NATO Secretary General Criticizes Russia's Stance on Third Site
September 6, 2007 :: News
NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer criticized Russia's stance on the U.S. missile defense to place an X-band radar system in the Czech Republic and ten Ground Based Interceptors in Poland. "Let me speak openly. Russia's sharp criticism of U.S. plans attached a counterproductive and useless coloring to the NATO-Russia dialogue... Russia's warnings addressed to our Czech and Polish allies are inappropriate in today's Europe."
The Secretary General did find Russia's counter-proposal, suggesting the joint use of Azeri radar base, heartening. "I would not judge the specific advantages of this proposal but I think it point out to three nuances. First, Russia recognized the existence of potential rocket menace; second, Russia seeks for joint solutions; third, pragmatic compromise on missile defense shield can be found," Scheffer said. (Article, Link)
» More stories on: European Missile Defenses, NATO, Russia
Franks Urges Russia to Join Another Race
September 5, 2007 :: RIA-Novosti :: News
Responding to Russian rhetoric that American and NATO efforts to construct missile defenses in Europe will precipate an "arms race," U.S. Congressman Trent Franks, one of three co-chairs of the new Missile Defense Caucus in the House of Representatives, has challenged Russia to join in a missile defense "race" with the United States. Franks was the keynote speaker on September 3 at the Multinational Ballistic Missile Defense Conference in Maastricht, the Netherlands. Congressman Franks challenged Russia to complete the best missile defense system:
My challenge to the leaders and people of Russia is this: There was a time in history when America and Russia's predecessor, the Soviet Union, had a massive arms race and built thousands of missiles and nuclear warheads that have ever since cast a foreboding shadow of fear across humanity. But times have changed. It is now technologically possible to build systems to defend our citizens against nuclear missiles and therefore, to diminish their military and strategic value and, ultimately, their purpose for existence. So, to Russia I would say, let us have another race, and let it be one of cooperation or of competition as you choose. Let us cooperate or compete to see whether both of us or which of us can develop the best missile defense systems to protect our own children and all of the children of the world from falling under the shadow of nuclear Jihad. Let us together, turn Mutually Assured Destruction into Mutually Assured Survival for our children and our children's children. This is my Challenge to Russia.
Full text of Franks' remarks below: (More »»»)
» Text of Trent Franks Keynote Address
» More stories on: Policy, Russia
Russia to Deploy S-400 Systems Around Moscow by August
July 25, 2007 :: RIA-Novosti :: News
Russia will deploy the first air- and missile-defense battalion of the new S-400 systems around Moscow on August 6, according to a Russian Air Force spokesman. "A battalion equipped with S-400 Triumf air defense systems and a command post will be put on combat duty [around Moscow] August 6," Colonel Alexander Drobyshevsky told a news conference July 24. The S-400 Triumf is a new defense system developed by the Almaz Central Design Bureau as an upgrade of the S-300 family. The system is said to be effective against stealth aircraft and cruise and ballistic missiles at a range of up to 400 kilometers. Russia successfully conducted live firing tests of the S-400 complex at the Kapustin Yar firing range in the Astrakhan Region on July 12-13. (Article, Link)
» More stories on: Russia, Russian Missile Defenses
» Missile system details for: S-400 (SA-20 Triumf)
Jaap de Hoop Scheffer: "There is Every Reason to Strive for Preserving the CFE Treaty"
July 24, 2007 :: Interfax :: News
Interfax interviewed NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer about NATO-Russian relations and Russia's recent suspension of its obligations under the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) treaty. Scheffer reiterated NATO's disappointment with Russia's suspension, and voiced his hope that NATO and Russia could find common ground on the landmark treaty for the sake of European security.
[The] Allies did express disappointment and concern with the unilateral decision of Russia. They also reiterated their full commitment to the CFE regime and called upon all signatories to continue implementing fully all the obligations under the CFE Treaty and associated documents. At the same time we have invited Russia for a constructive and creative dialogue on this important issue. The NATO-Russia Council (NRC) framework—that has served us so well over the last five years— can also play a helpful role... the CFE Treaty is such an important document and represents years of extensive negotiations and discussions that there is every reason to strive—on all sides—for preserving this landmark Treaty and bringing the Adapted CFE Treaty into force. Don't forget also that the Adapted Treaty reflect not the realities of the bygone, bloc to bloc era, but those of the new cooperative security situation in Europe.
