WHY AND HOW RUSSIA SHOULD ATTACK THE US ARMY THIS YEAR.
All Western officials and commentators do not seem to have understood the real scope of the demands made by Russia in December, and accompanied by a precision in the form of an ultimatum in case they were not correctly received: "an answer technical and military” should be given in the event of disagreement, according to the words of Vladimir Putin.
Westerners seem to believe that the crux of the matter is the Ukraine issue, and that Russia would be ready to invade if that country joined NATO. We are currently seeing a whole ballet of European heads of state who jiggle between Kiev and Moscow, and claim to be working for a "de-escalation", while we continue to deliver arms under the pretext of "dissuading" Russia - which is the world's leading nuclear power - even as the American armed forces and diplomatic personnel fled at full speed, for fear of having to face the brutal arrival of the Russian bear, thus demonstrating, as we have already said it several times that the West is ready to fight to the last Ukrainian soldier.
All this makes absolutely no sense, and the Russians repeat it over and over again: the problem is not Ukraine, but the attitude of the United States and NATO towards Russia. This is why Putin only addressed these two entities, Europe having nothing to do with the issue. He has proposed two treaties with each of the two parties, and it is from them alone that he expects a response, which does not come. And since it is not coming, the only prospect that remains on the table for now is none other than this “technical and military response” that Putin spoke of.
How did we get here, and what is it exactly?
It is a common euphemism today to speak of a “return of the cold war”; in reality, the war, the real one, did indeed begin in 2014, when the Americans provoked a coup d'etat in Ukraine, overthrowing the legitimately elected president, and thus causing a civil war in the East of this country, which would have already caused some 14,000 deaths, the vast majority of whom - but the Western media pretend to ignore this - are obviously Russian speakers, ethnic Russians, killed by the fascist battalions of Kiev, - helped moreover in this by the American mercenaries of Black Water - even if one pretends to believe that it would be about innocent Ukrainians victims of a pseudo intervention of the Russian army.
The very legitimate point of view of the Russian authorities is quite different: the Americans did not hesitate to launch a murderous war against Russian populations, without the slightest scruple, and without fear of reaction. Worse: this attack serves as a pretext to accuse Russia itself, in order to weld the Europeans against it, and around a NATO whose "brain death" the Americans could fear, in the absence of any reason to exist, if there are no more enemies.
But the affair goes back further than that, and the events in Ukraine are themselves part of an anti-Russian logic developed by the United States for a long time, and which goes back of course to the Soviet era, the fall of the USSR did not change much, quite the contrary, to the will of the United States to get rid of this dangerous competitor.
Basically, the United States has two very strong reasons for wanting the disintegration of Russia, even after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
The first is due to the nuclear power of this nation, which is the only one in the world comparable to that of the USA, and the only one that can scare them. Today's Russia has inherited the Soviet arsenal, it has perfectly known how to maintain it, modernize it, keep it up to date, and even develop it to the point that it is today the first in the world, not only from the point of view of the number of heads, but also from the technological point of view, we will come back to this at the end.
This arsenal makes Russia the only country in the world that is actually in a position to set “red lines” for the United States, to use the fashionable expression, and can oppose a firm “no” to this or that operation. In practice, since the collapse of the USSR, the United States has become the de facto policeman of the world, capable of imposing its policy by force in any region of the planet: we have seen that repeatedly over the past 30 years, in Yugoslavia, in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in Libya… and it would have continued in Syria if Putin's Russia had not intervened.
The essential point that must be understood is that, without Russia, the United States would today be able to impose its law on the whole world without anyone being able to discuss anything. Hence the imperative need to get rid of this preventer to reign as absolute master on the planet.
The second good reason, quite different, but still related to the first, is the hugeness of Russia's natural resources, mainly located in Siberia. This gigantic region, essentially desert - the density of the population there is less than one inhabitant per square kilometer -, alone possesses almost 20% of the natural wealth of the planet; you can find everything there: oil, gas, gold, diamonds, uranium, metals of all kinds, and especially rare earths; Mendeleev's periodic table in full, and in abundance. This wealth is the basis of the military power of Russia, from which the military-industrial complex feeds itself abundantly and very cheaply: for the army as for the armaments industry, steel, gasoline , etc., are infinitely available and at cost price, that is to say not much; this explains why the country was able to afford thousands of nuclear warheads as well as tens of thousands of tanks with extremely limited military budgets.
