Military Review

Cold war on the horizon, or than the Pentagon will respond to "Russian provocations"?

In connection with the exacerbation of the situation in the international arena, the terms “cold war” and “arms race” are increasingly heard. However, various experts and politicians have not yet agreed on the relevance of such terminology. Some believe that the new cold war between Russia and the United States has already begun, while others consider such a development as possible only in the future. However, alarming signs occasionally appear. newswho can speak directly about the desire of some officials to unleash a cold war and launch a new arms race. That is, among other things, one of the latest statements by the US Secretary of Defense.

Official statements

Last Saturday, 7 November, US Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter spoke at the National Defense Forum at the Reagan Library with an extensive speech on major issues in the international arena and Pentagon’s plans to counter new threats. Some of the minister’s theses can be interpreted in a variety of ways, including as the first evidence of an impending arms race. The fact is that, in addition to international politics, Carter touched on the topic of confronting a military threat and creating new weapons.

The main statement of E. Carter, which attracted the most attention, concerns Russia and the world order. In his opinion, it is Russia that is the main threat to the order existing on the planet. As an example, the minister mentioned “aggression” against Ukraine (according to the official US version, Russia participates in the Ukrainian civil war), as well as other actions that do not suit foreign countries. In this regard, according to Carter, the Pentagon is currently searching for ideas and solutions that will help counteract unfriendly Russian actions.

Ashton Carter, US Secretary of Defense

Separately, the Minister touched upon the topic of Russian nuclear weapons and its roles in world order. According to Carter, Russia is currently “rattling nuclear weapons,” which makes it necessary to ask questions about the plans of the Russian leadership in the field of strategic stability. In addition, the US minister doubts whether the Russian government respects the existing rules regarding the non-use of nuclear weapons.

After such accusations, E. Carter was forced to make a reservation. According to him, the United States does not want a new cold war, not to mention an open conflict with Russia. Nevertheless, he noted the intention to defend his interests, to defend his allies, and to maintain the existing world order, the main threat to which is Russia.

According to E. Carter, Russia is engaged in undermining stability in Europe and the Middle East. Over the past few years, it has "violated the sovereignty" of Ukraine and Georgia, as well as intimidating the Baltic countries. In addition, Moscow launched an operation in Syria, which contributes to the deterioration of the situation and the extension of the civil war. Because of this, the United States has to take measures to deter Russian aggression, as well as reduce the threat to itself and its allies.

The American minister notes that in response to the Russian “nuclear saber rattling”, the United States is taking some measures related to the development of the armed forces, primarily the nuclear triad. The United States is engaged in the modernization of the naval, air and ground components of strategic nuclear forces. Due to such programs, it is planned to increase the combat capability of the corresponding part of the armed forces responsible for nuclear deterrence.

Carter said that the Pentagon is investing in a number of critical areas that are a relevant response to Russian "provocations." These areas include the Minister unmanned systems, the project to create a promising long-range bomber, electronic warfare systems, cyber systems, as well as electromagnetic railguns, lasers and other amazing technologies that he can not describe.

How to understand?

Ashton Carter argues that the United States does not want to enter into a new cold war with Russia. Nevertheless, some actions of the US military and political leadership can be considered evidence of preparations for an arms race. Moreover, this is how one can interpret some of the statements of the head of the Pentagon. He first mentions Russian projects, and then talks about American programs that are the answer to them. Approximately the same thing was based on the Cold War arms race.

How fair are the assessments of Carter’s statements as the first evidence of a new arms race — time will tell. Much more interesting at the moment are his statements regarding promising American developments, which should be symmetrical or asymmetric responses to Russian "provocations." The list, called the Minister, is small, but still worth consideration. In one of his phrases, the official mentioned several interesting directions in the development of military technology, attracting the attention of both American and foreign specialists.

Unmanned technology

As one of the "trump cards" in the confrontation with Russia, the American minister called unmanned technology. Indeed, the United States is one of the leaders in this area. They have a large number of different types of UAVs, designed to solve a wide range of tasks. This technique is used to conduct reconnaissance at various levels, and is also capable of striking at enemy targets. UAVs have firmly taken their place in the structure of the armed forces and are unlikely to lose it.

The development of drones continues, and there are certain successes in this matter. For example, great hopes are being placed on the Northrop Grumman X-47B drone project. The developments on this project will be further used to create a promising multi-purpose deck UAV that can replenish aviation groups of aircraft carriers. To date, the X-47B have demonstrated the ability to automatically fly, the ability to take off and land on an aircraft carrier, as well as receive fuel from a refueling machine without operator control.

