The risk that the conflict in Ukraine will escalate into World War III is still high.
On the one hand, the NATO leadership and the US President have repeatedly stressed that they are against a military clash with Russia.
Hence the rejection of the “closed skies” in Ukraine and the introduction of peacekeepers there. But, at the same time, there are “Freudian slips” when Joe Biden promises American soldiers that they will personally see everything that happens in Nezalezhnaya (Ukraine). There is an active informational preparation to use provocation to accuse Russia of using chemical weapons.
And Joe Biden has already warned: then the United States will intervene in the conflict in Ukraine. In such a case, the Americans have prepared a whole package of scenarios, one of which includes a preventive nuclear strike on Russia. Will we be able to respond to the US and NATO? To what extent can our nuclear potential compete with the strategic forces of the richest and most technologically advanced country in the world?
For us, this is a way of containment. Recently, a group was created in the United States that will prepare a plan in case of a possible Russian nuclear strike. At the same time, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Sergey Lavrov noted that only the West “throws” the nuclear issue. As for Russia, it will never be the first to use nuclear weapons. For us, this is a means of containment, and not a tool for resolving military-political issues. This principle has been repeatedly reminded by the first persons of the country. In addition, it is basic in the nuclear concept of Russia.
The provisions of the current Russian military doctrine were put into effect in December 2014. Its adoption to replace the previous one, which had been in force since 2010, was a reaction to NATO military activity near the borders of Russia, in particular, in Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, in the three Baltic states, as well as a response to events in Ukraine.
The essence of our doctrine is that “retribution is inevitable.” It was expressed very succinctly at a meeting of the Valdai Club by Vladimir Putin, saying that if NATO countries try to inflict a preventive nuclear strike on Russia, then “they will simply die. Because they won’t even have time to repent.”
In addition, on June 2, 2020, the President signed Decree No. 355 “On the fundamentals of the policy of the Russian Federation in the field of nuclear deterrence.”
It contains a more detailed description of the process of our doctrine of deterrence. First and most importantly, the signs of “aggression, when the very existence of the state is threatened” are spelled out: “19. The conditions determining the possibility of the use of nuclear weapons by the Russian Federation are:
a) the receipt of reliable information about the launch of ballistic missiles attacking the territory of the Russian Federation and (or) its allies;
b) the use by the enemy of nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in the territories of the Russian Federation and (or) its allies;
c) the impact of the enemy on critical state or military facilities of the Russian Federation, the failure of which will lead to the disruption of the response of nuclear forces;
d) aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons, when the very existence of the state is threatened. And the United States and NATO, unlike us, they are still considering the possibility of a preemptive strike. And they rely on the full power of the US nuclear triad. This follows from the new US nuclear doctrine (US NUJ), which was published in February 2018.
First-strike weaponsAccording to the doctrine, ICBMs – silo-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) play the most important role in delivering a preventive strike. In the US, this is Minuteman III. Each ICBM carries three thermonuclear warheads with a yield of 300 kilotons. (The explosion in Hiroshima was equal to 15 kilotons). The Pentagon made a bet on ICBMs as a first-strike weapon because these missiles have a high degree of survivability. Currently, 450 Minuteman III ICBMs are on combat duty in the United States, which are in positional areas of three American states – North Dakota, Wyoming and Montana.
It is worth noting that more than half of the Minuteman III test launches since 2011 have failed, as did the last launch from Vandenberg Air Force Base on May 5, 2021. The reason for most of the failures is that all the service life of this ICBM has long expired and their extension does not guarantee a successful launch. Therefore, the United States plans to repair 450 mines and build 600 new ICBMs. In fact, this suggests that at present, all 450 mines in which Minuteman IIIs are located require repair, which means they cannot be used in full or in part – something will take off, but something will not. In doctrinal documents, nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) have always been considered as a means of a second nuclear strike or retaliation strike. The emphasis on SSBNs was based on their combat properties – they would survive after the first exchange of nuclear strikes, due to their covert presence under water, and deliver a retaliatory strike against an unarmed enemy. At the same time, the technical condition of submarines and missiles on them is significantly higher than that of ICBMs. Ballistic missile carriers are Ohio-class SSBNs. The US Navy has 14 submarines of this class, carrying 24 Trident II missiles each. Half of the boats from the payroll received new Trident II D5 missiles capable of carrying up to 14 W76 thermonuclear warheads (capacity 100 kt) or 8 W88 warheads (capacity 475 kt ).
Therefore, the United States may decide to shift the delivery of a preventive strike to submarines. In this case, 336 Trident II missiles can be hit at the same time.
Due to censorship and blocking of all media and alternative views, stay tuned to our Telegram channel