed targets during the drill, he added.
S-400 Triumph is the next generation upgrade to the S-300 anti-aircraft weapon system family, which was deployed around Moscow back in 2011. It has an operational range of up to 400 kilometers, depending on the missiles it is using, and can destroy up to 36 targets simultaneously.
Over 800 servicemen and more than 200 military vehicles are taking part in the war games at the Ashuluk Range, Klimov said. The summoned troops are responsible for 13 regions in Russia’s west, including Moscow.
Ashuluk firing range was a subject of a recent exchange between Washington and Moscow.
Earlier this month, the drills area housed over 100 warplanes and helicopters, which took part in the joint drill by Russia’s air force and air defense forces. Following the drill, US Department of State spokeswoman Jen Psaki said that Washington is “deeply concerned” by the maneuvers of the Russian military, which are “provocative and only serve to escalate tensions” on the border with Ukraine.
The Russian Defense Ministry was quick to point to the large distance between Ashuluk and the conflict zone in Ukraine, almost 1,000 kilometers away bordering Kazakhstan in Central Asia. The ministry thus voiced “concerns over the lack of basic geography knowledge expressed by Jen Psaki.”
In March and April, the Russian military did conduct separate mass ground exercises, which Moscow explicitly linked to the growing unrest in south-eastern Ukraine.
In April, the Ukrainian army began a military campaign to bring to heel the protesters in the country’s Donetsk and Lugansk regions, who refused to recognize the coup-imposed authorities in Kiev and demanded federalization. Over the summer, the operation started gradually spilling over the border, with Russian checkpoints and refugee camps coming under fire from the Ukrainian side.
Post by TsarSamuil on Sept 11, 2014 0:10:34 GMT -5
Submerged Russian nuclear sub test-fires Bulava strategic missile.
RT.com September 10, 2014 08:16
A Russian Borey-class nuclear submarine has successfully test-fired a Bulava SLBM, the Russian Defense Ministry reported. The ballistic missile was launched from a submerged sub and hit a target some 5,000km away.
The Vladimir Monomakh, head vessel of the Borey class, fired the missile on Wednesday from the White Sea off Russia’s northwest. All of the Bulava’s warheads hit the Kura test range in the Kamchatka Peninsula in the Russian Far East, the ministry said in a statement.
Borey-class submarines are the designated backbone of Russia’s sea-based part of nuclear deterrent, with Bulava being its nuclear weapon of choice. The missile had a somewhat troublesome development history, with technical glitches plaguing the early tests. The launch on Wednesday was the 19th in the SLBM’s history.
Post by TsarSamuil on Sept 12, 2014 0:25:48 GMT -5
‘Deterrence not arms race’: Russia hints it may develop rival to US Prompt Global Strike.
RT.com September 11, 2014 19:37
A highly-placed Defense Ministry official says that Russia may be forced to match the US Conventional Prompt Global Strike (CPGS) doctrine, which prescribes that a non-nuclear US missile must be able to hit any target on Earth within one hour.
“Russia is capable of and will have to develop a similar system,” Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Borisov said during a public discussion of the Russian rearmament program for the decade of 2016 through 2025.
“But mostly we will concentrate on countering CPGS, as our military doctrine is a defensive one.”
But the official denied that the Kremlin was setting off for another Cold War-style arms race with the West.
“This is not in these plans, and I hope will never happen,” said Borisov. “We simply want to protect our civilian population from outside threats.”
While Prompt Global Strike is often treated as a futuristic super-weapon, it is simply a system that ensures that strike areas of existing technologies cover the entirety of the planet. The concept of CPGS was first explicitly stated in official US documents during the first George W. Bush administration, and in more than a decade on, it has gone through various iterations, from ones that would see kinetic weapons fired at targets on the ground from space, to hypersonic missiles, to conventional solutions of placing short and medium range missiles around the world. There is no deadline for the program’s official completion, which as just as much a subject to budget constraints as other articles of the defense budget, or consistent status updates on whether its aims may have already been achieved through existing armaments.
Despite its vague remit and gradual implementation, the program has caused considerable consternation in Moscow and Beijing. A previous US study showed that up to 30 percent of enemy nuclear launchers could be taken out with conventional weapons that would form part of the CPGS. Russian officials have said that together with the missile defense system the US is deploying around the world, this could mean that the current nuclear balance could be undermined.
This was clearly on Vladimir Putin’s mind when he spoke of creating new “assault capabilities, including maintaining a guaranteed solution to the task of nuclear deterrence" at the same Wednesday meeting.
