#4
Moskovsky Komsomolets
March 14, 2002
NEANDERTHALS 2002
Opinions on the nuclear threats still faced by the world
Author: Victor Sokirko
[from WPS Monitoring Agency, www.wps.ru/e_index.html]

THE LOS ANGELES TIMES PUBLISHED AN ARTICLE ON THE PENTAGON'S PLANS, IN WHICH RUSSIA WAS LISTED AMONG POSSIBLE TARGETS FOR NUCLEAR STRIKES. MOSCOW TOOK THIS NEWS ABSOLUTELY CALMLY. RUSSIAN WARHEADS ARE ALSO AIMED AT THE US, AND BOTH COUNTRIES ARE CONCERNED ABOUT DEVELOPMENT OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS.

The Russian government's official response to the "information leak" which listed Russia among states targetted for an American nuclear strike proved quite restrained. Moscow merely ignored the article in an American newspaper, and did not make response statements. Even Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov, who is currently visiting the US, did not try to find out from President Bush whether American nuclear missiles were aimed at Russia. The Foreign Ministry was perhaps the only one to respond to the missile threat, sending an official inquiry to Washington, but this is more like a diplomatic move than the position of Russia as a whole.

However, this attitude of Russia's political and military leaders to the probability of a nuclear attack is quite understandable: it has long been known we are in the nuclear gun-sights. To be fair, one should note Russian missiles are not all aimed at test targets on the Kamchatka Peninsula. It is just not accepted to say out loud that the entire U.S. map is marked with small flags of our nuclear strikes. This is tactless, and carries the risk of international discord. Well, the missiles are aimed and let it be so; those who need to know will know.

When Boris Yeltsin suddenly revealed that Russian missiles would no longer be aimed at Britain and the US, residents of these countries were shocked: "Why, all this time we have been facing a threat of nuclear annihilation!" It was perhaps only British and American military people who were not surprised, for they knew our plans. Whether charts with position data for objects were removed from the warheads of missiles or not remains secret (placing them back takes little time, experts view), but one can surmise these "signs" also marked every other NATO member country, as well as some very unfriendly states like, for instance, Japan. And even today, one would hardly throw away schemes of blows striking - this thing is useful in the household and may come in handy. Six thousand Russian warheads are sure to not lie at depots as wasteful load that turned out to be unclaimed after completion of the Cold War. AT least, battle watch at rocket troops has not yet been canceled.

It would be naive to believe rocket warheads do not look in our direction from overseas.

Agreements on reducing strategic offensive weapons signed by Washington and Moscow were far from canceling Pentagon plans for striking nuclear blows. Moreover, every year brought more objects for attack. It is not by chance Americans are not ready to reduce nuclear arms below the level of 1,700-2,200 warheads that are capable of tearing apart the whole globe. And the Russian Defense Ministry is perfectly aware of this. Therefore, the present publication in The Los-Angeles Times has hardly become a revelation for our military people.

Why then Americans seemingly by chance show the nuclear club from behind the back, if this is know without that? There are several versions here. The first and simplest is that this is a usual show of strength and scaring rivals. The entire world diplomacy indulges in this. The second is that there are many opponents in the US itself to creation of a National ABM: for example, leaders of the U.S. democratic party doubt the reason of the Bush administration's stake on ABM systems in the cause of providing national security. On the verge of the counter-terrorist operation, democrats attained reducing assignments for the ABM system by $1,3 billion addressing this money for battling terrorism and purchasing usual armaments. This means one needs a scary story, in which America gets many enemies who can be calmed down with nuclear strikes, while hiding behind the ABM "umbrella". For if one fires missiles at Russia or China, atomic doughnuts will fly back. And the third reason is the fear of Americans to lose their world superiority cracked after September 11 last year when it became evident the US were vulnerable to strike a non-standard blow for the part of the enemy.

It is not by chance concerned American congress people assigned their army to make a fundamental survey of the nuclear doctrine, in order to determine the lines to build their nuclear forces along in the next ten years. the cock sparrows worked hard and reported the new situation in the sphere of security requires going farther, performing a transformation of the American armed forces and getting ready to act in a new, unpredictable world. The military people suggested creating a New Triad consisting of offensive shock systems, defense and offensive defensive, and a renewed defense infrastructure. The substance of creating the Triad is to bring down danger for the US in conditions of reducing nuclear forces (to that very minimum of 1,700- 2,200 operatively deployed strategic nuclear charges).

