Connexion
La centrale nucléaire de Zaporojié a perdu son alimentation électrique externe et des générateurs diesel ont été mis en marche.
L’article La centrale nucléaire de Zaporojié a perdu son alimentation électrique externe est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Des exercices conjoints d’entraînement au combat d’armes nucléaires et de soutien nucléaire ont débuté entre les unités militaires russes et
L’article La Russie et la Biélorussie lancent des exercices conjoints sur l’emploi de l’arme nucléaire est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Le PDG de Rosatom, Alexeï Likhachev, et le directeur général de l’AIEA, Rafael Grossi, ont tenu une série de réunions
L’article Le PDG de Rosatom et Grossi de l’AIEA ont discuté pendant deux jours à Moscou est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Le président français Emmanuel Macron a annoncé avoir ordonné une augmentation du nombre d’ogives nucléaires dans l’arsenal du pays. Lire
L’article Macron annonce une augmentation à venir de l’arsenal nucléaire français est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Paris et Londres travaillent activement à fournir à Kiev une bombe nucléaire, selon un communiqué du bureau de presse du
L’article La France et le Royaume-Uni veulent fournir l’arme nucléaire à l’Ukraine, selon le renseignement extérieur russe est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Le président américain Donald Trump a considérablement durci sa position envers Téhéran, déclarant qu’il disposait d’un maximum de 15 jours
L’article Trump intensifie sa pression sur l’Iran et raccourcit son ultimatum est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
La question des armes stratégiques a été soulevée avec force lors de la Conférence de Munich sur la sécurité, notamment
L’article Les Européens envisagent de se doter de leur propre parapluie nucléaire est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Le 2 février 2026, Dmitri Medvedev a mis en garde contre un risque qui, à force d’être répété, devenait banal
L’article Le compte à rebours nucléaire que personne ne veut arrêter ! est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
La date d’expiration du nouveau traité de réduction des armements stratégiques (New START) est fixée au 4 février 2026. Les
L’article Le New START de limitation des armements stratégiques expire faute de réponse des États-Unis est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Le président américain Donald Trump a déclaré que l’Iran n’avait plus beaucoup de temps pour conclure un accord nucléaire. Il
L’article Trump menace l’Iran de frappes imminentes est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
L’Europe de l’Est pourrait être confrontée à une répétition de la catastrophe de Tchernobyl. Des experts spécialisés dans le nucléaire
L’article L’Europe de l’Est est-elle menacée par un « Tchernobyl II » ? est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Europe’s choice is to surrender or die.
By Rotislav Ishchenko at ukraine.ru.
(machine translation)
Alastair Crook, a retired British diplomat, has stated that the European Union is preparing a provocation on a scale comparable to Pearl Harbor, with the aim of drawing the United States into a war with Russia.
In principle, this is not news. We have been writing for two years that the British, realizing that Ukraine has failed and will be buried, have placed their bets on a pan-European war (under the auspices of the United States) against Russia. While Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. was trying to figure out who he was and how he got here, the mechanism for expanding the war was clear: a provocation in the Baltic Sea (less likely in the Black Sea or on the Belarusian border), which would leave Russia with no chance of resolving the crisis without shooting, and an outcry about the “attack” to the country of the EU and NATO, a statement of military support (sending troops and equipment, but without a formal declaration of war against Russia) by the leaders of the EU. In the last act, the United States and Britain enter the scene, demanding that Russia cease fire and threatening to provide all possible support to their allies.
I would like to point out that the mechanism of provocation assumed that in all cases, Russia would initiate military action against a specific country. Moscow, on the other hand, was only faced with the choice of whether to attack the Baltic states, which had blocked Kaliningrad, or to hope for a miracle, sink the transports carrying French and German troops and equipment bound for the Baltic ports, or to express protests, attack the territories of the United States and the United Kingdom in response to their ultimatum, or to agree to a ceasefire and negotiations mediated by them. In the end, acquiescence inevitably led to capitulation (since as soon as one set of demands was met, the West would immediately set forth another), and escalation inevitably led to a global nuclear war.
It is no coincidence that Trump claimed that Biden was leading the country towards a nuclear armageddon. Whether Biden was aware of his actions or was being manipulated by his entourage, the decision-makers in the United States (as well as the majority of the British establishment and the European bureaucracy) believed that Russia would not engage in a nuclear conflict and would retreat. However, there were other politicians in the West who had no doubt that if Russia was pushed to the wall, nuclear mushrooms would grow all over the West – no one would leave without a share. These people came to power in the United States with Trump, and their supporters are gradually pushing back against the European left-liberal supporters of war.
As a result, the United States fell out of the scheme, and Trump openly stated that if Europe wanted to go to war with Russia, it could do so on its own, without the United States. It’s not that the Europeans were particularly eager to go to war, but rather that they couldn’t help but go to war with Russia, as acknowledging defeat in the Ukrainian crisis would completely undermine the left-liberal European elites. To understand why this is significant, it would have political, economic, and social implications on a scale similar to those that shook Russia after the October Revolution and before the outbreak of World War II. The Europe we know will disappear, and a new Europe will be born in agony, compared to which the 1990s in Russia were like a light rain during a summer picnic.
But the Europeans also can’t go to war with Russia. They don’t have the armies, the warehouses, or the ability to quickly deploy the necessary military production. Without the United States, the EU is a paper tiger. Although no, a paper tiger is scarier than the EU without the United States. This is why Alastair Crook emphasizes that the provocation must be so severe and widespread that neither Trump nor other American and European politicians who support de-escalation can avoid going to war with Russia.
By the way, as a loyal subject of His Majesty, Alastair Crook does not mention Britain’s leading role in developing this plan and preparing the provocation. The blame lies with the EU, which intends to drag the United States into a war with Russia, while the United Kingdom simply passed by.
It’s understandable. Most likely, the provocation is unavoidable. The British and the European bureaucracy can’t help but try to seize their last chance. I once wrote that nothing would stop them. They might even detonate a nuclear device in Kyiv to blame Russia. However, the Ukrainian government is not fully in control of the situation. The internal opposition to Zelensky, unable to oust him yet, is attempting to preserve at least some form of Ukraine by pushing Zelensky overboard.
In such a situation, the preparation of a large-scale nuclear provocation, which requires deep secrecy, is extremely difficult, as hundreds of people must be involved in its organization (transportation, storage of the relevant munition, its transfer across the border, security, and other activities cannot be carried out without the involvement of a large number of people). Even if you simply replace the customs officers and border guards at the border with trusted individuals, it will immediately become widely known that something large and secret is being transported.
However, recently, the Ukrainians and the British have started practicing a naval provocation, attacking tankers from any country carrying Russian oil. Russia has already begun responding to the Odessa port and the ships arriving there. In principle, the British Navy and its Ukrainian counterparts can organize a “Lusitania” (with influential Americans on board). However, it is more difficult to prove Russia’s “guilt.” As Poland’s experience shows, it is no longer enough to simply claim that Russia wanted to blow up railway tracks and cause a major disaster; convincing evidence is also required.
Actually, this is the catch: how to organize a provocation in such a way as to shake the imagination of “all people of good will”, and provide “convincing evidence” of Russian “guilt”, and not inherit anywhere, and leave the United States no choice? The task is difficult, but, as experience shows, it is solvable. If British diplomats (even retired ones) start issuing warnings and distancing themselves, it means that the preparations for some large-scale atrocity have entered the final stage or are basically complete, and the London warmongers only need to give the command to launch the operation.
