Will the US be able to destroy Russia’s main allies – the army and navy?

Americans will strike without conditions and warnings

A few days ago, John Herbst, the former US ambassador to Ukraine, director of the Eurasian Center for the Atlantic Council, said: the main goal of all sanctions against Russia is to deprive it of a strong army and navy.

“And we don’t want a strong aggressive state to have a strong army or a strong navy,” the Russian-language TV channel RT, in particular, quoted the functionary.


Since this statement was made by John Herbst in the television studio of “independent” Ukraine, it is likely that some of the local TV viewers took this pathetic statement seriously. However, among Russian military experts, this statement caused at least a skeptical smile.


For example, Vladimir Kozin, a professor at the Academy of Military Sciences of the Russian Federation and a leading expert at the Center for Military-Political Research at MGIMO, called this goal absolutely unreal.


– As is known, the sanctions were imposed a long time ago by the Americans themselves, and from the European Union,” he stressed in an interview with a correspondent.

  • But, nevertheless, nothing terrible happened for us. How much money is required for defense, and so much is allocated. Promising government order is defined and executed.


Moreover, in the opinion of Oleg Ponomarenko, a military expert at the Center for Strategic Conjuncture, this American aspiration even leads to the opposite effect: the more Russia is “clamped down” on the international arena, the higher its absolute military might is.


– If, in relation to any other country, the“ sanctions ”strategy might have worked, – the expert specified, “in this particular case it will not work with Russia, we have a very powerful resource base.

Of course, Oleg Ponomarenko recognizes, sanctions can prevent the penetration into Russia of some technologies that our country did not possess before, and this, in theory, could prevent the creation of new types of weapons. But, in his opinion, it is quite possible to balance the balance of scales in the modern arms race more mass production of military equipment of previous modifications. That in the event of a military conflict is fraught with serious losses for the enemy, who, in principle, understands this perfectly. Moreover, Vladimir Kozin argues that we have enough money not only for this, but also for the modernization of existing nuclear weapons, so there’s nothing to be sad about.

– What then says this phrase of the former American ambassador? Does he not understand the state of things?

  • It’s just such bravado, – Vladimir Kozin believes.

– This is wishful thinking. He wants so much, especially since he is a former American ambassador to Ukraine.


– But do not such tirades serve as indirect evidence that America fears a direct military clash with us?

– I think that fears. There are even exaggerated fears. After all, the fact is that our president, the Supreme Commander himself, said a hundred times that Russia does not need aggression, we are not planning to seize Europe or other parts of the globe. We have practically no military bases on the territory of foreign countries, when compared with the Americans or NATO. We have the entire military doctrine can fit in four words – conditional defensive nuclear deterrence. Conditional – because in two cases there is the word “if.” If a direct attack is made on us with the use of weapons of mass destruction and if aggression is committed with the use of conventional weapons, provided that the very existence of our state is threatened. Accordingly, if there are no these “ifs”, there will be no use of nuclear weapons on our part. But the “tramp” doctrine of February 2 of this year is several times more aggressive.

– What is it?

– It can also fit in four words – unconditional offensive nuclear deterrence. Therefore, there are seven times more reasons for the use of nuclear weapons. Against our two bases – as many as fourteen. And they are incomprehensible not only to non-specialists, but even to specialists. For example, the possibility of using nuclear weapons by Americans comes in the event that somewhere abroad a technological breakthrough occurs! This is a rubber formula, what is considered a technological breakthrough? Or, for example, a cyber attack on the United States. If any hacker tries to break into the Pentagon network – also a nuclear strike. And the teachings of the American and NATO troops, the number of which doubled.

And the teachings of the American and NATO troops, the number of which doubled compared with 2014? Only large three hundred a year, but small ones are not counted. For personnel – a three-fold increase. Air reconnaissance 10 times increased around our borders in all directions. In general, all this suggests that the United States definitely has anxiety. And there is a desire to keep Russia in suspense, so the military expenses are huge.


– Can you give the numbers?


