SUBSIM Radio Room Forums

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)
-   General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)
-   -   New Cold War (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=93041)

Type941 05-12-06 11:33 AM

From Financial Times
Quote:

Russia hits out at 'dangerous' US nuclear warhead replacement plans

By Neil Buckley in Moscow and Demetri Sevastopulo in Washington
Published: May 12 2006 03:00 | Last updated: May 12 2006 03:00

Russia has expressed concern over US plans to replace nuclear warheads with conventional charges on some intercontinental missiles, warning it would be impossible to tell one from the other on launch.

A senior Kremlin official condemned the switch being discussed in the US as "irresponsible".

"You can imagine, a rocket is fired, especially from a submarine, and no one knows what kind of warhead it is carrying," the official said. "It is not written on the rocket whether it has a conventional or nuclear warhead."

He said the Pentagon's plans were "extremely dangerous" and the launch of such a missile could lead to an "inappropriate" response from other nuclear-armed states.

The comments came a day after President Vladimir Putin referred to the danger, in his annual state of the nation address, although he made no specific reference to the US. "The media and expert circles are already discussing plans to use intercontinental ballistic missiles to carry non-nuclear warheads. The launch of such a missile could . . . provoke a full-scale counter-attack using strategic nuclear forces," said Mr Putin.

The Russian president's seventh state of the nation address placed heavy emphasis on the need to modernise the country's military forces, including its nuclear arsenal, to enable it to withstand external pressure.

Mr Putin also said Russia needed to "preserve the strategic balance of forces", noting that the US was spending 25 times as much as Russia on defence. He pledged not to repeat the mistakes of the cold war, when the Soviet Union spent so much on arms that it weakened its economy, but warned that the arms race was not over - an apparent reference to US plans to develop new types of nuclear weapons.

"What's more, the arms race has entered a new spiral today with the achievement of new levels of technology that raise the danger of the emergence of a whole arsenal of so-called destabilising weapons," he added.

"There are still no clear guarantees that weapons, including nuclear weapons, will not be deployed in outer space. There is the potential threat of the creation and proliferation of small capacity nuclear charges."

In February, the Pentagon unveiled its Quadrennial Defence Review - a major assessment of the capabilities needed by the US over the next 25 years - which called for the conversion of some ICBMs from nuclear warheads to conventional weapons.

While some military officers concede that problems exist regarding the difficulty for another country to detect the kind of warhead launched, they say the changes are needed to improve US strike capability.

Yesterday in Le Figaro, the French newspaper, Donald Rumsfeld, US defence secretary, wrote: "On certain issues, Russia has not been very co-operative and has used its energy resources as a political weapon."

Earlier this year, at a Nato defence ministers conference in Italy, Mr Rumsfeld acknowledged the Pentagon had concerns about Russian military sales to Iran, but denied the US-Russian military relationship was deteriorating.

Type941 05-12-06 11:34 AM

another FT Piece.

Quote:

Putin stresses need to 'make our own house strong'
By Neil Buckley in Moscow
Published: May 11 2006 03:00 | Last updated: May 11 2006 03:00

Russian president Vladimir Putin made a thinly veiled attack on the US over double standards on democracy yesterday, and warned that Russia needed to modernise its military forces to be able to resist external pressure.
ADVERTISEMENT

Mr Putin chose a theme of national renewal for his seventh state of the nation address, calling for investment in modernising the economy and pledging to reverse the steep decline in Russia's population - currently falling by 700,000 a year. But what Kremlinofficials had billed as a foreign policy speech was in fact largely devoted to domestic issues.

The Russian leader made reassuring noises on energy security, saying Russia could play a positive role in forming a "uniform energy strategy" for Europe. He added that Gazprom, the Russian gas giant - whose dizzying growth into the world's third largest company by market value Mr Putin celebrated - would "fully meet the demand" of traditional partners as well as developing new markets.

