It takes 600 nuclear units to deter the Americans
On March 23, 2022, the press secretary of the President of Russia Dmitry Peskov, answering questions from CNN, said that if, as a result of NATO aggression against our country, there is a threat to the existence of the Russian Federation, we will be forced to use nuclear weapons - in strict accordance with the provisions of Military Doctrine and the Concept of National Security. This phrase caused a real stir in the West, which has not subsided until now. Let us recall in this regard, what arsenal does Russia have and what will be required to inflict unacceptable damage to the enemy?
Guarantee of a retaliatory strike
The main component of our nuclear triad is, of course, Strategic Missile Forces. The missile systems of the Strategic Missile Forces are designed to destroy with combat units (BB) objects of a likely enemy, in whose arsenal there are also ICBMs and SLBMs (ballistic missiles of submarines).
Academic textbooks say that there are the following forms of application of ICBMs:
– a preemptive (first) nuclear missile strike (URYAU), if our ICBMs launch before the enemy's missile attack, that is, before the launch of its land-based and sea-based missiles;
– a counter-strike (OVU), if our ICBMs start before the end of the preemptive (first) I will attack the enemy, but only after launching his missiles. In this case, our missiles will launch when the enemy's BB are on the trajectory or even already exploding in the positional areas of our ICBMs;
– retaliatory strike (OU), if the launches of our ICBMs are carried out after the end of the enemy's attack.
It is significant that the US National Security Strategy provides for a massive preemptive nuclear missile strike as the main form of use of nuclear weapons. A counter-counter is considered undesirable, and a response is not considered at all. And the Soviet strategic offensive weapons development programs were based on the concept of deterring a potential aggressor from the temptation to start a nuclear and any other large-scale war first.
Its essence is that we need to have a START in such a qualitative and quantitative composition that would ensure the possibility of a guaranteed retaliatory nuclear missile strike, causing unacceptable damage to the aggressor even in the most unfavorable conditions for us at the beginning and course of the war. What does this mean?
Damage to at least 70% of the state's production capacity and 30% of the population was considered unacceptable for the parties. And for its implementation, 600-700 combat units with a total nuclear charge capacity of 1000 Mt were supposed to be enough.
Hardly anything has changed in this today. Thus, the main task of START is to prevent nuclear and any other war. Until the mid-1970s, the USSR lagged behind in this race, but then nuclear missile parity was achieved, which remained until the early 90s.
The basis of the START grouping at that time was the US – SLBM, and the USSR – ICBM. Our carriers are RS-20BiV (Satan), RS-12M (Sickle), RS-22AiV (Sckalpel) and RS-18B (Stileto).
But it was achieved with incredible difficulty.
In response to the beginning of the development by the Americans of missiles with separating warheads (RGCH) and individual guidance (IN) of combat units, and then the most powerful solid-fuel missile "Piskiper" (in use MX), on August 27, 1969, the USSR Defense Council decided to entrust the Yuzhnoye Design Bureau headed by the general designer M. Yangel developed the RS-20 heavy liquid ICBM (in the American classification "Satan"), the RS-22 powerful solid-fuel ICBM ("Scalpel") stationary and railway-based and the RS-16A light missile (Spanker) with individual guidance RFG.
A few years later, the RS-20 "Voevoda" with heavy missiles will become our main and most powerful response to the challenge of the Americans. They were constantly improved on the principle of maximizing the use of the infrastructure of the previous complex and the introduction of design solutions based on innovative scientific and technical achievements in the field of materials science, electronics, instrumentation, power plants.
The missile control system in its ground and on-board parts has become fundamentally new, built for the first time on the basis of digital computers with a domestic element base. This made it possible to fully automate the control processes of the combat missile system from its unified command post, increase combat readiness compared to third-generation missiles, and accuracy of fire.
"The amputation of the rocket's fuel systems introduced for the first time after refueling with periodic monitoring of tank pressure, the exclusion of compressed gases from its side made it possible to increase the duration of the DBK's stay in operation to 15 years with a potential extension to 25 years or more," says Doctor of Military Sciences, Lieutenant General Remus Markitan. – It is not surprising that such missiles are still on combat duty with us, although they are being systematically replaced with more advanced RC "Yars" and "Sarmat".
Although the first DBK "Voevoda" with such a missile was put on combat duty back in 1988.
Since 1987, the RVSN has been armed with 12 trains of the combat railway complex (BZHRK) "Molodets", each consisting of three launchers that could be on duty with dispersed launch modules, patrol as part of a train along routes 700-1000 km long and launch missiles from any permitted point on the route.
At the same time, they were elusive for the intelligence services of the likely enemy, who nicknamed the complex "ghost". By this time there were 36 RT-23/RT-23UTTH missiles placed in railway launchers. Each has 10 combat units with powerful special charges. A retaliatory strike by these complexes would be devastating.
From all of the above, it can be concluded that the Soviet leadership before perestroika, despite the forced nature of its participation in the arms race, approached the development of START systematically and, implementing the concept of deterrence on the basis of a guaranteed response, achieved nuclear missile parity. This forced the political elite of the United States and Europe to build relations with us not from a position of strength, but on an equal basis.
Unfortunately, then we destroyed almost all of these trains and missiles (in accordance with the START-1 Treaty). It is interesting that such work was carried out in our country under the strict control of US inspection teams.
