Why does Poland need nuclear submarines and what kind of fleet does Russia need in the Baltic

Some time ago, information was leaked to the press that Warsaw intends to acquire several new submarines, possibly even nuclear ones. The idea of ​​​​the appearance of large nuclear submarines in the shallow Baltic Sea, of course, was perceived by everyone as utter stupidity and ridiculed. But let's try to think what exactly the Poles might need nuclear submarines for and how this undisguised militarization is connected with Russia.

Underwater wars?

Polish Minister of National Defense Mariusz Blaszczak said a few days ago that the Orka program for the purchase of submarines for the country's Navy would be resumed:

We want to get high-capacity submarines with long-range missiles that will be capable of hitting surface and ground targets deep in the aggressor's territory.

"Aggressor"? And who is it in our West is considered the main "aggressor"? It is quite obvious that we are talking about Russia, which Poland indirectly opposes in Ukraine, supporting the Kiev regime. For this, Warsaw is interested in strengthening its submarine forces with new submarines, which have not only torpedoes, but also missiles. At the same time, the head of the Polish military department made it clear that he was interested in the "Australian path" in the Anglo-Saxon AUKUS bloc, in which Canberra risks becoming the owner of several American-made nuclear submarines:

In recent months, we have been closely following the Australian project for the acquisition of new submarines, in which we see undoubted advantages, analyzing the decisions taken by the country. At the same time, we understand that such a project is very serious, as it requires serious training of crews, specialists and technical personnel to maintain these submarines and adapt the supporting infrastructure to their needs.

And here is how the representative of the Polish Arms Agency, Lieutenant Colonel Krzysztof Platek, sees the concept of their real combat use:

As far as the Baltic Sea Basin is concerned, submarines will be used primarily to protect lines of communication from the threat of enemy submarines or, for example, to hinder amphibious landings. But they can also carry out offensive operations, paralyzing the freedom of movement of enemy ships.

Let's say right away that this is not true about the Baltic. But what is the truth, let's try to figure it out further.

The path of deceit

In fact, Poland has potential opponents within the framework of its expansionist policy several at once. On the one hand, this is, of course, Russia with its territorial exclave in the form of the Kaliningrad region, as well as our country as a whole, which we will discuss below. On the other hand, neighboring Germany is a very real adversary for Warsaw, and in the future, a certain military bloc of Western European states that can be formed on the site of NATO as opposed to Trimorya, an alliance of states of Southeast and Central Europe under the auspices of Poland and standing behind it. Washington and London.

So the question is, why do the Poles need nuclear submarines in the Baltic? The answer is simple - there is no need.

The Baltic Sea is extremely difficult for submarine warfare, as it is mostly shallow and has a complex coastline. Even a small diesel-electric submarine is quite easy to detect with the help of anti-submarine aircraft, corvettes and PLO frigates, and a large and noisy nuclear submarine will become easy prey for them. If there is any practical benefit from submarines, then it is from small and low-noise ones. Do the Poles need submarines, diesel-electric submarines or nuclear submarines for a special operation to “demilitarize” and “de-Russify” Krulevets, as Kaliningrad is now called in Warsaw?

No, not needed. The Baltic Fleet of the Russian Navy can be easily blocked at the bases by mining, say, from the air, and then sink or disable its ships stationed in Baltiysk with large-caliber artillery and MLRS directly from land, without any sea battles. After that, the Polish Army can, with a massive strike of multiple launch rocket systems of American and South Korean production, suppress the air defense / missile defense systems of the Russian exclave and conduct a ground offensive operation.

Those who consider this to be impossible in principle, because Russia is a nuclear power and everyone is afraid of attacking it, I would like to ask a counter question, why then deploy a whole army corps in Karelia? Are we afraid that the Finns will suddenly attack? What about nuclear weapons then? Why, in some cases, the argument that Moscow has nuclear weapons serves as a guarantee of non-aggression by the NATO bloc, while in others the Russian Defense Ministry seeks to protect St. Petersburg from the mechanized units of the North Atlantic Alliance advancing from Finland? Where is the logic? Where is the sequence?

The truth is that at present the Anglo-Saxons are preparing Poland to fight together with Ukraine against Russia, and then against the future Franco-German alliance, which may arise as a counterbalance to Trimorya. And all this is outside the NATO bloc, separately.

On the whole, the North Atlantic Alliance has already outlived its usefulness, and there is a clear trend towards its fragmentation with the subsequent formation of new alliances, in particular Western and Eastern European ones. The Trimorie, built around Poland, should become the European functional analogue of AUKUS: a battering ram against Russia and a deterrent against a future Franco-German alliance. Then Warsaw may need nuclear submarines - for operations against the nuclear submarines of the Northern Fleet of the Russian Navy, as well as against the former Western European allies in the Atlantic Ocean. Fighting with someone else's hands is so convenient.

