Russia in the 21st Century [Superthread]

[MarkOttawa]

Start of lengthy piece (note US worked on these in 1950s-60s):

U.S. Has Been Secretly Watching Russia's Nuclear-Powered Cruise Missiles Crash and Burn
Successful or not, if Russia is test flying these weapons, this means it has been repeatedly crashing nuclear reactors into the ground or the ocean.

Following Russian claims that it is developing a new nuclear-powered cruise missile, there are reports that the U.S. government has been actively spying on this work and that some or all of the test flights have failed. This, in turn, raises questions about the safety and viability of such a weapon, as well as why American officials would keep this knowledge a secret. 

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin publicly announced the as yet unnamed missile in an annual speech on March 1, 2018. The Kremlin says it successfully tested one of the weapons near the end of 2017 and released video footage claiming to show the launch and it in flight. So far, Russian authorities have not released any other significant details about the weapon’s configuration or capabilities, though Putin implied that the final design would be broadly similar in size and shape to the existing, conventionally-powered Kh-101 cruise missile.

At the most basic conceptual level, the weapon could conceivably reach supersonic speeds, fly at very low altitudes, and have effectively unlimited range thanks to its nuclear powerplant, allowing it to hit targets anywhere in the world with little warning and dodge anti-missile defenses.

But shortly after Putin’s address, CNN, in a story citing an anonymous U.S. government official, cast doubt on the possibility that this weapon was anywhere near operational. That individual added that the “United States had observed a small number of Russian tests of its nuclear-powered cruise missile and seen them all crash.” Fox News said its own sources indicated the same thing, that the weapon was in the research and development phase and that at least one had crashed during testing in the arctic...
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/18948/u-s-has-been-secretly-watching-russias-nuclear-powered-cruise-missiles-crash-and-burn

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

Russian and US nuke developments and plans, esp. low-yield--start of lengthy AvWeek piece:

Cold War Frost Grips Nuclear Arms Debate

The end of the Cold War led to an extraordinary reduction in city-destroying nuclear weaponry, with both Russia and the U.S. reducing their respective stockpiles by more than 80% compared to the highs of the mid-1960s and ’80s. As of Feb. 5, the two sides are at their lowest levels since the outbreak of the Soviet-U.S. nuclear arms race over six decades ago, each now possessing 1,550 accountable “strategic” warheads.

But despite hopes for continued arms reductions, the world now finds itself on the brink of another nuclear arms race, although Moscow and Washington won’t admit it. Even though neither side intends to break faith with the 2010 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New Start) by increasing their respective number of deployed high-yield nukes, Russia and the U.S. are now engaged in a tactical nuclear weapons buildup.

As a renewed Cold War chill sets in, Trump administration defense officials publicly acknowledge that Russia is decades ahead on nuclear weapons modernization, but also commands a leading position when it comes to tactical nukes. According to the administration’s 2018 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR), Russia has a modern, active stockpile of “up to 2,000 nonstrategic nuclear weapons,” whereas the U.S. commands at most several hundred B61 free-fall bombs carried by “dual-capable” fighters and bombers. The U.S. outguns Russia in terms of conventional, nonnuclear forces, but this position is offset by a “tactical nuclear weapons gap,” U.S. officials say.

The Defense Department and NNSA are getting to work on a low-yield warhead option for Trident

Pentagon to begin analysis of alternatives for nuclear sea-launched cruise missile

Russia’s low-yield nuclear force, capable of raining down upon U.S. and NATO targets across Europe at a moment’s notice, includes close-, medium- and long-range ballistic, cruise and anti-aircraft missiles, gravity bombs, depth charges and torpedoes. In response, the Pentagon has proposed rapidly developing and fielding a low-yield warhead for the Trident II (D5) submarine-launched ballistic missile, as well as a longer-term project for a sea-launched cruise missile, plugging a hole in deterrence left by the retirement of the nuclear Tomahawk in 2012-13. These new initiatives add to an expansive list of strategic nuclear weapon programs that will replace Washington’s critically outdated nuclear triad of bombers, missiles and submarines.

But despite this heavy investment by the U.S., Russia has a few new tricks up its sleeve. In an address to the Russian Federal Assembly on March 1, President Vladimir Putin unveiled several newly developed tactical and strategic nuclear weapons designed to outsmart even the most capable U.S. missile defenses. This list includes Russia’s latest 440,000-lb. (220-ton) RS-28 Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile, dubbed “Satan II” by NATO. It has “practically no range restrictions,” with the ability to strike the North and South poles, Putin says, and it will eventually be armed with hypersonic maneuvering reentry vehicles capable of propelling nuclear warheads at speeds “in excess of Mach 20.”

