Russian President Vladimir Putin has informed his annual news conference that Russia is developing new “hypersonic weapons” in response to a new arms race, which he claims was triggered by the US.

The Russian leader urged Washington to agree to a one-year extension of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), which maintains a nuclear balance between the two countries. The treaty expires in February.

Putin wanted more cooperation from Washington and added that he reckons US president-elect Joe Biden was more open to talking about negotiations on the issue, as opposed to current President Donald Trump.

Also known as New START, the current treaty replaced the Treaty of Moscow that was set to expire in December 2012. It calls for halving the number of strategic nuclear missile launchers.

START Negotiations Have Been Difficult

In October, the US and Russia came close to concluding negotiations over a short-term extension of New START. Putin put forward an offer to extend the treaty, but Trump’s national security advisor Robert O’Brien rejected the proposal, calling it insufficient.

In response, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov issued a statement clarifying Moscow’s offer by saying that the Russian President envisioned a one-year extension as well as a freezing of nuclear warheads by each side.

During a meeting of NATO defense ministers in Brussels later on in October, the US ambassador to NATO, Kay Bailey Hutchinson said that an agreement was close at hand.

However, Lavrov produced another statement clarifying that the Russian Government was – and still is – awaiting an official response from the Trump administration.

Another Nuclear Arms Race is the Last Thing the World Needs Right Now

This will be one of the most pressing issues that Biden will have to deal with when he comes to office in January. Without NEW Start, both Russia and the US would be free to deploy unlimited numbers of strategic warheads and the missiles, submarines and bombers to deliver them.

As Bloomberg argued, letting the treaty lapse could open the doors to a new arms race between Moscow and Washington. As a result, there would be less transparency about each side’s intentions and that would have a destabilizing effect on global stability. It might even encourage China to expand its own nuclear arsenal. New weapons and new means to spy on rivals’ stockpiles would drain money from the conventional weapons the US needs to maintain its deterrence.

New START’s demise would also end on-site inspections that the world’s two largest nuclear powers conduct of each other’s armed forces. That would remove a critical source of intelligence used to detect cheating and to give insight into each other’s arsenals.

Is Biden Strong Enough to Stop Putin from Gaining the Upper Hand?

Biden supports an extension but he has failed to specify for how long. Meanwhile, Putin favors an unconditional five-year extension. As Reuters reported, this is because the Russian leader has learned from the Cold War that Ronald Reagan succeeded in bankrupting the Soviet Union by forcing a nuclear arms race, which he wants to avoid.

The argument is that by cutting the treaty’s length, it would tie the negotiations to all aspects of military power. Also, if New START is extended to February 2026, that would put its expiration beyond the incoming US President’s four-year term, potentially reducing his leverage to secure a follow-on pact. Biden must do everything he can to prevent Putin from gaining the upper hand in nuclear talks, which is why slashing New START’s duration seems like the most sensible option.

At some stage, China will also need to be brought into an agreement as they possess a growing stockpile of nuclear warheads.

As Trump’s four-year term comes to an end, it appears unlikely he will renew START before his term in office expires. It is a shame he will leave the White House without making progress on this issue, but there is no doubt that Putin is keen to hear how Biden intends to conclude the New START negotiations.

L'articolo Should the US and Russia Extend the START Treaty? proviene da InsideOver.

It is no coincidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin chose an annual naval parade in St. Petersburg on Sunday to announce that the Russian Navy will be armed with hypersonic nuclear weapons and underwater nuclear drones going forward. This calculated public relations move was an opportunity for the Kremlin to assert Russia’s military strength on the global stage.

What New Russian Weapons are On Deck?

Some of these weapons are yet to be deployed, but they include the Poseidon underwater nuclear drone, designed to be carried by submarines, and the Tsirkon (Zircon) hypersonic cruise missile, which can be deployed on surface ships.

Many Western experts have questioned how effective they are, but the combination of speed, maneuverability and altitude of hypersonic missiles, capable of travelling more than five times the speed of sound, makes them hard to track and intercept.

In addition, the Russian Navy is receiving 40 new vessels this year.

Putin Wants to Reestablish the Russian Empire

Although Putin insists that he does not want to enter an arms race with US President Donald Trump, the Russian Government’s actions speak louder than its words. As Chaim Shinar wrote in the European Review, Putin’s actions in Georgia in 2008 and in the Ukraine in 2014, demonstrate that he wants to reestablish the nineteenth-century Russian Empire. In order to achieve his goals, the Russian President uses “soft force” and societal fermentation in Russian-speaking “near abroad” nation states of the former USSR. He has no respect for the principles of international law.