But most experts agreed that Russia current abilities are already sufficient to withstand CPGS, even if it lacks the same attack capabilities.
"We already have a system of swift retaliation," said Yuri Baluyevsky, former Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces. The retired general is helping to develop the Kremlin to develop a new military doctrine by the end of the year, in the face of geopolitical changes in Ukraine, NATO’s increased presence in Eastern Europe, and the NATO missile shield.
"Russia has missiles, such as the long-range, air-based X-101 strategic cruise missile, which is able to strike at distances of 5,000 kilometers (about 3,100 miles)," the president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, Konstantin Sivkov, told RIA news agency.
"It also has high-precision ballistic missiles that could strike ground targets, providing they had normal warheads. These are the two main elements of a rapid long-range strike, That is, it can be done now. Basically, existing long-range aviation would be sufficient.”
Another expert suggested that Russia’s air defense systems – which cost considerably less than launches of ballistic missiles to operate – should form the backbone of the country’s response to CPGS.
"To create an adequate aerospace defense system it is important to develop interceptor systems, such as the S-500. It is capable of hitting targets not only in the air but also in near space at an altitude of 200 kilometers above the Earth, which are moving at a speed of up to 8 kilometers per second," said Igor Korotchenko, editor-in-chief of National Defense magazine.
The unveiling of CPGS has not only bred stiff resistance around the world, but also doubts at home in the US itself. A Carnegie Center study from last year said that the system held some of the same risks as a nuclear attack, and was much more likely to be used. Within the allocated 60-minute timeframe, incoming conventional missiles could be mistaken for nuclear warheads, their trajectory could be misunderstood, or they could simply hit the wrong target – all situations that may unleash a rapid response, which Russia and China, at the very least, appear to be very capable of already.
Russia fires Iskander-M missiles during large-scale drill in Far East (VIDEO)
RT.com September 20, 2014 19:54
Russia has successfully fired Iskander-M missiles during Vostok-2014 maneuvers in the Far East. It was the first launch of its kind for the Eastern Military District.
Early on Saturday, the Iskander-M missile brigade was ordered to move to the firing pad in the remote woodlands of the Jewish Autonomous Region. The missile strike eliminated all training targets.
The aim of the exercise is to check the coordination between staff and commanders of different combat arms, as well as improve the command and control of troops while performing advanced tasks.
“Iskander is...one of our strongest weapons; the guarantor of our security,” Major General Mikhail Matvievsky, chief of Strategic Missile Forces and the Artillery of the Russian Ground Forces, remarked following the test.
The Iskander (also referred to as NATO's reporting name SS-26 Stone) is characterized by high mobility and maneuverability, as it takes just 20 minutes to place the system in operational readiness.
The system is capable of hitting targets at a distance of up to 400 kilometers, with a precision of around 30 centimeters. It can hit adversary troops or underground command centers, depending on the warheads placed on the rockets. If necessary, its missiles can also be armed with nuclear warheads.
The advanced missile system has been used by the Russian military since 2006.
The strategic command and staff exercise, code-named Vostok-2014, kicked off in the Eastern Military District on Friday and will continue until September 25.
"About 100,000 servicemen, up to 1,500 tanks, 120 aircraft, 5,000 pieces of weaponry, military and special hardware, and 70 ships will take part in the exercises," the Russian Defense ministry said.
Tactical and cruise land, sea, and air-launched missiles will be fired during the drill, which is taking place at more than 20 training ranges from Anadyr in the north to Vladivostock in the south.
Russian troops will train to defend the coastal area and the islands in Sakhalin, Kamchatka, Chukotka, and the southern part of Primorsky Kray.
Post by TsarSamuil on Sept 22, 2014 15:59:48 GMT -5
Russia to fully renew nuclear forces by 2020 – official.
RT.com September 22, 2014 12:13
Russia is set to renew the country’s strategic nuclear forces by 100 percent, not 70 percent as previously announced, according to Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin.
"The formation of the technical basis for strategic nuclear forces is going at a faster rate, and in fact, we will renew not 70 percent of the SNF, but 100 percent," Rogozin told Rossiya TV channel.
The deputy premier, who’s responsible for the Russian defense industry, also declared that in 2015 the army and the navy are to switch 30 percent of their weapons to "cutting edge" technology, and by 70 percent in 2020.
"Should we amaze our colleagues, and is it necessary to brandish all types of weaponry to surprise them? Something must be preserved as a quiet secret for yourself to reveal at the most critical moment," Rogozin said, as quoted by RIA Novosti.
