0 $
2,500 $
5,000 $
400 $
15 DAYS LEFT UNTIL THE END OF JANUARY

Russia’s New Nuclear Deterrence Fundamentals: Potentially Respond To Ballistic Missile With Nuclear One

Support SouthFront

Russia's New Nuclear Deterrence Fundamentals: Potentially Respond To Ballistic Missile With Nuclear One

Click to see full-size image

The highest priority of the Russian state policy in the field of national security is to ensure nuclear deterrence as the basis for strategic deterrence, reported Russian Ministry of Defense’s outlet Red Star on August 7th.

As such most notably, Russia would potentially respond to a ballistic missile launch with a nuclear missile launch.

“The first condition is related to the receipt of reliable information about the launch of ballistic missiles attacking the territory of Russia and (or) its allies. The very fact of a ballistic missile launch will be recorded by a missile attack warning system.

At the same time, it will not be possible to determine the type of its equipment (nuclear or non-nuclear). Therefore, any attacking missile will likely be deemed as a nuclear-armed missile.”

The growth of negative trends in the world accompanying the formation of a new system of global and regional security contributes to the creation of prerequisites for the intensification of current and emergence of new threats to the Russian security, which can develop into military conflicts of various scales and intensity.

Most significantly, the most important actions that Russia needs to undertake is to deter any potentially enemy from attacking it and/or its allies.

The official views of the Russian Federation on nuclear deterrence in modern conditions were publicly declared on June 2nd, 2020 in the “Fundamentals of the state policy of the Russian Federation in the field of nuclear deterrence.”

It should be emphasized that the appearance of a document of this level in public space occurred for the first time in the entire history of the Soviet Union and the Russian Federation as its legal successor.

As a document of strategic planning in the field of military security, the Fundamentals define the dangers and threats that need to be neutralized, which nuclear deterrence is carried out, the main principles and subjects of deterrence and, most importantly, the conditions for a possible transition to the use of nuclear weapons.

There are various reports regarding the Fundamentals.

For example, the media of the United States and its NATO allies emphasize the “aggressiveness” of Russia’s policy, its desire to “justify the creation of its new strategic weapons,” “lower the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons,” and split the bloc’s ranks.

More balanced publications by “neutral” specialists speak of Russia’s desire to give international legitimacy to Russian initiatives in the field of nuclear deterrence in the face of aggressive American steps to build up strike arms and break the system of international arms control treaties.

At the same time, a number of Western experts and most domestic experts note the timeliness of the document’s appearance and Russia’s desire to curb the arms race unleashed by the United States, the militarization of space, the modernization of the American missile defense and the demolition of the international security system.

As such, declaring under what conditions Russia would use a nuclear weapon make any attempts to exert “force pressure” on Russia essentially useless.

In order to bring the Russian position on nuclear deterrence to the attention of the world community and the military-political leadership of the states – potential adversaries, a number of conceptual provisions set out in the Fundamentals were declared.

  1. Once again, it has been doctrinally confirmed that the “nuclear policy” of the Russian Federation is purely defensive in nature.

This is not a simple declaration, but the cornerstone of the general policy of the state, on which strategic deterrence has been and is being built. Russia is not going to attack anyone, but will take all steps to neutralize any aggression against the country. This approach reflects a strategy of active containment and can be characterized as “active defense”. At the same time, Russia is making and will make all the necessary efforts to reduce the nuclear threat.

  1. Nuclear deterrence is aimed at ensuring that the potential adversary, including the coalition composition, understands the inevitability of retaliation in the event of aggression against Russia and its allies — inflicting unacceptable damage on it in a retaliatory strike.

At its core, nuclear deterrence is a specific form of the reflexive policy of the state, carried out by influencing mainly the military-political leadership of a potential adversary through the conviction of the inevitability of negative consequences for him as a result of the guaranteed use by the Russian Federation of forces and means of nuclear deterrence.

  1. At the heart of nuclear deterrence lies the combat capabilities of nuclear forces of various bases, therefore, maintaining the nuclear potential at a level sufficient to ensure deterrence is one of the priority tasks of our state.

At the same time, the minimum sufficiency of combat-ready forces and means is stated, capable, due to the rationality of their structure and composition, methods of use, as well as high combat readiness, to ensure the infliction of unacceptable damage to any potential enemy in any development of the military-political and strategic situation.

This means that Russia will not get involved in an exhausting nuclear arms race, priority is given not to quantitative, but to their qualitative composition.

  1. It was emphasized that the main military threats, for the neutralization of which nuclear deterrence is being carried out, come from the collective West and are associated with the build-up of general-purpose groupings near the borders of the Russian Federation, which, among other things, are armed with means of delivering nuclear weapons, with the deployment of missile defense systems and means, strike weapons for various purposes and basing, including space.
  2. Two groups of states have been identified as subjects of nuclear deterrence:
  • individual states possessing nuclear and (or) other types of weapons of mass destruction or significant combat potential of general-purpose forces that consider the Russian Federation as a potential adversary, as well as military coalitions (blocs, alliances) with the participation of these states;
  • States that provide their national territory for the deployment of strategic offensive weapons (cruise and ballistic missiles, hypersonic aircraft, attack unmanned aerial vehicles), strategic anti-missile defense systems, radar stations for the warning system of nuclear missile strike, nuclear weapons and (or) others types of weapons of mass destruction of other states that can be used against the Russian Federation and (or) its allies.