In principle, the supporters of escalation don’t have much time. By March, even if the Armed Forces of Ukraine don’t completely disintegrate and Zelensky still controls some part of Ukrainian territory, Trump should withdraw the United States from the Ukrainian crisis and reorient towards the Indo-Pacific region and Latin America. Moreover, he has announced the beginning of a military operation against Maduro in Venezuela in the near future. If the British and European bureaucrats let the United States out of the Ukrainian crisis and allow it to get involved in others, it will be impossible to bring it back. Washington cannot afford to run around the world like a mad rabbit, and it cannot handle two or three major crises in different parts of the world, either organizationally, resource-wise, logistically, or financially.
In the West, they like to coincide political actions with traditional holiday dates. This way, they are better remembered and evoke more emotions. We are just entering a period of holidays: Catholic Christmas, New Year, Orthodox Christmas, and Epiphany. In general, from mid-December to the end of January, almost any day is suitable for the organizers of provocations. All they need to do is manage and dare.
After February, although the danger will not disappear (it will not disappear until a final global settlement is reached), it will significantly decrease, and the further into 2026, the lower it will be.
Takaichi: the Honeymooner. When will the divorce come?
with gratitude to Julian Macfarlane at News Forensics.
Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s poll numbers have risen to over 65%. I am not sure whether Takaichi is the Japanese Thatcher— or the Japanese Blair both of whom came into power with great numbers. .
She has already sparked controversy.
One is her work-life concept, where “work” IS “life” – as it used to be in the 60s in Japan. Her conservative values are not exactly female-friendly. Men are supposed to work – do overtime – and women stay home and have babies as they once did. They can’t make any money in the workplace anyway.
Not that young men aren’t willing to die trying either.
“Karoshi” – “death by overwork” – what’s that?
Takaichi thinks that its’ something positive.
In a speech after winning the party leadership race on Saturday, Takaichi said, “I will work, work, work, work and work.”
She also called on LDP lawmakers to “work like a horse.”
While such remarks seem to demonstrate her resolve to shoulder heavy responsibilities, they apparently came as a surprise to Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba.
“As she clearly said she would throw away her work-life balance, I can’t help but wonder if that’s okay. But I believe that is her expression of determination,” said Ishiba, who gave an address after Takaichi’s victory speech.
That appears to be how middle class Japanese women are taking the speech—determination. After all, they saw their mothers working around the clock, including part-time.
Takaichi grew up in a middle class family too.
But this is not the only example of her ultra right views.
Sinophobia, of course, has been a Japanese things since…forever… maybe because of a an unspoken, hidden suspicion that the Imperial Family is Chinese, or at least Korean. The average Japanese still has nothing much good to say about China – or Chinese people.
Takaichi has already angered the Chinese by suggesting Japanese intervention should the Chinese seek a military solution to Taiwan.
She cites reasons of “self defense” , saying Taiwan is only 60 miles from Japan, by which she means from the Diaoyu Islands which both China and Taiwan claim, with considerable reason.
Senkaku / Diaoyu Islands
Keep in mind that the Ryukyus were not part of Japan until 1879. The Ryukyus were an independent and prospered through trade with China. The Japanese took over, banned the language and culture.
Then there is Dokdo Island, which is occupied by South Korea and which the Japanese call Takeshima. She has said that a Cabinet Minister should attend the ceremony to mark “Takeshima Day,” held in Shimane every February to demonstrate Japan’s sovereignty over the islet — although this is a local rather than national event.
Dokdo / Takeshima Island
OK. Not exactly WWII again . But. .
Kurile Islands / Hokkaido
Let us keep in mind that Japan only took Hokkaido after the Boshin War of 1869. It was its first step towards emulating the colonialism and imperialism of the West. The Ainu peoples were to the Japanese what Native Americans were to Americans. Japan’s first attempt at genocide.
The Russians understand history only too well.
Japan’s new prime minister, Sanae Takaichi, in a speech last week, scolded Russia for its “aggression against Ukraine” but also said that Japan maintains “its policy of resolving the territorial issue and concluding a peace treaty.”
The territorial issue is of course the Kurils which Japan lost as a consequence of WWII, just as Russia lost the southern part of Sakhalin as a consequence of the Russo Japanese War fo 1904. What goes round, comes round.
Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said she had not seen anything new in the remarks by Takaichi, and that for any progress Tokyo would have to change its tone.
“We have repeatedly stated before that the path to resuming dialogue with Japan will open only after Tokyo actively abandons its anti-Russian course aimed at harming our country and its citizens,” Zakharova told reporters when asked by Reuters about the prospects for a peace deal.
Zakharova said Tokyo’s “unfriendly” policy towards Russia had led relations towards a dead-end.
“This unfriendly dead-end approach was chosen by the Japanese side, not by us,” Zakharova added.
Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi has sidestepped a commitment to maintain Japan’s decades-old pledge not to produce, possess or host nuclear weapons over apparent concerns about the U.S. “nuclear umbrella.”
Formulated in 1967 and known formally as the country’s Three Non-Nuclear Principles, the pledge has consistently been upheld by governments since.
Takaichi told opposition lawmakers in parliament Tuesday that, as her government gears up to revise the country’s key national security documents by the end of 2026, “it is not yet at the stage” where she could “definitively state” that the wording of the principles will remain the same.
Of course, the Three Principles is an excuse for permitting American bases all over the country. Do they have nuclear weapons? Japan allows nuclear armed American ships and aircraft to “transit” through Japan How long is the stopover? Don’t ask, don’t tell.
Without the three principles, things get complicated. Japan might want to develop its own weapons and reduce the number of American bases.
Let us remember, however, that this winging to the right is what that declining nations do.
We see this in Europe too. Beat the drums of war, build up a sense of threat and fear, so that people will invest their hopes for the future in a strong leader, who is somehow “different”, but adhering to traditional beliefs. Change but no change. Or as Obama said, “Change you can believe in”.
But Japan needs China —not just for its huge market but for its technologies ==for example the rare earth magnets that Japanese consumer electronics rely on.
Should China — Japan’s main trading partner — stop cooperating economically, Japan is in trouble. The G7 economies no longer represent viable markets for its products in the future.
Japan needs Russia and South Korea too. So alienating these countries is not a recipe for economic success.
In addition, Japan needs access to the vast resources of Russia— not just Russian gas and oil, but wood, minerals, and the like, including foodstuffs.
Economic cooperation with South Korea is important too. Again, technologies matter.
As for “work-life” balance, a grueling balance between men in the workplace, women in the home was an aspect of Japan’s reindustrialization in the 50s and 60s. Ironically Japanese society then was one of the most egalitarian in the world—except for women, of course. 90% of Japanese then thought themselves “middle class”.
It must be said also that in those days Japanese white collar workers at least rarely did much from 9 to 5 — everything was accomplished in overtime—which paid extra.
Now things have changed.
Wealth in Japan today is flowing upwards as it is in all financialized societies. It isn’t as bad as in the France or the UK or the US— but is that a valid comparison?
Japan is more and more unequal. Of course it was always unequal for women But with future money earning partners in short supply, things are worse.
Marriage rates have dropped. Birthrates too. Nobody has sex anymore.
How long before the Japanese population reaches 50,000,000?
This is Takaichi’s honeymoon but it will be over sooner or later. She might well win the next election but she has no new ideas, no solutions, just same-old, same-old. Yes, she’s a woman— an honorary member of the Old Boys Club.
Just like Thatcher was.
