MYTHS OF WAR AND COOPERATION

In the first edition of our magazine in March, the author of these lines wrote, in an article headlined "The Munich reproach", that the confrontation between the USA and Russia has reached a new level, the consequences of which will resemble the Cold War of the Soviet period.

Indeed, the USA and its allies have clearly demonstrated their desire to promote their military-political interests further to the east, prompting Russia to take retaliatory steps.

At present, the entire world community is actively discussing the issue of a new missile defence system (ABM) which the States and its NATO allies intend to deploy in Poland and the Czech Republic, allegedly to defend Europe from Iranian missiles in the future. It must be remembered that in Poland the Americans are planning to deploy an interceptor missile system, while in the Czech Republic they will install an X-band radar system.

This initiative immediately alarmed the Russian public and official circles, which maintain that this missile defence system has nothing to do with the Iranian nuclear threat and is aimed solely against Russia.

And again, as was the case in February, by a twist of fate the story came to a head in Germany. This time it was at the resort town of Heiligendamm where the G8 leaders had gathered. Everyone expected another open confrontation at the private meeting between Presidents Putin and Bush. However, the Russian leader suddenly puzzled everyone by moving his "knight". He offered his American counterpart no more nor less than the joint use of the Daryal radar station in the Azerbaijani town of Qabala, leased by Azerbaijan to Russia for 10 years. Who would have thought it? First, it turns out that in this way, Russia de facto recognizes the presence of a nuclear threat from Iran. Second, what is probably even more important is that Russia is calling on the American military to explore new areas, i.e. to settle in Azerbaijan - something they have zealously opposed so far. What's more, if we take a logical look at Putin's words in Heilgendamm, it seems that the USA could even deploy interceptor missiles here with "Russia's permission". On the one hand, Putin pointed out that the use of the Qabala radar station will make it possible to down Iranian missiles far away from Europe and that the downed missiles will "fall into the sea" (from a purely geographic point of view, there are no other seas nearby but the Caspian and Black seas). But on the other hand, the Kremlin boss clearly wants the USA not to deploy missile defence systems in Poland and the Czech Republic. It seems that, for the time being, the Americans will have to shoot down purely hypothetical Iranian intercontinental missiles from a closer distance. And third, with this proposal, Putin openly outlined his priorities, clearly "surrendering" Iran: for Moscow, its European borders are more important than its southern borders and cooperation with Iran. But is everything so clear in reality?

The bottom of the "iceberg"

We have to point out that most of the "iceberg" in all this American-Western-Russian confrontation over the missile defence systems is under the water and at first sight, is not so apparent. First, it is said that the missile defence system in Europe targets Iran. Isn't this too far away? Or to be more precise, are the Americans overestimating the potential of the Iranian military-industrial complex? The overwhelming majority of experts are sure that Iran is as far from creating intercontinental missiles as from launching a lunar rover. The Shahab medium-range missiles that Iran has are so unreliable that even the Iranians themselves do not know where they will fall and how far they can fly. Even in the best-case scenario, their "target zone" is only 2,000-2,500 km. They could not only not reach America, but neither could they reach Eastern Europe. According to the most optimistic calculations, Iranians need more than a decade even to approach the production of such long-range missiles. Besides, there is a problem here: it must be that by creating an anti-Iranian missile defence system in Europe, the Americans are preparing in advance to sit and wait until Iran gets hold of nuclear weapons and, at the same time, create intercontinental ballistic missiles on which it will install these nuclear warheads. In that case, what should we do about all this anti-Iranian rhetoric and about possible air strikes on Iranian territory? What should we do about the fact that there are three American aircraft carriers and a vanguard cover squadron in the Persian Gulf? For how many years will they stay there awaiting the creation of a missile defence system in Europe? Where is the logic here?

Second, it is said that the missile defence systems in Europe are being targeted on Russia. This theory, which is supported mainly by the Russian establishment and public, does not stand up to scrutiny. Even if missile defence systems are installed near the Russian border, the Americans will not be able to defend themselves from hypothetical Russian strikes on their territory, just as they will not be able to defend Europe. There are several reasons for this. The first reason is that, despite the reduction of strategic arms, Russia still has a large arsenal of intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of hitting American territory. What's more, the missiles deployed in central Russia will fly not over Europe, but over the Arctic. Russia also has an arsenal of missiles in the Far East which will not be affected in any way, even by 10 European anti-missiles. Third, the Americans still do not have an effective system of defence against modern Russian missiles with their numerous homing warheads: they can shoot down two or three of them, while eight or 10 will reach their target, razing North America to the ground. And finally, the most important thing is that everyone seems to have forgotten (most of all the Russians themselves) that they have super-modern and undetectable nuclear submarines carrying nuclear weapons which have no equivalent in the world. Any of them could surface wherever and whenever necessary and launch so many missiles that they will destroy half of the world. Perhaps some of the older generation still remember the sensational story of a Soviet submarine which surfaced near New York just to demonstrate its capability and quietly sailed away in an unknown direction. The Americans have no effective system of defence against these submarines, and the tracking system installed across almost the whole of the seabed under the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, and which cost an astronomical amount of money, will not give them total security against a strike. So what is Moscow worried about?