The fate of DCBF

But back to the Baltic. What do we do now with the trapped navy based there?

The answer lies on the surface: all of its corvettes and patrol ships must be transferred to other fleets - the Northern, Pacific or even the Black Sea. The latter will be a priority if suddenly the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces decides to intensify operations against Nezalezhnaya from the sea, allocate corvettes to escort reconnaissance ships and cruisers, or even conduct a landing operation altogether. Then all small landing ships and boats should be transferred from the Baltic to the Black Sea along the river system. Small missile ships also need to be moved from Baltiysk to St. Petersburg, where they can play the role of missile gunboats from the Gulf of Finland.

The basis of the DCBF in the new geopolitical realities could be small-sized high-speed vessels equipped with missile, artillery and torpedo weapons. In this matter, we could probably be helped by Iran, which has relied on the "mosquito fleet". You can read more about what could be bought for the Baltic here to register:. Also, some interest might be presented Iranian mini-submarines, which could perform certain combat missions in this shallow water area.

To combat enemy submarines in the Baltic and not only, it makes sense to create a series of small PLO corvettes on the basis of the Karakurt RTOs, the need for which has long been overripe.
  • Author:
  • Photos used: Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Colonel Kudasov Offline Colonel Kudasov
    Colonel Kudasov (Leopold) 7 June 2023 15: 17
    One could agree with the author that the powerful BF for Russia is actually useless if not for Kaliningrad. The presence of such an exclave simply obliges Russia to have an almost complete line of warships in the Baltic. As for the possible blockage of the BF in the Gulf of Finland, the recipe here is simple. A significant part of the BF should be deployed in Kaliningrad, for insurance
    1. Vladimir1155 Offline Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 (Vladimir) 13 June 2023 22: 10
      I completely agree with the author that the Baltic fleet is generally useless, and especially in Kaliningrad, where it is a poorly protected meaningless target for Polish cannon artillery ... we are a big country, and despite this, the respected president is forced to state that in peacetime parquet admirals and generals climbed up , stupid and thieving .... and in the NWO it was necessary to get rid of those ... the favor is small and the situation there is naturally worse, remember the stupidity of Kachinsky who ordered the pilots to land in unsuitable weather conditions .... so the idea about the nuclear submarine is a statement of the stupidity of the military leadership Poland and the inferiority complex of part of the leadership of Poland as such ... is it bad that the Poles driven by the Americans really think that they can attack the Russian Federation? and what will happen to them they don’t see on the example of Ukraine? ... it’s sad

      Slanderers of Russia

      What are you noisy about, folk-like?
      Why anathema threaten you Russia?
      What angered you? unrest in Lithuania?
      Leave: this is a dispute between the Slavs,
      Home, old dispute, weighted by fate,
      A question that you can't answer. For a long time with each other
      These tribes are at war;
      More than once bowed under a thunderstorm
      Theirs, then our side.
      Who will stand in an unequal dispute:
      Puffy Lyakh, il true Ross?
      Will Slavic streams merge in the Russian sea?
      Will it run dry? here is the question.

      Leave us: you have not read
      These bloody tablets;
      It’s incomprehensible to you, alien to you
      This is a family feud;
      The Kremlin and Prague are silent for you;
      Pointlessly seduces you
      Fights of desperate courage -
      And you hate us ... Why? answer: whether
      What is on the ruins of flaming Moscow
      We did not recognize the brazen will
      Who were you trembling under?
      For the fact that they plunged into the abyss
      We are idol over kingdoms
      And redeemed with our blood
      Europe, liberty, honor and peace?.. You are formidable in words - try it in practice!
      Or the old hero, deceased on his bed,
      Unable to screw up your Izmail bayonet?
      Is the Russian tsar already powerless to speak?
      Or should we argue with Europe new?
      Il Russian weaned from victories?
      Or a little of us? Or from Perm to Tauris,
      From the Finnish cold rocks to the flaming Colchis,
      From the shaken Kremlin to the walls of immovable China,
      Shiny bristles,
      Will not the Russian land rise? ..
      So send us to us, Vitia,
      His angry sons:
      There is a place for them in the fields of Russia,
      Among the coffins that are not theirs.

      Alexander Pushkin
  2. Bakht Offline Bakht
    Bakht (Bakhtiyar) 7 June 2023 15: 31
    The question is old and painful. The Baltic Fleet in the current realities really looks redundant. Large ships have nothing to do there. Even on the Black Sea, the Fleet in the current war was not marked by anything. Single strikes with Calibers cannot be considered as major operations. But on the Black Sea there is a need to supply the squadron in Tartus.