This essentially makes potential hosts of, for example, US nuclear weapons – such as Germany to reconsider their position. As recent surveys even show that most Germans wish that the US nuclear would be removed the country, regardless of this.

  1. The above principles of nuclear deterrence are generally known and determine the main directions of Russia’s policy to ensure containment. This also applies to the centralization of control, and the constant readiness of forces and means, and the rationality of their structure and composition.

Furthermore, it emphasizes that compliance with international obligations in the field of arms control is a priority for Russia.

  1. For the first time in a public space, conditions have been declared that determine the possibility of Russia’s use of nuclear weapons.

The first condition is related to the receipt of reliable information about the launch of ballistic missiles attacking the territory of Russia and (or) its allies. The very fact of a ballistic missile launch will be recorded by a missile attack warning system.

At the same time, it will not be possible to determine the type of its equipment (nuclear or non-nuclear). Therefore, any attacking missile will be deemed as a nuclear-armed missile.

Information about the launch of the rocket will automatically be communicated to the military-political leadership of Russia, which, depending on the prevailing situation, will determine the scale of the response actions of the nuclear forces

In the Fundamentals, Russia has designated “red lines”, which it advises shouldn’t be crossed. If a potential adversary decides to do this, then the answer will no doubt be overwhelming.

At the same time, the specification of response actions (where, when, how much) will be determined by the military-political leadership of Russia, depending on the situation.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

Support SouthFront

SouthFront

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
15 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
johnny rotten

It is all right, but the madmen will not take it into consideration, perhaps they will not even read it, where the able-bodied people see the risk of war the crazy warmongers see only the profit, the exceptionalism of those who believe they live on the bright hill will drag everyone to the ‘hell.

HiaNd

I don’t agree. They did take Russian hyper-sonic missiles in consideration and have reacted very strongly on that.

Everything that is use of the strategic weapons in Russian army does interest them
To which extent they will be affected with this “news” I can not tell.

This article does NOT speak about anything new, since use of tactical nukes was announced by Russia few years ago already.
This is just new specification.

If US in local conflict like Syria decide to use ballistic missile against Russian base, Russia of course can not know if it is nuke or conventional missile.
So they will respond immediately with tactical nukes.
And we will end up with nuclear conflict most probably.

Lone Ranger

Good move.
Deterrence is gold.
As we could see strange things can happen, only way to stop genocide is a threat of total annihilation.

christianblood

Exactly, that is the only way the U$-led Evil Empire could be stopped!

<>

Hmm, interesting..
“The first condition is related to the receipt of reliable information about the launch of ballistic missiles attacking the territory of Russia and (or) its allies”
So if Israel or the U.S attack Iran (as Russia claims they are their alliy), does that mean Russia will strike back even if they themselves weren’t attacked? then we will have a Mutual assured destruction.
If anybody thinks for a second we would let Iran get a nucelar bomb, they haev a big mistake.

Lone Ranger

They probably already have one.
Aside from that Russia and Iran arent allies, partners maybe but not allies.
If you are really a military guy than your strategical thinking is compromized.
Lets say everything you wrote is true…dealing with a “maybe” through deterrence and diplomacy is sure better than total annihilation.
Going down guns blazing might look cool but isnt very smart on the longterm…

<>

We don’t have a choice, Iran having a nuke is like Hezbollah having one, I’m sure you would agree with me that Russia would not let any Chechen rebel group have nukes too. It’s more than a redline for us, it’s an existential threat that we can not agree to.

christianblood

Then why does Israel is transferring its nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia, a Saudi Arabia which is basically NO different from ISIS and Al-Qaeda? More of this below:

https://www.mintpressnews.com/israel-saudi-arabia-nuclear-weapons/243256/

Lone Ranger

Chechen rebel groups were far worse than any Iranian faction.
Just my opinion…
You would be right, if they wouldnt have one already.
Im pretty sure they already do.
How do I know that?
Simple logic.
If they wouldnt have any you would have already started a war or full nuclear strike on them.
As I often say deterrence is gold.
If it was up to me every single nation would have nukes, all the wars would stop instantly.
MAD Doctrine works.

<>

Best option is to remove the mullah regime so Israel and Iran can be friends again, we have no disputes except for their radical Islamic ideology. If it does come to a war..well so help us God the ME will not be the same again.

Lone Ranger

There is already a war for the past 10 years…
Iraq tried to remove them on CIA orders in the 80s, they ended up losing 5million Iraqis, the war lead to an economic collapse and the invasion of Kuwait, we know the rest of the story.
Israel wont start a conventional war.
And how many times can you and the U.S. dish up that fertilizer story?
Sooner or later even the sheeple will notice and what than?
As I said to your earlier, your foreign policy is counterproductive.
But afterall its not my problem…

rightiswrong rightiswrong

The best option is to remove the mad Zionist regime so Palestine can come back into the realm of civilised nations.

christianblood

Well-said!

rightiswrong rightiswrong

If anybody thinks the world will watch IsraHell and the USA nuke millions of people and do nothing, they have made a big mistake.

Tommy Jensen

The problem for Russia is that our US ballistic nuclear missiles are stealth invisibles and noise less!

No one can see them on the radar when our missiles are flying and arriving, and that is a BIG problem for all our enemies!
Further we have our Space Centre with photonic lasers, and we only use ballistic missiles in pawn wars because it is obsolete.

15
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x