From his lectern, Putin unveiled a new type of missile, torpedo and unmanned submersible, each powered by small-scale nuclear reactors and able to deliver devastating payloads at intercontinental ranges while navigating around U.S. air and sea defenses. He says Russia has also become the first nation to field an air-launched hypersonic strike weapon, which entered service in December 2017 on aircraft assigned to the nation’s southern military district. That district borders Turkey, Georgia, Ukraine and incorporates Crimea.

Putin says these weapons are “invincible,” designed to overcome current and future Western missile defense systems, including the Aegis Ashore sites now installed in Romania and Poland. They will be used as leverage for arms control negotiations, with the Russian president calling on the U.S. to halt and even roll back its missile defense shields and return to compliance with the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which the George W. Bush administration unilaterally withdrew from in 2002.

“No one has managed to restrain Russia,” Putin says. “Everything I have said today is not a bluff, believe me.”

One man who knows for sure Putin is not bluffing is Air Force Gen. John Hyten, head of U.S. Strategic Command (Stratcom). He has been warning about Russia’s rapidly advancing nuclear arsenal since assuming the position of Stratcom commander in November 2016. While Putin’s claim of owning “invincible” nuclear weapons is an exaggeration, the threat these weapons pose to the U.S. and its NATO allies is real.

“The return of great power competition is not necessarily a return to the Cold War, but the emergence of a new, complex and threatening security environment,” Hyten said during a presentation at the National Defense University on Feb. 16. “Rather than reducing the salience of nuclear weapons, Russian leadership has made explicit nuclear threats and brandished their nuclear weapons in ways we have not seen in a generation.”..
http://aviationweek.com/aviation-week-space-technology/cold-war-frost-grips-nuclear-arms-debate

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

Cyber Bear getting awfully bold:

Russian Hackers Attacking U.S. Power Grid and Aviation, FBI Warns


    U.S. officials warn of attacks, including on nuclear plants
    Cyber-attacks underway since at least March 2016, U.S. says

Russian hackers are conducting a broad assault on the U.S. electric grid, water processing plants, air transportation facilities and other targets in rolling attacks on some of the country’s most sensitive infrastructure, U.S. government officials said Thursday.

The announcement was the first official confirmation that Russian hackers have taken aim at facilities on which hundreds of millions of Americans depend for basic services. Bloomberg News reported in July that Russian hackers had breached more than a dozen power plants in seven states, an aggressive campaign that has since expanded to dozens of states, according to a person familiar with the investigation.

"Since at least March 2016, Russian government cyber actors" have targeted "government entities and multiple U.S. critical infrastructure sectors," including those of energy, nuclear, water and aviation, according to an alert issued Thursday by the Department of Homeland Security and Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Critical manufacturing sectors and commercial facilities also have been targeted by the ongoing "multi-stage intrusion campaign by Russian government cyber actors."

Cyber-attacks are "literally happening hundreds of thousands of times a day," Energy Secretary Rick Perry told lawmakers during a hearing Thursday. "The warfare that goes on in the cyberspace is real, it’s serious, and we must lead the world."

Separately Thursday, the U.S. sanctioned a St. Petersburg-based “troll farm,” two Russian intelligence services, a close ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin and other Russian citizens and businesses indicted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller on charges of meddling with the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

A joint analysis by the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security described hackers as extremely sophisticated, in some cases first breaching suppliers and third-party vendors before hopping from those networks to their ultimate target. The government’s report did not say how successful the attacks were...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-15/russian-hackers-attacking-u-s-power-grid-aviation-fbi-warns

Mark
Ottawa

 

[pbi]

As Boney M once sang: Ahhh, those Russians.

Always bad, always there. Is anybody really surprised that they behave they way they do? More or less the way they always have? 

As the great George Kennan, father of Containment, said: "Russia can have at its borders only enemies or vassals".

