Putin: Listen to Russia Now by Willy B

Rusian President Vladimir Putin delivered his State of the Nation Address to the Federal Assembly, yesterday, and while his lengthy remarks covered the gamut of policy issues in Russia, it was his remarks on nuclear policy and weapons that garnered headlines around the world.

"I believe it as my duty to say this: any use of nuclear weapons of any yield - small, medium or whatever - against Russia or its allies will be regarded as a nuclear attack against our country. Retaliation will be instant with all the ensuing consequences," Putin said to draw loud applause from the audience. He warned that "nobody should have any doubts on that score." At the same time Putin cautioned against creating new threats to the world, "but on the contrary to come to the negotiating table to give thought to an updated, future system of international security and the civilization’s sustainable development."

Though the new weapons that Putin described were not a response to the U.S. Nuclear Posture Review, released last month, he directly attack aspects of that document. "Some of the provisions of the updated US nuclear strategy review, which reduces the threshold for using nuclear weapons, trigger tremendous concern. One can try to calm down anyone behind the scenes as one chooses, but we read what has been written. It is written in such a way that it can be used in response to a conventional weapon strike or even in response to a cyberthreat," Putin noted. He stated that in its military doctrine, Russia "reserves the right to use nuclear weapons only in response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it or its allies or in the event of aggression with the use of conventional weapons, when the very existence of the state is jeopardized."

Then Putin went on to describe a number of new systems that Russia has had under development, systems, with one exception, that have not been previously officially described. He stressed, however, that these new systems were a response to the 2002 U.S. unilateral withdrawal from the ABM treaty of 1972 and the subsequent deployment of U.S. missile defense systems both inside and outside of the U.S. he said that all of Russia's suggestions on joint work have been rejected by the US, explaining that Moscow has tried to convince Washington not to violate the anti-missile defense treaty, but all this has been in vain. According to Putin, the US military build-up will eventually render Russia's nuclear arsenal pointless unless Moscow acts, specifying that all agreements under the New Start Treaty are gradually being undermined and devalued.

Putin explained that Russia has started the development of weapons that do not use ballistic flight paths, "which means that the missile defense systems are useless in struggle against them." In late 2017, he said, Russia successfully tested a completely new type of armament "unmatched in the world" — a nuclear-powered missile, with virtually unlimited range that can, therefore, attack from any direction. He also announced that the beginning of the active phase of testing of the RS-28 Sarmat heavy, liquid fueld ICBM, saying that it would be invulnerable to interception as its capabilities allow it to bypass any missile defense. In addition, Moscow has developed underwater drones capable of operating at enormous depths and intercontinenal distances, as well as creating hypersonic weapons.

"No one listened to Russia before we created new armament systems, so listen to Russia now," Putin said (emphasis added), saying that the country is one step ahead of other states.

The response from the Pentagon, so far, has been to say that these weapons are not a threat and that US missile defense is not aimed at Russia. "We're not surprised by the statement [by Putin], and the American people should rest assured that we're fully prepared" to defend against attack, Dana White, the Pentagon's chief spokesperson, said at a briefing, yesterday afternoon. "We're prepared to defend this nation no matter what" Putin might add to his arsenal of nuclear weapons."

"They know very well that it's not about them. Our missile defense has never been about them," White went on, referring to US nuclear deterrence policy. "We need to ensure we have a credible nuclear deterrent, and we are confident that we are prepared to do -- and we are prepared to defend this nation no matter what."

While the Pentagon dismisses these new weapons, and even questions their viability, some experts are more serious. "I'm still kind of in shock," Edward Geist, a researcher specializing in Russia at the Rand Corp, told NPR in reference to the nuclear powered cruise missile. "My guess is they're not bluffing, that they've flight-tested this thing. But that's incredible."

