1 - frednu

Stockholm
(March 29, 2015)
EUROPE:
NATO MILITARY BUILD-UP,
WITH NO ARMS CONTROL
Vladimir P. Kozin – Head of Advisers’ Group,
Russian Institute for Strategic Studies,
Corresponding Member at the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences,
Professor, Russian Academy of Military Sciences
© Vladimir Kozin. 2015
1
THREE ELEMENTS OF CONCERN RELATED
TO EUROPE
BMDS
TNW
© Vladimir Kozin. 2015
CW
2
Mk-41
© Vladimir Kozin. 2015
3
EWR Vardø
EWR Thule
EWR Fylingdales
4 Aegis ships (the
Netherland4444s)
US BM44DS IN EUROPE (EPAA):
THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION
17 September 2009
ПРО США в Европе:
План администрации Обамы (ЕПАП)
17 сентября 2009 г.
24 SM-3 in Poland
(+possibly,GBI)
4 US Aegis ships
(in Spain)
X-Band
EWR
+ BMDS THAAD
+SM-3 (sea-based Aegis)
+ Aegis Ashore (SM-3)
24 SM-3 in
Romania
AN/TPY-2
+ NATO’s ALTBMD
+ PAC-2 +PAC-3
+ tactical nuclear wpns
+ 6 US Aegis ships
© Vladimir Kozin. 2015
4
Aegis capable US ships with SM-3 interceptors
Version
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
3.6.1.
23
24
23
19
17
16
13
11
?
?
4.0.1
5.0
5.1
TOTAL
2
0
0
25
4
1
0
29
6
3
0
9
4
0
32
9
6
0
9
8
0
33
9
13
0
35
9
15
1
36
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
29
32
43
Production of SM-3 per year
Block I/1A
107
113
113
136
136
136
136
136
136
136
Block IB
1
16
25
61
100
169
251
328
400
472
Block IIA
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
19
31
70
Block IIB
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
108
129
138
197
236
305
394
483
567
© Vladimir Kozin. 2015 (Source: US Congress Research Service.2014)
678
5
THE CORE OF THE US BMDS IS SEA-BASED “AEGIS” BMD WITH SM-3
INTERCEPTORS
2009:
2010:
3 КР/CG + 15 ЭМ/DDG = 18
5 КР/CG + 16 ЭМ/DDG = 21
RUSSIA FACES MINIMUM 6 US NAVY
COMBAT VESSELS WITH AEGIS BMDS
THAT IS WITH 180 SM-2 & SM-3
INTERCEPTORS IN EUROPE AND 8 SUCH
SHIPS IN ASIA-PACIFIC WITH 240 SM-3
2015: 5 КР/CG + 25 ЭМ/DDG
= 30 (incl. 14 in the Atlantic & 16
in the Pacific)
2041:
84 КР +ЭМ/CG+DDG (or 27% of the entire US Navy)
EACH SHIP MAY HAVE 30+ SM-3 INTERCEPTORS
Each 24 hours several BMDS ships are
sailing in the Black Sea, Baltic Sea,
Barents Sea
6
©
Vladimir Kozin. 2015
CURRENT THREAT: THE US TNW IN EUROPE IS A LEGASSY OF THE
COLD WAR
B61-3:170 Kt
B61-4: 50 Kt
B61-7: 360 Kt (SOA)
B61-10: 80 Kt
B61-11: 400 Kt (SOA)
В61-12: 50 Kt (SOA)
DEPLOYED AT 13 BASES
IN SIX NATO COUNTRIES
Deployment of the US
NTW in Europe is a
violation of the NPT
© Vladimir Kozin. 2015
THE US TNW IN EUROPE:
high precision free-fall
bombs
7
СИСТЕМА ПРО США/НАТО В ЕВРОПЕ УСИЛИВАЕТСЯ ПУТЕМ СОВЕРШЕНСТВОВАНИЯ И
МОДЕРНИЗАЦИИ ТЯО США И НАТО ПЕРЕДОВОГО БАЗИРОВАНИЯ.С ДРУГОЙ СТОРОНЫ,
СИСТЕМЫ ПРО США И НАТО ЗАЩИЩАЕТ ТЯО В ЕВРОПЕ
US/NATO BMDS IN EUROPE IS BEING STRENGTHENED BY THE UPGRADING AND
MODERNIZATION OF THE US/NATO FORWARD-BASED
TACTICAL NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN EUROPE
ON THE OTHER HAND, THE US BMD IS PROTECTING THEIR TNW IN EUROPE
ПРОГРАММА ПРОДЛЕНИЯ СРОКА СЛУЖБЫ ЯДЕРНЫХ АВИАБОМБ В-61 К 2038
ГОДУ ПОТРЕБУЕТ ДО 65 МЛРД.ДОЛЛ.
