Der Spiegel reported the reluctance of the US European partners in NATO to serve as "cannon fodder" in the event of a nuclear confrontation with Russi

[DARPA]

The authoritative German publication Der Spiegel reported the reluctance of the US European partners in NATO to serve as "cannon fodder" in the event of a nuclear confrontation with Russia. According to these data, Paris and Berlin actively oppose Washington's plans to deploy in Europe, cruise missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads. Reasons brewing rebellion at the surface in the event of a scenario written in the United States, the Europeans will be in the sights of Russian strategic forces.

As the newspaper writes, the Germans did not agree with the reasoning part of the decision in Washington. According to US officials, Russia allegedly broke the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. Thus, the placement of new nuclear weapons in Europe is presented as a necessary retaliation. However, sources told Der Spiegel that Europe does not believe that any violations on the part of Moscow's proven.

As the newspaper writes, the Germans were not enthusiastic about the US intention to place in the Eastern Europe and warehouses with military equipment. According to the authorities of Germany, no major changes in the level of threat from Russia (insist on what the Americans) did not happen.

However, the European elites have yet to sustain a serious test of strength. One thing sobering publication in Der Spiegel, and quite another - which began on Sunday the visit of the US Department of Defense Ashton Carter, who plans to meet with his German counterpart, Ursula von der Lyayen June 22. There is no doubt that the Pentagon will push for the Europeans adopted a decision on cruise missiles.

Leading expert of the Center for Military-Political Studies, Moscow State Institute Mikhail Alexandrov believes that the question of the deployment of US missiles in Europe is too much uncertainty.

- The media passed a message that the US is supposedly going to deploy medium-range missiles in the UK. Moreover, it is unclear about any missiles speech. Given the fact that the United States except for "Tomahawks" Now there is nothing, "Tomahawk", probably had in mind. As for the English, they will without question be allowed to put US missiles.

Another question: if the US decided to withdraw from the INF Treaty, they must officially inform us about it. However, Moscow is no data on this subject has not received. Perhaps the United States will take such a step if Russia withdraws from the INF Treaty.

"SP": - According to Der Spiegel, in Berlin do not see a compelling reason to accuse Moscow of violating the treaty.

- The head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Sergei Lavrov confirmed that we consider the INF Treaty to be useful for Russia. According to him, Moscow is not going to come out of it. While I believe that Russia had long been denouncing this document.

"SP": - That is - to give the Americans a legitimate reason to place its missiles in Europe?

- Placing "Tomahawks" in Eastern Europe does not make sense. Because these missiles could have and sea-based. Let's go down to the territorial waters of the Polish American cruiser and will let out "Tomahawks" in the direction of Russia. Another thing is that these cruise missiles today are not very effective because of their low speed. This subsonic cruise missile would be an easy target for modern air defense system of our country.

"SP": - But the Pentagon could go back to the development of ballistic missiles "Pershing". Or even set up production fundamentally improved supersonic missiles. In this case podlёtnoe time before the goals in our territory drastically reduced.

- It practically does not change anything. For example, the missile "Trident", placed on submarines will reach the Central Russia in 17 minutes. Even if her release from the Atlantic. Moreover, it can strike at any point in our country. At the time, as "Pershing" to "get" only to the Urals. Americans ground missiles in recent years did not develop. The maximum that they can quickly implement - to restore production, "Pershing-2". In any case, it is an old rocket, which is easy to knock down using, for example, the C-400.

Compared to us Americans do not win if Russia will withdraw from the INF Treaty. Because we will be able to deploy lighter missiles, which are not specified in the START-3 Treaty. In this case Russia will be able to clear the entire military infrastructure in Europe in the first hours of the war. Then NATO will lose the opportunity to conduct any offensive against us.

"SP": - The head of the Pentagon flew to Berlin to force the Germans, in which case, accept the nuclear strike?

- The Americans claim that Russia allegedly has violated the INF Treaty. Say, we tested some cruise missile. Or speculate on the topic of our "Iskander" can hit targets at ranges of over 500 kilometers. Clearly,
Germans do not lend themselves to innuendo. Because they do not want to be substituted under our missiles.

If you start a nuclear war in the European theater, it does not necessarily lead to an exchange of blows between Russia and the United States. Yes, and we do not take the risk to beat - even if the Americans hit us from Europe, the retaliation will be sent to the United States.

If Russia is a blow to Europe, Washington will have to decide whether to answer or not.

The question is whether the Americans because of Poland and the Baltic states to take nuclear exchange? We have more opportunities to use nuclear weapons in Europe than Americans.

In Europe, only two countries, which have their own nuclear weapons - the United Kingdom and France. Let's move on to Russia, the troops would have to withdraw from the territory of France. Here we will lay them somewhere in the middle of Europe. The Germans understand that the theater of war could be Germany, Poland, the Baltic States. And Russia will not beat the Americans. As a result, Europe will become a nuclear desert, Russia and the United States will remain unaffected. The maximum that we get - is the fallout. And Russia would strike at the places of deployment of nuclear weapons in Europe.