Long Range Bomber

Mentioning the project of a promising long-range bomber, E. Carter is referring to the program LRS-B (Long-Range Strike - Bomber). At the end of October, the Pentagon completed an analysis of two proposals submitted to the tender for the development of this project, and chose a contracting company to develop a new aircraft, and then launch its mass production. By decision of the military, the specialists of Northrop Grumman will create a new project. The union of companies Boeing and Lockheed Martin remained without an order, but a few days ago it announced its intention to achieve a review of the results of the competition. According to some reports, the company "Boeing" and "Lockheed-Martin" intend to appeal to the value of their own and competing project, urging the military in the greater profitability of their own proposals.

Aircraft LRS-B in the artist's view

Almost all information about the LRS-B project is still under secrecy. Over the past few years, fragmentary data has been published on the technical requirements for a new aircraft, but over time, they could have changed, which is why previously announced information should have lost its relevance. According to unconfirmed data, you want to create and build a subsonic heavy long-range bomber, the design of which will be used so-called. stealth technology.

The LRS-B bomber will have to overcome the enemy's air defense, and then strike conventional and nuclear weapons on key targets. This requires minimal visibility, long range and the ability to refuel in flight. In the future, the possibility of creating an unmanned modification of a bomber is not excluded. Such a UAV will be able to show higher performance in comparison with the manned version and, as a result, will have greater potential.

The timing of the LRS-B project has not yet been clarified. In addition, even existing plans have already been adjusted several times. Thus, the date of announcement of the winner of the competition has been shifted for several months. In addition, protest from Boeing and Lockheed Martin could lead to a new timing shift. As a result, the date of the first flight and the timing of the first deliveries to the troops remain unknown.

Electronic warfare

New American electronic warfare systems are quite an interesting topic. Over the past few months, a number of statements have been voiced about the ambiguous situation in this area. Some foreign experts recognized the advantages of Russia in the field of EW facilities, and also complained about the backlog of American developers of such equipment. For example, in the summer of this year, Lori Bakhut, the former head of the EW US Army Service, said that the United States has a powerful intelligence system and can listen to anything. At the same time, however, the American capabilities for disabling enemy communications are only one tenth of the Russian potential in this area.

Nevertheless, it should be noted that the United States is working in this direction and achieved some success. So, at the end of the last decade, the full-scale operation of Boeing EA-18G Growler deck-mounted electronic warfare aircraft began. These aircraft are designed to ensure the full combat operation of strike deck aircraft. Their task is to suppress the enemy’s communications equipment and jamming to counter radar stations. In 2011, the Growlers took part in a real armed conflict for the first time.

Rail gun

Since the middle of the last decade, the American companies General Atomics and BAE Systems have been working on the creation of a promising rail gun. Due to the use of Lorenz's force, such a weapon is in theory capable of accelerating a projectile up to speeds of several tens of kilometers per second. Such indicators have not yet been achieved, however, the existing successes can demonstrate the prospects of such weapons.

Back in 2008, the American industry showed an experienced rail gun with muzzle energy at the level of 10 MJ, which allowed it to accelerate the projectile to a speed of more than 2500 m / s. Two years later, a sample was demonstrated with muzzle energy up to 33 MJ. A little later, BAE Systems began testing its own version of the rail gun, which after a number of modifications can be used in practice. After equipping this tool with a set of necessary equipment, such as automatic supply of ammunition or a cooling system of working bodies, one can consider the possibility of its use in practice.

Aircraft EW EA-18G Growler

Currently, rail guns are considered as promising weapons for warships of new projects. According to calculations, with a muzzle energy of the order of 32 MJ and a projectile mass of about 2,5-3 kg, shooting at a distance of up to 150-180 km is possible. With a further increase in the main parameters of the gun, the firing range increases. Another positive quality of such weapons is the possibility of using light and compact ammunition that does not need relatively large shells with a propelling charge. However, in this case there is a need for an appropriate power supply and placement of a number of specific units.

Earlier it was claimed that in the second half of this decade, an experienced rail cannon could be installed on one of the American ships, after which it would begin testing. In addition, it was said about the desire of the Pentagon to arm such guns promising destroyers of the project Zumwalt. By the middle of the next decade, it is planned to achieve muzzle energies of the order of 60-65 MJ. Thus, it is quite possible that the tests of the first high-grade ship rail guns will begin in the next few years. Nevertheless, the complexity of the program and the repeated shifts of the deadlines force the US military to restrain its optimism.

