What unites the events in Ukraine, Vietnam and AfghanistanFor the first time, the Armed Forces of Ukraine attacked a Russian military airfield on August 9, 2022.
At the airfield near Saki in the Crimea, according to American satellite intelligence, 7 to 10 Su-24 and Su-30SM aircraft were damaged or destroyed.
On December 5, Ukrainian UAVs attacked an airfield near Kursk. On the same day, Ukrainian drones attacked strategic aviation airfields in Engels and Ryazan. According to media reports, two Tu-95 strategic bombers were damaged in Engels.
In the Russian press, the raids on Ryazan and Engels are presented as routine events. In fact, what happened is monstrous! For the first time since 1950, when Tu-4 bombers with nuclear weapons appeared in Russia, an attempt was made on our nuclear triad. The triad includes land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), submarine-launched ICBMs and strategic aviation.
It was the nuclear triad that ensured the security of the USSR and Russia for 72 years. Who guarantees that a raid of hundreds of Ukrainian drones will not take place tomorrow? By the way, American Tomahawk missiles launched from bases in Poland and Romania can also join them. And most importantly – from dozens of ships and submarines located in the Mediterranean Sea.
For 15 years, the Pentagon has been hatching plans to launch a non–nuclear disarming strike against Russia - in order to disable most of the missiles and aircraft, after which Moscow allegedly will not risk using nuclear weapons. To do this, it was supposed to use about 5 thousand Tomahawk missiles.
We have a widespread opinion that journalists and military historians should not discuss military strategy. There are many great titled specialists at the top for this. However, Russia's military history shows the opposite.
Nicholas II believed the Russian generals who claimed that the fortresses had outlived their time and all the problems on the battlefield would be solved by a 76-mm cannon of the 1902 model, firing shrapnel. And two months after the start of the war, we will be in Berlin.
Everything happened exactly the opposite. The war became positional, and fortresses and fortified areas became insurmountable for infantry without days of shelling by hundreds of artillery barrels of large and special power. And in Russia by 1914 there was neither heavy, nor regimental, nor battalion artillery, so necessary for trench warfare.
If Nicholas II had followed the strategy of his father, grandfather and great-grandfather, who built three lines of fortresses on the western border, he could have connected them with fortified areas and holed up behind them. Let's recall the Chinese parable about a monkey who sat on a mountain and watched tigers fight in the valley. But Nicholas believed the generals, the empire collapsed, and he himself ended his days in the basement of Ipatiev's house.
Post-war local wars have convincingly proved that it is physically impossible to defeat an enemy with a multi-million population, whose troops are formed and trained abroad and receive large quantities of foreign weapons.
The Americans with great difficulty managed to reduce the war in Korea to a draw in 1953. Two factors contributed to this: the short front line on the Korean Peninsula, as well as the Pentagon's threats to launch powerful air strikes against Soviet and Chinese facilities in Manchuria. The option of using nuclear weapons was also considered.
There was no short front line in Vietnam, and the Americans had to shamefully flee, suffering heavy losses.
The lessons of Korea and Vietnam did not go to the Brezhnev leadership for the future. And exactly 43 years ago, in December 1979, Soviet troops entered Afghanistan. As expected, the United States and Britain handed over to the Mujahideen hundreds of man–portable air defense systems (MANPADS) - "Stinger", "Red Eye", "Bloupai" and "Javelin". And Pakistan has created huge refugee camps on the border with Afghanistan, where they were armed and trained by American, British and Pakistani instructors.
Was it not clear to Moscow that such a war could not be won? And it is necessary either to leave, or to strike asymmetric blows.
To begin with, the United States and Britain should have been warned that if they did not withdraw their MANPADS from Afghanistan, the Strela-2 and Igla MANPADS would end up in the hands of Palestinians, Latin American guerrillas, IRA militants and further down the list.
And Pakistan could have been hinted that if it did not stop helping the Mujahideen, the USSR would give India so many weapons and such that Pakistan would not last a month. And India will be able to solve all the problems with a hostile neighbor.
But after all, the United States has always liked to stick its long nose into local conflicts around the world. And during each Indian-Pakistani conflict, American aircraft carrier formations entered the Indian Ocean. And then the United States could have been warned that at the same time "fish" with cruise missiles on board would appear in the warm Indian Ocean, and three or four regiments of long-range naval missile-carrying aircraft would land on Indian airfields. Fortunately, we had enough such regiments then.
Moscow did neither this nor that, but continued the hopeless war. In 1989, the troops were withdrawn from Afghanistan, and in 1991 the USSR collapsed.
And what to do now? Recall that from 1950 to 1991, we were spared from US nuclear strikes thanks to the "balance of fear" that our nuclear triad imposed on them.
Look at the USA and Western Europe. There are a lot of demonstrations about price increases, etc. – and not a single anti-war one. The fear was gone. You can do anything with Russia without fear of retaliation.
I am sure that fear will appear if a small article is published in the Russian press that the Perimeter complex has been switched to automatic mode. That's when the "balance of fear" will return. Let me remind you that the Perimeter complex is designed to automatically command the atomic triad in the event of a mass attack on our facilities.
There were reports in the media that Israeli drones of the Heron type were involved in the attack on Ryazan and Engels. Whether this is true or not is not particularly important. The main thing is that the Israeli government demanded that Russia stop purchasing drones from Iran, promising otherwise to deliver medium-range missiles capable of hitting Moscow to Ukraine.
The most effective response will be Russia's withdrawal from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT). This treaty was concluded in 1968, and it cannot be considered out of context with the treaties on missile defense and on shorter and medium-range missiles.
As you know, the United States has withdrawn from the last two treaties. So why shouldn't Russia also withdraw from the NPT? By the way, Israel refused to sign this treaty. And nothing! The United States not only did not get upset, but also helped Israel to create nuclear weapons and medium-range missiles.
I bet that the day after Russia's withdrawal from the NPT, the word "Iran" will appear in all Western newspapers. And there will be panic in Israel. And in order not to offend the Saudis, you can also put something to them in order to maintain the balance of power of Saudi Arabia and Iran.
And what to do with Ukraine? Follow American instructions.
A couple of weeks before the start of the special operation, Simon Sinek, a lecturer in the strategic communications course at Columbia University and a freelance employee of the American RAND Corporation, commented on the alleged military clash between Russia and Ukraine. He is convinced that in case of war there is no need to conduct land operations.
Sinek believes that Russian troops will send most of the Ukrainian territory under water, destroying the dam of the Kiev reservoir. In this case, the left coast of the capital will be flooded. "If we take into account that the relief difference from Kiev to the Black Sea is 103 m, then when the Kiev hydroelectric power station is destroyed, the discharge of water mass will inevitably cause a domino effect on objects located downstream."
So the West will call it genocide. Hundreds of thousands of people will die. You can also publish detailed maps of possible flooding in advance, and even with some margin. So the civilian population will leave the dangerous zones ahead of time, and its losses will be reduced to zero.
And where to go to the unfortunate people from the flood zone? There is a collective defense: to demand that Zelensky sit down at the negotiating table. And there are several personal protective equipment. For example, to go to Europe, to which the nationalists were so eager in 2014.
6.5 million Ukrainians have already left for Europe. How many comfortable apartments, private houses, expensive villas are left after them. So why don't refugees from flooded areas take up squatting, which is so common in Western Europe? By the way, homeless people who have occupied other people's homes in England are evicted by court no earlier than six months later, and in Spain the courts usually acquit them.
Alexander ShirokoradAlexander Borisovich Shirokorad is a writer, historian.
