"Disarming Russia, staying with its own people": what is Washington's plan

The US Department of State has appointed a new deputy head, Bonnie Jenkins. She is quite an African-American lady, in the spirit of the times, but, of course, that is not the point. A senior State Department official, as follows from the official statement, will oversee issues of "arms control and international security." As usual in Washington, Jenkins, having not yet begun to fulfill the most important duties entrusted to her, has already managed to speak out about those on Twitter, beloved by her colleagues. It seems that not much has been said, but upon careful reading, the impression remains quite concrete - alarming and depressing.

Mr. Blinken's deputy is firmly convinced of one thing - "strategic stability" in this world should be achieved exclusively through the "limitation" of Russia and China of their nuclear potentials. This is the only way - and nothing else. The United States, in turn, should not cut or diminish anything. On the contrary, they should "strengthen and strengthen their positions" to "contain threats" emanating, as you might guess, from the states mentioned above. Well, let's try to figure out what such policybased both on double standards traditional for the United States and on a complete lack of understanding of the real situation in the world.

Russian "hypersound" is evil, American is good

It is such a simple idea that our overseas "friends" have been trying to present to the world recently, ranting about the "dangers" and "risks" that the newest domestic weapons systems allegedly carry him and at the same time convincing everyone of their own "peacefulness". Thus, the successful test launch of the 19M3 Zircon rocket, carried out from the Russian Navy frigate Admiral Gorshkov on July 22 of this year, caused so much panic in Washington, as if it had struck with perfect accuracy a training target not located three and a half hundred kilometers away. , and the lawn in front of the White House. However, there is nothing strange here. The aforementioned ammunition is a hypersonic cruise missile capable of speeds up to Mach 7. Another "cartoon of Putin", which has turned into a ruthless reality for the United States.

On this occasion, a very representative briefing was held at the Pentagon on the same day, during which John Kirby, responsible for public relations in this department, not only showed the audience the test footage (no longer trying to call them "staging" or "computer graphics") , and for a long time and in detail told the media about the "deep concern" caused by Russian hypersonic weapons both in the US defense department and in the entire state administration there. The emphasis was on the fact that Russian missiles are “destabilizing and dangerous”, since they are potential carriers of nuclear warheads. The American "hypersound" is a completely different matter, since the Pentagon "doves of peace" will never think of putting atomic warheads on their analogous missiles.

This raises a completely natural question - how long will the United States continue to keep, excuse me, for idiots around everyone? Does Mr. Kirby, who with the most honest look crucify about the "non-nuclear path of development of" hypersound "that the United States and its allies have chosen, really think that someone will believe him and take his words seriously? Firstly, the Americans have not yet created anything close to their domestic models. If they do it (if they do it), then we will talk about whether their missiles can contain nuclear "stuffing" or not. Second, modern military Technology are such that this cannot be said with complete certainty about many modern types of weapons. Yes, it seems, the charge is normal. But this is for now ... For example, the American MLRS HIMARS may well serve to launch a tactical missile with a range of up to 300 kilometers. And quite a nuclear charge. Well, and, thirdly, the question here is not even its presence or absence, but where and how this or that state plans to deploy and use its own hypersonic arsenal.

The Americans do not at all hide the fact that as soon as they have it, the corresponding missiles will be in the very immediate vicinity of the borders of the most probable military adversaries of the United States - our country and China. The same Bonnie Jenkins, by the way, in his post confirms exactly 100%, speaking of the need to "strengthen the American positions in the North Atlantic and the South Pacific." It is said rather vaguely, but smart, as they say, is enough. It is not without reason that literally the next day after the heartfelt speech of John Kirby from the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, a very reasoned and sobering answer sounded to him. Or rather, to the "hypersonic" plans of the Pentagon.

Don't scare us ...