New development or arms race?

You can admit that Ashton Carter was right. The United States does have several promising defense programs that can be a response to “Russian provocations.” American engineers are creating new UAVs, electronic reconnaissance and electronic warfare, as well as other technology, including those previously encountered only in science fiction. Certain successes at this stage allow the US military to look into the future with optimism, and also to remind about their military potential in statements concerning the international situation.

Nevertheless, it should be noted that the latest statements by the US Secretary of Defense and other words of high-ranking officials can be interpreted in a variety of ways. For example, hints and direct statements about new projects can be perceived as veiled threats to a potential adversary. At the same time, Carter stresses that the United States does not want to start a new cold war, not to mention an open armed conflict. In this case, the threat can be attributed to an attempt to contain a potential enemy, but in general the whole situation looks ambiguous and controversial, including because a high-ranking official can be accused of inconsistency.

Statements about new projects can also be a warning: foreign partners and potential adversaries are reminded that the US military power will grow, which is why friendly or at least neutral relations with them should be maintained. Those who will not follow these "tips" will have to enter into open confrontation or a new cold war. In addition, promising US projects will force the other side of such a conflict to intensify the development of its defense industry and armed forces. It is hardly worth reminding how exactly the military buildup is called, with an eye on the actions of a potential enemy.

As a result, Ashton Carter’s recent speech leaves an ambiguous impression. On the one hand, a high-ranking official claims that Washington does not want a new cold war and an arms race. On the other hand, his theses look ambiguous and can lead to specific conclusions.

According to official statements, no one wants a new global confrontation, similar to what happened a few decades ago. Nevertheless, despite this, officials continue to read out speeches in which there are ambiguous or even aggressive attacks in the direction of certain states. It cannot be ruled out that such “double standards” will eventually lead to the beginning of a new Cold War, which, according to the official version, is not needed by anyone.

On the materials of the sites:
Photos used:
Wikimedia Commons
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Vladimyrych
    Vladimyrych 10 November 2015 06: 10
    Yes, in general, you can't expect good things from mattress mats ... You need to keep your ears on top and not expect some kind of "warming". They can give us some unpleasant surprise. We must be ready for anything.
    1. vladimirZ
      vladimirZ 10 November 2015 06: 46
      There will be no "cold war" only in one case, in the case of complete subordination of Russia to the Americans, the United States and Europe.
      In all other cases, even the slightest defense of Russia's sovereignty for some kind of independence, the Cold War is inevitable, and this is proved by the entire thousand-year history of Russia, including especially the post-Soviet one.
      The current leaders of the state should be guided by this provision and not look for "partners" in the West. There are only one "partners" for the destruction of Russia.
  2. VseDoFeNi
    VseDoFeNi 10 November 2015 06: 11
    And what can this answer to the rapidly losing influence in the world of a poor bunch of states?
    1. Sirocco
      Sirocco 11 November 2015 06: 58
      Quote: VseDoFeNi
      And what can this answer to the rapidly losing influence in the world of a poor bunch of states?

      I wrote several years ago, comparing the United States with a rabid dog that runs around the enclosure, trying to bite everyone, for what they do it, from envy, anger, from the fact that they are sick and die, and there is nothing they can do about it. As a result, they are trying to drag as many countries as possible to the next world, and if possible, the continents.
      So we do not expect good from them, this article, this is a statement of facts. Do you want peace, prepare for war. Alas, this is so. A cancerous tumor is excised, but they don’t agree with it, here lotions from chamomile infusion will not help.
  3. MolGro
    MolGro 10 November 2015 06: 31
    All these plans will depend on the economic condition of the SGA.
    With a serious fall, such as in 30 years! Most scientists and specialists will leave for their homeland because life in the SGA will become unbearable, and given the very poor teaching and engineering school in the SGA, all these dreams are unrealizable (there are too many immigrant rectors, scientists and engineers who do not have the resources to support themselves in these professions)!
  4. Same lech
    Same lech 10 November 2015 06: 36
    According to official statements, no one wants a new global confrontation, similar to what happened a few decades ago. Nevertheless, despite this, officials continue to read out speeches in which there are ambiguous or even aggressive attacks in the direction of certain states. It cannot be ruled out that such “double standards” will eventually lead to the beginning of a new Cold War, which, according to the official version, is not needed by anyone.

    Words words...

    The basis of these contradictions is the economy ...