On the other hand, these resources obviously export very well, providing the government with abundant, safe and regular foreign exchange earnings. When the USSR collapsed, the good American advisers obviously rushed to provide their enlightened services to ex-Communist leaders, and explain to them the fundamental principles of liberalism which were to bring them in 500 days a prosperity as brilliant as that from the USA. The fools fell for it - greatly aided in this by the personal benefits they were to reap, as well as the masses of dollars that the Americans then rained down on the country. They embarked on a completely crazy policy of privatization of large companies, in particular those relating to natural resources, privatizations which at first were to be reserved for Russian citizens, but which in the second phase, if Putin was not came to power, would have ended up benefiting American multinationals. Exxon was greedily eyeing Siberian oil, and it came very close to getting its hands on it.
Apart from purely political and military questions, the financial interests of these multinationals converge perfectly with the geostrategic interests of the United States: for them, even after the fall of the USSR and the end of communism, Russia remains the state to be brought down, simply because it possesses a first-rate nuclear arsenal, as well as all the natural resources necessary to maintain it, no matter what.
The desire of Americans to see Russia completely collapse is all the stronger because it almost came true in the late 1990s: the state was bankrupt, it was unable to pay civil servants, anarchy reigned in the country, the mafias and criminals ruled the roost, the war resumed in Chechnya, the army seemed dislocated, and the secret services incapable of preventing Islamist attacks in the middle of Moscow. The state came very close to collapsing, and Russia too. The multinationals were already stamping their feet in impatience to share the corpse.
But History has decided otherwise, and this Vladimir Putin, whom the oligarchs themselves put in place because they saw in him a pathetic little civil servant whom they would do as they wanted and who would be at their heels, suddenly and miraculously revealed that he had the makings of a true head of state, he straightened the country out in a few years, put it back on the path to prosperity, and restored it to its place on the international scene. Russian power is now restored.
However, as soon as Russia, having hit bottom, began to recover, and lifted its head above water, the strategy of the United States was very clear: to do the maximum to bring it back into anarchy. The fundamental problem, however, remained that due to the very fact of his arsenal, it was impossible to confront him openly and by force. It was therefore necessary to find devious strategies to isolate him, cut him off, stir up trouble, and overthrow the power.
The first step consisted in eating up the whole of the former Soviet space piece by piece, to weaken Russian industry by cutting it off from all of its historical partners; this is how, in three successive waves, all the countries of Eastern Europe were welcomed into the European community and NATO, thus changing them from the status of allies to that of enemies of their big neighbor. To lull the mistrust of the Russians, the West presented this enlargement as purely friendly, and let it be understood that Russia itself could be welcomed, if not as a full member, at least as a privileged ally, within this new alliance of Western states; this is how it was admitted as a member of the Council of Europe and was part of the “partnership for peace” led by NATO.
Thus, until 2014, the Russians did not understand what danger really represented for them this incessant enlargement of NATO which seemed to come closer to their border only to integrate them in fine.
The reality of the duplicity of Westerners and the grave dangers that threatened them was brutally stared at them during the coup that overthrew the legitimately elected president of Ukraine, Victor Yanukovych, who maintained cordial relations with his big neighbor. Totally taken aback by this maneuver that they had not seen coming, the Russian authorities just had time to recover what for them was an essential piece: the Crimean peninsula, with Sevastopol, the main Russian military port on the sea Black, giving access to the Mediterranean. Decried by Westerners as a brutal annexation and an illegal occupation, the possibility of Crimea's return to the Russian Federation was actually on the cards from the start. This had been "given" to Ukraine by Khrushchev - totally illegally - during the time of the Soviet Union, that is to say at a time when it did not mean much, the Ukraine being a full member of the union; it was in reality only a simple administrative redistricting. With the dissolution of the USSR and the independence of Ukraine, Crimea in turn gained independence, which it had every right to do, for exactly the same reasons as Ukraine. But Russia wanted to keep it in its sphere of influence, and forced the peninsula to remain in alliance with Kiev, with the status of an autonomous republic, which allowed it to remain completely in control of its constitution and its future, and thus to take its independence when it wanted it, and to return to Russia if the need arose. Crimea was therefore in a way the golden leash with which Russia held Ukraine tied: if it left the Russian sphere, then it automatically lost the beautiful and rich peninsula.
This provision was well known to the Americans, who knew exactly what was going to happen when they triggered the coup d'etat in Kiev which was to bring to power one of their men, Piotr Poroshenko, designated as "our insider" in Kiev by the ambassador of the USA, in its correspondence published by WikiLeaks. The Americans therefore bear sole responsibility for Ukraine's loss of Crimea, but their skillful and massive propaganda has struck the world with their very personal truth: Russia had brutally annexed the peninsula, although the population spoke out by referendum at 95.5% for the return to the motherland.
