Video - Captured Russian officer explains how 2-3k Russian officers w/ fake ID run Putin's proxy Ukraine forces.

Full video transcript in English here: http://t.co/X7yCGzF0Ym via @LUGANSK_TODAY

— Silver Surfer (@RobPulseNews) July 30, 2015

Video - The Honeymoon Is Over In the Crimea.

Video - Russian helicopter pilots preparing for Victory parade, will fly in very close formation.

Preparing for Victory Parade already in full swing. So helicopter from the Tver region went to the outskirts of Moscow Kubinka to continue preparation for the celebration in the general scheme of the Air Force. However, the flight turned out to be difficult.

Percussion Russian Ka-52 "Alligator" and Mi-28-H "Night Hunter" - machines, of course, all-weather and equally effective both day and night. But hurricane wind and snowfall in early April forced the pilots to demonstrate their skills on the way from Torzhok in Kubinka.

More than two dozen helicopters virtually all types will be presented at the anniversary of the Victory Parade. In addition to the Ma-28-N and the Ka-52, this latest modification of the Mi-8 with the index "AMTSH" and the famous Mi-24, and heavyweight champion of the Mi-26.

For the first time over Red Square they fly not in isolation, but as part of larger units. The distance between the helicopter rotor will not exceed 10-20 meters - even for experienced pilots is a challenge to their skill. Source.

Russia grants Kiev gas discount, but Kiev counts on the EU to fit the bill.

Russia grants Kiev gas discount, but Kiev counts on the EU to fit the bill. (RBTH).

The centrist newspaper Nezavisimaya Gazeta writes that Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev has signed a decree on the extension of discounted gas supplies to Ukraine. Moscow is ready to supply Kiev with gas at $250 per 1,000 cubic meters. The publication explains that this will allow Ukraine to acquire gas at a cheaper rate than directly from gas hubs in Europe.

However, Kiev, writes the newspaper, is not able to purchase reserve gas even at reduced prices.

The Ukrainian government is counting on the Europeans paying for its gas supplies: Kieve is holding talks with the European bank for Reconstruction and Development, the World Bank and other international financial institutions on the granting of loans for pumping natural gas into storage tanks in the summer period in order to create the necessary fuel reserves for the next heating season and ensure the uninterrupted transit of Russian gas to the EU.

Nezavisimaya Gazeta notes that Kiev’s current attempts to use European money to replenish Ukraine’s underground gas storage tanks are a repeat of the actions taken by former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko in 2009.

Russian experts explain that the super-reduced prices for Ukraine are principally due to political factors. “It appears that the European Union is now interested in the preservation of gas supplies from Russia to Ukraine. And the Europeans may allocate further credit to Ukraine for this,” says Mikhail Krutikhin, a partner at consulting company RusEnergy.

However, he stressed that the sides remained in fundamental disagreement on the issue of the gas contract.  Hmmm.........And there's still the unsettled remaining debt to Russia. Read the full story here.

Russian Pres Putin: 'try to take Crimea away and I will give you a nuclear war'.

Russian Pres Putin: 'try to take Crimea away and I will give you a nuclear war'. (TheAustralian).

As President Putin celebrated the anniversary of the annexation of Crimea on March 18 with an appearance at a concert outside the Kremlin, a group of retired Russian generals sat down in Torgau, Germany, with a group of their American counterparts. The assembled Russians once ran the interior ministry, the military directorate in charge of nuclear weapons, the GRU (Russian military intelligence) and the FSB (the main successor agency to the KGB). The American individuals present had similar backgrounds in the military, CIA and Defence Intelligence Agency.

Behind closed doors, over two days, the Russians delivered a series of blunt warnings from Moscow that reveal just how precarious Europe’s security has become over the past year, and how broad the gulf between the Kremlin and the West now is.