    In recent years of the twentieth century. the impossibility of protecting humanity from an impending anthropoecological
    catastrophe without changing the form (type, method) of development. There was a situation when the traditional type of development being translated into the future significantly increased the dangers and the protection against them turned out to be less and less effective. The development of civilization more and more clearly showed features that could no longer be considered progressive, and problems appeared that threatened the death of the entire human race. They got the name of global problems ...

    In general, there is nothing good ahead for mankind ... again, a war for a place under the sun.
  5. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 10 November 2015 06: 39
    It has long been noticed that the more worthless and uneducated a person is, the more aggressive and vociferous he is. So it is with the Secretary of Defense of the United States, who expresses the opinion of the country - the world gendarme.
  6. nozdrevat58
    nozdrevat58 10 November 2015 06: 50
    Frantic. And in the stream of anger does not know how to bite. These attacks, including and the fact that Russia will suffer losses in Syria, a near man - grumbling saliva. After all, someone does the job better. than him.
  7. press officer
    press officer 10 November 2015 07: 15
    Quote: VseDoFeNi
    And what can this answer to the rapidly losing influence in the world of a poor bunch of states?

    Yes, they can just be dirty! the other day, after all, he said (translated into human language) - that "Russia and China are" not obedient "states and want to end the unipolar world, but the USA (!!!) will not allow this, because they consider themselves exclusive and only they can be the only ones in the world to become "world policemen" and, without the permission of any UN or anyone else, do whatever they think is necessary in the world! They will decide for themselves who to bomb, who to overthrow, and who to hang! And only "an exceptional nation "can afford this, decide for sovereign states how to live and whether to live in general! angry So .... the main thing is that we continue to defend our Motherland and God forbid us once again such rulers as the "marked" and drunk ... negative
  8. Tatar 174
    Tatar 174 10 November 2015 07: 20
    All the money. Carter yells about Russian provocations, so that he will be allocated more money. some of them will be transferred to him personally. Since Obama’s term is about to expire and he will leave the place of the distributor and stop feeding his people, so they are trying to grab more while there is an opportunity. In general, it is old as the world and nothing new, and so everywhere and everywhere and on every kilometer. The era of the Golden Calf.
  9. parusnik
    parusnik 10 November 2015 07: 28
    In his opinion, it is Russia that is the main threat to the existing order on the planet...Yes who would doubt it! smile He who is not under the USA is against them ...
  10. igordok
    igordok 10 November 2015 09: 19
    If you think about it, the "cold" war has accompanied humanity throughout its history. Sometimes the "cold" war was interrupted by a "hot" one. In ancient times, XB was local. In a more modern world, it becomes global. As long as there is antagonism, there will always be wars. But it's better to let them be - "cold".
    1. Turkir
      Turkir 10 November 2015 12: 34
      If you think about it, the "cold" war accompanied humanity throughout its history

      It is especially clear that such loud statements by the head of the Pentangon give military orders to corporations, increase their stock price on the stock exchange and, the old demagogic slogan, give new jobs.
      War is a continuation of the economy by other means.
      And what superprofits!
  11. Roy
    Roy 10 November 2015 09: 40
    "How will the Pentagon respond to" Russian provocations "?