(Article, Link)
» More stories on: Russia, NATO, Treaties and Agreements
Financial Times: Prague Warns of Kremlin Ambition
July 20, 2007 :: Financial Times :: News
Czech government officials have recently made a series of noteworthy observations about Russian foreign policy and influence in Europe. The Czech Republic's Foreign Minister Karel Schwarzenberg commented that while Russia is not an imminent threat, it could become one within the decade.
Maybe Russia will be a threat once more... In the last few months there have been some rather surprising occurrences... Russia would like to achieve the same status [vis-a-vis America] that the former Soviet Union had. Then the two of them, Washington and Moscow, would be the two to decide European issues. I am very sorry, but we consider that is our affair too.
In separate comments, an independent member of the Czech government Prince zu Schwarzenberg concurred with the Foreign Minister's statement while speaking at the International Institute for Strategic Studies.
We can understand that Russia is claiming its former position of superpower... However, we are scared by a strategy oriented more on prestige and on building military might instead of investing in civil infrastructure. With this strategy, I am afraid that Russia will once again end up as a giant with feet of clay... The Russians have always thought much more in long-term and strategic considerations than other European states. Other European states [go] from one election to another, and think more about tactics.
Both officials agreed that Europe must acquire energy independence to preserve its full independence. (Article, Link)
» More stories on: Allies, Russia
Economist: The West and a Grumpy Russia
July 19, 2007 :: The Economist :: Events
The Economist critiques Russian President Vladimir Putin's recent suspension of Russia's obligations under the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) treaty. The CFE regulates the number of troops, tanks, artillery and aircraft which can be stationed in Europe. Russia announced that because NATO has not ratified treaty amendments to the CFE from 1999 while Russia has, it would be justified in suspending its obligations under the treaty. NATO has demanded that before they ratify amendments that allow Russia to deploy greater numbers of troops to its restive Southern Republics, Russia must first withdraw all conventional force from Moldova and Georgia. The suspension would take effect in six months to allow for negotiations between the two sides, but the six month window is likely to be only cosmetic.
The planned suspension of the CFE is only part of Russia's new post-Cold War foreign policy. Russia resents NATO's eastward push, the U.S.'s new bases in Romania and Bulgaria and a planned missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic. Acquiescence caused by its weakness in the 90's has evaporated with the flush of petro-dollars in recent years. Putin is attempting to eliminate older treaties signed in weakness, and reengage in the European political arena by dividing the Europeans from the U.S., and the Eastern Europeans from their Western counterparts. The next target could likely be the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty which banned both superpowers from building or deploying land-based missiles with ranges from 500-5,500 km.
Unfortunately, the U.S. is contributing to the deterioration of security in Europe by "looking askance at binding agreements to limit the two sides' strategic nuclear arsenals after the current Moscow treaty governing them expires in 2012. Meanwhile the counting rules being used (which date from the earlier Start-1 treaty) will lapse in December 2009." The Economist concludes that good Cold War agreements are evaporating because hotheads on both sides refuse to find common ground. (Article, Link)
» More stories on: Russia, Analysis
Merkel Open to Missile Shield Due to Iran
July 18, 2007 :: News
German Chancellor Angela Merkel said she did not oppose U.S. plans for a missile defense system in Europe to counter a possible missile attack from Iran. "I am not against Mr Putin but also not against the idea," Merkel said at a semi-annual news conference in response to a question about the U.S. shield plan. "I have always said that one cannot say there's no threat coming from Iran." While the U.S. plan, which would place ten Ground Based Interceptors in Poland and an X-band radar facility in the Czech Republic, has angered Russia, Chancellor Merkel thought Russian President Vladimir Putin's latest counterproposals were an encouraging sign of possible reconciliation. "Thanks to the Russian proposals we no longer talk about whether we have to have a missile shield, but how can we do it together," she said. Chancellor Merkel also stressed that any plan must cover all NATO and European countries: "We in Europe will have to think again about whether we need to fully cover Europe. Southern Europe won't be covered and this will have to be discussed in NATO and in the NATO-Russia Council." (Article, Link)
» More stories on: Russia, NATO, European Missile Defenses
Russia Rejects NATO Offer but Rules Out 'New Cold War'
July 18, 2007 :: Spacewar.com :: News
Russia rejected a NATO proposal for consultations over the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) treaty from which it said it would withdraw. Russia added, however, that it would consider talks the U.S. later. "I don't see much point in holding such a meeting since the position of NATO on the CFE treaty has not yet changed," said General Yevgeny Buzhinsky, a top defense ministry official, in Itar-Tass. The Russian general said the CFE treaty should either be changed or renegotiated. Buzhinsky added that if NATO countries do not ratify the treaty by December, Russia will withdraw. The CFE treaty regulates the deployments of tanks and troops in NATO and former Warsaw Pact countries in Europe. NATO countries insist they will only ratify the treaty once Russia withdraws its remaining forces in Georgia and Moldova.