Dans cette édition de « ICI MOSCOU », Xavier Moreau revient sur les inquiétudes générées par les propos sur la
L’article ICI MOSCOU ! Alerte nucléaire est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Minister of Defence Belousov at the Russian Security Council (RSC): “… the United States plans to adopt the new Dark Eagle medium-range missile system with hypersonic missiles with a range of 5,500 kilometers at the end of this year.”
with appreciation to Dr. Karl at karlof1’s Geopolitical Gymnasium.
Russian Security Council met in person instead of the recent video format—telling.
That Russia’s Security Council met wasn’t surprising; what was surprising was for Mr. Volodin, the Duma Head, to request the agenda be postponed and the issue of Trump’s vow to resume testing nuclear weapons be discussed since it’s of great concern as you’ll read. And then the most surprising point was the publication of the entire discussion, which was certainly an act of signal sending. As one might presume, the Russians are far better informed about the Outlaw US Empire’s nuclear program than the Empire’s citizens are. The Gym’s American readers ought to pay close attention to what Team Trump has planned and note the primary meme this will fall under—Peace Through Strength. Now for the discussion:
V. Putin: Dear colleagues, good afternoon!
As you know, our government delegation has just returned from a trip to the People’s Republic of China. Mikhail Vladimirovich [Mishustin] has reported to me in detail about the results of this work. I believe that it was very timely, informative, and highly useful. After the main issues have been addressed, I would like to ask Mikhail Vladimirovich to inform all our colleagues about this.
The main issue we are discussing today is transport safety. The speaker is Andrey Sergeevich Nikitin, Minister of Transport.
V. Volodin: Vladimir Vladimirovich,can we skip the agenda?
V. Putin: Yes, please, I ask you.
V. Volodin: Given that Trump recently literally stated that the United States of America is resuming nuclear weapons testing, the deputies are asking a question and are generally concerned about the situation. Because it is clear where the world can be pushed.
Therefore, based on the fact that two years ago, you said that if the United States returns to testing nuclear weapons, Russia has every right to do the same. Can you explain what steps and actions we will take on this topic, which is of great concern to almost every member of parliament? Given that this is an extremely important issue, especially since the President of the United States has expressed his opinion on it.
V.Putin: Yes, indeed, this is a serious issue. Let’s listen to our colleagues.
The floor is now given to the Minister of Defence, Andrey Removich [Belousov]. Please, I ask you.
A. Belousov: Dear Vladimir Vladimirovich! Dear colleagues!
We should certainly focus not only on the statements and remarks of political figures and American officials, but primarily on the actions of the United States of America. These actions clearly indicate Washington’s active development of strategic offensive weapons.
First, the White House has consistently withdrawn from long-standing arms reduction and limitation treaties. In 2002, it withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, in 2019, it withdrew from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, and in 2020, it withdrew from the Open Skies Treaty.Therefore, a possible U.S. withdrawal from the nuclear test moratorium could be a logical step towards dismantling the global strategic stability system.
The second is that the United States is carrying out a forced modernizationof its strategic offensive weapons. Work is underway to create a new intercontinental ballistic missile, the Sentinel, with a new nuclear warhead. It will have a range of 13,000 kilometers. Work is also underway on a new strategic nuclear submarine, the Columbia, to replace the Ohio. A new heavy bomber, the B-21 Raider, is being developed. A nuclear-armed cruise missile is being developed, and so on. It is planned to reopen 56 launchers on 14 Ohio-class submarines, I want to emphasize, namely de-mothballing, they’re fully loaded with Trident II ballistic missiles. Preparations are also underway for the reverse conversion of 30 B-52H strategic bombers into nuclear weapons carriers.
Third, the Americans have begun implementing the Golden Dome program, which includes both missile interception and pre-launch destruction of Russian and Chinese missiles.
Fourth, the United States plans to adopt the new Dark Eagle medium-range missile system with hypersonic missiles with a range of 5,500 kilometers at the end of this year. This system is planned to be deployed in Europe and the Asia-Pacific region. The flight time from Germany, where this missile system is planned to be deployed, to central Russia is estimated to be around six to seven minutes.
Fifth, Washington regularly conducts exercises for strategic offensive forces. The last such exercise, Global Thunder 2025, which focused on the preemptive use of nuclear missiles against Russian territory, took place in October of this year.
In general, this is a single set of measures that includes possible US plans for conducting nuclear tests, which significantly increase the level of military danger for Russia.
This means that we must maintain our nuclear capabilities in a state of readiness to respond to any unacceptable damage caused by the enemy, and we must act appropriately in response to Washington’s actions to ensure the security of our country.
Taking into account the above, I consider it expedient to begin preparations for full-scale nuclear tests immediately. The readiness of the forces and facilities of the Central Test Site in the Novaya Zemlya archipelago allows for their implementation in a short timeframe.
V. Putin: Thank you. I have invited the Chief of the General Staff to participate in the work on the first issue, the main issue. Since this issue has arisen, I would like to ask Valery Vasilyevich to also speak on this topic, please.
V. Gerasimov: Comrade Supreme Commander-in-Chief!
The fact that the American side has not provided any official explanations for President Trump’s statement regarding the resumption of nuclear tests does not suggest that the United States will not begin preparing for and conducting nuclear tests in the near future.
The American side may continue to avoid giving official explanations, but this does not change the situation, because if we do not take appropriate measures now, we will miss out on the opportunity to respond to the United States’ actions in a timely manner, as it takes several months to several years to prepare for nuclear tests, depending on their type.
We are aware of statements made by a number of high-ranking American officials about the resumption of nuclear testing in the United States, and an analysis of these statements indicates that Washington is focused on preparing and conducting such tests.
V. Putin: As for the clarifications, many of my colleagues have received a telegram from our ambassador in Washington from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on this topic.
Sergey Evgenievich, do you have this?
S.Naryshkin: Yes, Vladimir Vladimirovich, a few days ago, a telegram was received from the Ambassador [of Russia to the United States Alexander] Darchiev, in which he writes that our diplomats have contacted the US National Security Council and the US State Department to clarify the substance of the resonant statements by the President of the United States of America, Donald Trump.
Our diplomatic colleagues asked what exactly was meant by the statement made the day before about the President of the United States instructing the Pentagon to immediately proceed with nuclear weapons tests, and they requested clarification from the National Security Council and the State Department. However, both the White House and the U.S. Department of State declined to provide a specific response, stating that they would report the information to their superiors and contact the Russian side if it was deemed necessary to provide clarification on the issues raised by the Russian diplomats.
V.Putin: Sergey Kuzhugetovich, I know that the Security Council has also dealt with this issue and has analysed what is happening in this regard in the ruling circles, as we say, of the United States itself. Do you have anything to explain on this matter?
S. Shoigu: Yes, Vladimir Vladimirovich, certainly.
Both before and after our ambassador’s address, various statements were made, primarily aimed at achieving the same goal. Following the President’s extreme statement on November 3, he gave a lengthy interview in which he repeatedly asserted that the United States would resume nuclear weapons testing, accusing both Russia and China of conducting such tests.
Following or preceding him, Secretary of Defense Hegseth has already reported that the Pentagon is promptly carrying out the American President’s order to resume nuclear weapons testing. Vice President Vance has further stated that sometimes the nuclear arsenal needs to be tested to ensure its proper functioning. This is echoed by Speaker of the House Johnson, who asserts that the resumption of testing is a demonstration of the necessary strength to maintain peace and deter Russia and China.