THE SLEP PROGRAM OF THE FREE-FALL NUCLEAR-TIPPED US B-61 AIR BOMBS
BY 2038 WILL REQUIRE
US $ 65 BILLIONS
ОЖИДАЕТСЯ ПРИНЯТИЕ НА ВООРУЖЕНИЕ НОВОЙ АВИАБОМБЫ В-61-12 (400-930 ЕДИНИЦ)
A NEW MODIFICATION OF THIS BOMB WILL BE COMISSIONED: B-61-12 (400-930 PIECES)
Авиабомбы В-61-7, В-61-11 и В-61-12 рассматриваются американскими
военными как тактические, так и стратегические, так как они могут
быть доставлены самолетами тактической и стратегической авиации, то
есть самолетами F-35 (две бомбы) и B-52H и B-2 (по 16 бомб)
Вombs B-61-7, B-61-11 and В-61-12 are considered by the US military
both as strategic and tactical, because they can be delivered by both
strategic and tactical aircraft, namely
В-52Н и В-2А (16 bombs each), as well as by a new Joint Strike Fighter F35 (2 bombs each)
©
Vladimir Kozin. 2015
8
NO SINGLE NATO STATE-PARTY TO THE CFE TREATY HAS EVER
RATIFIED IT
There is a need to draft a principally
new CFE Treaty, a legally binding one,
without flank limitations of TLE and
radical disparities in favor of NATO,
without artificial linkages with
conflict resolution,
and without the US TNW and BMDS
© Vladimir Kozin. 2015
9
NATO SUMMITS IN CHICAGO & NEWPORT:
A QUALITATIVELY NEW TRIAD
NATO SUMMIT IN CHICAGO (2012) &
IN NEWPORT (2014)
PREVIOUS SUMMITS
SERIOUS
THREAT
NW
NW
CW
BMD
ICBM
CW
SLBM
Heavy
bombers
Традиционная триада СНВ
Traditional SOA nuclear triad
©
Vladimir Kozin. 2015
“Старая”
диада
“Old” diad
Since 1989
New combined triad
involving strategic and tactical nuclear,
conventional weapons and ballistic missile
defense
10
NATO decided to demonstrate hostile
intentions to Russia and to resort to
provocative power projection
NATO FORWARD-DEPLOYED
POTENTIAL IS ENHANCED RADICALLY
& IS MOVING EASTWARDS TO
RUSSIA
Wales Summit :
 approved NATO Readiness Action Plan
 sanctioned the NATO Spearhead Force -VHDJTF (composition
in February 2015)
 established 2 new NATO C3I centers in Poland and Lithuania +
4 more (Bulgaria, Latvia, Estonia, Romania)
 urged more NATO member-states to join the US BMDS
 NATO military activity near Russia’s land increased by 5 times
In 2015 there will be 200 military drills
Wales Summit is the most anti-Russian meeting after the Cold
War 1.0
©
Vladimir Kozin. 2015
11
NATO DCA NEAR RUSSIA’S TERRITORY
NATO AF Operation
«Baltic Air Policing»
Began in March 2004 over Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia
+ AWACS are patrolling the airspace
The USA has acquired 8 military bases
in Bulgaria, Romania, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and
Estonia
DCA FROM 15 NATO MEMBER-SATES ARE
INVOLVED IN THIS OPERATION
AIRCRAFT ARE IN THE AIR 24h/365-366 days
per annum
© Vladimir Kozin. 2015
12
RUSSIAN AND NATO MILITARY DRILLS IN EUROPE IN 2015
© Vladimir Kozin. 2015
13
Chuck Hagel: “Russia is on NATO’s doorstep”
14
US President Directive № NSPD-66/HSPD-25
signed January 9, 2009
«B. National Security and Homeland Security Interests in the Arctic
1. The United States has broad and fundamental national security interests in the Arctic region and is
prepared to operate
either independently or in conjunction with other states to safeguard these
interests. These interests include such matters as missile defense and early warning; deployment of
sea and air systems for strategic sealift, strategic deterrence, maritime presence and maritime
security operations; and ensuring freedom of navigation and overflight».