Experts consulted by The National Interest's Dave Majumdar, including Russian nuclear expert Pavel Podvig and Micheal Kofman of the Center for Naval Analysis have little doubt that the systems described by Putin are viable.  "They apparently tested all that Putin showed, so it is all feasible," Podvig said "Whether these things would make sense is another matter. I don't think any of these are really necessary if we are talking about countering missile defense." Kofman agreed that all of the systems are feasible and real. "Most of this is reality, it's just a question of near or distant reality," Kofman said.

http://tass.com/politics/992246

https://sputniknews.com/russia/201803011062108691-putin-russia-weapons-us-missile-treaty

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2018/03/01/pentagon-putins-alleged-new-nukes-dont-threaten-us-defenses.html

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/01/politics/us-russia-putin-missile-pushback/index.html

https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2018/03/01/590014611/experts-aghast-over-russian-claim-of-nuclear-powered-missile-with-unlimited-rang

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/russias-nuclear-weapons-buildup-aimed-beating-us-missile-24716

Comments

[Willy B]

This is one aspect of U.S. strategic policy making that's hardly ever admitted by the policymakers. U.S. decisions have strategic consequences that other powers will respond to. This is what the Russians have been trying to tell us for years and this is what we've been refusing to hear. Perhaps this can be attributed to the "sole super power" mentality that dates back to Dick Cheney's 1992 draft defense planning guidance in which he stated then, that it would be US policy not to tolerate any challenges to our status as the world's only superpower.

[JohnsonR]

This situation should be regarded as the fruit of policy decisions and strategic choices made by the globally dominant US regime and elites (and indeed perhaps to some extent voters) after and since the collapse of their Soviet rival.

They could have chosen to live in a world of cooperation with Russia, respect for national sovereignty, and compliance with the UN Charter they themselves had had a hand in drawing up, but instead chose a world of interventionist "democracy promotion", the Kosovo war, NATO expansion, and confrontation, because they thought Russia was down and out for good and all that was needed was to apply the final boot.

[RC]

"They know very well that it's not about them. Our missile defense has never been about them," says the Pentagon's Dana White.

So the US has spent a borrowed fortune deploying missiles across former Warsaw Pact countries since 2001 to achieve exactly what?

[The Twisted Genius]

This sounds like our project Pluto from the very early 60s. It was a plan to construct a nuclear ramjet powered cruise missile. The ramjet was tested, but our government wisely decided to drop the program because it was far too provocative. Back then, generals and politicians believed MAD was a way to prevent war and that they all believed the other side also believed all out war was a terribly bad idea. The ABM treaty reinforced that idea.

The Reagan administration started talking about surviving a nuclear war with enough shovels and doors. I remember how hard they fought the release of the anti-war movie "The Day After." Bush W's pulling out of the ABM treaty was a huge mistake. The bipartisan pushing of NATO's boundaries to the east was just as big a mistake. A part of Putin's recent statement was for internal consumption. Let's hope another part of that message was to point out that war will destroy us all so we best all come to our senses and work to reduce the chances of tripping foolishly into a suicidal war.

[J]

What needs to be addressed, a subject neither the Pentagon nor the White House is broaching -- nuclear attack SURVIVAL.

Russia, since D.C. decided to IMO go and get stupid regarding the ABM Treaty, Russia has been in addition to upgrading their cache of weapons response to an attack, have been working on their ability to protect their citizens, and assure their citizenry's 'survival' in the event of a Nuclear Attack.

On the opposite side of the pond, D.C. meanwhile has been sitting on its hands doing nothing to ensure National Nuclear Survival, other than 'stay inside'. WTF??? Stay inside? When I read Ready.gov's BS, I scratched my head in befuddlement and anger. This type of response by Ready.gov shows that D.C. could care less about the nation's citizens, meanwhile they have the nuclear survival bunkers and underground nuclear shielded facilities for the 'big boyz' survival, but NOTHING, NADA, ZIP facilities for the rest of the nation's citizenry.

Russia's upgrading of their nuclear deliverable cache now includes the abilities to wipe from the face of the earth both our East and West Coasts in a nuclear flash, literally.

So if and when the fur flies, the score when its the close of the first exchange, Russian citizen survival 1, U.S. citizen survival -- big goose egg aka 0.

Guess I'll need to bend over and kiss my arse in that event if and when it comes! And a new pair of Foster Grant's won't even help.

[different clue]

willy b,

( reply to comment 2 ),

"We" have not been refusing to hear these concerns from Russia. Some of "we" have refused to hear, and others of "we" have been hearing it for a while.

Enough of "us" had enough of the "we" who refuse to hear that "us" voted for Trump by just enough to get Trump elected. Unfortunately, the "we" who refuse to hear also still have a grip on foreign and defense policy, and on the making and hyping of MSM narratives. And as those "we" never get tired of telling us, they "won" the "popular vote", which gives them all the right and power they need to maintain and extend their antirussianitic racist antirussianite beliefs and policies.