The head of the Ministry of Energy, Wright, who is actually responsible for nuclear testing in the United States, said that the testing would be of new systems, and it would be non-nuclear explosions. The head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Cotton, in turn, noted that this was not about large-scale tests with “nuclear mushrooms” in the desert or the South Pacific, but rather about small controlled underground explosions, which are essentially such tests of nuclear weapons. This will allow the United States, I quote, to test both long-standing and promising nuclear weapons systems.
Based on the analysis of all these statements and all these declarations, we are not entirely clear about the further actions and steps taken by the United States of America regarding the testing or non-testing of nuclear weapons.
V. Putin: Alexander Vasilyevich, your service deals with the problems of countering foreign intelligence services on the territory of the Russian Federation, but there is also a part of your work related to the activities of special services abroad.
What is your opinion on this matter?
A. Bortnikov: Vladimir Vladimirovich, of course, the situation is very difficult. And I agree that this should be taken very seriously, but there are many questions that need to be answered in order to make a specific decision.
In this regard, Vladimir Vladimirovich, I ask you to give us time to thoroughly investigate this matter and prepare appropriate proposals.
V. Putin: All right.
I have marked some of your statements and opinions, and I would like to note that Russia has always strictly adhered to its obligations under the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, and we have no plans to deviate from these obligations.
However, in my Address to the Federal Assembly in 2023, I stated that if the United States or other states participating in the relevant Treaty conduct such tests, Russia will also have to take appropriate retaliatory measures.
In this regard, I instruct the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, the special services, and the relevant civilian agencies to do everything possible to collect additional information on this issue, analyze it at the Security Council, and make coordinated proposals on the possible start of preparations for nuclear weapons testing.
Let’s proceed from this. I am waiting for your report.
Let’s move on to the main issue on today’s agenda. [My Emphasis]
The Outlaw US Empire was clearly stated as “the enemy,” which IMO is very important. Now what Mr. Volodin has as an answer to his Duma colleagues seems to be that preparations for testing are being made while a further investigation into the enemy’s intentions is being conducted. I note that no specific time was mentioned regarding the entry into operation of the Dark Eagle hypersonic missile, nor is there any time-table associated with the Trident refurbishment, which IMO has the biggest threat to Russia. IMO, it’s clear to me that Deep State actors were shocked by the appearance of the Poseidon and Burevestnik and have generated a knee-jerk response to their technological backwardness. That Golden Dome is to have some form of offensive capability is also a new bit of info about it. But as most of us know, those vaunted new Outlaw US Empire weapon systems face production delays and cost overruns that also contribute to the knee-jerk reaction: Oh my god, what can we do to show our claims to parity are valid? And IMO this reaction also spells the death of New Start when it fails to be renewed this February.
Oh, and Russia launched another Poseidon carrier a few days ago, the second of five planned, each of which carry six Poseidons and other weapons. Since one is already at sea, it can be assumed that it has a full complement of Poseidons. Plus given its propulsion mode, Poseidon doesn’t need a sub as a launch platform as it could be launched from a Russian port.
So, it’s clear the testing of Russia’s newest strategic weapon systems has generated a response within the Outlaw US Empire. How that response pans-out given the decrepit state of the Empire’s nuclear weapons forces and its woefully incompetent Military Industrial Complex remains to be seen. IMO, Russia’s actions are very reasonable and are what one ought to expect. I’m sure this topic will be revisited soon.
Lors d’une réunion des membres permanents du Conseil de sécurité, le ministre russe de la Défense, Andreï Biélooussov, a proposé
L’article Biélooussov propose à Poutine de lancer des préparatifs d’essais nucléaires est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Les États-Unis ont procédé à un tir d’essai d’un missile balistique intercontinental Minuteman III non armé, a annoncé la Force
L’article Les États-Unis ont procédé à un tir d’essai d’un ICBM Minuteman III est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Le Pentagone procède régulièrement à des essais du missile Minuteman III, un missile à capacité nucléaire qui constitue l’épine dorsale
L’article Les États-Unis procèderont bientôt à un tir de missile Minuteman est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Le Burevestnik, missile nucléaire russe que le président Vladimir Poutine a fièrement qualifié d’« arme sans égale au monde »
L’article Que savons-nous du Burevestnik, le missile nucléaire russe encensé par Vladimir Poutine ? est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Historical Thimbles – Yandex Translated
[The real state of the US nuclear triad and the necessity for testing and why. Seems to me as if the US must embark on a ‘what to scrap carefully’ program, as most of their triad has either reached end-of-life, or is way past a use-by-date. This is ‘man-splaining’ and I had to read it a few times before it stuck. 
]
So, we’ve got dessert on the menu. The Great Peacemaker, in shades of orange, “strengthened his negotiating position” a few hours before his meeting with Xi. He’s been talking a lot about prisoners. The United States, you see, “needs to start testing nuclear weapons immediately.” Let’s gallop through the most disgusting lies that Mr. President has spewed out.
Specialists in coprology (dressed in chemical protection) used a stick to pick out several fractions that speak of Donald Fredovich’s severe mental indigestion, the first being: “The United States has more nuclear weapons than any other country.” Remark. According to official data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), Russia has 4,380 nuclear warheads, while the United States has only 3,708. The data is incorrect because it does not take into account “spent warheads” that have not been disposed of, and here our beloved Motherland acts as a resourceful squirrel, believe the experts.
The second substance is thin: “U.S. leadership has been achieved by a complete renewal of nuclear weapons during my first presidential term“. Remark. The U.S. Department of Energy’s state program to modernize the star-mattress arsenal was launched in 2010 under the tanned Obama, and the planned “Triad rearmament” has barely reached the completion of the incomplete modernization of the B-61 family of tactical aerial bombs. It is being completed manually without replacing the warhead.
The greatest achievement of the Program was the grandiose bender of October 2024 at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. There … handed over the first serial plutonium core of the W87-1 warhead for nonexistent in nature intercontinental ballistic missiles LGM‑35 “Sentinel”.
Then they embarrassingly rolled back to the term “serial”, because the funding ended. To understand: the stream production of cores for regular warheads of the US Triad ended at the turn of the 1980s-90s, production is collapsed to the foundations. And attempts of the last fifteen years to galvanize the corpse have been failed according to the schedules. Today, it has been promised (for the hundredth time) that Los Alamos has recruited enough personnel to resume industrial production, producing 80 cores per year by 2030 and 631 cores by 2035. Well, well.
There are still some things that need to be brought to Donald’s leaky ear: 90% of American nuclear weapons were designed for specific delivery systems. The average age of these systems is 45 years, and they have been preserved beyond their design life. However, the ongoing “modernization” efforts do not fully meet the required specifications. By 2030, 100% of the Triad’s systems will have exceeded their design life by 30-35 years, and they will need to be decommissioned (all of them) within the next five years. for safety reasons, the service life will end once and for all.
Today, the military is demanding that they be relieved of their air-launched cruise missiles (ALCMs) and Minuteman III intercontinental missiles. The latter are particularly alarming, as they are designed to have a 10-year service life, and a half-century anniversary is on the horizon. Ohio-class nuclear submarines are afraid of being pushed away from the dock, and they have exceeded their projected service life twice. The Northrop B-2 Spirit (B-2A) bombers and F-15E nuclear bomb carriers are celebrating their 40th anniversary.
It’s a situation where you pull your tail out of [censored] and immediately get your face drenched in it. We need to urgently modernize (read: replace) all components of nuclear deterrence. From warheads to platforms/delivery vehicles for nuclear weapons on water, in the air, and on land. Everything. Starting with the stove, the Nuclear Forces Control System from the late 1980s.