  • For this fiscal year – 719 billion dollars only from Americans. And the next year, Trump already threw the bait for 750 billion. The military spending of all NATO countries is adjusted to a single figure of 2% of GDP. Not all have reached this figure yet, and Trump is already demanding an increase in spending to 4% of GDP. In the next 10 years, Americans plan to spend $ 400 billion on upgrading only existing nuclear weapons. And in the next 30 years, the creation of fundamentally new carriers of strategic nuclear weapons – bombers, submarines – called expenses in the amount of 1.2-1.7 trillion dollars, taking into account inflation. Not a single nuclear state in the world, neither the nuclear “five”, nor the so-called “small countries” that also created nuclear weapons, can spend so much money on it, as the United States itself.

– Why did America need to pedal the arms race, once again inflating it to the universal scale?

– Because, starting in 1945, when the Americans first used nuclear weapons, they believe this is the most offensive unconditional nuclear deterrence.” This is, so to speak, the core. From here are large-scales of modernization.


Here is the withdrawal from the treaty on medium and shorter range missiles (DRSMD). In fact, America came out of it back in 2001, beginning to use when testing missile defense systems as target rockets, precisely those that according to the INF Treaty of 1987 are prohibited. By October of this year, by the way, America has already conducted 95 similar tests, including for the US military bases in Poland (completed) and in Romania (commissioned). And this is without taking into account the tests of the Patriot air defense system.


True, formally, legally and politically, the United States remained within the framework of the INF. They did not notify Russia in writing about this, although verbally many things were said, even ultimatums were. At the same time, the Americans at the same time violate the START-3 Treaty (on the reduction of strategic offensive arms) by refitting, wishing to get out of it. At the same time, they show disrespect for another ten such treaties.


So, the United States unilaterally withdrew from the ABM Treaty, unilaterally, Trump broke the Iranian nuclear deal. The US has not ratified the CFE Treaty (Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe) and the JNL (Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty), and is also part of the group of so-called “obligatory ratifiers”. Plus America refuses to consider the Treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Space (PAROS) and the Treaty on European Security (EST). Plus, they violate the open-sky contract by closing the space for inspection aircraft over Alaska’s territory and the Hawaiian Islands. The US Convention on the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons has not been fulfilled, citing the lack of money, which is a real lie. The United States refuses to discuss the 1972 agreement between Moscow and Washington on the prevention of incidents in the open sea and the airspace above it.


  • And for what the US needed it all?


– Because they want to create a fundamentally new ground-based, ground-based mobile cruise missile, which they have not yet had. And place it on the territory of their NATO allies. Finally, the moral pressure. They make more accusations against us than we can make ourselves. But at the same time, they did not show any convincing evidence that it is Russia that is violating the INF. And by the way, they themselves quietly violate the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons by deploying their tactical nuclear warheads on the territory of five foreign states: Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and Turkey.


Applicants from among US citizens should know Ukrainian and have experience in fighting.

– Then it begs the question itself – is America preparing to war?


  • I think they are preparing. With us and with China. True, I can not say for sure who is the first enemy on this list, and who is the second. Judging by Tramp’s strategies, China is still in the first place. But there were statements by major American military that the main enemy is Russia.

– Only now it is not clear what plus will America bring the outbreak of war? In any case, “otvetka” (answer) will be cruel.


  • They think they will win. With the help of Sergei Lavrov, we attempted to repeat the Gorbachev-Reagan formulation that a nuclear war cannot be deployed, since there will be no winners in it. We wanted to do it again with Trump. But the United States refuses. As well as abandoning the idea to write down and make legally binding the wording on non-use of nuclear weapons first. This is a very simple option, which does not require any cuts or money. Moreover, in America the president has the right to single-handedly use nuclear weapons, without meetings with the Minister of Defense and the Secretary of State, while we have such a decision is made by the “triumvirate” represented by the Minister of Defense, the Chief of the General Staff and the President as Supreme Commander. So the powder in such conditions must be kept dry, God forbid some fools in America will press the button. In the US Congress, however, last year they adopted a resolution limiting the president’s right to use nuclear weapons in the first strike. But Trump ignored it, so the sword of Damocles continues to hang over the globe.