But Mr Putin allowed himself some barbed, if oblique, criticism of the rebuke of Russia's democracy and human rights record by Dick Cheney, the US vice-president, in Vilnius last week. Mr Cheney had warned Moscow against using its energy might for "intimidation or blackmail" of its neighbours.

Mr Putin portrayed Washington as following an aggressive unilateral agenda, and noted that US military spending was now 25 times that of Russia - though he used some of the folksy language that has become his trademark.

"Their house is their fortress. Good for them," he said of the US. "But that means that we must make our own house strong and firm. Because we can see what is happening in the world. As they say, 'Comrade Wolf knows whom to eat'. He eats and doesn't listen to anyone. And judging by appearances, he has no intention of listening," Mr Putin added, to applause from Russian ministers and parliamentarians in the Kremlin.

Mr Putin said Russia need-ed to rebuild its military not just to deal with new and unpredictable threats such as terrorism, but to "preserve the strategic balance of forces".

"We should be able to respond to attempts to put foreign pressure on Russia . . . and it should be said frankly: the stronger our armed forces are, the less temptation there will be to put pressure on us."

But the president insisted Russia would not repeatthe mistakes of the coldwar when the Soviet Union spent so much on weapons that it undermined itseconomy.

Type941 05-12-06 11:38 AM

more of FT.

Quote:

The dangers of crying 'Comrade Wolf'


Published: May 11 2006 03:00 | Last updated: May 11 2006 03:00

In two months' time the leaders of the US, Russia and other members of the Group of Eight will gather at theirSt Petersburg summit. This will give them a valuable opportunity to tackle jointly the incredibly thorny problem of Iran's nuclear ambitions and to address the question of energy security. On neither issue are Russia and the US diametrically opposed. Moscow has expressed alarm at Tehran's nuclear enrichment programme but wants to cap it diplomatically rather than decapitate it militarily, while the issue of gas contract sanctity, on which Vladimir Putin, provided assurance yesterday, is one that primarily worries its European partners.


Nonetheless, the Russian president worryingly used his annual "state of the union" speech to jab back at last week's hawkish critique of his policies by Dick Cheney, the US vice-president, in a way that bodes ill for co-operative results coming out of St Petersburg. Gone is the language of partnership that both the White House and the Kremlin had used about each other.

Particularly graphic was Mr Putin's reference to America's more aggressive foreign policy of recent years. Having noted that US military spending was 25 times higher than Russia's, the Russian president went on to say the effect of this was that "Comrade Wolf knows whom to swallow, and he swallows without listening to anyone." Clearly referring to the talk in Washington about a military strike on Iran,Mr Putin warned that "the use of force . . . could be more disastrous than the initial threat" it was supposed to deal with. He also noted, probably with Mr Cheney in mind, the tendency to subordinate "all that pathos" about human rights and democratic issues whenever these clashed with US self-interest in currying favour with energy-rich allies. Piling it on, Mr Putin complained that Russia's bid to join the World Trade Organisation was being used as "a bargaining chip" on unrelated issues: the US is the last big WTO member holding out against Russian entry, and some of its senators tie this to the Iran issue.

Mr Putin's hawkish foreign policy rhetoric will have gone down well with the Russian public, all the more so for the generous social policy promises accompanying it. To tackle Russia's shocking population decline, Mr Putin promised French-style baby bonuses as well as more generous childcare and maternity allowances. His government can easily afford this out of oil revenues, which it has been hoarding.

As a result, Mr Putin may come to the St Petersburg summit with his domestic popularity as high as President George Bush's is low. There is nothing wrong with that: Mr Putin's demographic measures are long overdue and his warnings about precipitate action against Iran justified. But it will make him less susceptible to striking the necessary compromises with the US that are key to achieving results.

CCIP 05-12-06 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Happy Times
Stalin was a very cool-thinking strategist. He might be the only that could counter his moves. :hmm:

"Stalin" and "cool-headed" don't fit in the same sentence, it's a medical fact (I'm fairly sure) that he was paranoid.