The US party at the Elbe Group talks appears to have been surprised to discover that Russian security experts believe that the US is bent on destroying their country — and that Russia is both entitled and fully prepared to use nuclear force to defend itself. That point of view reflects both Mr Putin’s assessment of Russia’s vulnerability and the KGB background shared by him and his closest advisers, according to Kremlin insiders.

Swaggering nuclear rhetoric has increasingly permeated Russian life. In a recent documentary, Mr Putin said that when he gave the instruction to annex Crimea, he also ordered that Russia’s nuclear forces be placed on full alert.

He has referred to Russia’s nuclear might many times since the Ukraine crisis began, including in remarks to a group of schoolchildren in August, when he reminded them that “Russia is one of the leading nuclear powers”, and “it’s best not to mess with us”.

Notes of the Elbe Group meeting indicate some areas where the Kremlin is open to dialogue, namely on the “future nature and composition” of the contested territory in eastern Ukraine which, the generals say, Russia wants to see become “an autonomous entity in a confederated Ukraine”.

However, they also show the detailed thinking behind the nuclear bluster. Among the “key messages delivered by Russian participants” was a warning that any military move by the West on Crimea would trigger a Russian response, possibly involving nuclear force. “The United States should also understand it would also be at risk.”

The Russian delegation said that any NATO build-up in the Baltics would prompt an increase in Russia’s “nuclear posture”, according to notes drawn up by a US participant. The warning is baldly recounted: “Russia will use its nuclear weapons against NATO.”

When discussing possible Russian action in the Baltics, it reported: “Russian members mentioned a spectrum of responses from nuclear to non-military.” Hmmmm.....I'm convinced Putin believes he can survive a nuclear showdown with the West and emerge victorious.Read the full story here.

Russian Deputy Prime Minister Rogozin: ’Russia Will Surely Use Nuclear Weapons If US Strikes’

Russian Deputy Prime Minister Rogozin: ’Russia Will Surely Use Nuclear Weapons If US Strikes’(Fars).

Russian Deputy Prime Minister stressed that Moscow reserves the right to use nuclear weapons if it is attacked by the United States.

Russia was "preparing a response" to plans by the United States to develop a new fast-strike weapons platform capable of striking targets anywhere in the world in as little as an hour, Russian news agency RIA Novosti quoted Dmitry Rogozin as saying on Wednesday.

"They may experiment with conventional weapons on strategic delivery platforms, but they must bear in mind, that if we are attacked, in certain circumstances we will of course respond with nuclear weapons," Rogozin told Russia's State Duma, the lower house, without naming the US.

The official noted that the so-called Prompt Global Strike program was "the most important new strategy being developed by the United States today".

Russia amended its military doctrine years ago to allow for the possibility of using nuclear weapons in retaliation to a non-nuclear attack.

Rogozin said the principle is enshrined in Russia’s military doctrine and any aggressor or group of aggressors should be aware of that.

Rogozin’s comment came a day after President Vladimir Putin said that 40 new Yars (SS-29) Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) would be added to Russia’s nuclear arsenal in 2014.Hmmm.....Flexible...Reset

Cantor: 'Since when do we trust Iran?'

Cantor: 'Since when do we trust Iran?' HT: TheHill.

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) says the deal reached over the weekend with Iran is “dangerous,” and will help Iran become a nuclear power.

“I think this interim deal with Iran is, in fact, dangerous. It is a deal which brings Iran closer to becoming a nuclear power,” Cantor said Monday on “CBS This Morning.”

The deal, he said, falls “well short” of the U.N. Security Council resolution that called for no sanctions relief until Iran suspended its enrichment of uranium.
“I think it bodes very, very ominously for the region and in fact for U.S. security,” Cantor added.

Early Sunday in Geneva, the United States, along with Russia, the United Kingdom, France, Russia, China and Germany, reached a deal with Iran that freezes its nuclear program in exchange for limited sanctions relief for the next six months. The deal limits the amount of uranium Iran can enrich.

