Sectoral missile defense for Russia and NATO

Sectoral missile defense for Russia and NATO
So, at the Lisbon Summit of the country — NATO members agreed on the development of a European missile defense and invited Russia to participate in it. And she mouths Dmitry Medvedev gave his consent. But on a practical level, this means only the most general discussion of the concept and assessment of threats. What, in general, it is reasonable — you still try to understand why we participate in it, to put it mildly, unusual project? About which issues and now have more questions than answers.

Regarding the joint Russia-NATO missile defense system has three basic questions. How it will look at the technical level, in other words, how to cooperate Russian and Western systems? How it will look organizationally, in other words, who would "push the button"? Against whom it is intended?

The answer to the first question is very complicated because of cooperating, in general, there is nothing. In the Russian Federation there is a limited missile defense system is the Capital Region, made in the 70's.

The U.S. — even more limited missile defense system in Alaska and California (the same missiles GBI, which had to stand in Poland) and sea-based missile defense system (SAM 'Standard SM3 "on 5 cruisers of the" Ticonderoga "and 16 destroyers like" Arleigh Burke "). In addition, there are Russian S-300P, S-300V and S-400 and South American "Patriot", but they are used to fight only with the tactical and operational-tactical missiles, which are outside or to Europe or to the RF just does not fly so far . Accordingly, these air defense missile systems to the overall missile defense worthless. In the projects are South American THAAD and Russian air defense missile systems S-500, but how long these projects will be implemented — is not clear. In Europe and in Europe there is nothing apart from discussions on missile defense. Accordingly, the question of the technical comparability hangs in the air.

In general, the issue will be solved, perhaps, the easiest (if that is what cooperating). In the late 90's our motherland and the United States carried out computer simulations of collaborative problem solving missile defense, which showed that the problem solving. You can also see that the armed NATO forces are now in service with the South American, English, French, German, Italian, Russian tanks, infantry combat vehicles, artillery, air defense missile systems, aircraft, helicopters, ships. And nothing — all fully with all fits together.

As to the question "button", then there is need to see that the reflection of a missile strike is due for a minute, and then on the second. Because to a large extent has to press the button for automatic crossing of enemy missiles, respectively (European, Russian, American) area of responsibility. So the main thing — to find these areas. Maybe it's specifically meant Dmitry Medvedev, speaking of the "sectoral" missile defense.

AGAINST WHOM be friends?

And here we run across to the main question — against whom? The answer to which and destroys the entire structure common defense.

Reflection danger to Europe from North Korean missiles — is "a problem" and not military psychiatrists. Even if North Korea suddenly appears from somewhere a significant amount of long-range missiles with nuclear warheads to their targets there more close and burning. Circumstances to attack Europe with North Korea is not in principle. The possibility of not more than the possibility of an attack on the Old World aliens.

Essentially the same thing can be said about Iran, which, vpribavok, technological level is still lower than that of North Korea. His creation of long-range missiles, but also with nuclear warheads, and besides, their transition to mass production — is pure fiction. Much less that the first test of a nuclear Iran with a guarantee of 99.999% would be a prerequisite for an immediate attack on him by Israel and / or the United States, followed by about a nuclear program there Teheran will be forgotten for decades. And even if we suddenly fall somewhere on the Iran nuclear missile arsenal (maybe that will give the same aliens), then, as in the case of North Korea, absolutely impossible to find conditions for attack Europe (or even more so by the Russian Federation). All potential targets for non-existent Iranian nuclear missiles are located in the Middle East. The demonization of the West of Iran, after Turkey's most democratic countries in the region, is obviously irrational temper.

But make out the situation quite fantastic — Iran has a nuclear arsenal, and his minions at one point left the collective mind and decided to strike in Europe or in Russia. Even in this case the joint Russia-NATO missile defense system would be virtually worthless.

If Iranian missiles are flying to Europe, they pass by the Russian Federation (except for really quite surreal situation, if Ayatollah decide to kill the Baltic states), respectively, our defense weapon systems (by the way, and what we firepower?) will have no chance to hit them. Conversely, if the blow is struck by the Russian Federation, "in touch" is Europe. In other words, the parties will have to solve the problem of without the help of others, for reasons purely geographical disposition.

By the way, more perfectly protect Europe from Iranian attack would South American cruisers and destroyers with SAM "Standard-SM3" from the waters of the Black Sea. And here did not even need to create, and the ships and missiles, the U.S. is already there. The failure only in the fact that on these ships to our shores "together" and bring up "Tomahawk". This was thoroughly discussed in the article "Diagnosis: Russian air defense in the collapse" ("IEE", 19.02.10). In other words, for the sake of countering the Iranian danger fabulous we obtain a realization of the danger of war the only option for us from the U.S..