[turcopolier]

Willy B

One of the things we refused to notice during the Cold War was that Soviet equipment developments generally were attempts to match and mirror ours. pl

[Jony Kanuck]

Willy B,
Thanks getting this out quickly!
My Russian friends watched Putin's speech last night, instead of a movie. My quick & dirty summary is to use chess: The USA thought it had Russia in check but then Putin said checkmate. The first two weapon systems seem to be about to go into service; the Sarmat missile can come up the south pole thus evading anti missile, the air launched cruise missile is a 'sure' kill for any US ship within 1000k of Russia. The rational thing to do would be to sit down at a table with Russia & negotiate nuclear weapons away.
Can any US President do that?

[Willy B]

Yes, absolutely true. The Soviets didn't explode their first atom bomb until 1949 and prior to that resisted efforts that would have resulted in the US being the only possessor of the bomb. They also didn't reach parity with the US on ICBMs until sometime in the 1970's. There WAS a missile gap in the 1960-61, but it was the other way, in favor of the U.S.

[Alaric]

Any thoughts on the timing of this speech? Why now?

[David E. Solomon]

Willy B,

Good luck expecting a ration response from us.

Personally, I think neither the Trump camp nor the Clinton camp are rational. God help the world!

[HawkOfMay]

Geist goes on to say a couple more things about the Russian missile in the linked NPR article if folks didn't take the time to read it.

"There are a bunch of different ways to do it, and frankly, they're all terrible," Geist says.

He suspects that the Russian design would involve what's known as a "fast reactor," which is more efficient, but also less safe, than most nuclear reactors. If the missile crashed or the reactor failed, it would trigger a major incident.

"It's just crazy they field-tested this thing,"...."They're willing to go full Strangelove on us,"

[Anna]

"Dick Cheney's 1992 draft defense planning..." – by a draft dodger who, with the passage of time, has transfigured into a major war criminal. The same Cheney that is now trying to make oily gesheft on the disputed territories of the Golan Heights (https://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21677597-geologists-israel-think-they-have-found-oilin-very-tricky-territory-black-gold).
Putin speech sounds as a warning to the dangerously armed and very aggressive but mentally/morally underdeveloped deciders that have missed (intentionally) the chance to establish a viable system of global defense against powerful warmongers and natural disasters.
Let’s see how the ziocon “stink-tanks” are going to interpret the warning.

[Charles]

Trump could have. A major reason for this hilarious "Russia Changed the Election" fooforrah is exactly to prevent negotiations.

[Charles]

Because it was time for him to give his state of the Federation message.

[SmoothieX12]

Let’s see how the ziocon “stink-tanks” are going to interpret the warning.

I will repeat (again) a simple thesis--in general the US and its current political elites know next to zero about USSR/Russia and her military. In fact, it would have been better that they knew next to zero or complete zero about that--that would at least have necessitated some degree of caution. What they "know" however is a complete non-stop propaganda caricature which they themselves helped to create and, in the end, bought themselves. Per specific weapons--it is an interesting question, Kinzhal alone rewrites naval warfare completely and I am being very cautious in using this term "completely". It is a revolution in both military in general and, naval in particular, affair with gigantic strategic ramifications.

[SmoothieX12]

Any thoughts on the timing of this speech? Why now?

Good podium of address to Federal Assembly plus some warning signs of which we may not know, granted that what is happening in Washington can not be described as rational. Plus, at some point it was supposed to be announced anyway since some of the systems are already deployed and fully operational.

[Walrus]

Let me tell you what the survival plan is; 1. Immediate Martial Law. 2. Survivors will be dragooned into work details to bury the dead. 3. The injured will be triaged and those contaminated beyond recovery will receive a merciful bullet behind the ear.

At least that was the British plan.

[Walrus]

From what I have seen of it, Russian Aerospace engineering is superior to ours. They tend to go back to first principles and produce simple and elegant solutions to problems. We, instead, complexify and add additional computers. Anyone who has looked at an Antonov cargo aircraft or a Sukhoi will know what I mean.

I therefore think it would be suicidal to discount Putin's claims, but that is what the Borg is going to do.

[b]

@TTG - I believe the nuclear engine that drives the new Russian cruise missile is totally different from the Pluto one.

For one - Pluto never flew it was only ground tested. It was incredibly dirty as the reactor was unshielded. Any overflight would have "roasted the chickens in the barn yard" - literally. It was also very large and heavy while the Russian version fits into a normal cruise missile body (Putin said so).

