Russia: "Our missile sword can break your missile shield!"

[Stokes Pennwalt]

MOSCOW: The official considered to be a leading contender to succeed President Vladimir Putin criticized a landmark Soviet-U.S. arms treaty as being a "relic of the Cold War," and promised that Russia would have a "sword" capable of piercing a U.S. missile shield.

Russia promises 'sword' to thwart U.S. missile shield - International Herald Tribune

There isn't anything to this story beyond some bluster, I just thought it sounded funny when I read it.

[Stokes Pennwalt]

Ratcheting up the rhetoric just days before U.S. talks, President Vladimir Putin warned that the military would aim its missiles at targets in Europe once again if the United States builds a missile defense shield in Eastern Europe.

Putin Warns of Missiles Pointed at EU

Oh Putin, you so crazy!

[erik_kosberg]

Not sure what's so crazy about it, at least as far as the Russians are concerned. But the idea that a missile defense system would actually offer any real protection against a bunch of incoming MIRVs, now that's crazy.

[AuntieEmma[$]]

Didn't Bush do a mind meld with Putin's soul, and emerge to declare that soul to be good?

[brian_igo]

Great. Harry and Lloyd are running the two largest nuclear (nukulur) powers on Earth.

[Stokes Pennwalt]

erik_kosberg said

Not sure what's so crazy about it, at least as far as the Russians are concerned. But the idea that a missile defense system would actually offer any real protection against a bunch of incoming MIRVs, now that's crazy.

That is pretty much it though. Anybody who has actually bothered to spend five minutes reading about GBI knows its mission has nothing to do with Russian weapons that are so numerous they could overwhelm it by three orders of magnitude, even after it is finished. The accusations that it is some kind of threat to Russian security, or even international stability, are absurd. They and everybody else know GBI can do nothing significant to their arsenal.

The really weird thing is that Russia is making vague threats about changing their strike posture, which actually would be significant. It seems like Russia tends to do this every time some FSU tributary buddies up with the US enough to piss them off, but it isn't a proportional response.

[theworm[$]]

of course its absurd to think that this has anything to do with Russion weapons.

The point is that no matter what you or I think, the Russians see this as a threat to their security. Whether or not it really is, is pretty much irrelevant.

We're putting anti-missile systems in to stop Iranian missiles that don't even exist yet, and that's making the Russians uncomfortable. This is politics - not war games. It doesn't matter it the system are no threat to Russia - it matters that the Russian's see this as a hostile move.

It could re-open the cold war. Heaven knows that wars have been started for plenty of other illigitimate reasons - this wouldn't be the first or last.

[erik_kosberg]

Even if the Russian leadership doesn't see it as a real threat, they know that Ivan Sixpack does. There's no way that your average Russian citizen is going to give Bush the benefit of the doubt. Why did Bush pick this fight? Of course Putin will pander to his base.

[Stokes Pennwalt]

theworm said

The point is that no matter what you or I think, the Russians see this as a threat to their security. Whether or not it really is, is pretty much irrelevant.

How Russia claims to "see" this is not relevant at all, because their statements can be proven false by inspection. I didn't say I thought they weren't threatened. I said they are not threatened. That isn't an opinion, it is an objective statement of fact. They could claim that Sheryl Crow's vegan farts were a threat to their security and it would make no less sense than what they're saying now.

Putin is threatening Europe over something that literally does not threaten Russia in any conceivable way. The aggressive stance in this situation is absolutely not on the part of the US. My own suspicion is that Putin has just decided to use GBI as a red herring because he knows it will get him some traction with the international media (who are also generally clueless of its mission) and he is trying to regain some of the clout Russia enjoyed in his previous career. Plus hey, everyone's always down for a little America bashing anyway. In any case, Russia threatening to change the strike posture of their nuclear forces is, in itself, an action that goes far beyond simple domestic pandering or rhetoric. They haven't done anything like that since before they realized communism sucks. Re-open the Cold War indeed.

I would also add that the Russians are basically whining about a situation they created the day they started selling ballistic missile and nuclear technology to Iran. The fact that some American microwaves may end up radiating past their border is a direct result of those actions.

theworm said

We're putting anti-missile systems in to stop Iranian missiles that don't even exist yet, and that's making the Russians uncomfortable. This is politics - not war games. It doesn't matter it the system are no threat to Russia - it matters that the Russian's see this as a hostile move.

The Iranian missile capability is not phantom, and is growing rapidly (last one is a PDF). It is entirely reasonable to be prepared.

[erik_kosberg]

Putin has a counter-proposal.

[Stokes Pennwalt]

That is reasonable from a technical standpoint. These radar stations are designed to track an ICBM launched from Iran at the US. The shortest route is over the pole, which would take them directly over Azerbaijan, then Russia, and so forth. All we want is a solid radar fix on the missile for as much of its flight as possible so as to give the interceptors in Alaska the telemetry they need for a good kill probability. A radar of this sort based far south in Azerbaijan should be able to track an Iranian ICBM from the moment it clears ~120k feet (very low for this mission) until it is disappearing over the pole and ready to be picked up by the SBX in Alaska and DEW line in northern Canada.

Since Russia doesn't really have the sort of high resolution whiz-bang radar needed for tracking/engaging ballistic missiles I would assume that they would provide a base with physical security that American equipment could be installed in.

[erik_kosberg]

"Russia's President Vladimir Putin said Friday that U.S. missile defense interceptors could be located in Turkey, or even Iraq or on sea platforms..."

Iraq? Who knew that Putin had such a twisted sense of black humor?

[erik_kosberg]

Just a few minutes ago, both of these stories were on the news.google.com page simultaneously:

Bush: Need for missile-defense system in Europe is urgent

Pentagon chief says US might delay activating missile defense in Europe

Um, whatever.

[Stokes Pennwalt]

Well, the Czech Republic is where we wanted to build the early warning radar at first, but nothing is going to happen until they decide to let us in. There's been talk of basing another dozen interceptors in Poland as well, but that is also in the diplomatic phase so a probable outcome is unclear for now.

The US has been trying to get Russia onboard the idea of a multinational cooperative ABM network following the NORAD model since the most recent test went so well in September. Which way Russia wants to go will probably hold sway over where we end up putting stuff, for various reasons (some good some bad).

Mr. Gates's job is the actual deployment and operation of the system, where Bush is trying to sell it. They're speaking from two different perspectives. The soonest anybody expects to see assets placed in Europe is 2012 or so, after the stuff we have on the west coast is fully operational and tested to the point where other nations have confidence in the technology. There isn't a huge reason to rush in any case.