Russia threatens Nato with military strikes over missile defence system

[jimmy olsen]

Seems like this guy forgot it's 2012 not 1982

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/9243954/Russia-threatens-Nato-with-military-strikes-over-missile-defence-system.html

Russia threatens Nato with military strikes over missile defence system
Russia has threatened Nato with military strikes against in Poland and Romania if a missile defence radar and interceptors are deployed in Eastern Europe.

By Bruno Waterfield, Brussels

6:06PM BST 03 May 2012

General Nikolai Makarov, Russia's most senior military commander, warned Nato that if it proceeded with a controversial American missile defence system, force would be used against it.

"A decision to use destructive force pre-emptively will be taken if the situation worsens," he said.

Gen Makarov has threatened to target Nato bases hosting an anti-missile system designed by the US to protect European allies against attack from states such as Iran.

He said that Russia would counter Nato deployment by stationing short-range Iskander missiles in the Russian Kaliningrad exclave near Poland, creating the worst military tensions since the Cold War.

"The deployment of new strike weapons in Russia's south and northwest – including of Iskander systems in Kaliningrad – is one of our possible options for destroying the system's European infrastructure," he said.


John McCain, the US senator on a visit to Lithuania, attacked Russia's plans in Kaliningrad as an "excuse to have a military build-up in this part of the world".

"It is really an egregious example of what might be even viewed as paranoia on the part of Vladimir Putin," he said.

The chief of the Russian general staff has drawn up a detailed analysis, presented to the Alliance, that claims to show the Nato system could eliminate Russian missiles by the end of the decade.

"A thorough analysis showed that once the third and fourth stages are deployed, the capability to intercept Russian intercontinental ballistic missiles will be real," he said.

The missile defence row with Russia has dogged relations between Moscow and Washington for a decade and has now threatened to derail President Barack Obama's 2009 overture to "reset" diplomatic ties.

Anatoly Serdyukov, the Russian defence minister, warned on Thursday that Russia-Nato negotiations on the anti-missile system had reached an impasse.

"We have not been able to find mutually-acceptable solutions at this point and the situation is practically at a dead end," he said.

Russia's threat to militarise the dispute came as a special American and Nato team began Moscow talks ahead of next month's official deployment of the first elements of the new missile shield.

Alexander Vershbow, Nato's deputy secretary general, tried to reassure Russia that the new system was not even able to target Russian intercontinental ballistic missiles, even if the Alliance wanted to.

"Our Nato system is neither designed against, nor directed at Russia," he said.

"[Gen. Makarov's] briefings are based on the false assumption that the Nato system can launch before the burnout of an attacking ballistic missile, which is simply not the case."

Russia is vehemently opposed to the Nato and American defence system billed as defending European Alliance members in Eastern Europe from potential nuclear threats from Iran or North Korea.

Gen Makarov's hard line has raised concerns that it could herald a hardening of attitudes, or even a new Cold War, in the Russian presidential transition from Dmitry Medvedev back to Vladimir Putin, a military hawk and former KGB spy.

Mr Putin will be sworn in for a third term as Russian president on Monday and yesterday's talks in Moscow were aimed at trying to soothe tensions. The incoming Russian leader has already decided against attending Nato Chicago summit in two weeks as protest the shield's formal deployment.

"The developments are not positive," said a Western diplomat. "At best the comments are a negotiating stance, at worst it is a sign of a hardening line in Russia."

[mongers]

Seems like this guy forgot it's 2012 not 1982

Yeah agreed the NATO dud is so out of touch. 

[Razgovory]

I wonder if General Makarov will still be a general next week.

[Ed Anger]

I wonder if General Makarov will still be a general next week.

He'll turn into a pistol.

[DGuller]

I wonder if General Makarov will still be a general next week.

He'll turn into a pistol.

[KRonn]

Heh, Russkies, top General no less! Threatening NATO with an attack. How come the US and/or NATO can convince these clowns that we aren't at odds with them? Or maybe they don't want to see a missile defense, because even if they accept that it's geared towards Iran, well, Iran is kind of their friend. At least to use as a spoiler against the West. Just see how long they can hold that tiger by the tail as a so called friend.

[DGuller]

Heh, Russkies, top General no less! Threatening NATO with an attack. How come the US and/or NATO can convince these clowns that we aren't at odds with them? Or maybe they don't want to see a missile defense, because even if they accept that it's geared towards Iran, well, Iran is kind of their friend. At least to use as a spoiler against the West. Just see how long they can hold that tiger by the tail as a so called friend.

Russians, for better or worse, are extremely cynical when it comes to foreign policy.  They know that alliances and good relations can't be guaranteed to last, so they place a lot of value on facts on the ground.  They know that anti-missile shields in Poland are a potential threat to their power, so they assume it is a threat. 

They don't really care about the veracity of the claims about the intended targets of the shield.  All they care about is whether it has the potential to be used against them, or be a building block to a system that can be used against them.  If they think that it can be, then the potential of that threat far outweighs any warmth in relations that Russia may currently have with US.  Putin would be a really tough EU3 MP player.

[CountDeMoney]

has raised concerns that it could herald a hardening of attitudes, or even a new Cold War,

By all means, let's bankrupt them again even more.

[Razgovory]

Somehow I doubt Putin wants to be painted into a corner where his only choices are to accept the missiles or start WWIII.

[DGuller]

Somehow I doubt Putin wants to be painted into a corner where his only choices are to accept the missiles or start WWIII.

He's only painted into a corner if US calls him on it.  Also, painting yourself into a corner is not necessarily a bad strategy.  Sometimes the best strategy in the game of chicken is to remove your ability to back down.

[grumbler]

Yeah agreed the NATO dud is so out of touch.

Yep agreed duds are usually out of touch and Nato ones are no different and commas are for pussies.

[Tonitrus]

The article is a little bit misleading...

I looked at what the guy actually said (in Russian), and it seems to me that he -not- saying "if you put in the missile defense system, we will preemptively strike it", but actually saying "if you put in the missile defense system, and if there is a crisis situation, we'll have plans to preemptively destroy it in order to preserve our nuclear deterrent".

Now, whether the missile defense system is a realistic threat to their deterrent(laughable, but Russian paranoia is kinda understandable), is another issue.

[grumbler]

He's only painted into a corner if US calls him on it.  Also, painting yourself into a corner is not necessarily a bad strategy.  Sometimes the best strategy in the game of chicken is to remove your ability to back down.

Boy, I wish we had one of those Doomsday Machines!

[grumbler]

The article is a little bit misleading...

I looked at what the guy actually said (in Russian), and it seems to me that he -not- saying "if you put in the missile defense system, we will preemptively strike it", but actually saying "if you put in the missile defense system, and if there is a crisis situation, we'll have plans to preemptively destroy it in order to preserve our nuclear deterrent".

Now, whether the missile defense system is a realistic threat to their deterrent(laughable, but Russian paranoia is kinda understandable), is another issue.

Thanks for the clarification; I don't agree that Russian concerns are laughable, but do agree that the paranoia is understandable.

[Tonitrus]

I meant "laughable" in that I don't think even the grandest missile defense scheme we have envisioned to deploy in Europe has a snowball's chance in hell of stopping even a significant amount of Russia's ICBMs.