Thus, Russia was included in this concept of striking preventive nuclear blows (to be more precise, it has never been excluded from it). Without entering us to the list of terrorist countries, the US marked Russia with a cross simply because we dispose of a powerful nuclear reserve. The two nuclear powers are all even here, as they say: Russia's military doctrine also clearly states the possibility of striking the first blow in case there arises a threat to national security. At the same time, our missiles are unlikely to fly to Mongolia or Honduras...

The Cold War has long since ended, but "cold times" remain: the probability of a nuclear war is invisibly lingering. Fortunately, in the form of mutual threats so far... until one of the Neanderthals gets a bigger club.

Leonid Ivashov, a former chief of the Defense Ministry Main Administration for international military cooperation: Since the moment of appearance of nuclear weapons and means of their delivery, our territory has always been the first target for American missiles. Just like US territory was for ours. Besides, one should bear it in mind every previous statement about non-aiming missiles was a sort of political trick that to a certain extent guaranteed from unsanctioned strikes. Meanwhile, position data have always been installed at missiles.

One ought to picture clearly Russia has always been and will be a geopolitical rival for the US. Without control over Russia, or more widely, Eurasia, there is no control over the world, which Americans strive for. This is the corner stone of the entire American geopolitics.

Henry Kissinger, a former aide of the U.S. president for national security, noted once; "Russia is not a partner, but a client for the US". Therefore, the article in the newspaper delicately put us in our place, among the countries supposed to make the "axis of evil".

Andrei Nikolayev, chairperson of the Duma committee for defense: there is no wonder the Pentagon has plans for striking nuclear blows. Countries presenting the greatest probable threat as a rule find themselves among the first candidates for such strikes. These are countries possessing analogous weapons that can reach definite territories. Russian is among them: its missiles are capable of hitting targets in the US.

At the same time, this problem should be divided into two components: the political and the military-technical. The fact is very important in the political sense U.S. and Russian missiles are not aimed at each other. This is not fundamental; in the military- technical sense. A few seconds are enough to enter position data to warheads from computers.

Nuclear weapons is the armament of last century. However, one should take into account that in case a full-scale war still bursts out for various reasons, nuclear weapons will be utilized in it. By the way, it is not at all certain the US will be the first to use it. There are currently seven countries in the world that are already nuclear powers.

War undoubtedly remains in this century as a way to solve political, economic, and other contradictions in the world. Nevertheless, practically no document of the General Staff contains the notion of war. This means the General Staff does not know conditions and the form, in which a war may happen, and consequently, it does not develop a system of measures (protective, mobilizing, offensive, and other) in case it starts.

Pavel Felgengauer, an independent military observer: It is quite natural the information aroused absolutely calm response in Moscow: everyone knows without that we are at their gun point and they are at ours. Since the Cold war times, Russia and the US have had lists of priority targets for attack. Both parties naturally maintain these lists despite they signed in 1994 an agreement of non-aiming: aiming at a target is known to take one minute and missiles start in a few minutes...

The Pentagon plans have of course been changing over the last decade. Thus, when Kazakhstan, Ukraine, and Belarus liquidated their nuclear weapons, they were supposedly excluded from the list. However, it is not the plans, but the priorities that mostly change, accents are shifted. We were the main military threat for the US during the Cold War, while both our and their military people view currently this threat as quite unlikely.

The new thing in this document is only that Americans are seemingly beginning to create a new generation of small and super- small nuclear bombs to use in local conflicts or even simple counter- terrorist operations. These are bombs with regulated discharge and power, with a capacity of a few tons (ten, one hundred...). But again, there is nothing sensational here, because small and super-small charges and bombs intended to destroy underground targets have been developed in Russia and the US over many decades. As long as the end of the Cold War canceled the necessity to develop improved strategic warheads, "bomb-makers" are seemingly going to design new ones, for other - non-strategic - targets. Including in this country, which is by the way one of the reasons for this report to be met with benevolent neutrality in Moscow... Americans will have to launch tests for this and we are ready to resume them on Novaya Zemlya too. If Americans use such weapons, we will use it somewhere too - for instance in Chechnya. The Atomic Ministry has long been pushing the idea of regulated power through. This is when the power of usual strategic ammunition intended for a large war is reduced by 10 or even 50-100 times by pressing a couple of buttons, so that they can be used in small wars. The Security Council has also adopted special resolutions for this matter.

Conditions, under which utilization of this armament is possible, is a necessary routine. As a matter of fact, such decisions are made by supreme command, while the latter is by no means restricted in its actions. There is of course an agreement that non-nuclear countries will not be threatened with nuclear weapons, but no one currently takes it seriously. It has been observed so far, but what the future will bring... To my mind, the very fact of designing these weapons says its utilization is quite probable.

(Translated by P. Pikhnovsky)

BACK TO THE TOP    #197 CONTENTS    NEXT SECTION