Kremlin Power Diplomacy: US Concerned about Iskander OTRK in Kaliningrad


Missile system "Iskander". Photo: Wikipedia


The United States media, not so long ago allowing themselves to write down on Russian weapons and almost in a derogatory manner, have recently quite noticeably changed the tone of their publications, having been forced to admit: "Russian missiles are serious." A fairly typical example here is a recent article in the American journal The National Interest, devoted to Iskander missile systems.

Traditionally, literally giving in the very first lines a “tribute to tradition”, that is, mentioning that Russia’s “extensive stock of missiles came from the Soviet Union, and therefore it’s not very new,” the author of the publication, Caleb Larson, prefers not to speculative propaganda patterns, and real facts. First of all, he very objectively evaluates the tactical and technical characteristics of a powerful missile capable of "throwing" a warhead weighing up to 400 kg for 500-700 kilometers. Yes, and "put" it in the target with a maximum deviation of 2-5 meters.

The analyst also praises the ways of transporting the complex described by him, clarifying moreover that the Iskander combat crew includes transport and loading vehicles, which contributes to the quickest launching of the missile system, including after the launches. The author pays particular attention to the fact that, despite the repeated and persistent desire expressed by many countries to acquire this property from Russia, weapon (8 countries are called as candidates, from Syria to South Korea), only Armenia and Algeria were able to become happy owners of "export modifications of these missiles". Obviously, the expert sees this as an additional argument in favor of the Iskander - since Moscow does not want to share such weapons with anyone, it means that it is really very powerful and perfect.

However, Larson pays much more attention not to describing formidable weapons, but to his role in the "power diplomacy of the Kremlin." It is the manifestation of such that the author is inclined to consider the deployment of these missile systems in Kaliningrad. The fact of this placement in the USA is a cause for concern. What is very characteristic, the American author does not mention this city as the "internal territory" of our country, but as the territory of a certain "Russian enclave on the shores of the Baltic Sea." In his opinion, the Iskanders located there, which, if necessary, can hit targets “not only in the Baltic States and Poland, but also in eastern Germany and southern Sweden,” are initially oriented towards “targets in NATO countries,” but their main task is “By their ability to strike almost anywhere in the Baltic Sea, threaten the alliance’s important transport route.”

At the same time, the author of The National Interest is confident that in the event of a conflict in Europe, the Iskander OTRK will be used without nuclear warheads, which gives a "minimal risk of nuclear confrontation" between its participants. He also mentions the West, which is so disturbing, "the strategy of blocking vital vital zones and effectively blocking access to them." Considering the missile system he describes as an important element of such a strategy, Mr. Larson admits that this weapon is an example of Russia's successful implementation of “the desire manifested in the post-Soviet period to create ever more advanced missile technologies.”

In conclusion, in fact, contrary to his own initial statements, Caleb Larson concludes that "Russia's missile arsenal is very impressive." It is not only “huge”, but also in excellent condition and “constant operational readiness”. Well, such thoughts are much more correct and, most importantly, useful for maintaining peace on the planet than completely groundless ranting about the "backlog" of our country in any field of armaments.
Author:
Photos used:
Wikipedia / OTRK Iskander
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

27 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. rotmistr60 April 13 2020 06: 32 New
    • 17
    • 3
    +14
    “Russian missiles are serious”
    Really got it? Well, diplomacy without rockets is difficult to carry out, because not everyone understands too cultural a diplomatic language not backed up by a real opportunity to get a grip on the wort.
    1. Olgovich April 13 2020 07: 03 New
      • 10
      • 2
      +8
      Quote: rotmistr60
      Really got it? Well, diplomacy without rockets is difficult to carry out, because not everyone understands too cultural a diplomatic language not backed up by a real opportunity to get a grip on the wort.

      And after all they are silent, bastards, that these missiles are already only the ANSWER to aggressive actions of the West
      1. Mitroha April 13 2020 07: 09 New
        • 4
        • 2
        +2
        Quote: rotmistr60
        “Russian missiles are serious”
        Really got it?

        Yes, nothing came of them, except for finances from interested parties who want to maintain hysteria, to direct flows to develop the US budget.
        Quote: Olgovich

        And after all they are silent, bastards, that these missiles are already only the ANSWER to aggressive actions of the West

        Heh, so then they will have to admit it. And this can destroy the myth of the "rays of democracy and peace" that NATO carries
        Happy owners of export modifications of rockets

        Lord, what a liquid in their head
    2. Ironcity April 13 2020 09: 16 New
      • 6
      • 7
      -1
      All you need to know about National Interest is that its publisher is Simes from Channel 1, and the editorial board member is Pushkov. This "concern" (which no one has a clue about in the USA) is nothing more than an attempt to pass off wishful thinking. And all this garbage from ours with you, dear taxpayers of the Russian Federation, is paid for.
      1. Lopatov April 13 2020 10: 19 New
        • 7
        • 2
        +5
        Quote: Ironcity
        so it’s that its publisher is the host of Channel 1 Symes

        A great example of the fact that half-truth is not much different from a lie ...
        You "forgot" that he is the son of a dissident and the dissident himself, that he migrated to the USA in 1973, that he worked at the notorious Carnegie Endowment, that he is president of the Nixon Center founded in 1994 / "Center for the National Interest"
        1. Ironcity April 13 2020 11: 51 New
          • 1
          • 7
          -6
          And what does that change? Dissident from the 1st channel, og. Kisilev and Solovyov were also not always who they are now, to the point ...
          1. Lopatov April 13 2020 11: 55 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            Quote: Ironcity
            And what does that change?

