US turn into a maniac with nuclear weapons

 США превращаются в маньяка с ядерным оружием

The reluctance of Americans to admit the obvious will lead to nuclear war or the destruction of the hegemony of States.

The reluctance of Americans to admit the obvious will lead to nuclear war or the destruction of the hegemony of States.

United States persistently continue to break the system of global security, trying to significantly increase its military power in offensive weapons, including nuclear missiles. Ultimately, this may lead to either a global war or to a marked decrease of the role of States in the world.

Donald trump recently said that now Washington is seeking to conclude a new agreement on arms control with Russia, China and possibly several other countries. But those familiar with the real situation, understand the seemingly noble promise lies at best empty rhetoric, designed to lull the world community.

An important milestone in building a fundamentally new relationship between major powers in the area of security was the US withdrawal from the Treaty on the limitation of anti-ballistic missile systems (ABM) in 2002. The agreement, signed in 1972, to some extent, left a nuclear superpower without a reliable “shield” that served as an important deterrent from the beginning of nuclear war, because nobody wanted to strike on its territory in retaliation.

The decision to withdraw from the Treaty, then-President George W. Bush substantiated the need to protect against missiles from Iran and North Korea. The absurdity of this argument is confirmed at least the fact that after 17 years, the DPRK has no missiles capable of reaching the United States and Iran do as before as far from creating its own nuclear weapons. It is clear that American “hawks” just wanted to radically change the balance of power in the world, first of all, regarding Russia, which in the early 2000s, only began to recover from the effects of the collapse of the Soviet Union. After all, if you are almost fully protected from a nuclear attack, and your potential enemy can not boast, he can dictate almost any terms.

The Americans did not succeed. Russia was forced to develop fundamentally new military equipment. In particular, the underwater drone created by Poseidon, a cruise missile with a nuclear engine, high-precision hypersonic aircraft missiles “Dagger”, a hypersonic glider “vanguard”. It turned out that all attachments of the Americans in missile defense system was pointless. Moscow managed largely to restore the balance, when no nuclear power can not be certain of victory in the use of nuclear weapons. But the main and very sad outcome of the U.S. decision to withdraw from the ABM Treaty has become a new round of the arms race, which now became even more dangerous.

But history only teaches that teaches nothing. Especially when it comes to American politics. The United States has decided to make a new attempt to reformat the structure of global security for themselves. And it is important to note the US withdrawal from the Treaty on intermediate and shorter-range missiles (INF Treaty), this is the first time the President said trump in October 2018. Enclosed in a 1987 agreement between the USSR and the United States provided that the parties to destroy all launchers and rockets are not developing a smaller (500 to 1000 km) and medium (1000 to 5500 km) range, that is, those that can be placed in the immediate vicinity of the borders of a potential enemy.

In late summer of this year, the Pentagon confirmed that it has tested missiles that violate the INF Treaty. If we consider that the development of such weapons usually takes at least several years, it is easy to conclude that withdrawal from the Treaty, the Americans were preparing for a long time. But that is absolutely not surprising, and the decision was “weighty” arguments. Supposedly Russia in 2008 has developed a missile that can cover a distance of over 500 km. the Arguments of Moscow that “suspicious” rocket 9М729 it has a range of much less, was Washington simply ignored. Americans can, however, to thank as the reason for breaking agreements they openly called the power of Russia, and did not hide behind imaginary threats from small States. As they say, thanks though for your honesty.

I must admit that out of the INF Treaty is a big threat to the world. Given that American gunsmiths trying to catch up with Russia in the field of supersonic weapons. And it is possible that in a short time in the Arsenal of the Pentagon can be missiles that can reach the territory of a potential enemy in less than a minute (the more they are close to the border). The expectation that the other side simply will not have time to react and make a decision about a retaliatory strike, and therefore the attacker would remain unpunished.

How to respond to such a threat? Military experts found the answer quickly enough: the development of artificial intelligence (AI). It is expected that a significant number of decisions will be made not by people but by computer algorithm. If the systems detect launches will see that the country side released from the rocket, the car will take an instant decision about a retaliatory strike.

In Russia for several years, there is a “Perimeter” system, which involves a fundamentally new system of control of nuclear triggers. The gist of it is that you are using so-called command-ballistic missile (CBD), equipped with a powerful radio-transmitting devices. They are in danger will have to go to the enemy, and to fly over the territory of Russia and to transmit commands to automatic missile launches. According to experts, if the “Perimeter” system to modernize and fully equip the AI, it will be able, if necessary, to ensure retaliation in the event of the use of American intermediate-range missiles.

Of course, it is very good that in our country we can find an adequate response to American plans. Only the weapons have become more lethal, the world is still several steps potentially heading for disaster.

But, as you can see, no failure can make US just at least slow down the implementation of their plans, that is to say to pause and reflect on what is happening. And now under threat has actually the last barrier to the unconstrained increase the combat capabilities of the Treaty between Russia and the USA on measures for the further reduction and limitation of strategic offensive arms (SNV-3). The document provides the reduction of nuclear warheads up to 1550 units, Intercontinental ballistic missiles, ballistic missile submarines, and heavy bombers to 700 units. The contract for a period of 10 years was signed in 2010, the year the then heads of States Dmitry Medvedev and Barack Obama and entered into force in February 2011. Accordingly, in February 2021 it will expire. It can be extended for another five years, but in Washington, apparently do not really want.

