I want to follow up on my recent article, Understanding Military Exercises, and give you a deeper understanding why Russia is doing a tactical nuke exercise and what is the Russian General Staff wanting to achieve.
The current Russian exercise did not spring out of a black hole nor was it hastily conjured up in a period of a week or two. The planning for this exercise started months ago, and it appears that Russia had it on the shelf ready to go when circumstances dictated. As a result of belligerent, hostile threats by France and the U.K. regarding deploying troops to Ukraine and beefing up Ukraine’s weapons supply with more sophisticated weapons, Russia launched a comprehensive diplomatic and military response three weeks ago. Foreign Minister Lavrov summoned the British and French Ambassadors to the Russian Foreign Ministry for a verbal dressing down. They were warned in stark terms that Russia would respond with all necessary force if such actions occur.
As Lavrov was delivering a diplomatic beatdown, President Putin announced that Russia would conduct a military exercise to test its ability to deploy and launch tactical nukes. So, what are the objectives of such an exercise besides scaring the shit out of the West?
The first objective is to test the readiness of the units and personnel who load the missiles and drive the launchers. These soldiers are not sitting around on their asses waiting for the red flare to go up. They have other duties they must perform every day. The first step in the exercise process — after the national command authority has made the decision to mobilize and deploy the tactical nuclear force — is the alert to the units. Once alerted, they have to ensure they have access to the nuclear tipped missiles, that those missiles are loaded into the launchers, that the launchers are in good operating condition and that the vehicles can be started.
The next phase of the exercise is the deployment of the various units to designated firing points. This means the launch vehicles are loaded and the crews jump on and then drive to the place where they are to set up and prepare for launch. There are several problems or tasks each unit must deal with — e.g., Do they have sufficient fuel, water and food? Do they know how to get to the location where they are supposed to deploy and ready the launchers? Do their communications with headquarters command work? Do they know the proper procedures to ready the missile or missiles for launch?
Then comes the moment of truth — either the order to launch is given or they are told to stand down and return to base. The reason the Russians are doing this is to evaluate whether or not they are ready to carry out such a mission. And therein lies the other purpose of the exercise — put the West on notice that Russia is dead-ass serious about using a tactical nuke if the West decides to enter the conflict.
How might Russia use a tactical nuke? I am going to post Danny Davis’ recent video interview with Ted Postol below. Ted discusses the difference between the tactical and the strategic warheads. One possible option (but an option of last resort for the Russians), use a one kiloton warhead on a Ukrainian airfield or base, such as Yavoriv, in Western Ukraine near the border with Poland. Yavoriv is a defacto NATO base and has been used for storing weapons and training mercenary forces.
Russia has several other options before it must consider the use of tactical nukes. They can intensify targeting of bases and assembly points where Western forces are operating. They can impose a no-fly zone over the Black Sea for Western ISR platforms and then destroy any assets that dare venture into the forbidden area. Russia can take out the Starlink satellite that is enabling Ukrainian battlefield communications. I think there is little chance the Russians will go after the satellite because the Russians are probably exploiting it for intel purposes and are becoming more adept at jamming communications when necessary.
Despite my initial alarm over the Ukrainian attack on the Russian ICBM radar site in Voronezh, the Russian news media is paying little attention to the matter. It is not clear what hit the buildings. Does not appear to be the work of an ATACMs missile. The hole punched in the side of the building on the right in the photo below, shows no signs of fire or explosive force. Just a hole. Nonetheless, it is still a serious escalation on the part of Ukraine. It is akin to hitting a civilian apartment building in Belgorod. It does not enhance Ukraine’s tactical or strategic capabilities nor does it weaken Russia’s. It is gratuitous violence, e.g., Ukraine’s punching a hole in a wall.
I listened to Postel only yesterday, his counsel was wise shall we say, as was his praise of Putin compared to the maniacs in DC, Brussels and London.