ADVERTISEMENT

If Iran complies with this interim deal, a final deal that would curb its nuclear program could be reached. Cantor rejected Secretary of State John Kerry’s comments on Sunday morning talk shows during which Kerry said, “We do not recognize a right to enrich.”

The deal contains “language which says that Iran will have some type of right to enrich,” Cantor said. 

“Since when do we trust Iran? Iran has demonstrated again and again it cannot be trusted. I believe that the attitude should be mistrust and verify,” he added Monday.

Kerry said, however, “None of this is based on trust. It’s not a question of trust.”
Cantor is among a slew of Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill calling for renewed and tougher sanctions against Iran.
“We’ve got a real cost to us as we are now opening the door to the weakening of international sanctions that have been in place,” he said.

India was already asked by Iran in OCTOBER to settle some debts in euros via TURKEY's state-run bank Halkbank.

India was already asked by Iran in OCTOBER to settle some debts in euros via TURKEY's state-run bank Halkbank. (Taz).

Indian refiners are ready to start transferring cash owed for Iranian oil as early as next week following a landmark deal to curb Tehran's nuclear programme that allows importers to shift billions of dollars back to Iran, Reuters reported on Nov. 25.

World powers agreed on Nov. 24 to ease some of the sanctions they had imposed to force Iran to halt its nuclear programme. The measures have slashed the OPEC member's exports by more than half and cost it as much as $80 billion in lost oil sales since the beginning of 2012, the White House estimates.

Since February, sanctions have prevented Iran from repatriating cash earned from the oil it has been able to export, crippling its economy by choking off its biggest revenue stream.

The new agreement would allow Iran to receive about $4.2 billion in oil money from accounts held abroad if it fulfils commitments under the deal over the next six months. Iran's biggest oil buyers are China, India, South Korea and Japan.

India is Iran's second-largest buyer and now owes Tehran about $5.3 billion for oil imports, according to government and refining sources.

India's refiners in mid-October received a request by the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC) to settle some of those dues in euros via Turkey's state-run bank Halkbank as soon as possible. The refiners had used that payment route until February, when it was blocked by sanctions.

The request came some time before the nuclear deal, puzzling refiners as to why the payment channel could again be used. They have yet to start payments, but will do if the payment route is cleared under the nuclear deal.

"Next week, if it is possible, we will start making our payments," said P.P. Upadhya, managing director of Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd , one of Indian buyers of Iranian crude.

A government official also said that payments would be expedited once the payment mechanism via Turkey opens up.

"If that Halkbank route opens up ... rather than pushing this to a later date perhaps this money will go to the Iranians sooner rather than later," said the official with direct knowledge of the matter. Hmmmm....What was agreed with Iran by the Obama 'admin' AND WHEN?

Andrew Bostom: "Nuke Deal Fiasco Analyses Ignore Iran’s Genocidal Islamic Jew-Hatred"

Andrew Bostom: "Nuke Deal Fiasco Analyses Ignore Iran’s Genocidal Islamic Jew-Hatred"

 By Andrew Bostom | 

Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu, Iran’s President Rouhani, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov, and his Iranian counterpart Mohammad Javad Zarif, all concur on this critical outcome of the interim agreement struck between Iran, the U.S. and five other world powers, announced early Sunday morning, 11/24/13:Iran’s nuclear enrichment program will continue apace.

United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI), a not-for-profit, non-partisan, advocacy group which  seeks to thwart Iran’s ambition to obtain nuclear weapons, issued a press release highlighting the fundamental strategic failures of the interim 6-month pact:

By not agreeing to dismantle a single centrifuge, Iran has not rolled back its nuclear infrastructure and with the many centrifuges that it is currently operating, Iran retains the ability to breakout and produce enough weapons-grade uranium for a nuclear weapon in as little as 2 months. At the same time, the carefully constructed sanctions architecture developed over decades has been significantly rolled back.

UANI argued further that the Geneva agreement provided Iran disproportionate sanctions relief, which would enable the Iranian economy (as gauged by the value of its currency, the rial) to recover to an extent that Iran’s nuclear weapons development (i.e., nuclear enrichment, and plutonium generation) programs, would be abetted by this reduction in economic pressures.