"SP": - the Russian missile defense system capable of reflecting missile launches made in the immediate vicinity of our borders?

- For C-400 intercept "Pershing" is not a problem. The S-400 can also affect higher-speed rockets mentioned "Trident". Missile defense - a fully automated system. It monitors in real triggers that can pose a threat.

I started this story, the Americans, above all, putting pressure on us. We are now doing a ballistic missile with a flight range of 5,500 km. Formally, it is not covered by the contract. But we are accused that we have done a lightweight version of ICBMs "Frontier", which can be effectively used in the European theater of operations. US wants to give up these developments. At the same time they turn Europe into a hostage of its great geopolitical game against Russia.

The Europeans are not independent in making decisions, said the president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, Konstantin Sivkov.

- We see that, in fact, are American puppets. Although the resistance on this issue will be very strong. And in the future, if the US put their rockets, the current regime in Germany, France and other EU countries may fall. And in their place will come more nationally oriented forces.

Because any sane European does not want Europe to become the theater of combat operations during a nuclear war.

The US goal is very simple - to refocus on Europe of the strategic potential of Russia, now induced to them. That is, to facilitate his task in a possible nuclear conflict.

For a start, they can place in Europe cruise missiles type "Tomahawk" with a range of 2,500 kilometers and a large podlёtnym time. Certainly the Americans will now be to develop and medium range ballistic missiles with podlёtnym time 8-10 minutes. To achieve this will require 5-10 years.

"SP": - The United States already has a missile "Trident", which can be run from the area, for example, the Barents Sea, and after 17 minutes it hit the target in Central Russia.

- I do not agree with this opinion. "Trident" from the Barents Sea will not run. At this missile "dead zone" of nearly 3,000 km. In addition, our anti-submarine systems in the area are able to before starting to destroy the American submarine. The main area of ​​deployment of missile boats "Trident" - along the coast of the United States.

Placement of intermediate-range ground-based in Eastern Europe, the Americans will provide a new quality. The flight time is only a few minutes is able to give them a decisive advantage. Because for retaliation takes time to align with the political leadership of the Russian Federation. We've nuclear missile defense system - if the "sharahnet" over Russia at a high altitude, will not find anyone. First of all, ourselves.

"SP": - Then what can we say?

- I believe that in this situation is more suited asymmetrical response. Given that our main enemy is not Europe and America, we have to increase in proportion to the threat to the United States.

First, the group must deploy missiles "Iskander-M" (with a range of up to 500 kilometers) and "Iskander-K" (cruise missile P-500). The latter should be further developed, equipping nuclear warheads. A firing range to bring it up to 2500 kilometers. And the post of P-500 on our western borders. In the event of a large-scale military action, this force should be to destroy the position of medium-range missiles, as well as the rout of the NATO forces in Europe.

The second step - in addition to the strategic ICBMs (START-3 limits the number of intercontinental ballistic missiles) to deploy intercontinental cruise missiles. We have the Kh-101, and range which is about 5,000 kilometers. The developers claim that it can be increased up to 10,000 kilometers. However, even in the first modification, it represents a serious threat to the United States, if it is placed in the Far East.

If the missile will hit the target at a distance of 10,000 kilometers, it can be deployed in Siberia on mobile launchers. Because it is a small rocket that weighs two and a half tons. There is also the nuclear option X-102.

It is enough to place the order of 400-600 units that will sweep the entire territory of the United States from Siberia. Since this is a cruise missile, it will not capture the American missile defense system, "sharpened" under ballistic missiles. America's defense does not provide full control at low altitude. This creates favorable conditions for a powerful retaliatory nuclear strike against the United States. Even if their rapid global strike will destroy 80-90% of our ICBMs, cruise missiles in a specified amount would be enough to destroy America.

Small high-speed missiles can be placed on trailers and wagons trucks that will go under the guise of refrigerators in the country. All of them, in principle, can not be destroyed.

That is, we declare that we develop the strength to strike at American intermediate- and short-range missiles in the European theater and shock groupings of NATO (the cities are not we beat).

Plus, we can use these warheads, which are guaranteed to destroy the United States under any scenario. It is about developing megaoruzhiya - ammunition capacity of 100 megatons or more. These are charges that can initiate destructive geophysical processes. Such as, for example, the collapse of the San Andreas Fault, the explosion of the volcano Yellowstone. Or by using a series of explosions along the Atlantic plate to initiate mega-tsunami, with a wave height of several hundred meters. They demolished everything living in the United States and Europe along the coast to a depth of 500 kilometers. Such charges do not need much - just 20-30 pieces. Plus two submarines of Project 941, equipped with missiles with a warhead weighing 8 tons.

"SP": - Having a major response, the Americans probably rush to the negotiating table.

- Of course. No diplomatic persuasion does not help. Elite US understands only the language of force. They went to the signing of the START-1 only because we created under Brezhnev global missile R-36 with a very powerful warhead. And now you need to prepare an adequate response. So that they forgot about its missile defense system, about the claim of a violation of the INF Treaty.