In Conversations About Anti-Ballistic Missile Defense, Russia Has Only One Trump Card: Missiles
A program that successfully develops a technologically advanced missile complex could force the United States to reconsider its position.
The Pentagon recently had second thoughts about inviting representatives from the Russian Federation’s Ministry of Defense to their next “Potemkin village” in the Kwajalein Atoll. Our military will not have a chance to watch the picturesque scene of American missiles soaring through the air, and presumably in the Pentagon, they are now rubbing their hands with glee while thinking that they have managed to spite and annoy the Russians.
Indeed, the Americans must have seen something positive in this demarche. It seems that the Yankees have begun to understand that their reasoning does not sit well in Russian defense circles, that all previous head-nodding was just a diplomatic gesture (no pun intended), and that Russia — the horror! — does not really believe that the European missile defense system is directed against the “common enemy” so popularly discussed at bilateral meetings. Apparently, it was all an illusion that Moscow ever believed in the diplomatic jargon; the time has come to part with them. Now that the invitation to the missile test has been recalled, it has become evidently clear to any Illinois housewife that the Russians just don’t buy it.
Even the comatose level of military competence currently found in Ministry of Defense is enough to understand that consenting to participate in the imposed American game is not a gesture of politeness, but rather of something totally outside the bounds of diplomacy. It’s all about psychiatry. And the sad commentary on this obviously ridiculous “generosity” is the fact that we somehow politely, cautiously and with the lightest shade of resentment continue to make excuses not to take a stand. Just as a sucker allows a con man to wrap him around his little finger, Russia fails to abruptly stop the American game and instead just begins to babble angrily, “But sir, this is dishonest!”
The most offensive thing in this whole absurd story is not that the Americans staged yet another maneuver to show how bold and disloyal they are, but rather that they think it’s possible to mock our military by inviting them to the test while stifling their own laughter. Is there a reason or an incentive for this kind of behavior?
In an interview, KM.RU columnist and renowned military expert Vladislav Shurygin said he saw nothing out of the ordinary in this particular instance of anti-Russian diplomacy.
Shurygin: It is absolutely obvious that we are now witnessing a cooling between Russia and the United States. The American establishment is displeased with Putin’s return to power, and there is definitely a resurgence of anti-Russian sentiment, as seen through a number of anti-Russian political initiatives, like the Magnitsky List. In these circumstances, the Americans obviously think that it’s unnecessary to engage with Russia, especially in such important matters as missile defense.
Of course, invitations to observe their missile defense tests without giving us data on telemetry and diplomatic promises that have nothing to do with our own strategic missile defense capabilities offer us nothing besides an empty diplomatic formality. If the Americans withdraw the invitation to the Kwajalein Atoll, it means that they don’t see any sense in our attendance. After all, Russia’s position in the matter has already been discussed many times over.
KM.RU: In general, Russia does not have any trump cards. But would this situation be any different in conversations with the United States about missile defense?
Shurygin: At the moment (Editor’s Note: This interview was conducted in July 2012), Russia has no special trump cards in conversations on missile defense. However, there may be one if Russia can manage to create a program that successfully develops an advanced missile complex. If Russia were to churn out missiles like pies (as was standard under the Soviet regime) and build a promising new missile program, I think that there would be no question. It is important to remember that the initiators of the first laws restricting missile defense were the Americans, since at the time the USSR’s impressive progress in developing a rocket complex scared the United States into rushing to shield its backwardness with diplomatic agreements. These treaties called for a ban to missile tests, the placement of weapons in space and a number of other actions. All of these contracts have since lapsed.
If Russia is still able to develop a program to create modern arms, then we will have a decisive trump card. If not, the Americans won’t look back. They are wrapped up in the huge technological advantage they have gained in the last 15 years, and they will try to use their technological breakthroughs to repartition the modern world. Knowing a little typical American psychology and diplomacy, we have to understand that until this American dreadnought runs aground on a very robust underwater reef, there is little that can stop their progress.
KM.RU: Recall that at the end of March in Seoul, Barack Obama promised Dmitry Medvedev that he will have “more flexibility” in the conversation on missile defense after the American presidential election. Do you foresee that being the case?
Shurygin: I think that Obama is in a hostage situation right now. The elections are looming; it’s not a given that he will remain in the White House for a second term. There will not be any positive shifts in Russian-American relations until at least the end of this year. This is just a rule of thumb in political campaigns. The candidates have to clearly define and name all of their enemies, as well as their positions on them. So they dance around Russia, which is seen by the American establishment as the country’s main strategic adversary. For Obama, this perspective, popular among voters, is very unfortunate and misguided.