I heard little from him about Russia's latest anti-ballistic weapons platform, which officially entered service this year in very limited numbers, i.e., no more than 5 or 6 units, these units comprise one missile launch unit comprising two tubes, unlike the S-400 that has four tubes. Further, a minimum 4 other radar units are deployed, each platform as large as the S-500 platform. This new system is able to counter hypersonic missiles, nuclear warheads from MIRVs and space-based systems.
Whilst the present S-400's are competent and are known to be superior to the US Patriot system, i.e., they actually work, a more credible deterrence would be available if far more of the new systems were operationally deployed to protect key military infrastructure.
In reality, its lunacy to think of entertaining war with Russia, never mind China, given the destruction of any serious manufacturing process to support warfare as witness in Ukraine by the combined West, meaning, Western planners from the onset are looking at a limited nuclear strike, which Putin has stated repeated would lead to an actual nuclear annihilation and he ain't shitting around. China too is not sitting back and its navy is already larger than that of the USA, although much of this is outdated - they are presently changing this fact rapidly, something not lost on the USA. God knows why South Korea or Japan would want to associate with NATOstan maniacs given the disrespect they have for Asians in general.
Whilst the present S-400's are competent and are known to be superior to the US Patriot system, i.e., they actually work, a more credible deterrence would be available if far more of the new systems were operationally deployed to protect key military infrastructure.
That may be true, but to my mind these are minor tactical issues, if I may. The far more serious subject is the use of tactical nukes. I really do urge you to have a look at this video of a conversation with Ted Postol within the article:
It's depressing and a reminder of the dangers of the nuclear war, especially when you have a nutter like Lindsey Graham talking about nuking Gaza. An uncomfortable subject we should get familiar with. Cheers.
t, This is the dialogue I listened too by Ted Postel, and understand concepts behind battlefield deployment of mini-nukes, most of which, at the time in Uni, came from NATO, which constantly over hyped the Warsaw Packs ability to launch a mechanised, deep thrust into NATO and, as per doctrine, would meet such an attack with battlefield nukes, i.e., NATO, not the Soviet Union had a first strike policy - Soviet policy was different to that of NATO, i.e., any use of any form of nuclear weapon would result in total annihilation from a variety of land, sea and air platforms and did seem to keep the peace between the then two superpowers.
The key takeaway from Dr Postel is the fact that maniacs in Washington cling on to a belief that they can win a nuclear engagement and will be spared by their high tech missile interceptors, i.e., the Patriot system, which, is a known unreliable platform and a very expensive one at that.
My own personal opinion is that Putin has no requirement to utilise battlefield nukes to stymie a non-existent NATO incursion into Ukraine given the lamentable state of armoured brigades in NATO and fielded in Europe. As such, any incursion would be destroyed by Russia's stockpile of hypersonic missiles, which have been used sparingly in Ukraine up to this juncture in time, i.e., neither Putin or the Russian military command are stupid, although, its fair to say they were surprised by Ukraine's ability to counter Russia's first excursion into hostile territory, but on the whole, with a forced peace not available in 2022 Russia changed tactics, it has not changed its strategic goal or that of the SMO.
My own input, given what we know about the S-500, is enhancing its existing nuclear deterrence based on fixed installations, mobile platforms and submarines and horrendous power these weapons can unleash, something, as Dr Postel reiterated, does seem lost on many of the idiots in DC and Brussels, although, at the US military top brass level, they are not as crass or stupid as their political masters.
Further, and with enhanced cooperation between Russia and China, the US/NATO has to contend with the fact that the West can't fight a one front war, never mind an active two front war, be it Taiwan or Ukraine being the spark point. Hence, the idiot brigade is either planning a massive first strike, or, all talk is bluster, very dangerous bluster as both Putin and President Xi indicate clearly if they don't exist, neither will the West. This is the message that needs ramming down the idiot brigades throats, i.e., it is they, not China or Russia that are the genuine existential threat, regardless of the second coming of their messiah and belief in salvation - reality sometimes does trump ideology and crass stupidity.
on May 26, 2024, 10:51 pm