He added that the Russian army needs to be compact to move to “any threatening war theater” if necessary.
Rogozin also stated that Russia can do without the French Mistral helicopter carriers, the delivery of which was suspended over the situation in Ukraine. Moreover, the official described the statements from France that the contract could be disrupted as “unlawful” because one third of the ship was manufactured in Russia.
“For the same reason, it is impossible to transfer this half-of-the-ship to anybody else,” he added.
“Secondly, the money has been paid and it must be returned with penalties. Thirdly, it is not even money that France is risking, but its status of a reliable supplier in the World Trade Organization,” Rogozin said.
Mistrals aren’t entirely convenient for the Russian climate, as they were initially designed for the Mediterranean and wouldn’t be able to sail in northern seas, the deputy premier underlined.
Last but not the least, Russia can now make state-of-the-art ships that can easily match up to the Mistrals, the official said.
“Last year, on November 16 we transferred the Vikramaditya light aircraft carrier, which was formerly our Admiral Gorshkov missile cruiser, to our Indian colleagues. Thus, having implemented that contract and earning big money, we proved inside Russia and showed to the country’s leadership that Russia can now assemble ships of that kind,” Rogozin stressed, as quoted by ITAR-TASS.
The deputy PM also said that Russia would invite the world’s best specialists to work in the country’s manufacturing.
“In principle, we would be glad to hire French shipbuilders. I’m not joking. We’ll be employing the best specialists from all over the globe now,” Rogozin stated, adding that Ukrainian workers are welcome too, and for them the procedure of getting Russian citizenship would be simplified.
Among other developments, the Russian military-industrial complex will replace all the Ukrainian supplies in two-and-a-half years.
Post by TsarSamuil on Sept 24, 2014 12:09:19 GMT -5
US to Sell Medium-Range Missiles to Poland in $500 Mln Deal.
MOSCOW, September 23 (RIA Novosti) – The United States plans to sell 40 air-launched AGM 158-missiles to Poland as the Eastern European country further strengthens its defense amid the ongoing crisis in Ukraine, the Telegraph reports citing the US State Department.
The joint air-to-surface missiles can carry 1,000-pound warheads and have a far longer maximum range than the ones Poland currently is equipped with. They have a maximum range of 400 kilometers (250 miles). That is “further than the distance from Poland to Russia’s western border,” the newspaper observed.
The weapons, manufactured by Lockheed Martin, will act as a “deterrent to regional threats”, Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) said in a press-release. “The … sale will contribute to the foreign policy and the national security objectives of the United States by helping to improve the security of a NATO ally,” DSCA, an agency under the US Department of Defense, added.
Poland, which currently has 48 F-16 jets, also requested the sale of F-16 operational flight plan upgrades, according to DSCA. Additionally, Warsaw is set to receive spare and repair parts, support and test equipment, personnel training, technical and logistics support services from the US.
The US State Department approved the $500 deal on Monday saying that “Poland continues to be an important force for political stability and economic progress in Central Europe.”
Poland decided to accelerate the process of upgrading its missile defense system in March as the situation in Ukraine deteriorated, Reuters reported. Medium-range missiles make up the first phase of the countries upgraded air defense system.
Slavislav: Well,seems this place is on it's last legs.
Feb 25, 2021 3:15:05 GMT -5
White Cossack: Slavija will live forever.
Feb 27, 2021 17:18:22 GMT -5
ZlatkoLukic: Putin reminds me of Tito. A great leader, nur he should not forget that there will also bei a time after him.
Mar 14, 2021 16:35:38 GMT -5
ZlatkoLukic: Who will rule Russia then?
Mar 14, 2021 16:36:47 GMT -5
TsarSamuil: sergei lavrov i would guess
Mar 14, 2021 18:48:43 GMT -5
ZlatkoLukic: Lavrov is older than RasPutin.
Mar 15, 2021 15:36:02 GMT -5
TsarSamuil: not a fan of Lavrov, but do you trust anyone young? I like Viktor Orban, but he was educated in Soros college, he is one that turned against his teachings...who knows what nonsense since fall of USSR young Russians have taken in? Look at Serbia
Mar 18, 2021 14:59:57 GMT -5
TsarSamuil: again n again Serbia elected 'nationalists' that turned out to be Washington puppets..look at Serbia's president n prime minister...we need men with history of serving the motherland, lets not gamble.
Mar 18, 2021 15:01:20 GMT -5
White Cossack: It seems the USA push for war in U-Krajina.
Apr 2, 2021 9:22:55 GMT -5