Third, it is said that the Qabala radar station is a complete alternative to the missile defence system in Europe. This is another myth. We should not forget that, despite its power, the Daryal station in Qabala is only a tracking and early warning station. It is unable to aim anti-missiles like the aforementioned X-band radar system which the USA wants to install in the Czech Republic. From a military-technical point of view, Putin's proposals are naive, to put it mildly, because the Qabala radar station cannot serve as the centre of the missile defence system. The large radar station (128 metres high) in Qabala was built only to warn of ballistic and cruise missile attacks from the south and to watch space objects, and it is impossible to use this radar station to aim anti-missiles. The radar station in Qabala looks only to the south and does not even cover the whole territory of Iran - the northeastern sector near the Turkmen border is beyond its reach. It is not practical to use it as a warning system against an Iranian attack because it is within the range of Iranian Scud B missiles, tactical bombing aircraft and paratroopers, and could be put out of action quite easily. At the same time, several divisions - air defence, missile defence and motorized infantry divisions - are needed to defend Qabala in the event of an attack. But even in these conditions, success is not guaranteed.

At the same time, it is not known yet how long the Russians themselves will be using this radar station. According to the same Russian military sources, in 2006 Baku asked Russia to pay double the rent, from seven to 14 million dollars per year. In reply, the Russian deputy prime minister and former defence minister, Sergey Ivanov, said that a new, small, modern radar station, called Voronezh-DM, which is better than the Daryal radar station in Qabala, will be opened near Armavir in 2008. It will totally replace the Qabala radar station. 

Thus Putin's proposal was for purely political PR purposes, meant for domestic consumption on the one hand, and for the wide world community on the other. Putin wanted to show the world community his readiness to make a great compromise and cooperate, although the Russian president was aware that this could not be a full replacement. At best, the Americans would agree to use information from the powerful Qabala radar station, along with creating the European defence system, as the radar station is capable of warning them earlier than anybody else that a missile has been launched.

But this is not the full list of fairy tales and myths that the West and Russia are actively creating with rare unanimity. I have cited only the three main ones. As for the issue that this missile defence system is aimed at China, we will not examine this theory at all because it does not really sound serious, at least from a purely geographical and tactical point of view. At the same time, China's potential is absolutely incomparable to that of Iran.

But the most interesting thing is that in this case, both sides have such effervescent fervour that you begin to realize: it is equally beneficial, though for different reasons, to both sides to play on the "ABM card". This gives us a firmer idea that this iceberg, which marks a new upsurge in Cold War-style military hysteria, also has an underwater part that is bigger and more important. But we'll come to that a bit later…

The tip of the "iceberg"

However, let's return to the visible political component of the current confrontation. In principle, after Putin's proposal we could expect reaction from three sides: Azerbaijan, the direct owner of the Qabala radar station, the USA and Iran. Things were clear with Azerbaijan almost from the very beginning: President Putin said in Heiligendamm that he had already received the Azerbaijani president's agreement, which was then confirmed by official circles in Baku. The situation with the USA was slightly more difficult. At first sight, the Americans seemed to be thrown by the unexpected Russian offer, though there are quite a few weighty indications now that this proposal was not as unexpected as was represented. Even the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry confirmed that during negotiations in Baku, before the Heiligendamm summit, the Americans had expressed their interest in joint use of the Qabala radar station; this was even mentioned by the press before the G8 summit. Perhaps this idea was deliberately given to Moscow by the Americans as a sign of "friendship" in order to give Putin a chance to come out of the situation with credit and preserve his image as a constructive figure in the face of his inevitable failure in negotiations on the European missile defence system, and in the run-up to a tiring arms race. It is also a pretext for "surrendering" the southern borders with credit and, at the same time, losing Iran's support for the sake of more important objectives because, in this event, the Russian public would not be so critical of its leader's retreat. I will not be surprised if this turns out to be true: you can expect any turn of events in two-faced international politics (continually on display). Incidentally, the "American offensive", paradoxical as it may seem, is of benefit to Putin himself, as he is interested in preserving the continuity of his revisionist policy. But we'll discuss this later…

