Beware What
You Wish For: Russia Is Ready For War
By Pepe
Escobar
May 23, 2016 "Information
Clearing House"
- "RT"
- So foreign ministers from the 28 NATO
member-nations met in Brussels for a two-day summit,
while mighty military power Montenegro was inducted
as a new member.
Global
Robocop NATO predictably discussed Afghanistan
(a war NATO ignominiously lost); Iraq (a war the
Pentagon ignominiously lost); Libya (a nation
NATO turned into a failed state devastated by
militia hell); Syria (a nation NATO, via Turkey,
would love to invade, and is already a militia
hell).
Afghans
must now rest assured that NATO’s Resolute
Support mission – plus “financial support
for Afghan forces” – will finally assure
the success of Operation Enduring Freedom
forever.
Libyans must be reassured, in the words of NATO
figurehead secretary Jens Stoltenberg, that we
“should stand ready to
support the new Government of National Accord in
Libya.”
Stoltenberg
duly confirmed, “We
have already decided to enhance our forward presence
in the eastern part of our alliance. Our military
planners have put forward proposals of several
battalions in different countries in the region. No
decision has been taken on the numbers and
locations.”
These puny
“several battalions” won’t cause any
Russian planner to lose sleep. The real
“measure” is the deployment
of the Aegis Ashore system in Romania last week –
plus a further one in Poland in 2018. This has been
vehemently opposed by Moscow since the early 2000s.
NATO’s argument that the Aegis represents protection
against the “threat” of ballistic missiles
from Iran does not even qualify as kindergarten
play.
Every
Russian military planner knows the Aegis is not
defensive. This is a serious game-changer – as in
de-localizing US nuclear capability to Eastern
Europe. No wonder Russian President Vladimir Putin
had to make it clear Russia would respond
“adequately” to any threat to its security.
Predictably
all Cold War 2.0 hell broke loose, all over again.
A former
NATO deputy commander went
ballistic, while saner heads wondered
whether Moscow, sooner rather than later, would have
had enough of these shenanigans and prepare for war.
That worthless
Patriot
A case can
be made that the Beltway – neocons and
neoliberalcons alike - do not want a hot war with
Russia. What they want, apart from racking in more
cash for the Pentagon, is to raise the ante to such
a high level that Moscow will back down - based on a
rational cost analysis. Yet oil prices will
inevitably rise later in 2016 – and under this
scenario Washington is a loser. So we may see a
raise of interest rates by the Fed (with all the
money continuing to go to Wall Street) trying to
reverse the scenario.
Comparisons
of the current NATO buildup to pre-WWII buildups, or
to NATO when opposed to the Warsaw Pact, are
amateurish. The THAAD and Patriot missiles are
worthless - according to the Israeli Defense Forces
(IDF) themselves; that’s why they tried to improve
them with Iron Dome.
Meanwhile,
those new NATO army “battalions” are
inconsequential. The basic thrust behind the
Pentagon’s moves under neocon Ash Carter continues
to be to draw Russia ever further into Syria and
Ukraine (as if Moscow actually was involved in, or
wanted, a Ukrainian quagmire); trap Russia in proxy
wars; and economically bleed Russia to death while
crippling the bulk of oil and natural gas income to
the Russian state.
Russia does
not want – and does not need – war. Yet the
“Russian aggression” narrative never stops.
Thus it’s always enlightening to come back to this
RAND corporation
study, which examined what would happen if a war
actually took place. RAND reached an
“unambiguous” conclusion after a series of war
games in 2015-2015; Russia could overrun NATO in a
mere 60 hours – if not less – if it ever amounted to
a hot war on European soil.
The Rand
Corporation is essentially a CIA outpost – thus a
propaganda machine. Yet it’s not propaganda to state
the Baltic States and Ukraine would completely fall
in less than three days before the Russian Army.
However, the suggestion that additional NATO air
power and heavily armored combat divisions would
make a material difference is bogus.
The Aegis
changes the game in the sense that it qualifies as a
launch area for US missile defense. Think US
missiles with minimum flying time – around 30
minutes – from Moscow; that’s a certified threat to
the Russian nation. The Russian military has also
been “unambiguous”; if it is ascertained
that NATO – via the Pentagon – is about to try
something funny, there are grounds for a preventive
strike by Iskander-M systems out of Transnistria –
as in the destruction of the US missiles by
conveniently armed precision weapons.