Six months from now we believe that the Iranian rial will have regained significant lost value and there will be far less economic pressure on the Iranian economy. And accordingly there will be far less pressure for Iran to actually dismantle a material number of centrifuges, much less end its nuclear enrichment and plutonium programs for which it has no practical purpose except to produce a nuclear weapon. If Iran’s industrial-size nuclear program is not rolled back, Tehran will inherently maintain the breakout capacity to build such a weapon

While a number of equally sobering assessments (see here, here, here, here,here, here, and here) have reiterated UANI’s tocsin of looming geo-strategic calamity regarding the so-called “P5 + 1” agreement just brokered with Iran, the ideology animating Iran’s relentless pursuit of nuclear weapons—apocalyptic, annihilationist Islamic Jew-hatred—was uniformly ignored.

Charles Krauthammer: “A Pres desperate to change the subject and a Sec of State desperate to make a name for himself” will succumb to “a sucker’s deal” with Iran.

Charles Krauthammer: “A Pres desperate to change the subject and a Sec of State desperate to make a name for himself” will succumb to “a sucker’s deal” with Iran.HT: Heritage.

The deal that the Obama Administration struck at the Geneva talks yesterday amounts to a flawed agreement that risks reducing sanctions pressure on Iran over next six months in return for easily reversible Iranian pledges, some of which Iran has given before but subsequently reneged on. The deal requires Iran to curb some, but not all, of its nuclear activities over the next six months in return for about $7 billion in sanctions relief.

Significantly, Iran is not required to comply with U.N. Security Council sanctions that require a total suspension of uranium enrichment. Instead, Iran is allowed to continue enriching uranium to 3.5 percent levels, ostensibly for its nuclear power reactor at Bushehr, despite the fact that Russia already has committed to fuel that facility.

Another problem is that the interim deal, which creates a six-month window for further negotiations, may hinder Washington’s ability to reach an acceptable final deal. The Obama Administration has been stung by strong criticism from Congress and from U.S. allies who fear that it has squandered its bargaining leverage by easing sanctions in return for marginal concessions from Iran that will not reduce the long-term threat of an Iranian nuclear breakout.

To force Tehran to make the necessary deeper concessions in a final deal, more—not fewer—sanctions are required. But Iran has warned that any further sanctions will prompt it to abandon the agreement. Despite that warning, a bipartisan coalition in Congress has announced that it will impose more sanctions.

The Administration claims that the easing of sanctions will be reversible if Iran defaults on its obligations, but as long as Iran keeps the talks alive, it will be difficult to re-impose the sanctions without being accused of sabotaging negotiations.

As columnist Charles Krauthammer has warned, there is concern that “A President desperate to change the subject and a Secretary of State desperate to make a name for himself” will succumb to “a sucker’s deal” with Iran.

The Administration has resisted bipartisan congressional efforts to impose new sanctions on Iran. White House spokesman Jay Carney has warned that additional pressure on Iran could derail diplomatic negotiations and put the U.S. on a “march to war.”

But as Heritage Foundation Senior Fellow Peter Brookes has noted: “On the contrary, not being tough enough on Iran—whether with new sanctions or at the Geneva talks—may actually propel the simmering crisis toward armed conflict despite intentions to do otherwise.”

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has claimed that the deal has recognized Iran’s “right” to uranium enrichment, although that language did not appear in the agreement. This sets the stage for Iran to back out of the deal in the future, claiming that the West reneged on its commitments.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu denounced the deal as a “historic mistake” and warned that Israel “has the right and duty to defend itself by itself.” This is a signal that Israel could take preventive action to protect itself against Iran’s nuclear threat in the future.

Britain’s Sunday Times reported that Israeli and Saudi officials secretly have met to discuss cooperation against Iran, with Saudi Arabia agreeing to allow Israeli warplanes to cross Saudi airspace to attack Iran’s nuclear sites.