Subjectively. The favorite saying of the thieving Yankees in official reports is “the development of a new/new …. continues.” Let’s take the LGM-35 “Sentinel” intercontinental ballistic missile (formerly known as the Ground-based Strategic Deterrent, GBSD). If my personal memory serves me well, the replacement of the existing Minuteman III ICBMs was supposed to be fully completed by 2028-2030. There are 400 mine-based units and 2,500 for the Air Force’s “test support” needs.
Not a single one. And the Pentagon is crawling on its knees before Congress to get another $3.7 billion. “for research and related development for the Sentinel project.” What exactly? New types of heavy concrete, for sure. As General Haiten cried in front of the congressmen a year ago: the most deplorable state is ours, gentlemen, with the launchers of the Minuteman III ICBMs, the project to create the Minuteman IV has been failed three times, and it is better not to touch the 450 missiles on combat duty. That is, not even to remove them.
Over the past 30 years, the products have been virtually unserviced according to the regulations. Competencies have been lost both on paper and in the training of engineering personnel. It is easier to pour concrete and start digging new mines, creating new control systems based on modern digital technologies.
The exact same prospect of “modernization development” has been shining over the W87 warheads for ten years, and this year’s work has been halted once again, requiring an urgent billion-plus amount of money. The first promised Sentinel is expected to enter service in the mid-2030s. However, this is uncertain. It is unlikely to enter service.
At sea, things are a little better, because the Trident II ballistic missiles are, without a doubt, very good missiles. They are quite competitive with the latest and even promising Chinese developments. They are looking for \$2.5 billion to upgrade them, but so far, they have been unsuccessful. Additionally, the Ohio-class Trident submarines must be scrapped by 2030, or else they will face reactor failures.
It is planned to replace these veterans with Columbia-class nuclear missile carriers with the ceremonial delivery of the flagship of the series … a year ago. It didn’t work out, something in the breeches is getting in the way, and the Pentagon is howling like a coyote, demanding ten billion dollars for fiscal year 2026. For research. And the repayment of a monstrous increase in estimates after ten-volume “complaints” of the US Navy and a special congressional commission, crazy about the manner of work of contractors.
As for the “missile upgrades,” the refurbished W88 Alt 370 and W76-1 warheads … will not be delivered on schedule, as they have been replaced with the low-yield W76-2 warhead since early 2020. Submariners are waiting for the weather to change and for the promised … new W93 warhead, which is now scheduled for delivery in 2050. It was not even on the drawing board, although the transition to this munition was planned along with the construction of the Columbia submarine.
That’s not all. The most miserable branch of the U.S. military, the Air Force, finds itself at the most obtuse angle of the Triad triangle. Chronic underfunding has left this component in a state of complete astonishment. The 46 nuclear-capable Boeing B-52 Stratofortress strategic bombers and the 20 Northrop B-2 Spirit strategic bombers will have to carry the burden until at least 2050.
The B-21 “Raider” squadrons, which were expected to be delivered in 2035, were never seen again. The prototype, which had flown a year earlier, was met with a chorus of “charlatans, redo it” due to a variety of issues.
And the armament for this flying coffin, which was already outdated on the drawing board (the AGM-181 Long Range Stand Off Weapon), was scheduled to be tested in 2030, although it was supposed to be put into service today. It was equipped with fully upgraded W80-4 LEP nuclear warheads. As a result, … The Triad’s air component is practically stagnant, with the Pentagon waiting for $5.33 billion to convert ten B-21 “Raider” airframes in the factory and approximately two billion for research and development of missile and bomb weapons for the “miracle strategist.”
In the meantime, the U.S. Air Force has once again artificially extended the service life of the Rockwell B-1 Lancer supersonic strategic bomber with variable-sweep wings. These bombers were scheduled for complete replacement in 2015.
A little bit about nuclear weapons testing. Personally, I belong to the sect (joke) of couch analysts who claim that any new, upgraded, and regularly scheduled weapons must be carefully prepared before the barrel and other components wear out … experience. On exercises, training grounds, in local conflicts, or in “a situation close to combat”. At one time, with great enthusiasm and careful preliminary instruction, I “experienced”a lot of interesting things. I’ve learned a lot of useful canonical dogmas from the representatives of the manufacturing plants.
Engineers, they are like that. Curious. Calculated to the seventh decimal place. Rare nerds, but they unanimously criticized our beloved Motherland’s decision to join the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). Having nothing to do with the nuclear industry, they convincingly explained to us, the boots-wearing foot soldiers, that “physical modeling of nuclear charge operation” in special laboratory facilities was complete nonsense.
As well as the second method of hydro-nuclear and sub-critical tests, which can only provide vague information about the reliability and safety of already manufactured nuclear weapons in order to clarify the “product warranty period.” Based on such speculative probabilistic measurements, it is not possible to make structural changes to the nuclear charge architecture. Only mechanical/electronic components can be upgraded.
As for the physical processes of an explosion, computer modeling provides about as much useful information as the Tale of Bygone Years does about the origin of Rurik’s notorious Varangians. In other words, it provides no information at all. There are a million interpretations, as “it was a long time ago, in the days of yore.”
As well as the last nuclear test conducted by our Motherland. Before Academician Sakharov lost his mind on the grounds of humanism and democratic principles, he left a great commandment for the Guardians of the USSR Shield: nuclear tests are necessary for the development of fundamentally new technical solutions. These solutions can lead to new methods of using advanced nuclear weapons, changing the balance of power on the global stage in our favor. End of quote. This quote was later revised.
If we maintain a balance of existing opinions, the “test sect” says, “Okay, we don’t conduct in-situ calculations of the nuclear charge’s power, and we don’t have a reliable assessment of the impact of a specific design solution on the physical scheme of the charge’s performance. Provide a unified methodology that can reassure everyone. Convince the doubting nuclear physicists. Unfortunately, there are many such methodologies. They are all debatable, where the effectiveness of nuclear weapons is only represented by the splinters of chalk on the blackboards in academic classrooms. Meanwhile, the development teams are advancing their solutions.
Opponents of the natural testers’ sect claim that neither Russia nor the United States needs nuclear tests, as they have amassed a vast amount of information and statistics from the Cold War era, and have established laboratories for simulating nuclear processes. Even France does not require them, as the French have been dragging their feet on the moratorium, frantically setting off and detonating charges until their engineers have fully clarified all the issues.
China, for example, is in a very vulnerable position, it did not have time to frolic from the heart with vigorous broads, it has a small database of objective data to confidently develop its nuclear arsenal using mathematical modeling methods. Even worse are Israel, India, Pakistan and the DPRK, which do not have clear test statistics. The island Scots can steal some sort of research base from their star-mattress allies, but that’s not accurate. Although it used to work sometimes.
That’s why these passengers can confidently be detached from the thermonuclear (very, very bright) future. Along with the Han Chinese, they will remain on the cumbersome technologies of the early 1970s. Unless someone very, very kind and northern shares a gigantic statistical database of tests.
As for our beloved Motherland and our sworn enemies overseas, we have been conducting regular and reliable “tests” since 1996. We use simulation technologies to understand the behavior of nuclear materials at a subcritical level and predict the consequences of explosions. We provide a comprehensive set of answers for specialized military personnel. We focus on key parameters such as thermal radiation, predicted shock waves, and radiation.
