In recent years, the United States and NATO have been engaged in several promising projects designed to improve their defenses. First of all, it is the Euro-Atlantic missile defense system. It is assumed that the construction of a number of military facilities in Eastern Europe will help protect European and North American countries from a missile attack. In addition, projects are underway to create new strike systems capable of hitting a target anywhere in the world in a relatively short time. All of these US and NATO programs have a specific impact on the international situation and provoke controversy.
Anti-missile epic
In recent years, according to official statements, Iran has been viewed as a potential enemy to be confronted by the missile defense system. However, events in the international arena can develop in different ways and therefore can sometimes lead to unexpected results. For example, a few weeks ago Iran and several foreign countries took another step towards resolving the nuclear issue.
In November, official Tehran agreed to suspend the work of its nuclear industry for six months. During this time, specialized enterprises will not conduct any research, and will also stop uranium enrichment. In addition, now Iran and the IAEA are agreeing on the dates of inspectors' visits to Iranian nuclear facilities. Earlier this year, US analysts argued that by mid-2014, Iran would stockpile enough enriched uranium to make its first atomic bomb. The temporary suspension of the work of the enterprises of the Iranian nuclear industry should lead to a shift in the timing of the start of the creation of atomic weapons, if, of course, Iran is pursuing such projects.
The next negotiations may result in international agreements, according to which Iran will completely abandon plans to create nuclear weapons. It is difficult to assess the likelihood of such a development of events. For example, US President Barack Obama recently said that he was not sure whether the Iranian nuclear problem could be finally solved. If in the coming months of the conference, visits of IAEA inspectors and other events do not lead to the curtailment of work on the Iranian atomic bomb, then one should not expect any serious changes in the international situation in the future. Most likely, Iran will again be subject to sanctions and, being in such a difficult situation, will continue to develop nuclear technologies.
However, another scenario is also possible. If official Tehran accepts the proposal of the international community and abandons its military nuclear program, then in the near future some countries may find themselves in an awkward position. First of all, this is the United States. Over the past years, Washington has been constantly trying to put pressure on the Iranian authorities, demanding to abandon nuclear technologies. At the same time, the United States and its NATO allies are building a Euro-Atlantic missile defense system, ostensibly aimed at countering Iranian strategic weapons.
The available information about Iran's missile program clearly indicates that this country will not be able to make a ballistic missile suitable for attacking targets in the United States for the foreseeable future. At the moment, the maximum capabilities of Iranian missiles are in Eastern and, possibly, Central Europe. However, it is the United States that is most active in promoting the Euro-Atlantic missile defense system. There is a logical assumption that missile defense systems in Europe are being built not to defend against Iran, but to counter ballistic missiles from Russia or China.
The Iranian threat was constantly mentioned in the rhetoric accompanying the construction of the Euro-Atlantic missile defense system. After a recent international conference, events may occur that will force the United States and its NATO allies to look for a new official reason to continue building anti-missile systems. If Iran abandons plans to create nuclear weapons, then the need to create a Euro-Atlantic missile defense system will have to be backed up by new arguments.
Thus, in the current situation, one of the most advantageous scenarios for the United States and NATO - no matter how absurd it may seem - will be the continuation of Iran's nuclear and missile programs. In this case, there will remain an excuse not to reduce or even increase the costs of building a Euro-Atlantic missile defense system, which is actually designed to protect Europe and, to some extent, the United States, from Russian or Chinese missiles. Confirmation or refutation of this assumption will appear already in the middle of next year, when the six months provided by the existing agreement with Iran will expire.
Just a couple of days ago, new messages appeared that can be interpreted as a real reason to continue the construction of the Euro-Atlantic missile defense system. On December 11, speaking at the government hour in the State Duma, Deputy Prime Minister D. Rogozin said that Russia reserves the right to use nuclear weapons and is ready to use them if someone decides to attack. Rogozin noted that our country has never underestimated the role of nuclear weapons as a deterrent, and also advised potential aggressors not to forget about it.