The BBC’s chilling report into Putin’s willingness to deploy nuclear weapons prove that his latest move to arm Russian navy vessels with hypersonic missiles is a bid to intimidate weaker countries and make them more vulnerable to Russian occupation in the future. The Russian President said in a documentary that he put his nation’s nuclear weapons on standby during tensions over the 2014 Crimean crisis. This information was revealed as the Ukraine and Russia agreed to a ceasefire over the Crimea that started on Monday.

How Should the US Respond?

Al-Jazeera reports that the biggest threat to Putin’s hypersonic vessels would be if the US deployed intermediate-range nuclear weapons in Europe. The Trump administration would be sensible to do such a thing, but the coronavirus has caused Washington to focus on the growing threat of China instead. The US President’s decision to withdraw American troops from Germany also suggests that Putin is not a priority for Trump right now.

The US in general has concentrated too much of its efforts on tackling Russia for the last ten years and the coronavirus has exposed its neglect of Beijing’s growing influence, but that does not mean Washington should ignore Moscow completely. As Owen Matthews argued in The Spectator, another one of Putin’s aspirations is to make the West destroy itself. This is because Western democracy is facing a crisis.

Russia is Preying on the West’s Chaos

Even though Russia has been affected by a collapse in oil prices and COVID-19, the Russian President’s message to his own people is that his country’s situation is far less chaotic than the West’s. He does this to portray democracy as weak to his own people. The EU’s problems and the polarizing divisions between the Republicans and the Democrats are music to Putin’s ears.

The UK Intelligence and Security Committee’s report revealed the extent of Russian interference in the 2014 Scottish referendum, as did the US Senate Intelligence Committee’s investigation into a Russian fake-news campaign that used social media to suppress black voter turnout in 2016. Blacktivist, a Facebook page that the group operated, racked up 11.2 million user engagements and more than 360,000 likes by September 2017.

Putin’s military expansion ties in with his wider aim of sowing the seeds of division in the West. As long as the West is facing a crisis and is distracted by COVID-19, China and other issues, it is easier for the Russian President to quietly expand Russia’s military and pray on weaker nations that may not be defended by NATO. It is time for the West to realize it is facing a dual threat from both Moscow and Beijing.

L'articolo What Putin’s Hypersonic Nuclear Weapons Say About His Ambitions proviene da InsideOver.

While Russia and the USA are currently discussing the extension of a New START agreement in Austria, China continues to build its military weaponry of the future, including one that is already in Russian possession. Unlike the Kremlin, however, hypersonic weapons could soon become a geopolitical game-changer for Beijing.

In December 2019, Russia was the world’s first country to launch hypersonic missiles. Back then, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu referred to these weapons as a “milestone” for Russia and the Russian military. President Vladimir Putin spoke of an “ultimate weapon” that could break through any missile defense system and was virtually “invincible”. Russia’s Avangard missiles, as the fully operational weapons are called, are said to possess intercontinental range and can fly at 20 times the speed of sound.

What Makes Hypersonic Weapons Systems Unique?

Systems that reach more than five times the speed of sound, i.e. cover more than 6,000 kilometres per hour, are referred to as hypersonic weapons. The uniqueness is based on the speed that makes the missiles more difficult to be intercepted. Conventional missiles follow a fixed ballistic trajectory and can thus be shot down once defence systems have calculated their trajectory and their point of impact. With hypersonic missiles, however, targets and trajectory can be changed during flight.

Putin’s statements thus raised significant concerns in other governments. After all, Russia appears currently to be the only nation that possesses fully functional hypersonic weapons with intercontinental range.

Nevertheless, the Russians’ advantage should soon be matched if not exceeded, with France, the United States and China are already working on their own systems. Open is the question of how severe geopolitical implications will be.

China’s Quest for Regional Hegemony

However, Russia, despite its current pioneer status, is unlikely to utilize the latter to shift global power structures. Instead, China appears to be the most logical beneficiary. Beijing has the resources and the military to use hypersonic weapons effectively – particularly with regard to East Asia and China’s hegemonic claims in the region.

Hypersonic weapons will not reshape the balances of power on a global level. Nuclear parity and an always omnipresent MAD Doctrine remain supreme. Russia’s new weapons cannot reverse course into a bipolar world and help to once again project power across the globe. What hypersonic weapons do offer, however, is an advantage for regional claims to power.