The Pentagon recently had second thoughts about inviting representatives from the Russian Federation’s Ministry of Defense to their next “Potemkin village” in the Kwajalein Atoll. Our military will not have a chance to watch the picturesque scene of American missiles soaring through the air, and presumably in the Pentagon, they are now rubbing their hands with glee while thinking that they have managed to spite and annoy the Russians.
Indeed, the Americans must have seen something positive in this demarche. It seems that the Yankees have begun to understand that their reasoning does not sit well in Russian defense circles, that all previous head-nodding was just a diplomatic gesture (no pun intended), and that Russia — the horror! — does not really believe that the European missile defense system is directed against the “common enemy” so popularly discussed at bilateral meetings. Apparently, it was all an illusion that Moscow ever believed in the diplomatic jargon; the time has come to part with them. Now that the invitation to the missile test has been recalled, it has become evidently clear to any Illinois housewife that the Russians just don’t buy it.
Even the comatose level of military competence currently found in Ministry of Defense is enough to understand that consenting to participate in the imposed American game is not a gesture of politeness, but rather of something totally outside the bounds of diplomacy. It’s all about psychiatry. And the sad commentary on this obviously ridiculous “generosity” is the fact that we somehow politely, cautiously and with the lightest shade of resentment continue to make excuses not to take a stand. Just as a sucker allows a con man to wrap him around his little finger, Russia fails to abruptly stop the American game and instead just begins to babble angrily, “But sir, this is dishonest!”
The most offensive thing in this whole absurd story is not that the Americans staged yet another maneuver to show how bold and disloyal they are, but rather that they think it’s possible to mock our military by inviting them to the test while stifling their own laughter. Is there a reason or an incentive for this kind of behavior?
In an interview, KM.RU columnist and renowned military expert Vladislav Shurygin said he saw nothing out of the ordinary in this particular instance of anti-Russian diplomacy.
Shurygin: It is absolutely obvious that we are now witnessing a cooling between Russia and the United States. The American establishment is displeased with Putin’s return to power, and there is definitely a resurgence of anti-Russian sentiment, as seen through a number of anti-Russian political initiatives, like the Magnitsky List. In these circumstances, the Americans obviously think that it’s unnecessary to engage with Russia, especially in such important matters as missile defense.
Of course, invitations to observe their missile defense tests without giving us data on telemetry and diplomatic promises that have nothing to do with our own strategic missile defense capabilities offer us nothing besides an empty diplomatic formality. If the Americans withdraw the invitation to the Kwajalein Atoll, it means that they don’t see any sense in our attendance. After all, Russia’s position in the matter has already been discussed many times over.
KM.RU: In general, Russia does not have any trump cards. But would this situation be any different in conversations with the United States about missile defense?
Shurygin: At the moment (Editor’s Note: This interview was conducted in July 2012), Russia has no special trump cards in conversations on missile defense. However, there may be one if Russia can manage to create a program that successfully develops an advanced missile complex. If Russia were to churn out missiles like pies (as was standard under the Soviet regime) and build a promising new missile program, I think that there would be no question. It is important to remember that the initiators of the first laws restricting missile defense were the Americans, since at the time the USSR’s impressive progress in developing a rocket complex scared the United States into rushing to shield its backwardness with diplomatic agreements. These treaties called for a ban to missile tests, the placement of weapons in space and a number of other actions. All of these contracts have since lapsed.
If Russia is still able to develop a program to create modern arms, then we will have a decisive trump card. If not, the Americans won’t look back. They are wrapped up in the huge technological advantage they have gained in the last 15 years, and they will try to use their technological breakthroughs to repartition the modern world. Knowing a little typical American psychology and diplomacy, we have to understand that until this American dreadnought runs aground on a very robust underwater reef, there is little that can stop their progress.
KM.RU: Recall that at the end of March in Seoul, Barack Obama promised Dmitry Medvedev that he will have “more flexibility” in the conversation on missile defense after the American presidential election. Do you foresee that being the case?
Shurygin: I think that Obama is in a hostage situation right now. The elections are looming; it’s not a given that he will remain in the White House for a second term. There will not be any positive shifts in Russian-American relations until at least the end of this year. This is just a rule of thumb in political campaigns. The candidates have to clearly define and name all of their enemies, as well as their positions on them. So they dance around Russia, which is seen by the American establishment as the country’s main strategic adversary. For Obama, this perspective, popular among voters, is very unfortunate and misguided.