Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
Missile defense system - not a threat one needs to be concerned about
Vladimir Valerjevich, in your point of view do Russia and the US have a chance of coming to terms before the summit scheduled for May 2012?
Vladimir Yevseev, Director of the Center for Public Policy Research:
I believe that at the moment Russia and USA has no chance of reaching an agreement.
I do not think that we should link everything with the pre-election campaign.
It became clear that we could not find an agreement not after President Dmitry Anatoljevich Medvedev made a corresponding statement.
It became clear after the meeting in Honolulu in Hawaii when differences between positions
became so obvious that a corresponding statement was only a question of time.
I would like to underline the fact, that recently tensions between Russia and USA have been significantly aggravating.
In connection with this one can recall that Russia used the right of veto
concerning the resolution on Syria in the Security Council.
Russia believes that new sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran are unnecessary regarding its nuclear program.
Russia and USA disagree on the development of events in North Africa and Middle East.
Apart from it, we are in the middle of the pre-election campaign.
But I would like to say that our pre-election campaign was not the main reason underlying this statement.
Why cannot we agree?
It would be very easy to blame NATO for everything and say that there is the fifth article
of NATO statutes which does not allow you to come to terms with us.
It would be very easy.
But I would like to ask a different question:
what can we offer NATO for the creation of a combined missile defense system?
It has already been said that surely we could offer them information resources in our disposal.
For instance, two radio-location stations, one of the Daryal type in Gabala, Azerbaijan and another one,
which is much newer, the DM radio-location station in Voronezh which is located near Armavir
and which will have two opposite overlooks in the new future.
In fact, what we are offering for the creation of a combined missile defense system is not enough,
because the USA have a radio-location station in Israel,
in the near future they build a radio-location station in the South-East of Turkey.
They have a very strong covering from space of all objects and territories that interest them.
From this point of reference, we probably cannot talk in media resources
about our ability to significantly expand their information field.
Objectively, the necessity of information exchange in this area decreases.
If Russia had systems similar to Aegis, at least similar to the system which USA is planning to build in Romania,
then we could talk about the compatibility of the Russian and American system which will be located in Europe.
However, Russia does not have such systems.
In fact Russia has systems of counter air defense which provides certain opportunities regarding interception of ballistic missiles,
especially of a certain modification of S-300.
However, the current interception height ability of this system is only 30 km.
Since the height of medium distance missiles is 200-300 km we have to realize
that these complexes are not meant for the protection of any areas, at most - of some objects.
Moreover, they have limitations on the interception speed.
In this regard, we could discuss the S-500 complex
but I think it would be premature since this complex has not been developed yet.
Since Russia does not possess any striking elements and since the system
which Russia has on the borders of Moscow cannot be principally integrated in any European missile defense system,
the position of Russia at negotiations is rather weak.
Moreover, I would like to turn your attention to the fact that we should not overestimate
the threat of those systems which America is planning to build to in Europe,
and I am talking about land as well as sea elements.
If we talk about land elements, then first of all the speed announced for the interception which is 5,5 km per second is not evident.
There are possibilities of interception but they exist only for certain objects
located on the territory of certain Russian land divisions provided that certain trajectories of shooting are met,
the procedure is carried automatically and a number of other conditions.
In fact, under some certain conditions, probably the interception is possible,
but the accomplishment of all conditions and realization of it is practically almost impossible.
The same can be said about the sea component of the system,
because in order to accomplish interception of a ballistic missile on start with the help of ships
and cruisers equipped with the Aegis system, the ship must be located not further than 1000 km from the starting point.
You can check the location of Russian strategic underwater ships and it will immediately become clear
that for the interception of ballistic missiles on start since missiles are mostly attackable at this stage,
they would have to enter the Barents Sea.
At the same time they have ships which are not apt for sailing in the Arctic, they have no icebreaker fleet.
Everything points to the fact that the interception is probably possible but is quite improbable.
If we talk about the possibility of imposing limitations on SM-3 missiles,
the highest limitation which prevents interception in the active zone is limitation based on the surcharge.
It can put under question the possibility of interception of ballistic missiles in the active zone.
Thus, the system which will be developed by the USA worries Russia,
but it is not a threat one needs to be concerned about so openly.
It appears that a much larger threat for Russia is coming from systems built in different locations.
If these systems were developed on the perimeter of the USA,
than possibilities of interception of intersecting missile heading would be very different.
Russia should be truly concerned about it.
As long as Russia does not adopt a decision to create a single missile defense system
on the basis on new complexes which are not in the possession of Russia at the moment,
which will provide striking, kinetic interception as well as a certain miss,
we cannot talk about a system which will have to be somehow combined with the system in Europe.
At the moment I see no reasons for the creation of a single system of missile defense.