To exit the start-3 and start of production of the missiles extremely powerful in any number of Americans have found a new argument. In Washington in recent times repeatedly stressed that no agreement would be meaningless if it is not connected China. Supposedly, the previous agreement was a time when the planet was only the two nuclear superpowers: the USSR and the USA, and then Russia and the United States. But times have changed, and now China has significantly reinforced its military power, including increased nuclear capacity.

I must admit that the argument of the United States looks quite reasonable. But only if you omit the details. I’d say key details.

Officially in the Arsenal of China today has about 300 strategic warheads is much less than the United States and Russia. Experts notice, that if you connect the PRC to conclude a Treaty such as start-3, then it will open the way to Beijing to serious increase in the number of nuclear missiles.

On the other hand, many experts there are serious concerns that, in fact, already now China may have a much larger number of warheads. Some even say 10 thousand. And these suspicions are difficult to refute. First, China is quite a closed country from the point of view of any statistics. Take the indicators of economic development. Beijing publishes some data, and world experts speak absolutely about other. For example, the Chinese Ministry estimate the country’s debt in the amount of less than 20 percent of GDP, and the world’s experts talk about 150, 250 and 300 percent.

Secondly, China already has the necessary technology for the production of nuclear missiles and warheads. He could potentially create for their mass production industrial base, also no one doubts. The country that flooded their goods the whole world, could produce as 300 warheads and a hundred times more. Thirdly, China expressly States that it aims to soon become a leading world power. This means that needs to grow and military power, including in the nuclear field. In fact, in many policy documents of the Chinese authorities and the ruling Communist party this is stated openly.

Only all these suspicions of China missed the main thing: Beijing is for the most part only had to react to existing threats. This spring, U.S. Secretary of state Mike Pompeo said that the new start Treaty must include China. The response from China was immediate. Foreign Ministry spokesman of China Lou Kahn said that “China remains committed to a policy of not using nuclear weapons first and stands for the comprehensive prohibition and thorough destruction of nuclear weapons.” According to the representative of the foreign Ministry, China will continue to keep nuclear capabilities at the minimum level to ensure national security. That is, China isn’t aimed to attack any state and strategy of development of weapons is based on the ability to put a potential enemy unacceptable damage.

Moreover, long-term vision of China global development, expressed in the project “One belt and one road” involves all sorts of collaboration between different countries and socio-political systems. This is radically different from the slogan “America above all”.

During my trip to China one of the senior officials of the Chinese foreign Ministry once said to me that the global architecture in Beijing is compared to a stool with four legs. That is, the stability of the world rests, according to the Chinese leaders, on the equality of the potentials and capabilities of China, USA, Russia and Europe. If any of these “legs” to shorten or lengthen, the “stool” will become unstable.

In fact, very similar principles are important, and Russia.

But the concept of development, the US is quite different. There the world is in the form of the “Golden city” and “big village”. Simply put, in the world, according to Americans, should be one superpower, which should work all the rest of humanity. The concept of defence in this respect.

Today is actually the world’s two-faced strategy of development of the global security system. One of them speaks to US. This year, Donald trump stated that the purpose of development of nuclear forces is to provide the ability to “detect and destroy any missile launched against the United States, at any time and in any place.” We are talking about the creation of a system of complete invulnerability.

Another strategy pursued by Russia and China. Interestingly, its essence at the time was expressed by us President Ronald Reagan. “A nuclear war cannot be won and hence it never needs to,” he said.

For many years China provides nuclear weapon States to the Treaty on the non-use of nuclear weapons first. The basis of the project document in addition to the obligation to give up the opportunity to strike first are a few simple principles. First, the country must reduce the number of military personnel. Secondly, not to increase military spending and try to reduce them to the minimum value required for solutions to local tactical problems. Thirdly, to establish a rigid system of control over the transmission of any state of the technologies and military equipment. Fourth, actively promote the international arms control and the process of reducing arsenals.

That is, China is ready to allow its territory to observers both from potential enemies and from international organizations. This makes it virtually impossible uncontrolled increase in nuclear capacity than China, I suspect today.

It would seem that the argument of the Chinese side is quite logical. By the way, in 2013, speaking at the Brandenburg gate in Berlin, Barack Obama said that the reduction of the U.S. strategic warheads three times will not affect US national security. But, as we know, speeches of the American politicians and their actions differ radically.

It is important to understand that the current actually maniacal desire of the USA to achieve total superiority over the entire world leads not only to an arms race, but also for reducing the role of the United States in the international arena. The desire of all Americans to “crush” under their interests logically leads to the fact that other States are trying to build an alternative security architecture.

This architecture is based on two things. This is an adequate response in terms of technology, the threat from the US and the convergence of all of American politics does not agree. In 1994, Russia and China issued a joint statement on no-first-use nuclear weapons first against each other. Now the armies of the two countries have conducted joint military exercises and shared technology.

By the way, China is absolutely unprecedented. For many centuries China never joined any Union, and relied solely on their own strength. But Washington’s unwillingness to negotiate could reverse this long-standing tradition.

To summarize, the system of global security, as well as the position of the United States in the world depend primarily on U.S. policy. Or they admit the obvious and start looking for a compromise, or will push the world closer to nuclear Apocalypse.

Share Button