            Everything changes.
            After this, it is difficult to try to portray the National Interest as the mouthpiece of Kremlin propaganda.

            Quote: Ironcity
            Dissident from the 1st channel, og.

            Not the first, not the last.
            Pozner is also a "dissident from Channel 1, og"
      2. Doccor18 April 13 2020 10: 46 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        You're right. Why capture Kaliningrad if three dozen western corporations work there.
      3. Den717 April 13 2020 17: 26 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Ironcity
        And all this garbage from ours is paid, dear taxpayers of the Russian Federation

        Can you show how?
        It would not be bad for the founder of the VO to understand that if the experts of the caliber A. Pushkov, not R. Skomorokhov, would print in VO, maybe VO would be quoted close to ni. And this is a completely different level of interest and authority. And the price of an ad slot would have grown. laughing
    3. Chaldon48 April 18 2020 16: 20 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      On one of the Egyptian pyramids, the inscription was decoded that any contract is just a tablet with a record of the conditions, if they are not stood by soldiers with spears
  2. DMB 75 April 13 2020 06: 33 New
    • 15
    • 2
    +13
    The fact of this placement in the US is a "concern"

    Usa satisfaction satisfied.
    1. knn54 April 13 2020 09: 49 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      And if you put the Iskanders in Chukotka, will the missiles reach the Elmendorf airbase ... F-22 began to disturb something.
  3. Lipchanin April 13 2020 06: 37 New
    • 8
    • 7
    +1
    In general, I pushed everyone to trembling knees with the subtext "I need money, otherwise the Russians will come"
    only Armenia and Algeria were able to become the lucky owners of “export modifications of these missiles”.

    What a strange choice of partners request
  4. Andrei Nikolaevich April 13 2020 06: 37 New
    • 7
    • 3
    +4
    Diplomacy without the Iskander is an empty phrase. The notes of protest, and all sorts of "concerns" do not affect the "world community." Look at the Outskirts. Well, about whom they wipe their feet, the whole world .....
    1. Lipchanin April 13 2020 06: 50 New
      • 13
      • 7
      +6
      Quote: Andrey Nikolaevich
      Well, about whom they wipe their feet, the whole world .....

      Yes you sho ???
      Whole world with them bully
  5. mark1 April 13 2020 06: 52 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    warhead weighing up to 700 kg.

    Am I missing something, or is the author just terribly catching up? Like BG 480-500kg.
  6. jonht April 13 2020 06: 58 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    A good diplomatic word and really good rockets are more useful to the world than just a "good word".
    Well or so "with the FSA to live on one planet, armed to the teeth to walk." wassat
    For those who do not understand humor, there is a badge "-".
  7. Thrifty April 13 2020 07: 01 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Well, yes, there will be no nuclear charges — we will mount thermonuclear charges on Iskander, they say it’s cleaner, Greta won’t cry, just that. ...
  8. parusnik April 13 2020 07: 21 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Yes, somehow do not care about their concern ..
  9. 75 Sergey April 13 2020 08: 31 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    And why should they be afraid that their NATO is so great, it’s not enough for everyone.
  10. depressant April 13 2020 09: 06 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    So what? Our "not-so-new missiles" are capable of cutting western foreheads well into your lack of logic. This is necessary! They are placing their weapons near our borders and are sadly complaining when, in response, we also put our missiles near ... our borders!
  11. Chaldon48 April 13 2020 10: 28 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    I want to tell the Westerners to sit quietly guys and there will be nothing to be afraid of, or as they used to say in old times: "Do not wake famously while it is quiet"
  12. Ros 56 April 13 2020 10: 32 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    I did not understand something, where are the stripes and where is Kaliningrad. Pull half-wits into your puddle and worry there, and in Oyrop, let your sixes worry.
  13. ZaharoFF April 13 2020 12: 25 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Russia's missile arsenal is very impressive

    Better late than never. Zadornov was right.
  14. Old26 April 13 2020 14: 34 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: mark1
    warhead weighing up to 700 kg.

    Am I missing something, or is the author just terribly catching up? Like BG 480-500kg.

    This is an export option. Warhead up to 500 kg, range up to 300 km

    Quote: knn54
    And if you put the Iskanders in Chukotka, will the missiles reach the Elmendorf airbase ... F-22 began to disturb something.

    No. there the distance is about 1500-1700 km
  15. iouris April 15 2020 16: 38 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    What do these OTRKs decide? Nothing. It’s enough to have determination and a published plan of causing unacceptable damage to the “decision center”. This center is one.
  16. Radikal April 19 2020 17: 29 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Traditionally, literally giving in the very first lines a “tribute to tradition”, that is, mentioning that Russia’s “extensive stock of missiles came from the Soviet Union, and therefore it’s not very new,” the author of the publication, Caleb Larson, prefers not to speculative propaganda patterns, and real facts. First of all, he very objectively evaluates the tactical and technical characteristics of a powerful missile capable of "throwing" a warhead weighing up to 400 kg for 500-700 kilometers. Yes, and "put" it in the target with a maximum deviation of 2-5 meters.
    And the author can refute - it is evidence that the existing missile systems for - Strategic Missile Forces, Navy, Ground Forces made from scratch? In the period - from 1991 to the present. I'm sorry, but I won’t be able to. sad