I think you're naturally inclined of thinking that Russia is a threat directly to other countries more so than it actually is. It will take a massive re-alignment of the world for Russia to actually go and invade another country in Europe as a means for expansion. Yes, there will be continued political pressure, but so far as I'm concerned - they will remain self-determined.

Russia is tired of being the "bad guy" in world affairs, and there seems to be an effort to paint it as such again, by people like Cheney. But as long as Putin-style strategy is continued, Russia is not going to get their hands dirty and any accusations against it are likely to have an effect of making the average Russians more disdainful of the West. Again, I emphasize - this government is not stupid. It won't invade Finland, I can guarantee you that. It has little interest in a bad relationship with Europe, just as Europe should have little interest in a bad relationship with Russia.

In terms of democracy, Russia sort of is and sort of isn't. That is, Putin's government is very centralized and it's been getting increasingly heavy-handed. On the other hand, it's anything but undemocratic at the ballot boxes - I can safely say the majority of Russian voters support Putin. Because again, Putin has brought stability. There are, of course, some rather un-democratic things going on in other areas of politics, but the "government block" (basically, the same Yeltsin-then-Putin political coalition that has ruled Russia since 1991) stays in by playing their cards right. Cards which include the fear of communist return by some, the economy for others, the war in Chechnya (perhaps the dirtiest card), the disillusion with the West, and so on. The last 15 years in Russian history is really a textbook of how to exploit an essentially democratic system in a very tricky way.

scandium 05-12-06 12:50 PM

Cheney looking to start a new cold war? What a surprise. A cold war is an extremely profitable war and his current gig in the Whitehouse is up in 3 years. Not that the "War on Terror" hasn't already been profitable for his big business pals but the US still isn't quite broke yet.

Kapitan 05-12-06 01:10 PM

In my view the cold war has never ended americans still track and trail the russians the americans still moniter exercises but they are not 100% to blame norwiegens french german british just a few to name.

Cold war will probably now never go away theres just too much paranoia.

Mike 'Red Ocktober' Hense 05-12-06 01:15 PM

with the current rate of military buildup, both in the middle east and in the pacific... a HOT war is what you should really be worrying about...

there is no longer two monolithic sides to confront each other... at least there was a measure of control back then... introducing the military buildup of assets that we see happening today, plus the inflaming polarized ideologies into this new fragmented world situation, well eventaully a point will be reached where this has got to lead to an armed confrontation that will spiral out of control...

it will make mad of the 50s and 60s look like a church picnic...

make no plans past july 2014...

:cool:

--Mike

aaken 05-12-06 01:20 PM

@ Skybird:
just out of curiosity, I didn't get the meaning of your comment on the italian democracy. Care to explain (maybe in PM since it's off topic) ?

XabbaRus 05-12-06 02:13 PM

Hmmm I have been following this in the news and personally I think it all smacks of hypocrisy.

Russia is strong on the back of high oil prices, it's putting Russia in the position to strengthen its economy and its hand on the international stage. Suddenly Russia becomes the boogey man. She is just protecting her national interests like any other country who finds herself in a better position to do so.

As for democracy in Russia, the TV stations might all be owned by the government but the print media there are quite a few independents left and some quite critical. They are left alone. Also when you read some reports its as if just criticising the Kremlin (at work with colleagues, for example) is enough to get you thrown away.

In some ways I feel Russia has been just a little screwed over by Europe and the US. Again another example of lack of forward thinking. The USSR economy was screwed from teh 70's onwards but the west was so keen to have Russia embrace "democracy" no one seemed to think what the consequences would be.

I am not naieve to the faults of the Russian government but when I listen to Bush, Cheney and Blair harp on about democracy I want to be sick.

I don't know about Bush but I am pretty damn sure Blair would love to have the control Putin does and if he could take it he would. Just look at the way he is dodging questions about when he will step down in favour of Brown....

Besides democracy comes about once the economy is fully working, That is what Putins priority should be, sort out the corruption, make it easier for small and medium sized businesses to thrive as that is where most money and employment is going to be, then democracy can flourish.