More dangerous than Iran and North Korea in fact Pakistan, which already has a unique and missiles and nuclear warheads to them. However, as long as they do not reach even to the Russian Federation, much less to Europe. In addition, it is clear that the present management of the Pakistani missiles to shoot at us is not going to. Such a scenario would likely only in the case came to power in Islamabad constructive Islamists. Though this possibility is not zero, but small. Moreover, in this case almost certainly India and Pakistan, the United States would be killed "a preventive measure."

What does the China?

In the end, make out the option that no one not even stutter, but only for the sake of which we and worth bothering with "joint defense" — a threat to China. How unfortunate it did not sound, and then all of this would be an excellent idea worthless.

About the Chinese threat to the Russian Federation "NVO" has written more than enough, it makes no sense to repeat. One can only say that China is in the case of the scenario capture the Asian part of Russia is fully capable missile strike nuclear attack on the European side, where the main focus is our demographic, military and industrial potential, and natural resources just are not enough. So here the defense will be very not out of place. But this is Europe?

In 1-x, Europe will not want to protect us from China, it is quite naturally. This is dealt with in the article "What are we all the same should be done with NATO?"("
IEE ", 15.10.10). In-2, so clearly China will not cause strike Europe. If the control of Iran and North Korea is considered to be insane (which is not correct), it really is completely favorites China is not exactly crazy. Certainly, there is a world of huge pragmatists than they are. Europe for them to do with what kind of situation is not the enemy, on the contrary, it is an important market and a possible source of a huge number of relevant technologies. Accordingly, a nuclear exchange between China and Europe — it's not even a fantasy, but absurd.

In addition, from a blow to the western part of the Russian Federation Europeans did not help out, even if zahochut, because, as you know, we are closer to China than Europe. Accordingly missiles launched from China to us, simply can not be hit European missile defense. This problem again as soon as our own.

In addition, if carefully read the appropriate NATO documents, then surely there is written that the European missile defense is created to reflect the impact of ballistic missiles with ranges of up to 3 kilometers. This automatically excludes from the goals for her ballistic missiles, China, North Korea and Pakistan. It remains only to Iran. But even that of the flight range of the north-western regions can only get to the eastern European countries (maximum — to Berlin) and to most of Italy. Why ayatollahs strike at Warsaw or Bucharest — let them tell the creators of this excellent concept. The creators of this article is not fancy enough.

In fact, the practical implementation of the European missile defense, which the members of NATO agreed at the Lisbon summit, confirms that the event is a purely political nature. Its development will be allocated EUR 200 million for 10 years. This amount is completely negligible for such large-scale project (actually it should cost more than a dozen billion), which confirms its full fictitious from a military point of view. Its sole purpose — to save a South American presence in Europe, without which, in turn, NATO itself is unreal. If all this is not indicated, against whom oriented system. According to some media reports, French President Sarkozy insisted on naming Iran as a danger, but strongly opposed by the Turkish President Abdullah Gul. It's a lot of fun, taking into account that Iran's missiles reach the outskirts of Turkey, and to France — no. Even more fascinating that Obama and Merkel supported Gul.

So Makar, the only plausible way of cooperation RF and NATO on missile defense — the exchange of information on missile launches or to prepare for them, produced by satellites or ground-based radar. Then the parties can be really useful at each other.

The victorious North Atlantic BUREAUCRACY

The Lisbon Summit in general and adopted at its Strategic Concept of NATO namely (her analysis — another fascinating topic) has once again confirmed that the union has run its course, but its dissolution no one is ready. NATO bureaucracy die, but their capabilities and resources will not. Washington does not want to lose its political impact on Europe, which is first expressed in terms of a military presence there. Eastern Europe is still afraid of the Russian bear. Western Europe has long been a farewell to NATO, but evroarmiya it is still very weak and built very slowly (especially in the criteria for the next budget restrictions).

Because invent more artificial senses of the alliance. Since the unit is not being dissolved, then to Brussels, and Moscow is yavna need for cooperation (for a confrontation neither the strength nor the will nor impartial circumstances), but it strongly enough practical basis and very low level of confidence. Raise it through the defense very difficult. Not even as an artificial project, and it is not necessary to put the cart in front of horse. At first it must seem credibility and later — joint projects. Where does it undertake — is very difficult to understand, given the presence of both sides of the set is very strong psychic complexes. All the more so when, and across the Atlantic (Europe and USA) are uniformly "are leaving." While they still combined inertia and common basic values. But we do something and it does not. No trivial and common enemy against whom to be friends despite their differences (as in the second year of the world). And what does this defense?

SQL - 16 | 0,383 сек. | 6.95 МБ