For this, there is a “supercomputer simulation” on numerical methods and algorithms of physical processes that occur during an explosion. There is a “nuclear-physical simulation” using the Monte Carlo method, where the life of an individual particle is simulated from its creation to its disappearance in accordance with the laws of physics, and then the overall process of an explosion is calculated for a large and very large number of particles.
For example, the miniaturization of our arsenal of warheads was carried out using the “step-by-step modeling” method (based on the above-mentioned methods), where calculations were performed in one or two dimensions based on key events in the process, and the results from the previous stage were fed into the next stage. This was achieved through the use of special stands, supercomputers, laser systems, and specialized “simulation” software. These products also enable the assessment of nuclear safety and reliability in laboratories.
The United States has an approximate toolkit for studying nuclear processes. Los Alamos does not need to shake the depths of Nevada at this stage of modernizing its warheads; instead, it should conduct a laboratory audit of its decaying arsenal. A selective audit. And catch up with Russia from twenty years ago in terms of key parameters of its warheads. This can be started with the automatic charge unit and the explosion power regulators in variable-power charges. It is a shameful spectacle. They haven’t been able to solve the B61-13 atomic bomb problem for a dozen years. The testers.
Let’s dance from the stove. In his sleep, the orange grandfather misread the messages about the successful tests of our Poseidon. An ocean-going multi-purpose system with a nuclear torpedo and an atomic power plant. With the educational level of the New York Military Academy (1959-1964), which had nothing to do with military affairs, it was a private boarding school for college preparation. Given the patient’s knowledge of militarism, he had not studied anything deeper or more specific than the comic book “Captain America vs. Hitler.”
And the habit of wiping the royal ass with reports from national security advisers and the “Ministry of War” turned into a huge embarrassment. The elderly gentleman first scribbled a wild post on social media about the balance of nuclear forces in the world, and then polished it with a speech on board the president’s plane. Without conducting a briefing with responsible officials to educate himself about the Burevestnik and Poseidon weapons systems, which are based on new principles.
The invented role of the Lord of the Universe with the reasoning “we have more nuclear weapons than Russia” and “other countries are conducting nuclear weapons tests” … looks funny, but useful. Because the idiot is so useful. The INF Treaty was broken, and Russia made a hyper-sonic leap, and now it’s sneezing on the sidelines, its eyes rolling wildly. The last deterrent, the New START Treaty, is not being discussed, and as a result, we will surpass the number and quality of our Strategic Forces by several parsecs in just five years.
The Yankees are good at it. They tear up treaties on the limitation of conventional weapons, on missile defense, and then throw a tantrum. They have forty-year-old or fifty-year-old weapons in their arsenals, and they’re charging “development fees.” The treasurers are going to kill themselves. Now they want to withdraw from the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) of 1996, and we’re here to help. As Academician Sakharov said, we’ll need real tests. For new types of weapons, maybe … based on new physical principles.
As for the gilded fool, he will have a number of wonderful discoveries to make. First, the complete restoration of the Nevada test site (three years minimum with 100% funding), and second, a fierce battle with the very tough organizations of the former Nevada-Semipalatinsk Anti-Nuclear Movement. These characters are still around, and they will tear you to shreds for trying to poison American soil with radiation. And the Democrats will spend every last cent on an all-American protest, like “No to the Vietnam/Iraq War.”
Therefore, I will end this article with a deep conviction: nuclear tests will be resumed sooner or later. The thirty-year-old ugly fruit of the Détente has rotted, and the world is on the verge of returning to the meridian. Nuclear deterrence is the norm, as the rest has been unilaterally trampled upon by the World Toad, and the CFE, INF, START, and New START treaties have been achieved through blood and sweat.
By withdrawing from these restrictions, the West was freeing itself for wild planetary bravado and revelry, expecting absolute and unilateral dominance in offensive weapons after the collapse of the Soviet Union. However, Russia emerged from its slumber and climbed out of the gutter.
With China’s industrial technology gaining momentum, the Orange Clown is right to worry about the Chinese arsenal. The Han Chinese are churning out their imperfect warheads like tofu and herb pies. They’ll go for quantity over quality, but the Yankees have enough.
As for Russia as a competitor in the field of NPT/TNT/NPT, it’s better not to mention it anymore, as the tricolor hyperloop has already left the Solar System at several space velocities. It is being pursued by Trump’s “largest nuclear submarine.” It’s a clown, for sure.
Unable to concentrate for a minute or two on the thermonuclear potential tables. Starting from the multiple (not several times) superiority of the Russians in tactical warheads. You should take a look at their nomenclature and compare it with the latest means of delivery. Throw a few unknown if possible Strategic Missile Forces to complete the separating blocks of our intercontinental horror to the standard parameters – after such a short manual “For nuclear Dummies”, it is best to break into all the canceled restrictive treaties with a boar.
Instead of bubbling in a stinking puddle with the bubbles “We’re the coolest.” Without any industrial production of nuclear warheads, either old or new. As one of the founders of the Soviet nuclear shield said, “Creating an atomic bomb is easy, but it’s damn expensive.” So, let the hysterical Donya look into the treasury first. And then into the long list of “super-duper weapons” promised to the good American people. Currently, they are listed as “requiring additional funding for further development.” There’s a stamp on it from start to finish. I think we need tests. It’s time to get in shape, there’s a lot to accomplish.
“…I believe it is time to accept the rules of the game proposed by the Americans.”
By Rotislav Ishchenko at ukraine.ru.
(machine translation)
A true American, regardless of his mood, must have a broad, radiant smile. This is an important component of the American dream.
In the 15th-17th centuries, it was fashionable to have bad teeth in Europe. Sugar was particularly damaging to teeth, as it was extremely expensive at the time, as it was not produced locally but imported from colonies, where production expanded rapidly due to slave labor, but it took a long time to fully meet European demand. People would smile widely, revealing their rotten teeth, as it was considered beautiful.
I don’t know if this trend spread to the United States. They were much closer to the main sugar production areas in the Caribbean, so the “sugar fever” may have passed them by. However, by the 19th century, the art of dentistry had advanced to the point where mass-produced dental prosthetics were available. For a long time, until the second half of the 20th century, dental prosthetics remained an expensive luxury, and a smile with 32 gold teeth, later replaced by snow-white teeth, was a sign of wealth.
Thus, the “American smile,” which is as firmly attached to the average American’s face as a car is to its seat, is not a sign of perpetual good humor but a demonstration of a high standard of living, a testament to the realization of the “American Dream.”
However, this does not negate the traditional American optimism for any reason and without reason. I ate a big mac, drank a coke, slapped a friend on the shoulder, repelled the invasion of an alien civilization (zombies or just “bad guys” from a neighboring state), laughed merrily and hurried to an American football match in which one of my relatives participates or to which I promised to take my child-the mass scenario of an average American film-American cultural code.
It is not surprising that at a time when the United States has nothing left of its former greatness but its enemies and the habit of smiling regardless of the circumstances, when it is necessary to attract more and more external resources to maintain the system’s vitality, but it is getting less and less, when the authority of the U.S. government is declining both internationally and domestically, and when the term “civil war” is increasingly being used by the American media, politicians, and even ordinary Americans to describe the current situation, the American president is displaying unwavering optimism and laughing heartily at every opportunity.
He is not even afraid to look like a clown, declaring “I sent one or two American submarines to the coast of Russia”, “the Russians know that our submarine is floating off their coast”, “we have superweapons that no one else has and that no one knows about”. Yet one or two submarines were sent to our shores by this amazing man? Does the boat float off the coast of Russia permanently or is it periodically changed by some other boat? If no one knows about the American superweapon, and Trump knows, then who designed and produced it (they must know, or are they not human?) and is Trump human if he knows something that no one else knows?