D. Rogozin's words can be interpreted in different ways. Someone will see them as aggressive intentions, and someone - a warning addressed to possible enemies. One way or another, the Deputy Prime Minister recalled that Russia has both nuclear weapons and plans to use them. The size of Russian nuclear arsenals is such that any attempt at a massive strike on our territory threatens the attacker with colossal damage, which will exceed by orders of magnitude all the benefits of the conflict. Not only Russian officials know and understand this. The very fact that missile defense systems are being built in Eastern Europe suggests that the North Atlantic Alliance is well aware of the danger that Russian nuclear forces pose to it.
Lightning strike and response
Often, experts note that the Euro-Atlantic missile defense system in the form in which it is being built will not be able to effectively resist the Russian strategic missile forces. The simplest, albeit expensive, method of breaking through any missile defense system is a massive strike using a large number of missiles. In this case, anti-missile systems will not be able to intercept all sent items, and the capabilities of those who have broken through will be sufficient to cause serious damage to the enemy. Such an asymmetric response to missile defense makes it possible to ensure guaranteed retaliatory destruction of enemy targets without costly and not always effective investments in workable anti-missile systems.
The United States is currently working on another asymmetric way of maintaining parity in strategic weapons. The latest concept of a lightning-fast global strike involves the creation of weapons systems capable of destroying a target anywhere in the world within a few tens of minutes after deciding to attack. It is assumed that such tasks will be performed by high-speed high-precision systems equipped with a conventional warhead. In addition, in some cases, hypersonic guided missiles may not be equipped with a warhead at all, since their speed and energy will be sufficient to destroy a target with a direct hit.
It is expected that the creation of systems of lightning-fast global strike will significantly reduce the role of nuclear weapons in the structure of deterrence. It is probably for this reason that Washington has recently regularly invited Moscow to sign a new treaty on the reduction of nuclear weapons, which implies an additional reduction in arsenals. Such proposals can speak of certain successes in the creation of lightning strike systems. However, the official information about such projects is limited to only a few news items. Several US companies are developing and testing experimental devices, but there is no talk of practical products yet.
At the same time, however, the systems of a lightning-fast global strike are already beginning to turn into a reason for disputes between Russia and the United States. For example, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister S. Ryabkov, in an interview with Kommersant, called the American lightning strike systems extremely dangerous and destabilizing. The fact is that in the event of a serious geopolitical crisis, the use of such weapons, including not against Russia, can end in the most terrible way. Even if the weapon system is equipped with a conventional warhead, Russia may consider its use as an attack. Such features of promising high-speed and high-precision weapons, by definition, cannot have a beneficial effect on the geopolitical situation in the world.
Russia, if necessary, can respond to missile defense with a massive missile strike. We have nothing to use against systems of a lightning-fast global strike. It is worth noting that the United States currently does not have the necessary systems either, which is why a kind of arms race in this area is postponed until the near future. Nevertheless, the Russian defense industry is already preparing to defend itself against new threats. During his recent speech in the State Duma, Deputy Prime Minister D. Rogozin touched upon this topic as well. According to him, the Advanced Research Fund has already considered more than a thousand proposals regarding protection against new strategic weapons. 52 proposals were considered promising, and eight will be worked out as a matter of priority. The details of these proposals, for obvious reasons, were not disclosed.
A new arms race?
As we can see, even the solution of the Iranian nuclear missile program will not make the international situation less tense. Leading countries will continue to implement their plans, regularly hurting other people's interests. There is reason to believe that the emerging trend towards an increase in the number of controversial issues will develop in the future. Now Russia and the United States, with some participation of third countries, are arguing about the Euro-Atlantic missile defense system, and a new topic has appeared on the horizon - a system of a lightning-fast global strike. The creation of such weapons and means of countering them will lead to the emergence of new projects designed to ensure the unconditional leadership of one of the countries. This will be followed by the creation of new means of counteraction, and as a result, the situation may develop into a real arms race.
It is worth noting that after the end of the Cold War, the leading countries of the world did not stop the development of weapons and military equipment, seeking to surpass potential adversaries. This approach to defense projects is still used today, and there is no reason to believe that someone will abandon it in the foreseeable future. Therefore, it can be assumed that the emerging arms race in the field of strategic strike systems and means of countering them will be similar to the events of recent years. Despite the obvious importance of such programs, countries can no longer finance them in the same amount as during the Cold War.