Meanwhile,
Moscow has pulled a stunning success – of course,
it’s far from over – in Syria. So what’s left for
the Pentagon – via NATO – is essentially to play the
scare tactics card. They know Russia is prepared for
war – certainly much better prepared than NATO. They
know neither Putin nor the Russian military will
back down because of kindergarten scaremongering. As
for a too conciliatory tone by the Kremlin towards
Washington, things may be about to change
soon.
Say hello to my
S-500
The Russian
military are about to test
the first prototypes of the S-500 Prometey air and
missile defense system, also known as 55R6M
Triumfator M – capable of destroying ICBMs,
hypersonic cruise missiles and planes at over Mach 5
speeds; and capable of detecting and simultaneously
attacking up to ten ballistic missile warheads at a
range of 1300 km. This means the S-500 can smash
ballistic missiles before their warheads re-enter
the atmosphere.
So in the
case of RAND-style NATO pussyfooting, the S-500
would totally eliminate all NATO air power over the
Baltic States – while the advanced Kornet missile
would destroy all NATO armored vehicles. And that’s
not even considering
conventional weapon hell.
If push
comes to nuclear shove, the S-400 and especially the
S-500 anti-missile missiles would block all incoming
US ICBMs, cruise missiles and stealth aircraft.
Offensive drones would be blocked by drone defenses.
The S-500 practically consigns to the dustbin
stealth warplanes such as the F-22, F-35 and the
B-2.
The bottom
line is that Russia – in terms of hypersonic missile
development – is about four generations ahead of the
US, if we measure it by the development of the
S-300, S-400 and S-500 systems. As a working
hypothesis, we could describe the next system –
already in the drawing boards – as the S-600. It
would take the US military at least ten years to
develop and roll out a new weapons system, which in
military terms represents a generation. Every
Pentagon planner worth his pension plan should know
that.
Russian –
and Chinese – missiles are already able to knock out
the satellite guidance systems for US nuclear tipped
ICBMs and cruise missiles. They could also knock out
the early alert warnings that the satellite
constellations would give. A Russian hypersonic ICBM
flight time, launched for instance from a Russian
nuclear sub all the way to the US East Coast, counts
for less than 20 minutes. So an early warning system
is absolutely critical. Don’t count on the worthless
THAAD and Patriot to do their job. Once again,
Russian hypersonic technology has already rendered
the entire missile defense system in both the US and
Europe totally obsolete.
So why is
Moscow so worried by the Pentagon placing the Aegis
system so close to Russia’s borders? A credible
answer is that Moscow is always concerned that the
US industrial military-complex might develop some
really effective anti-missile missiles even though
they are now about four generations behind.
At the same
time, Pentagon planners have reasons to be very
worried by what they know, or hint. At the same time
the Russian military – in a very Asian way – never
reveal their full hand. The key fact of the matter
needs to be stressed over and over again; the S-500
is impenetrable - and allows Russia for the first
time in history to launch a first strike nuclear
attack, if it ever chooses to do so, and be immune
to retaliation.
The rest is
idle babbling. Still, expect the official
Pentagon/NATO narrative to remain the same. After
all, the industrial-military complex is a
cash-devouring
hydra, and a powerful enemy is a must (the phony
Daesh “caliphate” does not count).
The Threat
Narrative rules that Russia has to meekly accept
being surrounded by NATO. Russia is not allowed any
response; in any case, any response will be branded
as “Russian aggression”. If Russia defends
itself, this will be “exposed” as an
unacceptable provocation. And may even furnish the
pretext for a pre-emptive attack by NATO against
Russia.
Now let
those Pentagon/NATO planners duly go back to play in
their lavish kindergarten.
Pepe
Escobar is an independent geopolitical analyst. He
writes for RT, Sputnik and TomDispatch, and is a
frequent contributor to websites and radio and TV
shows ranging from the US to East Asia. He is the
former roving correspondent for Asia Times Online.
Born in Brazil, he's been a foreign correspondent
since 1985, and has lived in London, Paris, Milan,
Los Angeles, Washington, Bangkok and Hong Kong. Even
before 9/11 he specialized in covering the arc from
the Middle East to Central and East Asia, with an
emphasis on Big Power geopolitics and energy wars.
He is the author of "Globalistan" (2007), "Red Zone
Blues" (2007), "Obama does Globalistan" (2009) and
"Empire of Chaos" (2014), all published by Nimble
Books. His latest book is "2030", also by Nimble
Books, out in December 2015. |