«Б. Интересы национальной безопасности и внутренней безопасности в Арктике
1. США имеют широкие и фундаментальные интересы безопасности в Арктическом регионе и
готовы действовать там либо индивидуально, либо во взаимодействии с другими государствами с
целью защиты указанных интересов. Эти интересы включают такие направления как:
противоракетная оборона и средства раннего предупреждения; развертывание средств ВМС и ВВС
для обеспечения стратегических морских перевозок, стратегическое ядерное сдерживание,
военно-морское присутствие и операции по обеспечению военно-морской безопасности, а также
обеспечение свободы навигации и пролетов в воздушном пространстве».
© Владимир Козин. 2015
15
What are the major differences between Russian and
NATO military exercises?
Russia has never been the first nation that started a large-scale
of military drills. Russia has resorted to the responsive actions.
Russian troops are in their state. American troops are
thousands kilometers away from their country.
Russia agreed to invite foreign observers to its exercises,
including observers to “unexpected” or to previously
unannounced drills.
Russian western military district has the smallest number of
combat units stationed there. NATO forces massively
outnumber Russian troops there and they are heavily
reinforcing their presence there.
© Vladimir Kozin. 2015
16
BETWEEN 1972 AND 2010 SEVEN
BILATERAL NUCLEAR ARMS CONTROL
AGREEMENTS HAVE BEEN SIGNED:
SALT-1 (1972)
SALT -2 (1979)
INF (1987)
START-1 (1991)
START-2 (1993)
SORT (2002)
AND START-3 (new START in 2010)
THERE HAVE NOT BEEN ANY KIND OF TALKS ON
TACTICAL NUCLEAR WEAPONS
SINCE 1945 TILL 2015
© Vladimir Kozin. 2015
17
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE COLD WARS 1 & 2
IN TERMS OF ARMS CONTROL
THE COLD WAR
IN 1946-2014/2015
NEW PHASE OF THE COLD WAR IN
2014/2015
2 х SALT + 4 х START
INF
ZERO
CWC + BWC
Land-based
+ Naval CBMs
CFE
© Vladimir Kozin. 2015
18
CONTEMPORARY CHALLENGE: A DEEP-SEATED MISTRUST
BETWEEN THE USA & RUSSIA IN THE MILITARY DOMAIN
15 MAJOR DIFFERENCES IN GLOBAL ARMS CONTROL BETWEEN RUSSIA & THE USA
1. US regional and global missile defense deployment.
2. Conversion of the US SSBN into SSGN.
3. No desire of the USA to count SOA stored in active reserve.
4. US disagreement to control long-range nuclear-tipped SLCM.
5. The US has no intention to proliferate INCSEA accord on strategic nuclearpowered submarines.
6. US still has tactical nuclear weapons in Europe – outside its territory.
7. US still has offensive nuclear doctrine (general nuclear deterrence and
extended nuclear deterrence) – first nuclear strike.
8. No US intention to draft a new CFE (CFE-2).
9. No US desire to reach accord on PAROS.
10.US has no wish to sign ASAT accord.
11. Violation of the INF Treaty by the USA: testing BMD interceptors by using
medium-range and “intermediate-range” ballistic missiles.
12. Operation “Baltic Air Policing” conducted by NATO during 24h/365 days
13. Still no ratification of the CTBT by the USA
14. No limitations on combat armed UAVs
15. No limitations on hypersonic conventional weapons with pin-point accuracy
19
© Vladimir Kozin. 2015
CONTINUATION OF THE COLD WAR 1.0
OR THE BEGINNING OF A COLD WAR 2.0?
17 MAJOR THREATS
ARE
LISTED IN THE UPDATED RUSSIAN
MILITARY DOCTRINE
(DECEMBER 26, 2014)
13
THERE HAVE BEEN
IN THE PREVIOUS ONE
(2010)
©
Vladimir Kozin. 2015
20
СОПОСТАВЛЕНИЕ ЯДЕРНЫХ ДОКТРИН МЕЖДУ США И РОССИЕЙ
ASSESSMENTS BETWEEN THE US AND RUSSIA’S NUCLEAR DOCTRINES
USA
1. Наступательное сдерживание:
нанесение первого ядерного удара
(упреждающего и превентивного
удара)/Offensive deterrence: first-use of NW
(pre-emptive & preventive strikes)
2. Безусловное ядерное сдерживание: «мы
нанесем удар по любой стране», даже по
безъядерной зоне; небольшое исключение (не
будет ядерного удара по государствамучастникам ДНЯО, но с исключением: если они
соблюдают ДНЯО/ Unconditional deterrence:
”we will attack any nation, even inside the NFZ”;
very limited exception (”no” vs NPT memberstates, if they are faithful to the NPT)
3. «Расширенное сдерживание»: ТЯО в
Европе в качестве оружия передового
базирования, за пределами США/«Extended
deterrence»: forward-based land TNW, outside
the continental US
ПОДДЕРЖИВАЕТСЯ ГЛОБАЛЬНОЙ,
РАСШИРЕННОЙ ПРО/ BACKED BY GLOBAL,
EXTENDED BMD
©
Vladimir Kozin. 2015
RUSSIA
1. Оборонительное сдерживание:
неприменение ядерного оружия, нет
упреждающего и превентивного удара/
Defensive deterrence: no first-use, no preemptive, no preventive strikes
2. Условное сдерживание: ответный удар
«если на нас нападут»; нет удара по
участникам ДНЯО и безъядерных зон/
Conditional deterrence: responsive attack: “if we
are attacked”; no attack of any NPT memberstate and NFZ member-state
3. Отсутствие «расширенного
сдерживания»; не развертывает ТЯО за
пределами своей территории/ No extended
deterrence: no permanent land-based TNW
deployment outside Russia
ПОДДЕРЖИВАЕТСЯ ПРО ВНУТРИ ГРАНИЦ/
BACKED BY BMD WITHIN ITS BORDERS
21
HOW TO FIND THE WAY OUT FROM THE COLD WAR 2.0?