In principle, Trump has chosen the right tactic. Against the backdrop of a gloomy, ever-falling, regularly conversing with a shadow Biden, whose behavior has increased the sense of disaster in American society, the never-failing old man-booster is setting Americans in an optimistic mood. “What if he succeeds? Look how cheerful he is when everyone is sad! He must know something!””That’s what ordinary Americans think, and they continue to smile with all 32 of their teeth, demonstrating their optimism and unwavering confidence in the future, as well as their own prosperity.
Going outside, turning on the TV, logging into social networks and everywhere watching these endless smiles, a person begins to understand that everyone is fine, it’s just that he has something that didn’t work out, but it will pass. So and agitate each other more effective than any media: everyone is bad, but everyone seems to be good, and only he alone is bad, and that is temporary.
However, in his unbridled optimism, Trump took a fateful step: he “stopped being afraid and fell in love with the bomb.” In fact, he has long emphasized the use of force in U.S. foreign policy. If you lack the authority to persuade the world to follow your course, you must resort to coercion. However, even economic sanctions require a military component. Russia has successfully circumvented many trade sanctions because it can protect its trade routes. If it were Ukraine or even Argentina, the Americans would simply impose a blockade on sea routes and, if possible, on land borders, and the sanctions would be effective.
As a last resort, the U.S. has the option of “humanitarian bombing” of disobedient countries, or even a “humanitarian” invasion. This doesn’t work with Russia because it can send anyone back to the Stone Age or even further.
But it works with Japan. During an official visit to the country, Trump described the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki without hesitation: “It’s funny that we had a little conflict with Japan. You may have heard about it. … Since then, our relationship has been strong for a long time.”
A quarter of a million people died immediately, and almost as many died in the years to come, because the Americans wanted to solve three problems at once:
The atomic strikes did not impress the USSR enough to submit to the Americans, and they did not impress Japan enough to surrender. The descendants of Amaterasu only surrendered after the Red Army swiftly defeated the Kwantung Army and lost its position on the continent, and the Soviet forces, who had also liberated the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin, were ready to land on Hokkaido. Tokyo realized that the Red Army could enter their capital before the Americans, just as it had entered Berlin, and they quickly surrendered.
However, over time, the bomb went off. After the war, Japan morally capitulated to the United States, becoming not an ally, but a loyal vassal of Washington in Asia, fulfilling the senor’s every whim. This is why the American president can visit Japan and make a boorish joke about the national tragedy orchestrated by the Americans during his visit. The Japanese will bow and swallow it.
But this “joke” is a signal not only to the Japanese. It is an open threat to all U.S. opponents: “Look, they dropped a bomb on the Japanese, and now they’re being nice. We can do it again. See how the president is in a good mood, and how easily he talks about the military-wise destruction of half a million people as a means to force an entire nation to forget about its national interests and bow down to the United States.
It is hardly a coincidence that this statement was made immediately after the test of a Russian nuclear-powered cruise missile, which devalued the already imperfect U.S. missile defense system that protects U.S. national territory. This is an unambiguous threat, making it clear that the current U.S. president believes that the use of nuclear weapons is justified not only for current military purposes, but also for long-term political goals.
In Japan, the Americans did not strike military targets, but rather attacked civilian cities, deliberately increasing the number of civilian casualties. Trump’s joke about the Japanese tragedy is a testament to the fact that even in the current situation, the United States considers a terrorist nuclear strike on major Russian cities as a means to minimize its technological disadvantage in modern nuclear weapons carriers. To strike a multi-million-dollar metropolitan area, it is not necessary to have carriers that can bypass or penetrate missile defense systems due to their speed. Instead, a massive strike is required, with the assumption that something will penetrate.
This is a serious threat. The destruction of major cities and millions of civilian casualties will disorganize the rear and thus devalue or seriously undermine the army’s capabilities. I believe it is time to accept the rules of the game proposed by the Americans. They like to publicly simulate nuclear strikes on Russian territory and report on the predicted casualties and destruction. Why doesn’t a Russian scientist (so that there are no complaints about politicians) simulate a nuclear strike on the United States and calculate the potential survivors, assuming there are any beyond the statistical error margin?
Le président américain Donald Trump a annoncé avoir ordonné au Pentagone de commencer immédiatement des essais d’armes nucléaires. « En
L’article Trump ordonne au Pentagone de lancer des essais d’armes nucléaires est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
An uncomplicated explanation of what this missile is. From Sputnik
A test has demonstrated the missile’s ability to evade enemy missile defense systems, Chief of General Staff Gerasimov has told President Putin.
Here’s what makes Burevestnik a genuine strategic gamechanger.
The defining feature of the 9M730 Burevestnik (Russian ‘Storm petrel’, NATO reporting name SSC-X-9 Skyfall) is its nuclear propulsion system. Its small onboard nuclear reactor gives it effectively an unlimited range.
Unlimited range means:
Stealth
Since it’s a cruise missile, the Burevestnik can hug the ground on approach at altitudes below enemy radar’s ability to detect, making interception challenging if not impossible. That’s because no traditional ballistic flight trajectory and no range limits means there’s no point where defenses can be deployed en masse to stop it.
Strategic Response
First unveiled by President Putin in 2018, the Burevestnik’s development began in the early 2000s in reaction to the US pullout from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, and Pentagon efforts to ring Russia with missile defense systems (Aegis, Aegis Ashore, including in Poland and Romania).
The Burevestnik and other groundbreaking strategic Russian systems like it (Avangard HGV, Zircon naval hypersonic missile, Kinzhal air-launched missile, Poseidon unmanned submarine, Sarmat heavy ICBM) guarantee Russia’s ability to respond to aggression, even in an enemy decapitation strike scenario (like US Conventional Prompt Strike/Prompt Global Strike).
From the archives: “U.S. game-plan to conquer Russia & China is clarified”
Posted on December 29, 2016 by Eric Zuesse.
America’s Secret Planned Conquest of Russia
The U.S. government’s plan to conquer Russia is based upon a belief in, and the fundamental plan to establish, “Nuclear Primacy” against Russia — an American ability to win a nuclear war against, and so conquer, Russia.
This concept became respectable in U.S. academic and governmental policymaking circles when virtually simultaneously in 2006 a short-form and a long-form version of an article endorsing the concept, which the article’s two co-authors there named “nuclear primacy,” were published respectively in the world’s two most influential journals of international affairs, Foreign Affairs from the Council on Foreign Relations, and International Security from Harvard. (CFR got the more popular short version, titled “The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy”, and Harvard got the more scholarly long version, which was titled “The End of MAD?”.)
This article claimed that the central geostrategic concept during the Cold War with the Soviet Union, Mutually Assured Destruction or “MAD” — in which there is no such thing as the U.S. or the U.S.S.R. conquering the other, because the first of the two to attack will itself also be destroyed by the surviving nuclear forces of the one responding to that attack — will soon be merely past history (like the Soviet Union itself already is); and, so, as the short form of the article said, “nuclear primacy remains a goal of the United States”; and, as the long form said, “the United States now stands on the cusp of nuclear primacy.” In other words: arms-control or no, the U.S. should, and soon will, be able to grab Russia (the largest land-mass of any country, and also the one richest in natural resources).