I went back to Russia just after the 1998 crash and quite frankly I don't think Putin has done such a bad job stabilising the country. I feel sorry for Yeltsin due to the thankless task he had but at least now the country is on an evenish keel.

Georgia and the Ukraine, moaning minnies...you want cheap gas you play nicely....you want to go off and do your own thing, fine, but if you want to be truly independent then you pay the same price as everyone else.

Iceman 05-12-06 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike 'Red Ocktober' Hense
with the current rate of military buildup, both in the middle east and in the pacific... a HOT war is what you should really be worrying about...

there is no longer two monolithic sides to confront each other... at least there was a measure of control back then... introducing the military buildup of assets that we see happening today, plus the inflaming polarized ideologies into this new fragmented world situation, well eventaully a point will be reached where this has got to lead to an armed confrontation that will spiral out of control...

it will make mad of the 50s and 60s look like a church picnic...

make no plans past july 2014...

:cool:

--Mike

a man who has eyes. :up: ...but what up with july 2014? Doh!

XabbaRus 05-12-06 03:17 PM

Been reading again what CCIP has said.

Now the White House is trying to block Russia's entry to the WTO, bmainly due to concerns about "democracy" and human rights.

Then again look at China, ah but the US has a massive deficit with China so that should make sense.

The more Russia is backed into a corner the more belligerent she will become and come out fighting in one way or another. Also the more she will stick two fingers up to everyone else.

In some ways kind of like the kid at school who is shoved about, and made fun of who then works out and comes back and starts to throw his weight around.

Cheyney hasn't helped matters.....

Seriously we should get the world leaders in a room together and start banging heads....

Kapitan 05-12-06 03:28 PM

Well dont tell bush but Putin is black belt in judo

Should be intresting seeing putin is same build as me lmao

Skybird 05-12-06 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aaken
@ Skybird:
just out of curiosity, I didn't get the meaning of your comment on the italian democracy. Care to explain (maybe in PM since it's off topic) ?

Don't expect some deep intellectual comment here :lol: It just was an ironical stab at recent political events in italy - around berlusconi not willing to accept his defeat, and when he did, Prodi having extremely difficulties to see his candidates through election procedures in parliament, while Berlusconi's buddies voting with empty billets. also - how many governments have there been in italy since WWII? And how long do they usually survive, in mean? :-j

Skybird 05-12-06 03:55 PM

China wants energy, India wants energy, iran wants nuclear energy and weapons - Iran has oil, Russia has oil and gas and nuke tech. Dear america or europe: piss the Russians - and guess whom they will do business with, then? :lol: Neither the US nor Europe has the means to put threatening pressure on Russia. Cheney is an idiot. What he will acchieve by that confronting course is only: Russian oil and gas to China, to India, russian nuke tech to Iran, Iranian oil to china and India, military aid from India and China and Russia to Iran...and even more resistance from China and Russia towards any action concerning Iran. Those three are a natural alliance, and their interests mutually fit. Try piss the Russian, and all three will hang a sign on their door: "Do not disturb".

Unique style, Dick! One stupid move of yours, and several objectives of your intended plans lost. You should be prevented from using fork and knife for dinner: you're probbaly hurting your table neighbours with it, and yourself.

No matter if Iran, or China, or Islam: to solve all these problems and crisis depends on the fulfillment of one and the same most essential and vital precondition: becoming independend from Islamic and Russian energy ressources. As long as this precodntion is not successfully fulfilled, all this diplomatic threatening, and sabre-rattling, is just meaningless babbling. The only one who are impressed are the ones who do the babbling.

Kapitan 05-12-06 04:23 PM

The only thing they will achieve by boycotting Russia is a slap in the face litteraly, as skybird said if russia cant trade with america plenty of other people willing to pay that bit more so it boosts russia's economy and helps it grow and where will that leave europe and america up a creek without a paddel.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:02 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.