Recently, one of Netanyahu’s closest associates, former national security adviser Yaakov Amidror, told the Financial Times that Israel had the military capability to set back Iran’s nuclear program “for a very long time” and that there was “no question” that Netanyahu would act unilaterally if necessary.

If such a preventive strike occurs, Iran likely would strike back against both Israel and the U.S. In plain English, this means war.


See: If Israel Attacks  Hmmmm.....I'm more worried how fast the Saudis will use their nukes against the Mullahs once they feel threatened.

Related:  

Turki Al-Faisal: If Iran Acquires Nuclear Weapons, The GCC Should Consider Acquiring A 'Nuclear Deterrent' Of Its Own.

Guess what? Saudi Arabia has ballistic missiles pointed at Iran... and Israel.

Image showing two circular launch pads, #1 pointing in direction of Israel, and #2 pointing in direction of Iran. A vehicle-mounted ballistic launcher drives to the launch pads and directs itself along thick dark line pointing at ten o'clock. At the bottom of the image an underground bunker built into the hillside with two entrances, one 12 metres wide and the other 15 metres wide, can be seen, where missiles and their warheads are stored. Administrative and residential buildings are shown at the centre of the image.Jane's/DigitalGlobe 

Guess what? Saudi Arabia has ballistic missiles pointed at Iran... and Israel.HT: IsraelMatzav.(Telegraph). A satellite image of a newly discovered surface-to-surface missile base in Saudi Arabia published by Jane's shows that 'our friends the Saudis' have missiles pointed at Iran... and at Israel.

Analysts who examined the photos spotted two launch pads with markings pointing north-west towards Tel Aviv and north-east towards Tehran. They are designed for Saudi Arabia's arsenal of lorry-launched DF 3 missiles, which have a range of 1,500-2,500 miles and can carry a two-ton payload.

The base, believed to have been built within the last five years, gives an insight into Saudi strategic thinking at a time of heightened tensions in the Gulf.

While Saudi Arabia does not have formal diplomatic relations with Israel, it has long maintained discreet back channel communications as part of attempts to promote stability in the region.

The two countries also have a mutual enemy in Iran, though, which has long seen Saudi Arabia as a rival power in the Gulf. Experts fear that if Iran obtains a nuclear weapon, Saudi Arabia would seek to follow suit.

Robert Munks, deputy editor of IHS Jane's Intelligence Review, said: "Our assessment suggests that this base is either partly or fully operational, with the launch pads pointing in the directions of Israel and Iran respectively. We cannot be certain that the missiles are pointed specifically at Tel Aviv and Tehran themselves, but if they were to be launched, you would expect them to be targeting major cities.

David Butter, an associate fellow with the Middle East and North Africa program at Chatham House, the London-based foreign affairs think-tank, said there was "little surprise" that the Saudis had the missiles in place.

"It would seem that they are looking towards some sort of deterrent capability, which is an obvious thing for them to be doing, given that Iran too is developing its own ballistic missiles," he said.

He added, though, that the Saudis would know that the site would come to the attention of foreign intelligence agencies, and that the missile pad pointed in the direction of Israel could be partly just "for show".

"It would give the Iranians the impression that they were not being exclusively targeted, and would also allow the Saudis to suggest to the rest of the Arab world that they still consider Israel a threat." The missile base is located at al-Wattah, some 125 miles West of Riyadh. But while the missiles are large enough to hold nuclear weapons (which the Saudis don't have at present), they are Chinese missiles from the 1980's and I suspect that Israel - which declined comment - has the anti-missile capability to deal with them in case they aren't 'just for show.'Read the full story here.

Nukes are useless because nobody dare use them – Ahmadinejad to RT.

Nukes are useless because nobody dare use them – Ahmadinejad to RT.HT: Russia Today.

“This is something that I said many times before. It is not of any use to us to have nukes. Where can we use nuclear weapons? They are useless, nobody can use them. The US has most of the nukes in the world – where can it use them?” he said.