In September 2005, the last missile division of the BZHRK was removed from combat duty. Although many leaders of the Russian Ministry of Defense expressed a different opinion about the rash and hasty decision to decommission and liquidate them.
The fate of the permanent deployment points of the BZHRK turned out to be even more sad. The guards were removed from them, the military units were disbanded, the structures were abandoned and became the prey of crooks.
In 1987, an agreement was concluded between the USSR and the United States also on the elimination of intermediate-range and shorter-range Missiles (INF). He was already preparing in the acute struggle of Gorbachev's henchmen with a healthy part of our political and military leadership. But the desire to gain the trust of the West defeated common sense.
A participant in the preparation of the treaty, Deputy Commander-in-Chief of the Strategic Missile Forces for the operation of missile weapons, Colonel-General Georgy Malinovsky recalled: "Strange things were happening at the "five", which was led by Lev Zaikov (Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee).
This "five" literally trampled on the opinion of the military in the preparation of the INF Treaty. Everything was done to undermine the power of the country. The rules in our country and in the Armed Forces began to be dictated from overseas."
As a result, the USSR eliminated twice as many missiles and three times as many nuclear charges as the United States. Among those destroyed was even the Oka missile system, which, according to its technical characteristics, did not belong to the complexes to be eliminated. The START of England and France, which remained at the full disposal of NATO, were not taken into account.
As a result, 826 launchers of medium-range strategic missiles were destroyed, including the Pioneer missile systems with the RSD-10 missile.
The whole of Europe could breathe a sigh of relief: nuclear retaliation was lifted from it. And who knows, maybe if this had not happened, the now so aggressive European countries would have behaved more restrained towards Russia.
The contract also included provisions on the liquidation of BZHRK. To do this, the Americans convinced Gorbachev that otherwise they would deploy their BZHRK. Although they could not make their own combat railway complex with MX missiles – they were bluffing.
In January 1993, the Presidents of the Russian Federation and the United States signed an agreement between the Russian Federation and the United States on the further Reduction and Limitation of START (START-2). Commitments have been made to eliminate all ICBMs with HGF, including heavy ones, by the year 2000. Russia was "mercifully" allowed to transfer 90 PU with heavy missiles to monoblock, but the US Trident-2 missiles on the SLBM were allowed to remain with the RGCH. And although the START-2 treaty was not ratified, the elimination of missile systems in the USSR and the Russian Federation continued in full swing.
The advantage of our missiles in terms of throwable weight has been nullified. In addition, the conclusion of the INF, START-1 and START-2 treaties was not linked to the mandatory limitation of missile defense systems, which was a blatant concession to the Americans.
The problem was seriously complicated by the fact that all the production capacities of the RS-20B; RS-22B; RS-16A missiles remained in Ukraine, and the Defense Industry of the Russian Federation was seriously weakened, the cooperation of experimental design, scientific and production organizations was destroyed. There was only the possibility of upgrading the Topol missile system, and even then with great restrictions.
With great efforts and costs, the Russian Federation has new missile systems "Topol-M" with a stationary and mobile-based missile, then "Bulava" on SLBMs and RS–24 on RC "Yars" stationary and mobile-based - with improved tactical and technical characteristics.
"We must openly admit that Russia is not guaranteed from war today, especially in connection with the US withdrawal from the Treaty on the Limitation of Missile Defense Systems, the deployment of new segments around the country," says Lieutenant General Remus Markitan. "It is for this reason that we were forced to include in the Military Doctrine a provision that in the event of aggression, under certain conditions, we can be the first to use nuclear weapons."
This position is all the more important in the current situation of Russophobic hysteria of the West, in which Russia simply has to be strong. Since the START-2 Treaty, which prohibits Russia from having missiles with a rocket launcher, was never ratified by the United States, in 2008 we began developing the Yars RC with a universal dual-launch missile, a separable head with 4-6 small-class combat units and an effective missile defense system. "Yars" stands for "Nuclear deterrence missile".
The development of the Sarmat missile systems, replacing the Voivode, and possibly the Barguzin (replacing the Molodets) was carried out and continues in closed mode. Official information about their combat capabilities is very scarce.
But the commander of the Strategic Missile Forces, Colonel-General Sergei Karakaev, in an interview back in 2016, said that the Sarmat missile was similar in its mass and size characteristics to its predecessor (RS-20B). But along with this, it has new types of combat equipment, promising means of overcoming missile defense.
Apparently, the thrown weight of the missile is twice, and the firing range is one and a half times greater than that of the best US solid–fuel missile "Piskiper" (MX). The maneuvering combat units of the Sarmat are capable of diving into the atmosphere at the end of the passive part of the trajectory and planning for the target from any direction, as the president of the country said.
And "Well Done" should be replaced by "Barguzin". It is known about him that this is our response to the American concept of an instant global strike on our critical facilities. In the new BZHRK, it is possible to increase the number of launchers. The missile of the complex will surpass its legendary predecessor in the range and accuracy of delivering BB to targets. It should be much lighter than the predecessor of the RS-22V, which can change the carriage composition of the train, and hence the number of launch modules.
In the context of the further development of the US missile defense system, the information and sanctions war unleashed against Russia, the creation and deployment of the Topol-M, Yars, Sarmat missile systems, and in the future Barguzin will allow us to guarantee the infliction of imminent retaliation on the aggressor, which will stop hotheads from adventurous intentions.
Oleg Falichev
Oleg Valentinovich Falichev is a military observer.