How did the USA react? Now we can say with full confidence that the Americans have not given up their European plans. This is proved by all the statements made by top Washington officials, from Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to her deputy for Europe and Eurasia, Daniel Fried, and the new US Defence Secretary, Robert Gates, not to mention the US president. Although none of them totally rejected the proposal on the joint use of the Daryal radar station in Qabala, describing it as interesting and requiring expert research, the unambiguous view was expressed that this cannot replace the European missile defence system for the USA. Let me quote the most graphic and balanced view that summarises the situation. The USA thinks that Russian President Vladimir Putin's alternative proposal on the joint use of radar in Azerbaijan is valuable, although they remain loyal to the idea of creating elements of the missile defence system in Poland and the Czech Republic, Reuters quoted US Deputy Secretary of State for Europe and Eurasia, Daniel Fried, as saying. "We find President Putin's offer curious and very interesting," Fried said during hearings at the Senate foreign relations committee. Fried also pointed out that Washington has formally offered to start discussions with Moscow on details of the proposal. In the diplomat's opinion, "the main idea is that the Russians let it be known that they need a certain system and that Iran, or this region, is a source of potential danger". In Fried's opinion, it is necessary to focus "not on one radar station, but on how it can become part of the system and on how these elements together can ensure everyone's security". At the same time, the American diplomat said that the USA is puzzled and concerned about Russia's latest actions and statements regarding elements of missile defence in Europe. "We are going through quite a complicated period of relations," Fried pointed out.

Very few people remember now that in 2000, Russia and the USA signed a memorandum on the establishment of a joint centre to exchange information from early missile warning systems. But this document has still not been implemented and it was scrapped this year on American initiative. 

Much will become clear after the Putin-Bush meeting in Bush's parental home in the USA, where they will spend some time in early July.

As for Iran, to the surprise of many, Iran's reaction to Putin's proposal was quite relaxed. The Iranian Foreign Ministry outlined its position on the joint US-Russian use of the Qabala radar station in Azerbaijan. An official spokesman for the Iranian Foreign Ministry, Mohammad Ali Hoseyni, said that the Russian and Azerbaijani ambassadors "had been invited to the Iranian Foreign Ministry where they were informed about the position of the Islamic Republic", ITAR-TASS reports. "Moreover, the Iranian ambassadors in Moscow and Baku held meetings with representatives of the Russian and Azerbaijani foreign ministries, during which they expressed Tehran's attitude to this initiative," he said. "We think Russia is not going to create instability and harm security in the region of which Russia itself is a part," the Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman said. At the same time, he drew attention to the fact that "the latest statements by the US defence secretary and the British prime minister show that the real targets of the American anti-missile shield (in Europe) are Russian missiles". The Iranian president did not issue threats or express dissatisfaction either. Tehran is in favour of expanding "without restriction" its strategic relations with Moscow. Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinezhad said this at a meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who took part in a session of the Caspian "Five" foreign ministers in the Iranian capital. "Our relations with Russia are not superficial, these are strategic relations," the Iranian president's press service quoted Ahmadinezhad as saying. "Iran and Russia are two historical allies and should actively cooperate, because rivalry will not do any good to either country," he added. Thus, we can say that Iran understands very well the real cause of the "political tennis game", both over European missile defence systems on the one hand, and over the Daryal radar station on the other.

Is the whole problem about Russia?

It is natural that the Kremlin's reaction to American actions was more than hostile. Moscow is playing only one card: that USA is attacking Russia. What's more, they draw far-reaching conclusions. The chief of the general staff of the Russian armed forces, Army General Yuriy Baluyevskiy, said it is necessary to freeze the deployment of American missile defence systems in Poland and the Czech Republic. "The work to deploy a radar station in the Czech Republic and set up a positional area in Poland should be at least suspended and frozen," Baluyevskiy said at a news conference in Moscow.

Touching on Russia's proposal on the joint use of the Qabala radar station in Azerbaijan, Baluyevskiy stressed that "the Russian offer does not include the idea of using the Qabala radar station as a supplement to the radar station in the Czech Republic". "This is not and cannot be true," the Russian army chief of staff stressed.

According to Baluyevskiy, the proliferation of missiles and nuclear weapons in the world does not have a disastrous tendency.

"The United States is clearly voicing the idea that Russia has finally realized the presence of a missile threat from Iran. For this reason, the US leadership thinks, it has started making proposals on the joint use of the Qabala radar station with the Americans," the army chief of staff stressed. "As an army officer, I confirm that this is not true. We have never denied the tendency of the proliferation of missiles and nuclear weapons in the world, but we maintain that this tendency does not have such a disastrous nature as to require the hasty deployment of a global missile defence system, especially close to the Russian Federation."

At the same time, the Russian army chief of staff thinks, despite everything Washington has already decided to deploy missile defence bases in Europe.