The latter is precisely what China has been seeking, and Washington has been alarmed for some time. To the extent that the Pentagon considers its bases and ships in East Asia threatened by future Chinese hypersonic armament. The US is now faced with the decision of whether to find a military technology answer or to retreat from this region.

The South China Sea has been a center of military and political conflict for years. China claims areas in violation of international law and is prepared to defend these by force if necessary. Furthermore, while American technology currently offers an effective shield against Chinese ballistic missiles and cruise missiles, hypersonic technology will make these protection systems obsolete. In view of this, China’s investments are strategically more relevant than the Kremlin’s.

The EU Has Taken Notice

The European Union is also increasingly cognizant of the issues the new technology can cause – particularly in the wrong hands. Germany, for example, plans to use its EU Council Presidency as a stage to initiate a global dialogue on missile technology in general, but also in particular on hypersonic weapons and how a new arms race can be prevented.

However, the effectiveness of this agenda must be questioned. Preventive arms control of hypersonic weapons could make the world safer, but only if all actors are inclined to implement effective monitoring. With Beijing being one of these actors, however, the latter appears inconceivable. Beijing has shown it does not like to play by international rules, and even the EU’s best efforts are unlikely to change this fact.

L'articolo Hypersonic Weapons: the Future of Warfare? proviene da InsideOver.

China made news by releasing footage of their new missile the DF26 with an intermediate range of about 3000 km (about 2000 miles).  Significantly, this missile has the range to reach US territories in the Pacific like Guam, and it’s a hypersonic missile which makes it more difficult to track and destroy. Some analysts say there are currently no counters for missiles like this which makes it increasingly important to consider what this missile means for the US, potential US counter defenses and to how it fits in larger contexts like Chinese and US strategy.

The missiles can be armed with conventional or nuclear missiles, have solid fuel, and can be stored in underground bunkers and launched from wheeled launch vehicles. All of which make it harder to hit in a first strike (if armed with nuclear warheads) or harder to counter conventional missiles.  This helps form some of the most dangerous parts of China’s proposed strategy. While claiming they are simply defensive weapons, China has fought preemptive, offensive wars with every one of its neighbors so it’s a real concern.

In a standoff over disputed islands or in seeking to seize territory in the South China Sea China’s strategy calls for immense number of missiles from multiple weapon systems to deny access and deny American abilities to operate in the area. (This is often called Anti Access Area Denial  or A2AD by analysts.)  The Chinese wouldn’t seek to necessarily win in a firefight but display enough danger to prevent American forces from operating in the region while they completed their seizure of islands.

The DF26 would be a nuclear deterrent in peacetime, but in the above scenario it would be part of the conventional strikes that could hit American air and naval bases across the region or strike important communications and logistical support like refuelling or intelligence gathering planes. American forces would be overwhelmed with missiles within minutes, knocking out ships, planes, and infrastructure in a Pearl Harbor style attack.

Adding a fast and deadly missile to that strategy sounds scary but America hasn’t been sitting on its hands. Even though hypersonic missiles take a different course than conventional ballistic missiles and travel faster the US can try to detect and destroy launch sites before the missiles are launched. This would be especially difficult if China launches as a preemptive strike since the US would either be reacting to missiles thousands of miles from Chinese territory, or they would end up having to essentially launch their own preemptive attack on Chinese territory.

Adding to the difficulty, US doctrine calls for destroying anti-aircraft (AA) batteries and radar stations first so they can achieve air superiority, so the strikes would either be more dangerous or delayed depending if they target the missile launchers or AA defenses first. But if hostilities had already started the mobile nature of the launch sites means that warplanes would have to be very close.  Analysts say the F35 and drones don’t have the range to do this. But the F35 can network with a variety of versatile fighters including the F15E which is an exceptional ground attack aircraft.

The same weapon systems, the F35 or networked fighters, can also target the missile in their boost phase. This is the slowest phase of the launch and the F35 has specialized sensors that can detect hypersonic missiles. In addition to using traditional counter missile technology, the F15 (sooner) and F35 (later) are being tested with portable mounted lasers to destroy them. Traditionally lasers have required large amounts of power to produce and sustain a beam significant enough to destroy missiles, and a long cool-down period which made it difficult to use in the expected missile storms in combat but advances in technology have reduced both of those technologies.  Even then, the technology still has limitations. The effective range of these laser weapons is relatively short. It can only engage one target, most likely a missile, at a time. And it must sustain the laser on the target for a certain amount of time in order to damage, destroy, or confuse its sensors. But it would have unlimited ammunition and can be used in conjunction with other American defenses.

