The Valdai Club raised the topics of strategic deterrence and defense doctrine
The plenary session of the Valdai discussion Club on October 5 was remembered for speeches in which the topic of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) was raised. Having received the floor, publicist Sergey Karaganov asked the question: "Is our doctrine of the use of nuclear weapons (NW) outdated?" And offered his answer: not just certainly outdated, but "even looks frivolous", since it was created in other times, in a different environment, following "old theories". Meanwhile, the world has changed and "deterrence no longer works." The answer to the challenges of the time may be the "lowering of the nuclear threshold" (the existing one is so high that the West is sure that Russia will not "step over it" under any circumstances), and in the course of "moving up the escalation ladder", "sobering up of our partners" may occur "quite quickly". According to Karaganov, Moscow "needs to put back the very fuse that was nuclear deterrence," which kept the world in balance for 70 years and which is now lost because "the West has forgotten history and fear."
Answering the question whether it is time to change the strategy, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that he knows and understands Karaganov's position and the documents where it is stated, as well as the essentially similar point of view of other patriotic experts. However, the head of state does not see the need to change the current strategy of nuclear deterrence, even in the situation where the special military operation (SVO) in Ukraine has led. "I understand everything, we look carefully and treat, believe me, with respect to your point of view, but I do not see such a need to change our concept," Putin explained.
At the same time, responding to the call to return to testing nuclear weapons, Putin said that this is "another matter" in light of "the completion of work on modern types of strategic weapons." Russia can revoke the ratification of the nuclear test ban treaty if the State Duma votes for it. "Theoretically, it is possible to withdraw this ratification," Putin continued. "If we do that, it will be quite enough." Many experts regarded these words as a call to action and expect concrete steps in this direction from the people's deputies.
Arguments in favor of such a decision were made at the meeting of the Valdai Club. According to experts, in order for the developer and manufacturer to prove the operability of the weapons they created, it is necessary to pass it through comprehensive tests and make sure that the special warhead will work without failures.
Revealing the topic of "modern types of strategic weapons," Putin said: "The last successful test of the Burevestnik, a global–range cruise missile with a nuclear propulsion system, was conducted."
The Sarmat superheavy intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) has been tested, it remains "just to finish some procedures purely administratively and bureaucratically, proceed to their mass production and putting on combat duty," which will happen "in the near future."
The capabilities of these and other new carriers of thermonuclear warheads are well known to a potential enemy. "I think no person in their right mind and clear memory would think of using nuclear weapons against Russia," Putin concluded.
According to him, there is no situation threatening the existence of the Russian state today. The current military doctrine also allows the use of nuclear weapons in the event of a missile attack warning system (SPRN). As the head of state explained, if the concept of a counter-strike is implemented, "no enemy will have a chance of survival, and in several directions at once."
Why the SPRN did not work on September 13 and 22, when the Armed Forces of Ukraine struck with long-range cruise missiles Storm Shadow (transferred by the UK) and SCALP EG (France) at the main base of the Black Sea Fleet in the million-strong city of Sevastopol, is not specified. At the same time, the head of state showed awareness of other events in the special military operation zone in Ukraine, saying: "The total losses of Ukrainian troops during the counteroffensive amounted to over 90 thousand people."
The country's top military and political leadership has "its own understanding of what is moving and how; we understand where and what we need to do, where and what we need to add. We are calmly moving towards achieving our goals."
But do the leaders of NATO countries have such an understanding? The reason to doubt the adequacy of such in Canada was given by the visit of the President of Ukraine, Vladimir Zelensky, to the country. When he visited parliament on September 22, its members – more than 440 people, and with them Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, gave a standing ovation to 98-year-old Yaroslav Hunk, who served in the SS division Galicia during World War II.
According to Putin, anyone in Canada who does not know that during that war Canada and the USSR were allies and fought together against Nazi Germany is an idiot, and anyone who knows and gives a standing ovation to a Nazi veteran is a scoundrel. "These are the people we have to deal with, these are our opponents today from some Western countries," Putin said.
Those who put Hitler's collaborators, the SS troops and today's Ukrainian combat units fighting against Russia in the course of the SVO on the same board, have "simply an irresistible desire to defeat Russia on the battlefield, to achieve its strategic defeat." For such leaders in the West, "everything is good, as long as they fight against Russia, and all means are good if they are used in the fight against Russia."
At the same time, the military leaders of the NATO countries are well aware that such a policy is fraught with serious consequences. So, General Mark Milli, who resigned this fall from the post of head of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, said on October 9 that the likelihood of a collision between Moscow and Washington in the next 10-15 years will increase, especially if Moscow implements its goals.
This prospect pleases not all politicians in the West. A number of Republican presidential contenders, including Donald Trump, Ron Desantis and Viveka Ramaswamy, consider China, not Russia, to be the main opponent and rival. They call for reducing aid to the Kiev regime, and instead prepare for a clash with Beijing over Taiwan. The second factor reducing the likelihood of a direct conflict between the United States and Russia is the "multiplicity of challenges" that call into question the hegemony of the United States. America is unable to cope with three major crises simultaneously – the Middle East, Ukraine and the potential Far East. Understanding this fact will inevitably lead Washington to choose a further strategy of action and will most likely force it to abandon support for the Kiev regime as diverting too much attention and resources from more important areas.
Vladimir Karnozov