"If we summarize what we said then, in my view, the USA today is making the following assessment of President Putin's offer in Heiligendamm, namely, the deployment of US missile defence systems in Europe is non-negotiable for Washington, which is why Russia's initiative will not receive a positive response from the current US administration," he said.

At the same time, Baluyevskiy did not rule out that new positional areas of the US missile defence system will appear in the future. "What they are doing today is creating a system of radar stations which is planned to expand using the radar station in the Czech Republic - the third positional area… Where will the fourth and fifth positional areas be? They will be set up. I am telling you that they will be set up if they are not sensible," the general said. "The fourth (positional area of the US missile defence system) might be set up in northern Europe, the fifth one in the Far East, and this can be predicted today," the army chief of staff pointed out. At the same time, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov tried to smooth over the view that Russia has taken an anti-Iranian measure. "Russia does not see any threat from Iran and is outraged that the USA is using such threats to justify the deployment of its missile defence system in Eastern Europe," Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said at a news conference in Tehran after the meeting of the foreign ministers of the Caspian littoral states. According to Lavrov, if the USA seriously sees Iran as a threat, "these suspicions can be easily eliminated if they use information coming online into the Qabala radar station."

But the most important and remarkable thing in the minister's statement was the following. He expressed the opinion that the US plans to deploy elements of the missile defence system in Eastern Europe might provoke a race of strategic potential. "We are certainly on our way to resuming the arms race," Lavrov said.

"Bait" for the Kremlin

This story has several main components. It is clear that, at present, the American missile defence system cannot really threaten Russia. Nor will it be able to threaten Russia in the future. Can anyone seriously assume that the time will come when the Americans will take such a murderous or even suicidal step as the use of nuclear weapons against Russia or China? Or if we proceed from the fact that the missile defence system is a purely defensive system, then there is another question: does the USA think that Russia, or the same China, are capable of taking such a step? Or maybe, American analysts have considered some options several years ahead and are preparing for a nuclear war in advance? It is quite obvious that the idea of "strategic partnership" between the USA and Russia is going through a period of strong devaluation, but it should not happen to this extent!

Yes, we can suppose that the Americans have considered the situation and realized that their current economic domination in the world is in its final stages and that this component of American state power will be seriously undermined by Russia and China. In this case, the Americans see military-strategic and nuclear superiority as the only factor that will keep the USA at a peak of world dominance. To be honest, this view has full right to exist. Or the Americans are really sure that Third World countries opposing them will finally reach such a level of military capability that the States will face a real threat to its physical survival. Of course, if we set aside the current policy and methods that the Americans use to deal with their ideological enemies from the "axis of evil", which they have drawn up themselves, we can still believe this. But in this case, we cannot help saying that the Americans are anticipating quite a "good" world order for mankind in the near future. What is more, we should not forget that the USA itself is largely be blame for this confrontation, as it has assumed the role of world policeman and has set most of the world against itself… But these are only hypothetical reflections, as it were, proceeding from certain tendencies dictated by the Americans' behaviour. Let us set it aside for the time being…

And now I will try to explain the version of events that seems more plausible to the author of this article in connection with the above.

In our case, the arms race is being deliberately escalated, since the Americans want to eliminate the prerequisites for Russia's economic revival, which has clearly manifested itself in the recent period in connection with its sudden advance following the rise in fuel prices. Their calculation is quite simple: this is a blow to the weakest point of Russian society - the idea of a great power easily sacrificing the future of the country on the altar of its ambitions, as was the case in the Soviet period. As we can see, this formula is not a new one, it has just been taken out of mothballs and used again in the belief that the Kremlin will throw its money at the arms race and forget that it is necessary to develop the economy.

In this regard, on the one hand it is surprising and, on the other, sad, to see how easily Russian society "rose to this bait" and how easily or maybe even happily they swallowed it.

Such a political situation is mainly of benefit to the current Russian authorities. Having come to power on a wave of national revival, the current Russian leadership very quickly crossed that fragile border which separates the true national interests of the people from pseudo-patriotic ideas of a great Russia, which causes "shock and awe" to the whole world. Putin will be leaving soon. He needs a successor who will continue his policy so that his fellow citizens do not "curse" the deviation from democracy and the strengthening of authoritarianism which characterize his rule. In this regard, the current confrontation with the West is pouring water on this political fire of the Russian authorities - with all the purely negative consequences for both Russia and the rest of the world that might ensue from a split between the two most powerful contenders in the current global political atmosphere.

A Russian newspaper wrote that we now have to hope that Russia is not taken over by militaristic paranoia and forces which can see the USA only as an enemy, and that the USA learns to consider not only its own interests, but also the interests of those whom they call their partners…