That leads to the final point that puts this in a larger picture. Even though lasers are limited, they are part of a multi-layered defense against missiles. This system has been developed, tested, and upgraded since World War II. Even as potential adversaries like Russia and China promise new, faster, and deadlier missiles the US also fields new upgrades to its defenses that offer better ways to destroy them. This includes every layer of defense from the combat air patrol of the F35 to lasers to the rail guns and close-in weapon systems of ships.

Every new weapon system should be assessed and accounted for in military planning. But we shouldn’t give in to fear-mongering. Especially when the weapon system in question is simply a newer version of technology that has existed since Hitler launched V rockets against London. It has concerning specifications but remains to be seen if it will be a game-changer.

L'articolo How Dangerous is China’s New Missile? proviene da InsideOver.

Russia allowed US inspectors to examine Russia’s Avangard hypersonic nuclear missile The Kremlin claimed to be capable of penetrating the US military defence, Associated Press reported Wednesday (November 27).

The inspectors arrived in Russia for a two-day visit to examine the missile as part of the bilateral nuclear treaty New START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty), which will expire in 2021.

Previously Russia expressed its willingness to extend the treaty. However, the US has yet to respond to Moscow’s proposal.

What is the New START treaty?

The US and then-Soviet Union signed a historic agreement to reduce the stockpiles of nuclear warheads to one-third in July 1991. Then-President George W.Bush and then-Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev inked the treaty known as the New START in Moscow.

After the signing of the treaty, the Soviet Union collapsed in December 1991, before the New START ratification. Then, the agreement was reached by The Russia Federation and three former Soviet states where nuclear weapons were placed: Kazakhstan, Belarus, and Ukraine.

It took more than nine years to negotiate the treaty, as BBC History wrote. Under the agreement, Soviet saw the 50 per cent cut in its ground-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM)

The agreement also restricts the numbers of deployed ICBMs, submarine-based ICBMs, and heavy bombers used for nuclear missions up to 700 units. The deal limits the total numbers of deployed and undeployed assets to 800 units.

Both Washington and Moscow have been in a dispute over the Cold War nuclear agreement The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) signed in 1987. Both nuclear powerhouses withdrew from the treaty after accusing each other of violating the deal.

The collapsed INF banned the launch of ground conventional and nuclear missiles with ranges of 500-5,500 kilometres. The treaty forced the US and Russia, then the Soviet Union to relocate around 2,700 short-range and intermediate-range missiles from the battlefield.

Russia claims Avangard does not breach  New START

Russia’s Ministry of Defense stated that the exhibition of the Avangard aimed to maintain the treaty viability and effectiveness.

“Under the Treaty on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms, a US inspection group was shown the Avangard missile system with the hypersonic boost-glide vehicle on the territory of Russia on November 24-26, 2019,” said the ministry in a statement as TASS reported.

The ministry added that the hypersonic glider would resume its combat service in December 2019. A source in the country’s defence industry told TASS on November 13 that the first two UR-100 UTTKh ICBMs equipped with Avangard vehicle would enter an experimental combat duty at the end of November or early December in the Dombarovskaya division of The Strategic Missile Forces.

Russian President Vladimir Putin mentioned that Avangard is the latest breakthrough since the Soviet Union started its satellite mission in 1957. He claimed the newest vehicle could manoeuvre by making sharp twists and be activated a few seconds before reaching targets, making it difficult to be traced by any nuclear defence system. Also, Avangard can fly 20 times faster than the speed of sound, or one mile per second.

Will New START Be Extended?

After the INF was over, US President Donald Trump considered including China in the arms control talks with Russia, given Beijing’s modernized weaponry.

However, China refused to join, citing that the numbers of nuclear weapons possessed by the US and Russia are bigger than that of China. Also, Beijing felt that the US’ exit from the Iran nuclear deal made Washington less trusted.

The world has 14,000 nuclear warheads, and the US and Russia possess more than 90 per cent of them while China has around 290 nuclear warheads, according to the Arms Control Association.

Instead of letting the New START lapse, Trump and Putin have an option to extend the treaty for the next five years, as Iain King wrote for the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). 

Extending the deal until February 2026 can be the best and the most realistic option as both Russia and the US have more time to think about whether to involve China in an arms control discussion, decide which technology that goes with the agreement and discuss about what to do to anticipate if either of them breach the deal.

The START is one of the few international treaties Russia adheres to. Therefore, there should be a strong commitment from both Russia and the US to avoid a further global arms race.

L'articolo Russia Displays Its Hypersonic Missile Amid Calls For New START Extension proviene da InsideOver.