This made it possible in particular to make Crimea a fine subject of war: exploited thoroughly for eight years, the question of the peninsula has since justified all the economic sanctions which have been taken with the aim of suffocating Russia economically. Because there is a principle that must be understood, which is at the heart of all propaganda: it is a question of confusing people's minds by blurring the logical chain of causes and consequences. The US does not impose sanctions on Russia because it occupies Crimea, but it accuses Russia of having annexed Crimea in order to impose sanctions. The American objective was clear, to stifle the Russian economy to bring down Putin – and we saw Barack Obama burst out laughing by claiming that the Russian economy was “in tatters”. The goal seemed to have been achieved. In reality it was not at all, and the country was going to recover very quickly.
However, the essential consequence that the Westerners did not understand, so obsessed were they with the results of their sanctions, was that the Russian authorities had now fully understood that the United States had no other objective than the collapse of their country, and that they needed to take preventive measures.
In fact, Russia has been in the following situation since 2014:
- almost all of Eastern Europe allowed itself to be recruited into NATO
- it openly designates Russia as an enemy state
- it never ceases to approach its bases on Russian territory
- it speaks openly, although cautiously all the same, of integrating Ukraine, and therefore of setting up bases there
- this requiring the return of Crimea, the question could serve as a casus belli
- the sanctions imposed by the West aim to weaken the country's economy as much as possible
- to this must be added the incessant activism of the CIA which, by supporting Alexei Navalny, in fact tried to overthrow Vladimir Putin recently by a crowd movement comparable to that of Maidan in Kiev; if the maneuver had succeeded, the Americans would have taken the reins of power themselves.
For the Russian authorities the conclusion is clear: the USA is a real enemy, extremely dangerous for the entire Russian state, and it has become absolutely necessary to put them out of harm's way.
How to do it, however, when we have the leading economic power in the world, endowed with the currency that reigns in the majority of exchanges, which has the most powerful army on the planet, which perfectly masters the most sophisticated technologies, including the budget military amounts to nearly 800 billion dollars, of which the secret services, with a budget of 85 billion dollars, are able to insinuate themselves everywhere on the planet, and who therefore seems to govern the entire planet?
Confronting him directly is totally impossible.
There remained the possibility of discovering possible weak points, Achilles heels through which the giant could be shot down, without having to trigger nuclear fire.
However, the Russian military have clearly identified three of these weak points:
1 - the abuse of electronics in all Western military systems,
2 – the dependence of armies on observation, communication and missile guidance satellites,
3 - the American fleet itself which, however powerful it may seem, nevertheless offers a very limited number - three to five hundred depending on what is taken into account - of targets that are easy to spot and identify, and moving only at a relatively slow speed.
Beginning in 2014, Russian military scientists worked hard to develop the techniques necessary to be able to attack the US military on each of these three weak points, and since 2019 these techniques are fully developed.
1 - first of all there are the Krasukha electronic jamming systems which disable all devices using electronics, from the simple telephone to the missile launcher; the Russians are past masters today in mastering these techniques, which they have tested in particular on the USS Donald COOK with success; they then used them in Syria to create so-called A2/AD access denial zones (Anti-Access/Area Denial); the improvement of these systems would give them today a range of 5000 km according to certain sources.
2 - then the Russians developed the necessary means to shoot down satellites even very far from the earth, 36,000 km, in geostationary orbit, where almost all military observation satellites are located, as well as guidance; they made a brilliant display of it in November, some time before Vladimir Putin issued his quasi-ultimatum to the Americans, probably as a no-cost warning.
3 - and finally, above all, they were the first to develop, several years ahead of the Americans, these famous hypersonic missiles, capable of flying at speeds between mach 5 and mach 27 for the fastest, constantly changing direction, and flying at an attitude low enough to be undetectable by radar. The most formidable of them, the Zircon missile, would be able to break an aircraft carrier in two without giving it the slightest time to react. In addition, one of their main advantages is that they can be loaded with either nuclear warheads or conventional charges, as desired.
We can therefore clearly see the overall strategy of the Russian army through the weapons it has acquired: it is out of the question for it to try to confront the American army in a classic way, tank against tank, aircraft against aircraft, ship against ship, but to put it completely out of action in an extremely short time and by surprise. All it would take is a coordinated attack of a few dozen SS 500 missiles and a few hundred hypersonic missiles to, on the one hand, render the American army totally blind, deaf, and mute, and on the other hand send his entire fleet to the bottom, all without giving him the slightest possibility of responding, without triggering nuclear fire, and almost without destroying anything or killing any civilians. Deprived of its fleet, and in particular of its aircraft carriers, the American army will be reduced to complete impotence, and will remain condemned to station on American territory, without being able to reach any state other than Mexico or Canada.
