Russia allowed the suspension of the Poseidon project for an agreement with the United States

December 6 2019 28

To conclude a new strategic offensive arms treaty, Russia does not exclude the possibility of suspending the development of weapons with a nuclear propulsion system.

It is reported Interfax, citing a statement by the former head of the 4th Central Research Institute of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, retired Major General Vladimir Dvorkin.

Answering the question of whether the adoption of these systems could prevent the conclusion of a new START treaty, the scientist said that for the sake of being able to sign a new treaty, Russia could go to freeze work on these types of weapons.

Vladimir Dvorin is a participant in the meeting of the Supervisory Board of the Luxembourg Forum on the Prevention of Nuclear Catastrophe held yesterday in Geneva.

The main topic of yesterday’s meeting of the Supervisory Board was the crisis in the field of arms control and non-proliferation, the possibility of preventing an arms race that occurred after the US unilaterally withdraws from the INF Treaty, and the possibility of maintaining dialogue within the framework of the NSV after 2021, when the START-3 treaty expires .

Recall that new developments by Russian gunsmiths, including the Dagger hypersonic complex, the Burevestnik nuclear propulsion system and the Poseidon nuclear unmanned aerial vehicle, are not subject to START-3.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

steelmaker

0

6 December 2019 11: 16

STUPID! Having such a weapon, it is "purple" for us - will the United States renew the treaty or not. The initiative must come from the United States. The proposal for voluntary disarmament is a betrayal of the interests of RUSSIA !!! And suspension is disarmament!
1. Arkharov
  
  -1
  
  6 December 2019 11: 40
  
  Looks like everything is not quite the way we are broadcasted on central heating for internal use, and there are good reasons for this?
2. Sergey39
  
  0
  
  6 December 2019 11: 44
  
  "Suspension" is dust in the eye. In the West, no one really knows what is being developed here and what has been suspended or not.
  1. Binder
    
    -2
    
    7 December 2019 22: 49
    
    In the West, they are well aware that all the announcements about Russian prodigies that have no analogues are just golimny dwarf show-offs and laugh together at Russia.
3. Pishenkov
  
  +2
  
  6 December 2019 11: 59
  
  Not "violet", of course, but with "Poseidon" it's still better than without it, and the position in negotiations with them will be stronger ... The United States only understands strength ...
Afinogen

+3

6 December 2019 11: 23

Russia allowed the suspension of the Poseidon project for an agreement with the United States

As children, really, history has not taught us that it is impossible to believe the Americans, no way. They believe themselves - do not respect. They will now sign the agreement, and in a year they will withdraw from it. Remember the contract to reduce medium-range missiles, we blew up 1800 missiles. And they stored 800 in a warehouse (sort of destroyed) and then they left the contract when it became profitable for them.
1. Pishenkov
  
  0
  
  6 December 2019 11: 48
  
  ... it’s impossible not to agree.
  
  Americans cannot be trusted in any way
  
  - and they have proven it many times. For example, under a treaty on S and MD missiles - a treaty by treaty, and they built missiles for themselves. In no case should you stop anything! For them, only force and threat themselves work! And the more of these threats we have, the better we can talk to them and come to a "consensus", just without destroying anything in ourselves in any way ...
  The only option is the same way they treated the INF Treaty and "suspend" Poseidon. Promise, sign everything, and quietly go on with your business ...
  1. Arkharov
    
    -3
    
    6 December 2019 12: 55
    
    And what specific medium-range missiles did they build bypassing the treaty? Can you name? You seem to have surpassed even our official sources?
    1. Pishenkov
      
      +2
      
      6 December 2019 13: 13
      
      Specifically, 2 weeks after the end of the INF Treaty, the States tested the ground version of the Tomahawk at a distance of more than 500 km. I hope there is no need to explain that during this time it is impossible to even adapt an existing marine missile to land use. Moreover, a missile launcher was used for launch, similar to which was already deployed in Europe initially for missile defense systems. That is, you can put these missiles there literally right now. There was a sea of material on this subject in August and September, you apparently did not notice ... This is just an example.
      
      https://russian.rt.com/world/article/660334-ssha-raketa-drsmd
      1. plabu
        
        0
        
        6 December 2019 15: 17
        
        This uncle, or another, will soon tell you that it dawned on them from above, but they in no way violated anything.
        
        Pishenkov
        
        +1
        
        6 December 2019 16: 52
        
        No, I rather expect that they will say that there is no violation, but just took and launched a sea rocket from land ... Just something .. And the fact that it is about as easy and fast as converting a submarine into an armored train, they just doesn't get it ...
        
        Yes, it was understandable from the very beginning what AEGIS ASHORE was made for.
        
        Pishenkov
        
        +1
        
        7 December 2019 11: 27
        
        ... well look down ... well, word for word, as I said 1 day late only ...
      2. Arkharov
        
        -1
        
        6 December 2019 15: 50
        
        I heard about launchers. I asked you about a new rocket. She is?
        
        Pishenkov
        
        +1
        
        6 December 2019 16: 45
        
        If you didn’t hear in August, and for some reason didn’t understand from the link above that I wrote today, as well as from the link I’ve given, then I will repeat: ROCKET IS - the ground version of the Tomahawk, prohibited by the INF Treaty, was tested in the United States two weeks after the contract expires in August 2019. That is, it was developed and produced DURING the validity of this contract.
        