 

[jollyjacktar]

Bruce MacKinnon cartoon on Russia and. PM Teresa May.


http://thechronicleherald.ca/editorial-cartoon/2018-03-14-editorial-cartoon

 

[a_majoor]

Long article from Radio Free Europe about Russian mercenaries in Syria. It seems they had a much better relation with Syria or at least their Russian masters, but now have had heavy equipment withdrawn. It is also interesting that they see their deployments in Syria, Ukraine and other places as part of an ongoing war between the Russian Federation and the United States:

https://www.rferl.org/a/russian-mercenaries-vagner-commanders-syria/29100402.html

Russian Mercenaries: Vagner Commanders Describe Life Inside The 'Meat Grinder'
March 14, 2018 21:06 GMT
Sergei Khazov-Cassia Robert Coalson
Smoke rises following an air strike on a rebel-held area in Syria. According to one commander, a Russian officer "coordinates the air cover" with mercenary troops on the ground. "Sometimes it is a thing of beauty to see how perfectly the aviation and artillery support works out," he says. (illustrative photo)
Smoke rises following an air strike on a rebel-held area in Syria. According to one commander, a Russian officer "coordinates the air cover" with mercenary troops on the ground. "Sometimes it is a thing of beauty to see how perfectly the aviation and artillery support works out," he says. (illustrative photo)
Share
449
Print
The Russian mercenaries fighting in Syria say they are not in the country for the money or to help Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

"[Syrians] can't stand Assad," one Russian mercenary commander told RFE/RL. "Really. Only a tiny percentage of the population there supports him and the rest oppose him. Only [Russian President Vladimir] Putin supports him. Russia supports him -- no one else."

There is a bigger motivation, the mercenary claimed. "If you are fighting under a Russian flag, with a Russian weapon, even if you are eating moldy food and are 10,000 kilometers from home, you are nonetheless fighting for Russia," he said.

"There is no Syrian war," he added. "There is no Ukrainian war. There is only a war between the Russian Federation and the United States."

Article will be posted in the Long article thread

 

[Journeyman]

Bosnia-Herzegovina 2.0, anyone?

The Foreign Policy Research Institute has just published a report, Bosnia on the Chopping Block: The Potential for Violence and Steps to Prevent It, stating that Russia is actively supporting political and paramilitary actors within the Republika Srpska (RS), seeking to divide Bosnia and Herzegovina.

With Russian support, RS police and security forces are receiving army-style training and equipment; this is in direct violation of the Dayton Peace Accords. Russian organizations (such as the Night Wolves biker group, which played an active role in Crimea’s annexation), are helping to form Serb nationalist paramilitary forces.

In 2016, a Kremlin-backed coup attempt in Montenegro failed (bordering B-H); this was followed by Montenegro becoming part of NATO in April 2017.  Observers claim that Russia is now working to guarantee that the Montenegro scenario isn't repeated in Bosnia by apparently seeking to destabilize this NATO flank, providing support for secessionist  RS President Dodik, and hoping to splinter B-H. In addition to the military support, Russia is providing financial and political backing.


Complete FPRI report here

 

[jollyjacktar]

It would seem that Vald saw his shadow today and now Russians will have to go through 6 more years of Putin.

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/world/russia-presidential-election-1.4581534

 

[OldSolduer]

In Russia people do not elect President - he elects himself.

 

[tomahawk6]

Here is an image of the so called hypersonic rocket carried by a MIG 31 of which only 6 have been modified to carry the weapon.

https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2018/03/russias-kinzhal-mach-10-hypersonic-weapon-is-a-single-stage-pegasus-rocket.html

 

[MarkOttawa]

The rather different Russian perspective on nukes and, especially, missile defence--excerpts (further links at original):

Red Glare: The Origin and Implications of Russia’s ‘New’ Nuclear Weapons

“Crazy.” “Dr. Strangelove weapons.” These were just two of the more colorful reactions to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s revelation of new exotic nuclear delivery systems in a March 1 speech. The system receiving the most attention is a nuclear-powered and nuclear-armed cruise missile with intercontinental range, though the Status-6, a nuclear-powered and nuclear-armed long-range underwater vehicle, has also drawn comment. Why would Russia, which has over 1,500 deployed strategic nuclear warheads that can already be delivered from existing ballistic and cruise missiles, invest in these new, exotic — and, according to some, crazy — systems?

The answer is deeply rooted in two of the defining events of modern Russian and Soviet history: the Great Patriotic War (or World War II) and the Cold War. Far from being crazy, these “new” Russian nuclear weapons have their origin in an abiding fear and respect for U.S. nuclear and missile defense capabilities...

The Soviets took missile defense so seriously that they did not want to lose a competition in the field. Better that neither side have missile defenses than the United States be superior in offense and defense. Thus, despite intense interest in missile defense for both strategic and bureaucratic reasons, Soviet leaders were eager for an arms control agreement to end the competition. A Special National Intelligence Estimate in 1970 assessed that the Soviets would be interested in arms control limits on missile defense based in large part “on a fear that U.S. technology could put it ahead in this field.” Such limits were codified in 1972 as the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.

Freezing missile defense also allowed the Soviets to agree to limits on the number of strategic nuclear weapons...