Buzhinsky also emphasized his country's interest in converting the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty into a multilateral agreement, and in renegotiating the Strategic Offensive Reductions treaty which expires in 2009. The INF treaty bans ballistic and cruise missiles with a range of 500-5,500 kilometers, but currently only applies to the U.S. and Russia. The 2002 Strategic Offensive Reductions treaty reduces warheads in Russia and the U.S. by two thirds, to between 1,700 and 2,200 deployed warheads each. (Article, Link)
» More stories on: Russia, NATO
Berman: Russia Shows the U.S. the Central Asia Door
July 11, 2007 :: Jane's Information Group :: Analysis
Ilan Berman, Vice President for Policy at the American Foreign Policy Council, analyzed Russian and U.S. rivalry in Central Asia in the July 11 edition of Jane's Defence Weekly. In the aftermath of September 11, Russian President Vladimir Putin had acquiesced to U.S. air bases in Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan to fight the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. However,
[F]our years later, America's regional presence is dwindling rapidly. Already, disputes with local governments have led to the ouster of US forces from one strategic facility, the Karshi-Khanabad base in Uzbekistan, and called into question the future of its deployment in Manas [Kyrgyzstan]. Diplomatically, meanwhile, Washington faces growing regional hostility, punctuated by public calls from the six-member Russian- and Chinese-led Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) for an exit of US and allied forces from the region.
While the U.S. was quick to promote governmental reform and human rights, Russia offered "value-free" cooperation.
Fearful of the possibility of a permanent US military outpost in its immediate neighbourhood and of the potential for US-assisted democratic change there, the Kremlin has adopted a multifaceted strategy of economic and political outreach designed to diminish US influence there...Moscow...has pursued a "value free" approach to regional ties, emphasising co-operation on military, strategic and energy matters over structural and political reforms.
The autocratic regimes of Central Asia thus rediscovered a regional power that would aid them while condoning a slide back into autocracy. Compounding the problem, the U.S. has shifted its focus back to Iraq and the Middle East and away from Central Asia. Berman concludes that the U.S. ignores the region and its autocratic drift at its peril, considering its geopolitical and economic importance. (Link)
» More stories on: Analysis, Russia, Foreign Policy
Podvig on the Russian RS-24 as Modified Topol-M
July 6, 2007 :: Analysis
The RS-24 missile that Russia tested on May 29, 2007 is a multiple-warhead version of the Topol-M and not a new missile, concludes Russian analyst Pavel Podvig writing for the Russian Forces blog. Russia has long wanted to have a MIRV version of the Topol-M, assuming it could compensate the slow pace of missile deployment by making the forces look bigger. However, under the guidelines of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), Russia and the U.S. are forbidden from "increasing the number of warheads attributed to an ICBM or SLBM of an existing or new type [of missile] (Article V.12d)". Since under the guidelines of the treaty, the Topol-M would be considered a variant of the Topol missile, Russia cannot declare that it will be equipped with multiple warheads. Therefore, Russia declared the Topol-M a "new" missile.
It is (almost) official now - the RS-24 missile that Russia tested on May 29, 2007 is a multiple-warhead version of Topol-M. That was my guess at the time of the test, but now I have had it confirmed. The missile, of course, have a new warhead section, but it is a Topol-M. It was said to use a guidance system that shares technology with that of the Bulava SLBM and, just as I suspected, it will be using the same warheads. It appears, though, that MIRVed Topol-M will carry no more than six warheads (the range was reported to be from three to six, but no final number yet).
MIRVing of Topol-M has long been somewhat of an obsession in Russia - there is a broad consensus among experts across the spectrum that this could compensate for the slow pace of the missile deployment, if only by artificially making the Russian forces look bigger. I think this belief is deeply misguided, but this is where the Russian debate stands. ...
At the moment, Russia can declare it as a prototype, which means it does not have to attribute a number of warheads or throw-weight to the missile until it is flight-tested at least 20 times or deployed. Since START is set to expire in December 2009, this means that Russia may avoid a conflict with the treaty by simply withholding the final throw-weight declaration until then.
(Article, Link)
» More stories on: Analysis, Russia
» Missile details: RS-24