TO ERADICATE ALL LISTED CHALLENGES AND THREATS
THE USA MUST PULL BACK ALL ITS TNW FROM EUROPE AND
CANCEL ITS THE FISRT-USE OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS POLICY
AN INTERNATIONAL ABM TREATY SHOULD BE ELABORATED SPECIFYING THE
MAX CEILINGS ON THE BMD INTERCEPTORS AND SETTING LIMITS ON THEIR
DEPLOYMENT OUTSIDE THE OWNER STATES
NATO SHOULD STOP ITS CONVENTIONAL MILITARY BUILD-UP NEAR RUSSIA.
A NEW CFE TREATY (CFE-2) SHOULD BE DRAFTED. THE BALTIC AIR POLICING
OPN HAS TO BE CANCELLED
© Vladimir Kozin. 2015
22
HENRY A. KISSINGER
“The new Cold War really exists
and it represents a danger
that can be transformed into
“a tragedy” if ignored.
Such tragedy
can be gradually modified
into “a Hot War”.
©
Vladimir Kozin. 2015
23
Conclusion
Instead of imposing the Cold War 2.0
the entire Europe and the world at large
really need a global detente
that was developing quite successfully
during last century
RUSSIA CANNOT LET A NEW PHASE OF THE COLD WAR OR A “HOT
WAR” TO BE UNLEASHED - EITHER FOR ITSELF OR FOR THE ENTIRE
WORLD
©
Vladimir Kozin. 2015
24
A special US-Russia’s summit is
needed
to tackle all these issues with a new
US President after his inauguration
An All-European Security Summit
should be also convened
to debate all security-related issues
that have direct bearing on Europe
© Vladimir Kozin. 2015
25
REAL AIMS OF UNLEASHING
THE NEW PHASE OF THE COLD WAR
The Cold War 2.0 was intentionally initiated by President
Barack Obama for several obvious reasons:
1. To undermine Russia’s military and economic potential
2. To create more pro-Western states along the perimeter
with the Russian territory
3.To ruin the prestige of the Russian President & to
topple him
4. To increase NATO military expenditures
5. To undermine European economy & trade
6. To make Europe more submissive to the USA
©
Vladimir Kozin. 2015
26
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
THE COLD WAR 2.0 and THE COLD WAR 1.0
 INTENSIFIED NATO MILITARY ACTIVITY NEAR RUSSIAN
TERRITORY
BY 5 TIMES
 IT SLOWED DOWN THE OVERALL ARMS CONTROL PROCESS
 TRIGGERED ON A TOUGH WAR-FLAGGING RHETORIC VS
RUSSIA
 MUCH TOUGHER ILLEGAL AND UNJUSTIFIED SANCTIONS
HAVE BEEN IMPOSED
ATTEMPTS TO OVERTHROW THE LEGAL AUTHORITIES IN
POST-SOVIET TIME STATES HAVE INTENSIFIED
©Vladimir Kozin. 2015
27
10 ACTIONS THAT HAVE GRADUALLY LEAD TO A COLD
WAR 2.0
• US GLOBAL BMD: 1999, 2002 and 2009
• NATO ENLARGEMENT IN 1999-2009 (+ 12 states or + 43%)
• THE END OF THE ABM TREATY IN 2002
• THE END OF THE CFE TREATY IN 2007
• GEORGIA’S ATTACKED OF SOUTH OSSETIA IN 2008
• THE US DECISION TO MORDERNIZE THE TNW IN 2010
• THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EPAA 1st PHASE IN 2011
• THE ‘CHICAGO TRIAD’ SET UP IN 2012 AND ITS CONTINUATION IN
2014
• THE USA AND NATO DIRECT INTERFERENCE INTO
UKRAINIAN AFFAIRS AND OPEN VERBAL & MATERIAL THREATS TO
RUSSIA IN 2014
Even illegal arrests of businessman Viktor Boot in Thailand & pilot
Alexander Yaroshenko in Liberia and later sentenced in the USA
28
©
Vladimir Kozin. 2015
NEW COLD WAR WILL BE A LONG ONE & MORE DANGEROUS
IT WILL LEAD TO FURTHER MILITARIZATION OF THE USA AND
NATO