    The Pentagon will respond with what it is told from Tel Aviv. And not otherwise. The USA is an Israeli "state". And this is already an axiom.
  12. Zumich
    Zumich 10 November 2015 10: 04
    I believe that our officials, managers (of any level) will withstand, now the US tempter snake will begin to demand "to repay debts by betraying the Motherland" (example: Boris Borisovich Nadezhdin and how many more such quiet, ordinary-looking "correct" people) and completely seduce the ruble of the rest, other delights of life, and to eliminate the smart and rebellious. All hope is for our competent authorities, they are now experiencing a colossal burden, such Moldovans are hard workers, and Ashton & Co. are already spitting bile, but the main thing is that they would choke on it.
  13. sisa29
    sisa29 10 November 2015 10: 52
    And let's think about what the Cold War is. That war that they like to remember. This is a war of two idiological systems, a struggle of two economic paths of the development of civilization. Where was the struggle for loyalty to the ideas of socialism or capitalism of all small countries. And the struggle to solve global problems: space, science, achievements in sports. All for the sake of asserting the correctness of the chosen path. Unfortunately, the socialist path was a loser. So what now? Harassing a large group of capitalist states of the capitalist state of Russia and several friendly powers. And only economic motives are the basis. That idea that was before is gone. Of course, they are trying to replace it with patriotism and tales of evil enemies. But alas, only capitalism will triumph over the struggle of capitalism with capitalism.
    We won the Great Patriotic War because the "children of Stalin" fought and died for the Motherland. And now, based on the patriotism of the poor lower classes and the shouts of "Glory to United Russia" in the struggle for the redistribution of ownership of oil rigs, do we have a chance to win? Under the careful guidance of our nobles, we are from their French estates.
    1. 31rus
      31rus 10 November 2015 12: 17
      Russia itself, without any pressure, coercion, accepted the rules of the game of the Western world, and when they realized that there were a lot of "sharks" of their own, and even the question of Russia's sovereignty arose, there were serious disagreements (this is why both ours and Westerners " sharks ") there is a glimmer of hope that everything will return. But as soon as the illusions dissipate completely, then they will say" there is a cold war, "the iron curtain", and it will sound from both sides, with a difference of "local flavor"
    2. The comment was deleted.
  14. Nyrobsky
    Nyrobsky 10 November 2015 14: 30
    The United States itself initiated a wave of confrontation with Russia and brought the situation to the point where a concession to either side would be perceived as a manifestation of weakness.
    Mattresses can no longer abandon their rhetoric, since their authority in the world has been seriously undermined as a result of the fact that they could not prove that, according to the first of the shout, any country will take a favorable position for them. Russia rebelled in such a way that the USA satellites dropped their jaw and doubt crept in, whether their patron is so great.
    After all, everyone understands that in this confrontation Russia really only responded by countering the "friendly actions of partners" without showing aggression.
    The mattresses decided to push the situation to the limit, because understand that if they cannot persuade Russia to obey, then they are worthless and the world order they have built will be rebuilt not in their favor, and therefore the transition of the confrontation into a hot phase cannot be ruled out. To check Russia's readiness to "signal" the mattresses themselves will not be substituted, but some of its sixes will be sentenced by the United States to slaughter as a "trial balloon." So far, through the lips of Ashton Carter, they instill in their sixes the confidence that everything is under control and there are not exhausted opportunities to "calm down" Russia, but they (opportunities) are practically gone.
    Until the insolent man realizes that he can be guaranteed to receive by physiognomy, he will not calm down.
    How to impress him?
    Perhaps it will be an exemplary education "involved in the terrorist attack with our plane over Egypt" - quickly, efficiently and with maximum damage. Otherwise, it will not work to incline the mattresses to mutual understanding.
    But something tells you that this attack will not remain unanswered and experts are also aware of who was involved in it. And this is not a member of NATO, for which NATO must harness.
  15. trantor
    trantor 10 November 2015 15: 08
    What to talk about? The "cold war" is already underway or continues, whichever suits best. I am glad that no one will go into a direct conflict with us in the near future, and the main question is whether we have enough intelligence and the ability not to slide into a "symmetric" arms race. We are unlikely to withstand it, given the current state of our economy.
  16. Volzhanin
    Volzhanin 10 November 2015 15: 46
    The gut is thin in small-britonian-Saxons in an open confrontation with the Russian people to climb. In addition to unprecedented arrogance, they are characterized by universal cowardice, and without being sure of their impunity, they themselves will not trample for anything.
    To provoke someone - yes, they can. Only, we hope the fools in the 20th century have disappeared and the geyropa will refuse to serve as a ram for the Anglo-Zionists.
    So all these are cheap mattresses and stripes.
    But actually you can filter their filthy rows, if you want!
  17. s.melioxin
    s.melioxin 10 November 2015 17: 58
    It cannot be ruled out that such “double standards” will ultimately lead to the start of a new Cold War, which, according to the official version, is not needed by anyone.
    That's great. War is not needed, no one wants to fight. The Cold War is also unnecessary, the "hegemon" is tired. He himself no longer knows what to do next. Mongrels don't count. The world even this lopsided is still better. any war. BUT the armored train must be kept under steam. But what if. And what. Suckers are missing.
  18. The comment was deleted.
  19. Buffalo
    Buffalo 11 November 2015 01: 40
    The war is unlikely to be "cold". Mikhail Lesin, Vladimir Putin's personal envoy, was killed in the United States by those who guarded him. This is a mess!
    Read an online blog post titled:
    The death of Mikhail Lesin and flight 9268, which crashed over Sinai - is there a connection?
  20. Buffalo
    Buffalo 11 November 2015 02: 18
    Satanovsky stated that a Russian plane in Egypt was shot down by an English rocket, commissioned by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Qatar.
    The direct executors were Hispanic Americans who worked under the guise of UN staff.