The Russians say they have flown the thing and the U.S. intelligence now leaks that one has crashed. But we have seen no appropriate release of radioactivity. (At the end of last year some European stations sniffed a tiny bit of Ruthenium but that's it.)

Whatever the Russian's have it is NOT a Pluto like thing.

[Fellow Traveler]

Trump needs to go big and take the high ground - start developing nuclear rockets. We're not going to get anywhere with old chemical rockets and Greenpeace in Space.

[Peter AU]

TTG, the faint radioactive cloud detected late last year was most likely was the result of the test?

"The French nuclear safety regulator IRSN first detected the radioactive element ruthenium 106 in the air in late September, tracing its origins to the Ural Mountains in the border region between Russia and Kazakhstan. Other European cities like Stockholm, Milan, and Budapest also began picking up radiation traces."
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/11/22/16691374/russia-admits-mysterious-radiation-cloud

[Valissa]

OMG Anna, thanks so much for the laugh... "stink tanks" indeed! I feel like I should already know that pithy descriptor ;)

I could not get into the Economist article but found this one that looks to be on the same topic.

Israel Preps for Syrian War with Golan’s Oil and Water in its Sights https://www.mintpressnews.com/israel-preps-for-syrian-war-with-golans-oil-and-water-in-its-sights/237566/
Though the abundant fresh water in the Golan Heights is of crucial importance to Israel, the Golan’s value grew sharply following the discovery of a major oil reserve in the area, estimated to contain “billions of barrels” of crude oil that could turn Israel – which currently imports the vast majority of its fuel – into a net oil exporter. Yet, because the Golan Heights are internationally recognized as being under occupation and not an official part of Israel, the commercial extraction and export of this vast oil reserve cannot go forward — until this status changes. As a result, only exploratory wells have been drilled, mostly by a division of Genie Energy Co., a U.S.-based oil company connected to well-known figures such as Rupert Murdoch, Jacob Rothschild, and Dick Cheney.
-------------

Ahh... Darth Cheney strikes again... the plot thickens. A trio of oligarchs we all love to hate. Who needs soap operas when you have geopolitics.

[Flavius]

Americans whom we should expect would know better, including our political class, unfortunately have an Hollywood understanding of the 20th c's wars. It is a safe bet that that includes our current and last 3 Presidents and it is a sure bet that they know squat all about Russia or Russian history.
Hubris. It can nevertheless be said for Trump that he intuitively recognized that correct relations with Russia was a desirable thing and that demonizing Putin like he was some kind of third world despot serving in office until we had time to get around to him was insane. In fact this simple recognition got many people to vote for him, including myself.
So what did Trump inherit from the previous 16 years? 16 years of mismanaged policy capped off on the eve he assumed the Presidency with the Obama/Intel Community pissing like a bunch of amateurs into the face of the Russian Diplomatic establishment, for the most specious of reasons, which weren't presented to the Russians in a professional manner, the whole undertaking completely unprecedented even during the Cold War.
Meanwhile, back among the Beltway regulars: the Republicans fall all over themselves to demonstrate how much they hate the Russians by imposing sanctions, etc, partially out of ignorance and partially to keep the Pentagon and its suppliers happy and in
long robes; and the contemptible and craven Democrats fall all over in hate of the Russians because they prefer anything, including Cold War, to facing the fact that they lost their sure thing election to Trump because they ran a dreadful government grifter as their candidate.
Should it come as a surprise that Putin and his Administration would suspect that Russia is being encircled and would react by developing the weaponry to foreclose on Russia being progressively isolated, ignored, and perhaps even to have to fight another war on its own land mass? Can it be said that Putin is imprudent trusting Russia to its own devices rather than trusting Russia to American good will?
Only inside the Beltway would it come as a surprise. Incredible hubris.

[Razumov]

We once had a design for a Nuclear Powered Cruise missile of our own:

The "Crowbar"

http://www.merkle.com/pluto/pluto.html

https://jalopnik.com/the-flying-crowbar-the-insane-doomsday-weapon-america-1435286216

"a locomotive-size missile that would travel at near-treetop level at three times the speed of sound, tossing out hydrogen bombs as it roared overhead. Pluto’s designers calculated that its shock wave alone might kill people on the ground. Then there was the problem of fallout. In addition to gamma and neutron radiation from the unshielded reactor, Pluto’s nuclear ramjet would spew fission fragments out in its exhaust as it flew by."