In summary, nearly 35 years ago the Soviet leadership, fearful of renewed missile defense competition and U.S. nuclear modernization, began to mull exactly the sort of systems Putin revealed this month. They did so not because they were crazy, but because they were deeply fearful that the United States would resume missile defense competition in parallel with a competition over the quality of strategic nuclear forces. The Soviets doubted they could keep up in either competition — much less both — so asymmetric responses were their only hope...

...it is important that U.S. policymakers understand the Russian perspective. Russian proclamations about missile defense are not mere propaganda, though they may overstate some of their views publicly to influence various audiences. So what does this mean for the nuclear relationship? First, U.S. leaders should recognize that no amount of explaining of the technical limitations of present or even potential U.S. missile defense capability is likely to change long and deeply held Russian views about missile defense competition.

Second, and more importantly, there is probably no future for formal, treaty-based U.S.-Russian arms control if the negotiations do not cover missile defense. The Russians sought unsuccessfully to include missile defense in the last round of strategic arms control negotiations (2009-2010). Today, with their “new” systems, they have a stronger bargaining position. This presents a dilemma for American policymakers, who clearly want to continue the ongoing U.S. deployment of limited missile defense capabilities against North Korea and Iran, even if they do not seek to neutralize Russia’s strategic deterrent, as the Kremlin fears. The instinct may be to simply proceed with missile defense despite the consequences for arms control...

Austin Long is a senior political scientist at the nonprofit, nonpartisan RAND Corporation and the author of multiple studies on nuclear strategy.
https://warontherocks.com/2018/03/red-glare-the-origin-and-implications-of-russias-new-nuclear-weapons/

Mark
Ottawa

 

[tomahawk6]

The Russians targeted a British sub prior to the missile strikes on Syria.It wasnt part of the Syria operation.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5617799/Royal-Navy-submarine-hunted-Russia-cat-mouse-pursuit.html

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Honestly, that has been going on for...decades...between both sides.

"The Russian Kilo-Class submarines tracked the British crew..."

Author doesn't seem to know what he is suggesting there...

Nick Childs of the International Institute for Strategic Studies said submarine commanders were trained not to fire too many missiles at once as they would give away their position

:  or  :facepalm:, or both.

They could at least use a picture of a Kilo-class.  But they are small and don't look as 'scary' I guess?

 

[TQMS]

A couple of Russian points out of the PAO today at work.

Russian forces lined up along NATO's border for 'assault' operations
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/russian-forces-lined-up-along-12379551
(Mirror (UK), 17 April 18) Kremlin troops are poised for an attack, ambassadors from three Baltic states told MPs

US and Russian nuclear arsenals set to be unchecked for first time since 1972
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/17/us-russian-nuclear-arsenals-treaty-expire-unconstrained
(The Guardian, 17 April 18) Arms control experts have signed a statement warning international constraints will expire in 2021 unless a new nuclear deal is reached

 

[a_majoor]

I have thought of this as well, but Russian bellicosity towards the West is much more rewarding (in that the West has  not displayed much resolution in the past several decades). The other sticking point to this theory is the Russians haven't attempted to follow up in any of the ways "Hybrid Warfare" doctrine would suggest, not to mention the correlation of forces is distinctly unfavourable to Russia in Siberia (political, economic, demographic as well as military). Regardless, Russia does feel pressed from the Islamic South and the Chinese East, how they deal with this should be interesting in the coming years:

https://pjmedia.com/trending/direction-russias-new-nukes-pointed-anyway/

Which Direction Are Russia's New Nukes Pointed, Anyway?
BY STEPHEN GREEN APRIL 25, 2018

You might remember Vladimir Putin's speech last month, in which he revealed five "new" nuclear weapons systems. They weren't really new, because as Norman Friedman notes in a new article, "the Sarmat ballistic missile, the Avangard hypersonic maneuvering reentry vehicle, the Kinzhal air-launched hypersonic cruise missile, the Status-6 nuclear-powered autonomous underwater vehicle, and a nuclear-powered cruise missile," are all derived from previous Cold War-era systems. But it was a helluva speech, filled with sound and fury... but aimed at whom, exactly?

That's where Friedman's new piece for the U.S. Naval Institute gets really interesting, because he posits that Putin's bluster was not, despite all appearances, aimed at the West. Friedman believes that Putin's real audience sits at the headquarters of the Communist Party of China in Beijing. Friedman reminds us that "Chinese maps still show one of the results of the 'unequal treaties' between the Qing Dynasty and foreign powers — Russia’s possession of large swaths of Chinese Siberia, where many ethnic Chinese live today." And then there's the "intense nationalism" which the CPC has nurtured, especially in the last two decades as the country has grown rich.