The Iranian President believes society is “well over this one”. “It is so 20th century, even the people of the US are not going to allow the government to make use of them,” the Iranian president suggested, because “It is the most brutal and inhumane weapon that can be used against others.”

Throughout its history Iran “has always been a defender and has always used conventional weapons only,” claimed President Ahmadinejad. 
“Iran has never used chemical weapons. Iran is still defending itself with mostly a political-cultural defense,” Ahmadinejad said.
However, the outgoing president whose term finishes on August 3 warned that “one cannot get away with bombarding” Iranian nuclear facilities. 
“[Nuclear facilities] are securely localized in the heads of our scientists,” he said, referring to American and Israeli threats to carry out unilateral strikes on Iran in recent years.

The west headed by the US has been putting pressure on Iran over the country’s controversial nuclear program. Though Tehran always stressed the program is peaceful, Washington as well as Tel Aviv have suspected Iran of building nuclear weapons, something Tehran has consistently denied.
While the US has frequently stated that “all options are on table” while dealing with Iran, Israel threatened a unilateral strike on the Iranian nuclear facilities.
“Iran’s territory is 1,873 million square kilometers, that’s a vastness, are they going to bomb them all?”
“This is a psychological war and of course we’re ready to defend ourselves,” Ahmadinejad concluded.
However, the Iranian leader remarked that a direct dialogue between Iran and the US would be possible – if Washington agrees to “equal circumstances” dialogue, not a dictate.
“If somebody comes to you and holds a hammer over your head and forces you to have a dialogue – that is not right. A dialogue is about gaining understanding and resolving differences. It should not be used as a method to impose on others,” President Ahmadinejad said.

‘Every country will be affected by economic recession’

The world is facing an economic recession, the current economic crisis is an international one and it affects every country, be it Iran, Russia, the US or the EU, Iranian leader said.
“Iran has been under unilateral, one-sided, unfair sanctions, but despite severe unprecedented sanctions the country develops economically – nothing short of a miracle. All economic indexes are improving, per capita income is going up, the human development index is on the rise,” he said.
In late 2011 - early 2012, the US and EU imposed sanctions on Tehran targeting its banks and oil industry effectively banning the oil trade between Europe and Iran, and putting significant barriers to trade. Iran is still exporting oil, it has also begun to export electricity, steel and cement and the total exports, excluding oil, has grown seven fold, Ahmadinejad revealed.
“In many fields related to technology we are among the top 10 in the world,” Ahmadinejad said adding that in terms of scientific progress the country rose from 32nd to 14th in eight years and scientific growth is 11 times higher than the world average.
Western countries started to ignore Iran after the Islamic Revolution in 1979 and continued to do so over the last 34 years, but they have not succeeded in halting Iran’s economic development, President Ahmadinejad stated.

‘Fighting cyber war has become Iran’s second nature’

During the interview with RT, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has also talked of Tehran having always been aware of the cyber warfare conducted against it.
In March, law and technology experts agreed that the Stuxnet worm used against Iran in 2009-2010 was a cyber-attack. Stuxnet was allegedly used to change the speeds of around 1,000 gas-spinning centrifuges without being detected, thus sabotaging Iran's nuclear research. The US and Israel have been accused of collaborating on the virus in a bid to damage Iran’s nuclear program.
“This is a world of communications. Once you get connected to the internet – there are going to be problems of a kind,” Ahmadinejad said.
“We’re talking to each other right now, right?” he told RT’s Sophie Shevardnadze. “Do you think that we’re being bugged? That this place is bugged? Maybe we’re bugged, it is not difficult to do,” laughed the problem off the president.


“Naturally, there is a software war going on in the virtual world, our agencies are doing this – if it is necessary,” Ahmadinejad said.
Iranian electronic communication networks, banking systems, nuclear research network, electricity networks have all been attacked, but Iranian specialists “diffused the threats and counter-attacked,” Iranian President said. “This is a routine for us. These are the harms and disadvantages of communication technology.”

