"Second Bed" of Obama's Disarming Initiatives

As it is known, US president Obama addressed the president of Russia Medvedev with new disarming initiative: on the one hand, to reduce arsenals of strategic offensive arms, on the other - to refuse from ABM placing in Europe (in territory of Czechia and Poland) in exchange for support of the American policy by Russia in the Iranian question.

These initiatives represent not a personal position of the new president (known for aspiration to direct all forces on solving of internal problems of the USA) but consolidated offer of the American elite - and consequently deserve steadfast attention.

Unfortunately they are directed not only on intensity decrease in the world but also on realisation of mercenary American interests - and it should be considered at development of the attitude not only to them but also to all Obama's administration.

First of all, by this time the USA practically refused idea of expansion of ABM system in the Eastern Europe because of its dearness and coming to power of democrats who are not connected financially with corporations which assumed to receive incomes from this process. Оbama and his representatives specified many times the necessity to reconsider relations with Iran (with the help of Bush's diligence it became regional leader) and even restored diplomatic relations with it (without any conditions) that objectively reduces the need of the USA in anti-Iranian European part of ABM system.

The need of the Americans in the constructive attitude of Iran to them caused by necessity to strengthen military presence in Afghanistan which otherwise will return under control of Talibs. Increase of the American contingent in Afghanistan objectively demands its easing in Iraq - and, accordingly, the role of Iran as factor of the Iraqi stability will sharply grow already during the current year. Without that it behaves rather frostily, doesn't urging, despite of all intensity in relations with the USA, controlled by it (and forming the majority of the Iraqi society) Shiits on struggle against invaders but now its neutrality becomes much more necessary to the Americans, than earlier.

To irritate Iran with creation of expensive third area of ABM directed against it in these conditions is not at all in the interest of the USA.

It is characteristic that the government of Poland which signed with Condoleezza Rice agreement on ABM placing in its territory already after presidential election in the USA repeatedly expressed hope that the USA would begin construction of corresponding objects in the territory allocated for it. It testifies that no real work has been begun till now there.

Thus, Obama suggested Medvedev to exchange de facto decision made by him (to tell you the truth, without any formal obligations) for, as a matter of fact, quarrel of Russia with one of the few remained let's say partners.

As a whole all story with ABM system placing in the Eastern Europe makes an impression of information diversion called not more than to distract attention of the world community (and first of all of Russia) from real activity of the USA in ABM sphere.

After all it was supposed to place pitiful 10 ABM interceptor missiles in the Eastern Europe - while on Alaska already now, on the sly, without any discussions they placed 100 pieces representing effective "board" against the Russian rockets which if something happens will be directed to the USA through Arctic Ocean.  

The second territory of ABM - directed against China - also has been also developed on the sly in California: there's already radar there and the quantity of ABM interceptor missiles will reach "regular" 100 pieces in the near future.

Besides the USA develop naval system of air defence "Idzhis" - radars and interceptor missiles installed on the ships patrolling coast of the USA. It is rather effective system: several months ago its testing passed successfully, in the course of testing the American used-up satellite was liquidated.

At last, while the Russian political blockheads chew thrown to them cud about ABM in the Eastern Europe and joining of Ukraine and Georgia to NATO (that will not be admitted by, for example, Germany), the Americans develop the fourth component of their ABM - ABM of air basing. It is formed by chemical lasers established on planes and capable to force down a rocket at the moment of their start or right after it. Planes patrol considerable territories - where, for example, there are our submarines - and practically guaranteedly intercept rockets launched from these submarines.

In 15-20 years space ABM system can adjoin these systems but for a while they are enough.

All these projects being realized without any noise but with originally American speed, efficiency and scope cardinally change a parity of forces not only between Russia but also between the USA and all other world.

As a matter of fact there's no talking about any parity. After the end of expansion of naval and air ABM systems the USA can consider themselves guaranteed against attack from outside both Russia and China - and all restrictions on their activity, including aggressive, will be removed.

On this background Obama's offer to Medvedev on disarmament look a sneer - first of all because it does not take into account availability in the USA of cruise missiles of sea basing as class (and they have enough such rockets), at the same time it deprives Russia of possibility to raise capacity of rockets "Topol - M".

The fact that modern technologies of rocket destruction being now at the moment of start, developing, in 2-3 years will allow the Americans, "if something happens", for sure not to admit the start of any Russian rocket is essential. In this respect one thousand Russian rockets will be equal to zero.

However as a whole discussion of scales of reduction of the Russian rockets has highly scholastic character. In fact degradation of Strategic Missile Forces goes so quickly (availability of "petrodollars" is completely neutralized both by general corruption character of the state and presence of such outstanding "effective managers" as, for example, S.Ivanov) that reduction of nuclear potential of Russia will happen by itself - without any agreements.

Thus, Obama's offers are unprofitable for Russia.

However there is a threat that they after a while in this or that modified form will be accepted by president Medvedev - either because of incomplete understanding of the situation, or in hope of support of the USA and West as a whole in internal political struggle within the limits of notorious "tandemocracy".

Send by mail

Print