Virtual-mythical "reset" of relations between Russia and the U.S. may have most recently ordered quite a long time to live together with, perhaps, the only one of its accomplishment that goes beyond verbal diplomatically reverence and starry-eyed. As reported by Interfax, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, speaking at the State Duma, said that the development of the U.S. missile defense and NATO without Russia representation may be grounds for the RF output of the Contract on START.
"The very new START treaty may be held hostage to the so-called. South American phased adaptive approach "- highlighted the Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman. According to him, the opportunity to enter in connection with such criteria fixed in the contract. In addition, Sergei Ryabkov said that Moscow will be obliged to take retaliatory measures if the U.S. and NATO will develop a missile defense system without representation Russian side. "It is clear that such a scenario would be to have a very undesirable" — the constructive attitude shown by Russian diplomat added that "there is still time to agree."
The premise that inspired the Russian diplomacy is so uncharacteristic for her aggressive (albeit in a rather low-key performance), the tone of communication with the "American colleagues", became the last action on the European "anti-Russian theater missile defense operations." As it became clear first of May, the South American white-washed house, contrary to the assertions of the original own newfound resident peacemaker in the rejection of plans to deploy parts of the U.S. missile defense system (radar and missile) on the ground in Eastern Europe, in fact not going to turn away from their own aggressive goals. Just rusofobstvo instead of Poland, which was required to enjoy the least modern air defense system "Patriot" missile power released is planned to throw a little further south — to the countryside of Romania, the management of which, by the way, judging by a number of statements made by President Traian Basescu, is also not alien to the Militant russophobia.
Special cynicism (which in the case of the U.S., in truth, has long been used should be) this action assigns the event that the message was almost on the subsequent day after the beginning of the Russian-American talks on European missile defense in Brussels. Recall that last year's summit in Lisbon Council Our homeland — NATO (the first after the war in South Ossetia in 2008), both parties have agreed to no effort on cooperation in the creation of the European missile defense system. And the first of May this year in Brussels, a meeting of the NRC Chiefs of Staff, in what was the head of the Russian General Staff Nikolai Makarov. During the meeting, he said that Moscow is ready to open a discussion any constructive suggestions on the role of a European missile defense system, but NATO must guarantee that the new system would not threaten Russia's nuclear potential. In this context, following the Pentagon's missile defense move looks like a candid spit in his outstretched hand, which, in turn, does not leave any qualms about Washington's position on the issue. It's no secret that Americans speak specifically "controlling" and, if desired, can block virtually any decision which in the field of European security.
The chance of the Russian Federation has recently ratified contract with the United States on the limitation of strategic offensive arms KM.RU commented in an interview with the chief editor of the magazine "National Defense" Igor Korotchenko:
— Immediately wanted to see that it is not until the final decision, and the position of the Russian Foreign Ministry. The final decision will be made by the President on the basis of collective discussion held with the role of all relevant agencies, which one way or another are responsible for the situation in the field of national security.
Personally, I am of the view that out of the Contract START-3, even if we do not agree with the Yankees on cooperation within the framework of the European missile defense, we should not (and I believe we must proceed from the fact that we do not agree with them) as Contract START prototype is beneficial to both parties. With all that a number of his language, maybe we are not satisfied 100%. Yet out of it is inexpedient.
Now about what should be the correct response in the event of unfavorable developments (in Europe of a U.S. missile defense site. — Comm. KM.RU). Our homeland has to develop its own capacity in the field of military-technical measures, that in the event that will be a military solution, we could "zero out" the potential of a European missile defense (if We will not be there). First question on the measures relating to the conservation of tactical nuclear weapons as a primary means of countering threats in the western theater of war. It is, accordingly, it means, that any of the commanders of the unified strategic command (they have four) had the opportunity in the criteria for wartime use an independent decision on the use of tactical nuclear weapons in the area of personal responsibility. So Makar, we would definitely compensated for the risks that would carry us to a European missile defense system. That is, we do not need to get involved in negotiations with the U.S. to limit tactical nuclear capability. To begin with let the Americans will withdraw its tactical nuclear weapons from the territory of NATO. It will be a condition for us to take some negotiation process. Until such time as the Americans did not withdraw its tactical nuclear weapons from Europe, there are no negotiations on it should not be.
2nd. We need to have potential, associated with the liquidation of information and intelligence circuit of European missile defense. This means that we have to have the military capacity to destruction guidance and radar detection, and computational components ("brains" of the future European missile defense). It is associated with the operational and tactical missiles "Iskander" and spetsboepripasov that could be located on the territory of the Kaliningrad region, also in the area of Belarus within the framework of the respective contract with the state. Plus you need to use potential Russian medium bombers Tu-22 M3, which own abilities by firing missiles on Information and Intelligence contour of the European missile defense system. Then, if 10-15 years, European missile defense will really threaten us, we could quickly and correctly to take action to neutralize these threats.
And, of course, we need to go to the update-intensive SMF grouping, as early as the coming seven years, we will have to write off almost all languid liquid ballistic missile Russian production, which are in service. Instead they must be massive creation (within the quota on a brand new START treaty with the U.S.) solid-ballistic missile RS-24 "Yars" in the mobile version based. Having such potential retaliation, we are actually compel the Pentagon to ignore this danger, since at least 50 nuclear weapons delivered to the area in the U.S. retaliatory strike (if America we first storm) already prove fatal. Meanwhile we restore deterrence and strategic equation of nuclear safety, despite the fact that the above measures are quite low-cost asymmetric. We do not have to get involved in a frontal arms race, inventing some ga
llakticheskie hooks or tool, based on non-standard physical principles.
In the framework of the quota that we have under the START Treaty, we will have quite enough money to guarantee destruction of the United States in the case of the hypothetical nature of the conflict. We can not distract themselves and get involved, as the Russian Alliance, in the construction of thousands of ballistic missiles. Our economy will not stand. Yes, this is not necessary: almost rather have 200 ballistic missile RS-24 "Yars" in the mobile version. They are covered with camouflage from the special measures of surveillance and move on for the district which not limited to a specific coordinates. In addition, they are almost invulnerable for the first massive blow to us, even when using high-precision weapons (I'm not talking about a nuclear strike). For all this they are doing enough potential retaliation.