START is under threat

We have already joined the new arms race. 400 intercontinental ballistic missiles, which are planned to expand in Russia by 2020, 8 atomic submarines - is this is not a race of arms? Another thing is that this race is qualitative, not quantitative. The total number of nuclear charges does not grow, the old ones are simply removed and new, more advanced ones are introduced. But at the last stage of the Cold War, in the 80s, the arms race was just like that, more effective and deadly systems were introduced instead of obsolete. So to say whether the arms race will be or not, it means simply not to understand the situation. Both on defensive systems and on high -precision planning hypersonic, it is already going on.

As for the specifically the issue with the placement of the pro, we react hard, although these plans of NATO were known many years ago. 24 interceptor, which are located in Romania, have absolutely nothing to do with our forces, and with all the desire they will not even be able to intercept our missile, simply in reach and speed. But in politically, this is extremely unpleasant for us. Russia generally opposed the American program, claiming that it destabilizes the strategic balance. And the Americans do not provide any intelligible arguments why this is not so. They just say that this is not against us.

Indeed, according to the technical characteristics of the systems that are placed there, this affects us. But what will happen in 10-20 years, no one knows. And this is the main problem: the Americans do not go to any, even the most general, restrictions on the parameters that would free us from this anxiety. At a high level, we said that these missiles can be instantly reprogrammed into offensive funds. This is not so: the interceptors that are installed there cannot be easily used to hit ground targets. They have another head part, another guidance system. But instead of them, large -range cruise missiles can be placed there. Because now on ships both interceptors and large -range missiles Tomagavk use universal launchers. And we, observing this from outside, from satellites and aircraft, we will not be able to distinguish mines in Romania, adapted for one type of weapons, from another. Of course, they are different, but we have no confidence. And although in the strategic meaning of 24 rockets in Romania and the same amount in Poland will change little in Poland, given that they are already at sea, in terms of the START agreement, this would be a technical violation. And for the purity of the experiment, such technical issues should be resolved.

For example, it would be possible to agree on the right to verify the short warning time so that the inspectors had the opportunity to open the mines and make sure that there are not “tomahaws”, but anti -Ischers. It would be possible to do if there were political will on both sides, but it is not. In the same way, we could provide technical capabilities to make sure that our Iskander systems do not exceed 500 kilometers in terms of range and, accordingly, do not violate the conditions of STAR. But here, too, there is neither political will nor agreements.

Therefore, it can be summarized that the historical and very important security agreement on START is at risk. Moreover, in Russia, a high level has long been in doubt about its expediency for our interests, regardless of other factors, since it prevents it from creating missiles to protect against other nuclear missile powers. Technically, NATO violations are, which is recognized by many in the USA. They could be solved by a technical way if there was a mutual desire to deal with such excesses that appear in any contract, because technical means change and some of them fall into the “gray zone” between which is prohibited and what is allowed. But there is no will, not one of the parties is ready to admit that the other has reasonable claims. Instead, both Moscow and Washington categorically reject criticism addressed to their address and are equally categorically expressed to the opponent, as if these claims are already a proven fact. The arms race is already going on, and if we urgently do not take measures to sign new agreements, then in the next 10 years it will become large, multi -channel, multilateral and very dangerous. But so far no measures are taken, discussed and do not even stand on the agenda of the governments.

As for rail weapons, there are many experiments. An electromagnetic gun for missile defense was developed for another 30 years under President Reagan. Experiments were conducted, drawings were made. But now everyone is talking about "new weapons" again. There will be no “new gun” in the next 20 years! In order to move from the experiment to create a system that has some kind of strategic effect, decades are needed. Most of these systems are eliminated at different stages as too expensive, too complex or insufficiently effective. They are compared with other existing models, and often it turns out that such fantastic projects sound excitingly, but they do not solve serious tasks more effectively and do not solve for a lower cost. So about rail weapons, you should not raise any noise.

Photo: The head of the intercontinental ballistic missile RS-18 "Stiletto" (SS-19 Stiletto) in the mine in front of the training launch from the starting complex of the Baikonur cosmodrome. Sergey Cossack/TASS

If you have decided to support the "Daily Journal",
You can make a transfer with the appointment of payment

"Target financing" Daily Journal "