        The agreement entered into force on June 1, 1988. For the first time in history, the treaty eliminated a whole class of armaments: the parties pledged to destroy all ballistic and cruise missile systems ground based medium (1000–5500 km) and shorter (from 500 to 1000 km) ranges, and also not to produce, test, or deploy such missiles in the future.
        
        Clear enough this time ???
        Also, regarding the violation of treaties, you can familiarize yourself with the location of the chemical weapons of the United States, which should have been destroyed long ago, in accordance with the existing treaty, and which the Russian Federation, in accordance with the same treaty, has destroyed under its supervision the same Americans ...
        
        Arkharov
        
        -1
        
        6 December 2019 17: 40
        
        .. agreement by contract, and they built rockets for themselves ..
        
        - designation, index, etc. the new rockets? !!!
        
        Arkharov
        
        -3
        
        6 December 2019 18: 12
        
        That is, after all, the terrestrial does not exist, there is only the marine, which can theoretically be launched from the ground installation. So what?
        
        Pishenkov
        
        0
        
        7 December 2019 00: 50
        
        ... you are so ... stupid ... or pretending to be? Read again what is written above. Already 2! times. GROUND OPTION OF ROCKET TOMAHAWK !!!! And it was ALREADY launched !!!
        
        Arkharov
        
        -4
        
        7 December 2019 09: 33
        
        There is no ground version of the Tomahawk. There is a sea, which no one forbade.
        
        A US Department of Defense spokesman told Jane's that the test was conducted by the US Navy in conjunction with the Strategic Capabilities Office of the US Department of Defense. The ship's universal vertical launcher Mk 41 was used, from which a "variant" of the ship's Tomahawk LACM cruise missile was launched.
        
        They simply removed the launcher from the ship, put it on an improvised platform and launched it. The contract is terminated, at that moment they already had the right. Can also be done with any ship winged rocket. That's all, I’m not going to discuss your speculations anymore.
        
        Pishenkov
        
        +1
        
        7 December 2019 11: 23
        
        That's it, I was expecting this straightforward, and already wrote above to my colleague with the nickname 321, take a look a little higher.
        
        They simply removed the launcher from the ship, put it on an improvised platform and launched it.
        
        Can also be done with any ship's cruise missile.
        
        - Do you even realize that this is as "simple" as making an armored train out of a submarine? Well, just take it and put it on an "improvised platform" and ... go ... In about 2 weeks ...
        Business!
        And in the White House and in the Kremlin, different dumbasses sit and sign all sorts of stupid treaties ... land ... sea ... what's the difference? ... removed, set and ready! ...
        
        https://lenta.ru/articles/2019/08/23/tomahawk/
        
        https://112.ua/mir/ssha-rasskazali-o-zapuske-krylatoy-rakety-nazemnogo-bazirovaniya-tomagavk-504209.html
OXOTHuK Sakha

-2

6 December 2019 11: 32

Poseidons why - if there are Vanguards, Zircons, Prometheus?
1. Pishenkov
  
  +1
  
  6 December 2019 11: 43
  
  These are different classes of weapons, with different goals and principles of influence. What you say is how to say - why in the army are pistols and sniper rifles, if there are AKs, and they also shoot well? ... Or why do we need submarines if there are tanks, ships and planes?
  Look at the thing wrong in this case.
yuri semru

0

6 December 2019 11: 46

The grandmother said it in two, and everyone was already aroused. Time will tell.
kriten

+3

6 December 2019 15: 48

The proposal is due to the fact that this advertised superweapon did not work out or is it a bait for negotiations that will never happen ...
Dzafdet

+1

7 December 2019 13: 15

There will be no contract. So the article is about nothing ...
Vkd dvk

+2

7 December 2019 18: 28

We need to adopt the technique of penguins. By signing the paper - do not stop developing. Tests, yes, can not be done yet. But bring the development to the very test, so that in a month to begin. And not a test, but a production. Experienced, for accelerated conduct. In parallel, on many samples.
Vkd dvk

+1

7 December 2019 18: 32

Quote: kriten
The proposal is due to the fact that this advertised superweapon did not work out or is it a bait for negotiations that will never happen ...

The offer is not for average and not for monkeys that have not taken shape. They don’t understand that the weight in their hands is better than the weight in the hands of strangers. A weight, which you can fuck on the head, and put on your cup. And you choose what suits you more.
Martial Artist

+1

7 December 2019 22: 22

Why should Russia humble itself and offer the United States the destruction of its advanced military developments?
If the United States greatly interferes with Russia, then it is enough for Russia to shoot a nuclear missile into the center of the American supervolcano Yellowstone, and the United States will simply DISAPPEAR from Earth.
Therefore, let the United States crawl on its knees to Russia and derogatoryly ask Russia to pity them and not destroy the United States.
av58

0

10 December 2019 18: 59

From the statement of the retired general, one can make the assumption that:
1) we never had weapons with a nuclear propulsion system, and this is just a big bluff, or
2) high treason again, as under Gorbachev.