‘No ruler should feel safe’

As for a possibility of an uprising similar to the Arab Spring, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that such revolutions were managed from the outside.
“No ruler should feel safe, nowhere in the world, not only Iran,” he concluded adding that saying there is no ideal place despite humanity’s constant strife for perfection.
The planet with about seven billion population is being ruled by maybe 1,000 people, while the governments just come and go, the Iranian President declared, so legislation is imperfect everywhere in the world and the rulers should think about ordinary people – or be overthrown.
“In the next five-six year the countries run in a limited way by narrow-minded rulers will witness revolutions – including the US,” Mahmoud Ahmadinejad predicted.
In this regard the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt is a historical movement, a popular way of thinking that is going to stay in power unless something else of a comparable size and power emerges, Iranian President pointed out. “It cannot be eliminated completely.”
The same applies to the situation in Syria, where people should have a right “to choose elected rulers themselves,” Ahmadinejad said. Those who want to come to power militarily should be ready that the same rules of war would be applied to them.

“The westerners do not want the Syrian issue to come to an end,” he said, and the west would like to redraw the Middle East map through developing the Syrian crisis – even if it would last for 20 years, believes the Iranian President.

Russia Does Not Rule Out Preemptive Missile Defense Strike in Europe.

Russia Does Not Rule Out Preemptive Missile Defense Strike in Europe.(RN).Russia does not exclude preemptive use of weapons against [NATO] missile defense systems in Europe but only as a last resort, the Russian General Staff said on Thursday at a missile defense conference in Moscow. “The placement of new strike weapons in the south and northwest of Russia against [NATO] missile defense components, including the deployment of Iskander missile systems in Kaliningrad region is one possible way of incapacitating the European missile defense infrastructure,” Chief of the General Staff Nikolai Makarov said. Taking into account the “destabilizing nature of the missile defense system... the decision on the pre-emptive use of available weapons will be made during an aggravation of the situation,” he said. The projected European missile defense system could by 2020 have the ability to intercept Russian intercontinental ballistic missiles, Secretary of Russia’s Security Council Nikolai Patrushev said on Thursday. The United States and NATO agreed to develop the system at a summit in Lisbon in 2010, but talks between Russia and the alliance have floundered over NATO’s refusal to grant Russia legal guarantees that the system would not be aimed against Russia’s strategic nuclear deterrent. “By 2018-2020 - that is the third and fourth phases of the deployment of the Euro-missile defense in Europe – the continent should have enough anti-missile defense to be able to intercept part of Russia’s intercontinental ballistic missiles, and submarine launched ballistic missiles,” Patrushev said at an international conference on Euro-missile defense in Moscow. “The geographical regions and technical characteristics of these missile defense systems create the foundations for additional dangers, especially considering the current and future levels of high-precision armament of the United States,” he said. “Our experts say other targets, which could require serious missile defense against it, do not really exist,” he said. Patrushev said the creation of the Euro-missile defense, which is taking place without Russia’s agreement and will lead to a degradation of Russia’s nuclear deterrent, could lead to a disbalance in strategic stability at the regional and global levels. “The refusal to discuss the conditions for providing legal binding guarantees for the deployment system to be not aimed at Russia strengthens our convictions that the real goal of this missile defense system could differ from what is stated,” he said. Russia’s military and political leadership has already warned its western partners several times that if talks fail, Russia may take a series of measures including deployment of Iskander short-range nuclear-capable tactical ballistic missiles in the Kaliningrad exclave. NATO denies its missile defense proposals are aimed at Russia. "In fact, we have no desire at all to disturb global strategic stability," NATO's Deputy General Secretary Alexander Vershbow told the conference. "Quite the contrary: NATO missile defense will be capable of intercepting only a small number of relatively unsophisticated ballistic missiles. It does not have the capability to neutralize Russian deterrence."Read the full story here.