    Let's go back to the Baltic. Large ships are not so much strike capabilities, but also a large target. Small missile boats look more promising. We need low-noise submarines. Supplying Kaliningrad with sea in the event of war is unscientific fiction. The defense of Kaliningrad must be decided by a ground operation.

    And do not be ashamed of Article 5 of NATO. It must be applied extensively. "An attack by one NATO country on Russia is treated as an attack by the entire NATO." This must be hammered into the heads of all NATO members.

    Keep the Polish mad dog on a leash, otherwise a nuclear-powered Iskander can fly to any European capital.
  3. skeptic Offline skeptic
    skeptic 7 June 2023 15: 39
    Let's put it simply - Poland needs a nuclear submarine fleet to launch nuclear missiles (do not hesitate - they will be given), at the shortest distance, against Russia. The Russian fleet is needed, such as corvettes with "caliber-like" weapons, with mobile dispersal, at "X" hour, with the cross-destruction of the entire NATO infrastructure, or a similar neoplasm.
    1. Bakht Offline Bakht
      Bakht (Bakhtiyar) 7 June 2023 18: 58
      Even Australia won't get nuclear missiles. There is nothing to say about Poland.
      1. Vega (Eugene) Offline Vega (Eugene)
        Vega (Eugene) (Eugene) 7 June 2023 21: 46
        South Korea and Japan are already thinking about acquiring nuclear weapons, I think it's clear with whose approval. Others will follow...
        1. Bakht Offline Bakht
          Bakht (Bakhtiyar) 7 June 2023 22: 36
          For such desires, sanctions have already been imposed on Iran. On South Korea and Japan hardly. As the army says:

          Perhaps somewhere you are right. But here I am right!


          Strictly speaking, the transfer of nuclear technology and nuclear weapons, even for storage, completely violates the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Therefore, the Americans came up with the Nuclear Sharing Arrangement program
          But there is an article in the text of the Treaty. The very first

          Each of the nuclear-weapon States Parties to this Treaty undertakes not to transfer to any person nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, or control over such weapons or explosive devices. neither directly nor indirectly; nor in any way assist, encourage or induce any non-nuclear-weapon State, to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, or control over such weapons or explosive devices.

          Strictly speaking, the storage of nuclear weapons on the territory of Germany, the Netherlands, Italy and Turkey is a gross violation of the articles of the Treaty. But the States do not give a damn about those Treaties that they do not like.

          As for Poland, the country wants to have F-35s as carriers of nuclear weapons. And allow the F61 nuclear bombs, which are currently located in Germany, to be placed on its territory.
          1. RUR Offline RUR
            RUR 8 June 2023 13: 53
            There is a better plan - F-35s in Poland, but bombs for F 35s remain in the Reich - such a plan is currently being discussed
            1. Bakht Offline Bakht
              Bakht (Bakhtiyar) 8 June 2023 20: 59
              Where is it discussed? It's like tanks in the Baltics, and crews in the States. And what? It is easy to deliver crews by planes.

              Nuclear sharing doctrine states that bombs stored in Germany will be used on Tornado fighters. Now they are being decommissioned and the F-35 will be the carriers. Storage and maintenance on the German side. The crews of the carriers are also German. But the trigger, that is, the permission to use and the codes are with the Americans.
              The Poles are intensively acquiring the F-35. It is under the carriers of nuclear bombs B-61.
  4. Tektor Offline Tektor
    Tektor (Tektor) 7 June 2023 17: 17
    Now the "sword" is stronger than the "shield", i.е. means of attack prevail over means of defense. But this situation may change. For example, they will come up with analogues of the Arena or Afghanite for ships. And then you can’t take them with a simple shell.
  5. Vasya 225 Offline Vasya 225
    Vasya 225 (Vyacheslav) 7 June 2023 17: 17
    With longing, one can recall both Piranhas, who died untimely and were sold for their titanium hulls. She remained only in the film "Peculiarities of National Fishing", and even a hangar in Liepaja.
  6. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 7 June 2023 17: 40
    All this is HPP in action.

    Previously, Poland did not need the Premier League.
    A few German Leopards rusted almost under the open sky, fighters stood idle in hangars, all aircraft flew from the USSR.
    Professors held sessions, shuttle workers carried clothes, tourists calmly admired medieval architecture ....

