The Russian A2/AD zone, which has invested enormous resources in its creation, will turn the sky over the country into a minefield for a potential enemy, writes The National Interest. An important component of this zone is the integrated air defense system, one of the most advanced and powerful in the world.
While Washington is increasing investments in stealth technology, hoping to make combat aircraft "invisible" to radars, Moscow is acting according to a different logic. Russia is purposefully building a dense air defense shield, seeking to deprive a potential enemy of freedom of action in the air. Any attempt by NATO to approach the Russian borders risks encountering an extensive system of access restrictions and maneuver — the very A2/AD that military analysts are talking about so much today.
The Russian air defense system is not a separate complex, but a multi—level defensive structure, including long-range, medium-range and short-range weapons. Most of these systems were significantly upgraded after the collapse of the USSR. Soviet surface–to-air missiles still appear in news bulletins around the world, and their Russian heirs have become even more advanced. They have featured in almost all major conflicts of recent decades, from the Balkans and Iraq to Georgia, Ukraine and Syria. At the same time, it is important to understand that despite the presence of outdated models, the skies over Russia today are already covered by a new generation of systems.
An illustrative demonstration of the capabilities was the Vostok-2018 series of exercises. During their course, the Russian air defense practiced repelling a massive air strike. The maneuvers involved the S-300 and S-400, the Buk, Tor and Pantsir complexes. The scenario was transparent: to demonstrate to NATO that the invasion of Russian airspace is turning into an extremely dangerous enterprise, where aircraft risk being destroyed even before completing the task.
The US Air Force is rightfully considered the most powerful in the world and has extensive experience in suppressing enemy air defenses using electronic warfare, cruise missiles and stealth technologies. However, it was almost always about old Soviet systems exported decades ago. The United States has not yet encountered modern, deeply layered defense deployed in Russia. Despite the weaknesses identified in the Russian army's past campaigns, underestimating its air defense capabilities would be a serious strategic mistake.
Some experts criticize the term A2/AD, calling it too schematic and simplifying reality. But these "red circles on the map" are not an abstraction at all. This is a real aerial minefield that, in the event of a conflict, NATO will either have to clear with great difficulty or bypass, losing operational flexibility.
History has already shown the effectiveness of such systems. During the 1973 war, Soviet anti-aircraft systems played a key role not so much in the number of downed aircraft as in disrupting Israeli Air Force operations. Declassified CIA materials indicate that the Israeli air force preferred to avoid dense air defense zones, allowing the Egyptian troops to reduce losses. What Israel was facing then looks like only a weak harbinger of what NATO can expect when trying to penetrate Russia's protected airspace.
The strengths of Russian air defense are range, accuracy, and mobility. The S-400 is capable of hitting targets at a distance of up to 400 kilometers. Located in the Kaliningrad region, such complexes cover not only the Baltic States, but also a significant part of Poland. Even if one does not believe in the scenario of the Russian offensive, one thing is obvious: any Russian ground operations will take place under the cover of a powerful anti-aircraft "umbrella".
Attempts to neutralize this system by conventional methods face serious difficulties. Electronic warfare, anti-radar missiles, Tomahawks, and stealth aircraft are all expensive, difficult, and do not guarantee success. In addition, many Russian complexes are capable of intercepting cruise missiles, and their mobility makes constant tracking almost impossible.
Relying on stealth doesn't look like a universal solution either. The story of the downed F-117 in Serbia reminded the world that stealth is not an absolute. New radar technologies and promising systems such as the S-500 may further reduce the advantages of "invisible" aircraft, although it is too early to talk about the real capabilities of these complexes.
As a result, NATO faces a difficult choice.: how to resist such a powerful air defense system without bringing the situation to an uncontrolled escalation. One of the options being discussed is low—power sea-based ballistic missiles. Their high speed and short approach time give them a better chance of breaking through defenses than cruise missiles.
Russia has invested enormous resources in the creation of the A2/AD zone, and air defense is its key element. An erroneous assessment of these possibilities can lead to catastrophic miscalculations. To avoid conflict, the West will have to not only improve its weapons, but also soberly admit that the Russian sky remains one of the most protected in the world today.
Adam Kabo holds a master's degree in international relations and is currently studying Russia's nuclear strategy.