The view from the Kremlin not only includes Chinese revanchism, but also that "the Russian Army is thinly manned while the Chinese have a seemingly bottomless pool of manpower coupled with increasingly sophisticated weaponry."

From there, things look even more desperate from the Russian point of view. Anyone who paid attention to late Cold War history must remember how deeply rattled the Kremlin was by Ronald Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative. Desperately poor in so many ways, the Soviets simply could not afford to keep up with America's financial and technological might. They had no greater fear than the U.S. developing a missile shield strong enough for us to hide behind while launching a first strike against them.

The rest of the article is at the link.

 

[Good2Golf]

A couple of Russian points out of the PAO today at work.

Russian forces lined up along NATO's border for 'assault' operations
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/russian-forces-lined-up-along-12379551
(Mirror (UK), 17 April 18) Kremlin troops are poised for an attack, ambassadors from three Baltic states told MPs

If folks want to take the time to read up on the background and record of discussions in the day (1989-1991) regarding German re-unification and the West's assurances to Gorbachev and Yeltsin, here "NATO Expansion: What Gorbachev Heard " (ref: https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early ), they'd be rewarded with what objective people might call a basis for appreciating "Why the Russians might very well be acting the way they are..."

NATO did exactly the counter of what key leaders messaged to Soviet leadership they would not do -- they expanded right up to the Russian border.

Add to that ISIS and the Dragon on the other two non-frozen "fronts" and can intellectually honest people actually be surprised at how the Soviet company-man is behaving?

:2c:

Regards
G2G

 

[Kirkhill]

The role of nuclear weapons in Russian security policy is traditionally defined
in the Military Doctrine, in nuclear deterrence policy documents, and in key
speeches and declarations by the political leadership. At the doctrinal level there
has been no public change in the Russian nuclear position. The revised Military
Doctrine 2014 has the same wording as was previously used to explain Russia’s
policy with respect to the use of nuclear weapons. Paragraph 27 states: “The
Russian Federation reserves the right to utilize nuclear weapons in response to
the utilization of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against
it and (or) its allies, and also in the event of aggression against the Russian
Federation involving the use of conventional weapons when the very existence
of the state is under threat. The decision to utilize nuclear weapons is made by
the president of the Russian Federation.” However, the state in today’s Russia
is closely associated with the political system built around President Vladimir
Putin. This raises the question of whether the current political leadership makes
a distinction between regime survival and the state.

According to the new National Security Strategy “strategic deterrence and the
prevention of military conflicts are achieved by upholding nuclear deterrence
at a sufficiently high level” (Strategiia natsionalnoi 2015: §36). This is slightly
sharper than in the previous Security Strategy where the “importance of keeping
the potential of the strategic nuclear forces” was underlined.

In addition to the latest public declarations and the increase in nuclear exercises
over the last three years (both in size and duration), a debate is going on in military
newspapers and journals regarding the use of nuclear weapons to de-escalate a
conflict. Nuclear de-escalation means the use of non-strategic nuclear weapons
when a local war is escalating into a regional war. The use of nuclear weapons
should, according to this line of thought, frighten the adversary and lead to a
de-escalation of the conflict.

Reiterating a passage previously posted from a Swedish report (section 4.4.3)  https://www.foi.se/en/pressroom/news/news-archive/2016-12-08-russian-military-capability-is-strengthened-and-increasing.html

I think it is fair to say that Europe is sufficiently frightened.  Russia's Eastern Flank (and Alaskan Flank) may be different matters.

Lots of sound and fury in the Vladivostok area.  How many reserves does that leave to reinforce Kaliningrad?  Or even Rostov?

 

[MarkOttawa]

Bit off topic but a bit of a cartographic Cold War blast from the GRU's past--put your Cyrillic and cartographic hats on (plus any personal experience); did fairly well myself:

Quiz: can you guess the world city from its cold war Soviet spy map?
From 1950 to 1990, the Soviet army created incredibly detailed maps of much of the world
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/ng-interactive/2018/apr/27/quiz-map-world-city-soviet-cold-war-spy

This one took a truly educated guess :

Hint: "Tunes of Glory".

Mark
Ottawa

 

[jollyjacktar]

9/11 correct.  Lucky.

 

[MarkOttawa]

11/11--some luck esp. Edinburgh, Liverpool--had to do one outside check on San Fran vs San Diego.  Maritime/river/port aspects very useful.

Mark
Ottawa