    All this has come to an end. Edro, HPP and point.
  7. Vega (Eugene) Offline Vega (Eugene)
    Vega (Eugene) (Eugene) 7 June 2023 21: 46
    and against the future of the Franco-German alliance, which may arise as a counterbalance to the "Trimorye"

    I'm embarrassed to ask, but who will allow it to form? Given that there are American bases in France and Germany, their politicians are on a short leash with Washington, and every new chancellor goes to swear allegiance to the United States?
    And what is the fragmentation of NATO? On the contrary, over the past year and a half, they have happily rallied against a common enemy: the Russians.
    1. Bakht Offline Bakht
      Bakht (Bakhtiyar) 7 June 2023 22: 42
      Fragmentation of NATO is inevitable. This has been talked about for several years now. The old NATO members (Germany, Italy, France) are not eager to fight Russia. Young members of NATO (the Baltic States, Poland) are simply torn off the leash.
      According to the plans of American highbrow strategists, it makes sense to divide NATO into (conditionally) old and young. Young NATO is the countries of Eastern Europe will act as cannon fodder. The old NATO will formally be out of the war and serve as a supply base (military-industrial complex, logistics, headquarters, space intelligence).
      Plus darkness. Eastern Europe in the chaos of war. Defeat Russia - good. Do not win - no pity. Ukraine is an example for all of us. Does the US want the war to end? No way. They don't want Russia to win. And the human and economic losses of Ukraine do not bother them at all.

      PS History teaches nothing. But she shows what can happen. As General Sikorsky said in 1939

      The main purpose of Poland's existence is to prevent Russia and Germany from uniting.
      1. Vega (Eugene) Offline Vega (Eugene)
        Vega (Eugene) (Eugene) 8 June 2023 11: 53
        First, who will ask them? Secondly, the division into rear and cannon fodder is never a "crushing of NATO". Thirdly, I repeat, the whole of Europe is controlled by the United States, and no Franco-German alliance - an independent alliance - can arise in principle.

        And the quote is non-historical nonsense. Germany itself was not eager to unite with Russia - neither in 1914 nor in 1941, when Poland was not on the map at all. Germany needed colonies, not independent allies.
        1. Bakht Offline Bakht
          Bakht (Bakhtiyar) 8 June 2023 20: 23
          The quote is historical.
          Unification is understood not as a single state, but as an economic union. In fact, Haushofer was talking about the Berlin-Moscow-Tokyo axis.
          In modern realities, Primakov spoke about the Berlin-Moscow-Beijing axis.

          The division of NATO into two components, I think the issue is resolved. Much is said about this. How this will be done is still unclear.
      2. RUR Offline RUR
        RUR 8 June 2023 13: 55
        NATO members (the Baltic states, Poland) are simply torn off the leash.

        omitted Czech Republic, possibly Slovakia and Romania
        1. Bakht Offline Bakht
          Bakht (Bakhtiyar) 8 June 2023 20: 25
          Yes, perhaps the Czech Republic and Slovakia and Romania. I named the most inadequate.
          A cordon sanitaire against Russia should be created. The idea is old, from the 20s. Now she was pulled out of naphthalene.
  8. The comment was deleted.
  9. unc-2 Offline unc-2
    unc-2 (Nikolai Malyugin) 8 June 2023 11: 23
    Everything big grows from small things. The navy cannot exist without a civilian one. As is the air force. And whoever thinks otherwise is deceiving himself. Even military aircraft would not have to be all supersonic. Silent drones are needed. And that Poland will build a submarine fleet before our eyes? Submarines need to be built not for a day or two. If the Baltic Sea were teeming with civilian ships, then no one would covet this place. The Czechs stopped supplying training aircraft, and we are already in thought. Entire schools in aviation have been lost. The enemy was standing at Stalingrad, and we were already testing jet aircraft. Big from small. It doesn't happen otherwise.
    1. Bakht Offline Bakht
      Bakht (Bakhtiyar) 8 June 2023 20: 32
      The navy cannot exist without a civilian one.

      This is Dotrina Gorshkov. In principle, everything is correct. Admiral Gorshkov considered three components of the sea power of the state: the navy, civil and infrastructure. To have a global fleet, you need to have bases all over the world.
      The United States has it, China is doing it now. For Russia, at present, the ocean fleet is an unaffordable luxury. As they said at the beginning of the 20th century

      if you want to ruin a country, give it a Dreadnought.

      This does not mean that the Fleet is not needed. Needed and very necessary. But depending on which ships and in which theater.

      Severny and Tikhookensky are submarine missile carriers and ships providing their deployment.
      Baltic due to geography cannot be large. In principle, it is enough to have a Flotilla. But traditions in the Navy are a very significant thing. Therefore, the Twice Red Banner Baltic Fleet must be preserved. At least in the title.
      The main task of the Black Sea is to provide communications with the Mediterranean Sea and protect its coasts and infrastructure. That is, the BDK and escort ships.