The Russian Foreign Ministry quite rightly noted that any fact of the appearance on the territory of Europe of American launchers for hypersonic missiles (and the first of these is the deployment of Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW) complexes with a hypersonic (up to Mach 5) warhead C-HGB (Common Hypersonic Glide Body) is planned in two years), will be perceived by Moscow as "an extremely destabilizing fact." The Russian diplomatic department very specifically, as they say, "on the fingers" explained the reason for such a sharp reaction - the extremely short flight time of these missiles, capable of striking at a range exceeding 2.7 thousand kilometers, may simply not leave our country time for thought, but will require an immediate decision on the response. Including - and concerning "decision-making centers", and not only American launchers, from one of which the rocket "flies out". Perhaps - and as a result of an accidental launch.

This situation will somehow absolutely not be conducive to negotiating and clarifying whether it was deliberately released in our direction and whether it is equipped with a nuclear or conventional warhead. And, by the way, even if the planning block C-HGB does not carry an atomic warhead, it will still pose a considerable danger to our defense system (not to mention civilian objects). Such ammunition does not strike "in areas", but must, with ruthless precision, hit the key nodes of the enemy's defensive structure, depriving him of the opportunity to strike back. So such a launch entirely falls within the scope of Article 17 of the Russian doctrine of nuclear deterrence, in which it is written in black and white that Russia, in exceptional cases (which threaten its very existence), reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in response to a surprise strike. by the usual means.

The few seconds separating the launch of a hypersonic missile (or, moreover, missiles) from their achievement of goals will hardly allow one to guess whether this is an exceptional case. We will hit with all our hearts ... Do the Pentagon, the White House, the State Department realize this? Apparently not. There they continue to hope that "the Russians will not dare" and at the same time continue to blame our country for the growing military tension. In a report prepared by the US military department on the state of the nuclear balance in the world in 2020, this is exactly what it is stated: "humanity has become much closer to nuclear war." But the blame for this, according to its authors, is exclusively Russia and China, which "are building up their nuclear arsenals instead of reducing them." The Russians, as the document emphasizes, "are developing hypersonic intercontinental missiles, nuclear-powered missiles and autonomous torpedoes with the same propulsion system," and in addition, like their Chinese comrades, are modernizing their own ballistic missiles and submarines.

At the same time, the wiseacres from the Pentagon claim in all seriousness that the United States is "reducing the number of its own atomic weapons" and, moreover, "reducing their role in its defense doctrine"! What are you talking about ?! Isn't it your department recently announced the start of the development of the Long Range Standoff Weapon (LRSO) - an air-launched nuclear cruise missile with an increased (from 3 to 5 thousand kilometers) flight range? Having undertaken the mission of creating this "superweapon", the Raytheon Technologies corporation promises to cope with this task by 2027. And to equip this "super-duper missile", by the way, are planning, first of all, the newest strategic bomber of the US Air Force B-21 Raider. Somehow, all this is not very similar to the "reduction of nuclear weapons" and "refusal to use them", is it, gentlemen?

With all this, Washington, as we can see, continues to insist that only Moscow and Beijing should be "disarmed". Apparently, it is precisely this line that both his military and foreign policy departments intend to "bend", continuing to tell ridiculous tales about "non-nuclear" (yes, practically, peaceful!) "Hypersound" and their own plans aimed solely at "containment" and “Achieving strategic stability”. All these hypocritical and empty talk are completely canceled out by the real plans of the United States to deploy its strike weapons, both existing and prospective, in the immediate vicinity of the borders of Russia and China. It is very interesting - how would the State Department and the Pentagon react to the appearance of our hypersonic missiles (whether nuclear or not), say, in Cuba? Or Venezuela? However, given the vector of events that we observe today, it is quite possible that we still have to find out.

During a press conference at the Pentagon, John Kirby answered a rather silly question from one of the journalists: "Why is Russia developing nuclear hypersonic missiles?" replied: "You need to ask Putin about this ..." Well, the full answer to this question, sounded from the lips of Vladimir Vladimirovich, can be considered his words about the ability to inflict "an inevitable blow to any enemy", said recently, at the time of the celebration of the Day of the Naval fleet of Russia. Does this formulation suit you, gentlemen? Think about it, with a special emphasis on understanding the word "inevitable."