Russia to Draft New Defense Industry Concept by Year end

Russia to Draft New Defense Industry Concept by Year end.(RN).Russia will draft a new concept for the development of its defense industry that reflects existing and potential threats to its national security by the end of 2012, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said on Tuesday. His satement was earlier misinterpreted by reporters as an announcement of plans to draft a new military doctrine. “It will be a document on strategic planning for 30-40 years ahead,” Rogozin clarified in his Twitter blog. The new concept will take into account “the analysis of potential threats, internal and external, and the preparation of a military-technical response to localize and neutralize these threats.” “Work on the new concept will start in mid-May,” Rogozin said. The announcement comes at a time when Moscow is searching for ways to counter the so-called European missile shield, NATO’s expansion toward Russia’s borders, terrorism and drug-trafficking. It has been only two years since Russian President Dmitry Medvedev approved the country's new military doctrine, which allows preventive nuclear strikes against potential aggressors and the use of military force to protect the lives and interests of Russian citizens abroad. The Russian military has insisted on the strengthening of Russia’s nuclear deterrent as the cornerstone of strategic stability, while maintaining highly-efficient, mobile conventional forces. The Russian government has allocated 22 trillion rubles ($730 billion) on the state arms procurement program until 2020.Read the full story here.More here.

US President’s Plan Weakens at Least One Leg of Nuclear Triad

Russian US President’s Plan Weakens at Least One Leg of Nuclear Triad.(Heritage).By Brian Slattery.According to the U.S. Navy, America’s nuclear deterrent triad will be limping on one of its legs for over a decade because of the President’s fiscal year 2013 budget request.
The Navy will fall below its 12-boat nuclear-armed submarine requirement for 14 years because the Obama Administration’s plans to delay a replacement for the aging Ohio-class submarine by two years.
The Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine (known as SSBN) has fulfilled the Navy’s leg of the nuclear triad for the past 30 years. According to the Navy, the SSBN is America’s “only day-to-day assured nuclear response capability.” Furthermore, the SSBN fleet’s combination of mobility and stealth make it a particularly effective platform and an excellent nuclear deterrent. However, the first Ohio will retire in 2027. Delaying its replacement will create an unacceptable gap in the SSBN fleet that will last 14 years starting in the 2030s, according to Navy officials.
The obvious problem with this is that the Navy is not meeting its own fleet requirements. If 12 subs is the requirement, how will the fleet cover the same area with less? Navy officials and outside analysts alike should be seeking answers to this. Furthermore, with fewer vessels performing the same amount of work, what will be the effect on maintenance? Aging and overworked ships inevitably have more mechanical issues and require more repair work.
The Administration claims that the delay is necessary “to reduce risk in an acquisition effort that appeared to be moving too quickly from development into production.” This quote illustrates the fundamental disconnect the Obama Administration has between political goals and actual national security concerns. Defense officials should always strive to reduce risk in new programs. However, the notion that those efforts should come at the cost of increasing risk to national security is counterintuitive to the purpose of a defense force. The government must find a way to protect America’s security and interests, first and foremost. Other decisions should follow that basic requirement, not hinder it.
But the triad has two other legs it can lean on, right?
Wrong. The Air Force is currently flying a geriatric strategic bomber fleet. The U.S. plans to begin replacing other deterrent systems in 2030; by then, intercontinental ballistic missiles will be 60 years old. With the slide in nuclear-armed submarines, will these aging assets take on a bigger deterrent role? What are the implications of putting more miles on planes that are already past their initial service lives? How does the President plan to maintain a ballistic missile arsenal that is older than he is?
President Obama’s defense budget request is rife with similar shortsighted “savings” efforts. Meanwhile, entitlement spending continues to consume ever larger portions of the federal budget unaddressed. Rather than slashing defense to appear fiscally responsible, the President should request funding that adequately addresses threats to national security.Hmmm......Just wait till you give him more "Flexibility".Read the full story here.