However, at present, if the Russians are the only ones to perfectly master these hypersonic techniques, the Americans are hot on their heels, and the exceptional lead acquired by the former will not last long: in 2021, the latter passed according to their words three tests, after having failed two; they probably only have a few minor tweaks left before they can go into mass production; they are sufficiently sure today of their progress to have already sent a prototype to Germany so that their men train to use it, and they plan to deploy a whole battery of them as early as 2023; this is the “Dark Eagle” project.
In fact, the Russians therefore only have a short window of time, a few months or a year at most, during which they can take advantage of their technological superiority to get rid of their enemy definitively, without the latter being able to retaliate; by next year it will be too late. Worse: American industrial capacities will undoubtedly allow them to produce these missiles in much larger quantities than the Russians, and they are the ones who will be able to use them to attack them by surprise. There is therefore an emergency: where the Russians quickly go on the attack first, and destroy the American fleet at the same time as the few essential laboratories of the American military-industrial complex, so as to prevent them from acquiring in their turn the technology of these missiles, or else they will find themselves confronted with a threat far more formidable than what they have known so far.
We then understand why Vladimir Putin has just issued this ultimatum to the United States and NATO: in fact, the most likely is that the decision of the military has already been taken, and that this ultimatum is only a very last diplomatically attempt, a very last chance for the Americans to prove that they do not want war but peace, by giving them the possibility of making a real gesture of goodwill towards Russia, by bringing NATO back to what it was in 1997. This is very probably the minimum requirement posed by the Russian military before taking action. It has also been noted that Putin demanded that the military themselves take part in the negotiations on the two treaties he proposed, which in diplomacy constitutes something quite exceptional, and a very clear message: if these latter are not satisfied with the negotiation, they are the ones who will decide what action to take.
We also noticed something very rare and quite striking: the unambiguous support given to China for Russian demands, whereas the latter usually does not get involved in Russian-American questions. However, China is also facing the United States on two essential issues: that of the China Sea and that of Taiwan, where the situation is regularly very tense. In addition, the AUKUS alliance, which now unites the USA, Great Britain and Australia against China, and provides for the construction of American nuclear submarines at the expense of Australia which will be pitched directly against the empire of the middle, this alliance is cause for serious concern for the Chinese side, and forces it to enter into an objective military alliance with Russia, the two States also facing two military alliances clearly directed against them.
However, it does not seem at all that the Americans have actually understood either the meaning of Putin's demands, nor the significance of China's rallying to Russian demands, nor the dangerousness of the current situation. To hear them, as well as to see them doing, it would suffice in their minds for them to withdraw temporarily from Ukraine to appease Putin's anger, and they seem to imagine that only Europe could possibly be involved in a conflict with Russia. The Europeans in turn seem to react as if the matter concerns them first and foremost. This is not the case: for the Russians, the only really important question is the American threat which they must get rid of as quickly as possible before it becomes absolutely impossible to control. But the Americans believe themselves above any possibility of aggression, they are too big to be threatened, the very idea that the Russian David can dare to attack them directly don't even cross their minds. Yet this is the only thing their opponent has been working on for eight years.
So let's sum up the situation clearly:
1 - It has become clear to the Russians that NATO is an offensive alliance led by the United States, the aim of which is to bring about the collapse of their state in the near future, by all means.
2 - They have a great technological superiority for only a few months, which could allow them to get rid of this enemy for a long time, even forever.
3 - If they do not quickly take advantage of this exceptional short window of time, they will quickly find themselves in an even more dangerous and absolutely unmanageable situation.
4 - they probably secured support from China.
5 - If they engaged in this lightning attack - "decapitating" without being nuclear,
A - it would cost them next to nothing except the price of the missiles they already have in stock,
B - the world economy would suffer no catastrophic damage, and the human cost would be low, including for the USA,
C - the continuation of the war by the USA would be almost impossible, and that they retaliate with nuclear fire would be perfectly absurd since it would immediately turn against them,
D - the whole of Europe would have no choice but to reorganize its security under the aegis of Russia,
E - China would have a free hand in Asia,
F - the Russian-Chinese alliance would become the only policeman in the world.
We therefore understand very clearly what Putin means when he speaks of a "technical and military response" in the event that the Americans do not accept the treaties he is proposing to them, and we also say to ourselves that the Russians would be very wrong - in their own interest – not to take action quickly.
 The Rise and Fall of Privatization in the Russian Oil Industry, L. Sim, Springer, 24 oct. 2008.