IT WILL STALL THE ARMS CONTROL PROCESS, ESPECIALLY IN
NUCLEAR FIELED AND THE BMDS, HINDER THE PROCESS OF
CREATION OF A NUCLEAR-FREE WORLD
IT WILL INCREASE THE GLOBAL MILITARY EXPENDITURES
IT WILL BREAK DOWN ESSENTIAL PERSONAL CONTACTS
BETWEEN MANY WORLD LEADERS
NEW COLD WAR MAY BE TRANSFORMED INTO
A “HOT WAR”
©
Vladimir Kozin. 2015
29
The principle of multipolar world and “mutually assured
security” should prevail.
The Cold War 2.0 should be stopped and not proliferated
into other areas of the globe becoming the Hot War
There is the urgent need to carry out a rational
reconstruction of the present-day situation and adapt it to
the new realities in the system of international relations
A special US-Russia’s summit is needed to tackle all these
issues with a new US President after his inauguration.
An All-European Security Summit should be also convened to
tackle all security-related issues that have direct bearing on
Europe.
©
Vladimir Kozin. 2015
30
EXTRA CHALLENGE:
STRONG ANTI-RUSSIAN
WAR-FLAGGING RHETORIC
“RUSSIAN AGGRESSION IN UKRAINE”
“RUSSIA’S ANNEXATION OF CRIMEA”
“RUSSIA VIOLATED ALL INTERNATIONAL ACCORDS”
“Russia ranks second place
between Ebola fever & terrorism (ISIS)”: President Obama
at the UNO, Democratic Party meeting and in Brisbane
“RUSSIA WILL PAY HIGH PRICE” – WHAT FOR?
©
Vladimir Kozin. 2015
31
“WRITING ON THE WALL”
A potential confrontation between Washington and Moscow
could be stronger and deeper than during the Cuban missile
crisis in October 1962 and after NATO “dual-track decision”
stamped in December 1979
The difference between the looming military standoff and these
two cases is that during a new one the U.S. will have more
interceptors than during 1962 and 1979-1987 confrontation
*
*
*
THE TEMPTATION TO DELIVER THE FIRST NUCLEAR STRIKE AND
PROTECT THE USA & NATO BY MISSILE “DEFENSE SHIELD” IS GREATER
THAN IN THESE TWO HISTORIC CASES,
ESPECIALLY WHEN THE NUMBER OF INTERCEPTORS WILL
OUTNUMBER THE SOA WARHEADS
©
Vladimir Kozin. 2015
32
NEW PHASE OF THE COLD WAR
IN 2014-2015
The Cold War has not ended by adopting of
“The Paris Charter for a New Europe” on
November 21, 1990
A motto on “strategic partnership” between
Russia and the USA/NATO announced in
November 2010 in Lisbon
is no longer valid
©
Vladimir Kozin. 2015
33
«
RUSSIAN DEPUTY FOREIGN MINISTER
SERGEY RYABKOV
“Nuclear zero is possible. Even those who at the end of 60s were drafting the
fundamental Treaty on non-proliferation of nuclear weapons have been talking about
it. … Russia is fully committed to its obligations under Article 6 of the NPT. Russia
never abstained and will never abstain from talking about the nuclear zero”.
(Interview with “The Voice of Russia” broadcasting corporation. 28th May 2013)
«Ядерный ноль» возможен, и об этом говорили даже те, кто в конце 1960-х годов
разрабатывал фундаментальный Договор о нераспространении ядерного
оружия… Россия полностью привержена своим обязательствам по статье 6
ДНЯО, никогда не уходила и не будет уходить от разговора о «ядерном ноле».
(Интервью радиовещательной корпорации «Голос России», 28 мая 2013 года)
Vladimir Kozin.
2013
©© Vladimir
Kozin.
2013
34