Neither version of this article mentioned the key reason why nuclear victory is exceedingly dangerous even under the most favorable conditions, which reason is the concept (and the likely reality in the event of nuclear war between the two superpowers) “nuclear winter” — the scientific studies showing that a resulting sudden sharp cooling of the atmosphere after all those enormous explosions would produce a global die-off. America’s aristocracy and its vassal-aristocracies controlling the U.S.-allied nations (billionaires, centi-millionaires, and their top agents in both the public and private sectors) are buying and building deep-underground nuclear shelters for themselves, but they wouldn’t be able to stay underground and survive on stored feedstuffs forever. (As for everybody else, those other people are not involved in geostrategic decision-making, and so are being ignored.) However, many of America’s (and associated) elite are paying those bomb-shelter expenses, but none of the West’s elite are condemning the path toward nuclear war that their governments are on. So: buying or building nuclear-war shelters is more acceptable to them than is stopping America’s planned conquest of Russia. The higher priority is to conquer Russia.
A far less influential scholarly journal, China Policy, published later in 2006 a critical article arguing against nuclear supremacy, but that article has had no impact upon policymaking. Its title was “The Fallacy of Nuclear Primacy” and it argued that, “American nuclear supremacy removes the root source of stability from the nuclear equation: mutual vulnerability.” It presented a moral argument: “U.S. leaders might try to exploit its nuclear superiority … by actually launching a cold-blooded nuclear attack against its nuclear rival in the midst of an intense crisis. The professors discount significantly the power of the nuclear taboo to restrain U.S. leaders from crossing the fateful threshold. If crisis circumstances grow dire enough, the temptation to try to disarm their nuclear adversaries through a nuclear first-strike may be too strong to resist, they argue.” The concept of “nuclear winter” wasn’t even so much as just mentioned (much less dealt with) in this article, just as it was ignored in the two that it was arguing against.
The co-authors of (both versions of) the article that had proposed and endorsed nuclear primacy, then published in 2007 (this one also in International Security), a response to that critical article. This reply’s title was “U.S. Nuclear Primacy and the Future of the Chinese Deterrent”. But it had no more impact than did the obscure article it was arguing against.
Thus, nuclear primacy has become U.S. policy, and MAD no longer is U.S. policy (though it remains Russian policy). The U.S. government is planning to take over Russia (basically, to install a puppet-regime there). That’s the reality.
Central to the nuclear-primacy concept is that of what’s variously called a “Ballistic Missile Defense” (BMD) or “Anti Ballistic Missile” (ABM) system: a system to disable or knock out Russia’s retaliatory nuclear weapons so that a U.S. blitz nuclear attack won’t be able to be met by any nuclear counter-attack.
As “The End of MAD?” put it: “Russia has approximately 3,500 strategic nuclear warheads today, but if the United States struck before Russian forces were alerted, Russia would be lucky if a half-dozen warheads survived.”
In other words: America’s aristocracy aren’t necessarily hoping to protect all of the U.S. population from a counter-attack, but are willing to sacrifice perhaps a few million Americans here and there, in order to achieve the intended result: conquest of Russia.
That article then says that a BMD-ABM system wouldn’t necessarily indicate America’s determination to pursue nuclear primacy against Russia, because it could instead be intended purely and authentically defensively, to protect against nuclear attack from Iran, North Korea or some other country. However: “Other U.S. nuclear programs are hard to explain with any mission other than a nuclear first strike on a major power adversary. For example, the decision to upgrade the fuse of many SLBM warheads (the W76s) to permit ground bursts makes sense only if the mission is destroying hundreds of hardened silos. One might argue that ground bursts could be useful for a variety of other missions, such as destroying North Korean WMD bunkers or remote cave complexes housing terrorist leaders. The United States, however, already has a large number of highly accurate, similar-yield warheads that would be ideal for these purposes.” The article even notes that: “Other analysts have noted that the current U.S. nuclear force looks surprisingly like an arsenal designed for a nuclear first strike against Russia or China.” And, “A group of RAND analysts agrees: ‘What the planned force appears best suited to provide beyond the needs of traditional deterrence is a preemptive counterforce capability against Russia and China. Otherwise, the numbers and the operating procedures simply do not add up.’” So: the co-authors here are claiming to be merely giving a name, “nuclear primacy,” to America’s existing strategic military policy — not to be inventing or creating it. They are, above all, saying that this is the reality now in U.S. policy-making circles; that MAD no longer is.
And their article has, indeed, described the guiding strategic-planning objective not only of the George W. Bush Administration, but also of Barack Obama’s — as will now be documented.
U.S. President Obama has always been saying that the reason why America is installing anti-ballistic missiles (“ABM”s, otherwise known as ballistic-missile defense or “BMD”) in Romania, Poland, and other nations that border (or are near to) Russia, is in order to protect Europe against Iranian missiles that might be aimed against Europe. He says that this is purely defensive, not aggressive, and that what it’s defending from is Iran, not Russia — so, Russia has no reason for complaint about it.
But then, Obama reached his nuclear deal with Iran; and this deal ended, for at least ten years, any realistic possibility that Iran would develop any nuclear-weapons capability — Obama himself emphasized that this was the case; he wasn’t denying it.
So: Obama’s claimed reason for installing ABMs in Europe was now, quite simply, gone. (Not that it had been credible anyway, since Iran didn’t have any nuclear weapons. It was merely a pretext, not honestly a reason.)
Here is how Russia’s President, Vladimir Putin, stated the matter, at that time, during the meeting of the Valdai International Discussion Club, on 22 October 2015:
“The use of the threat of a nuclear missile attack from Iran as an excuse, as we know, has destroyed the fundamental basis of modern international security – the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. The United States has unilaterally seceded from the treaty. Incidentally, today we have resolved the Iranian issue and there is no threat from Iran and never has been, just as we said.
The thing that seemed to have led our American partners to build an anti-missile defence system is gone. It would be reasonable to expect work to develop the US anti-missile defence system to come to an end as well. [But] What is actually happening? Nothing of the kind, or actually the opposite – everything continues.
Recently the United States conducted the first test of the anti-missile defence system in Europe. What does this mean? It means we were right when we argued with our American partners. They were simply trying yet again to mislead us and the whole world. To put it plainly, they were lying. It was not about the hypothetical Iranian threat, which never existed. It was about an attempt to destroy the strategic balance, to change the balance of forces in their favour not only to dominate, but to have the opportunity to dictate their will to all: to their geopolitical competition and, I believe, to their allies as well. This is a very dangerous scenario, harmful to all, including, in my opinion, to the United States.
The nuclear deterrent lost its value. Some probably even had the illusion that victory of one party in a world conflict was again possible – without irreversible, unacceptable, as experts say, consequences for the winner, if there ever is one”
He called Obama there a “liar,” and that’s a blatantly truthful characterization of the situation. But Putin missed there saying what’s even more basic for an understanding of what Obama was doing in this matter — and which makes that “lie” from Obama particularly heinous: Putin missed saying that an anti-missile system can be at least as important as an aggressive weapon as it is as a defensive one, because if a first-strike attacker wants to eliminate the defender’s ability to strike back from the attacker’s first-strike attack, then an anti-missile system is the weapon to do that, by eliminating the defender’s missiles before those strike-back missiles can reach their targets. It nullifies the other side’s defense — and to do this is enormously aggressive; it strips the victim’s retaliation. The whole distinction between offensive and defensive can thus be pure propaganda, nothing having to do actually with aggressive and defensive. Whether the use will be defensive, or instead offensive, won’t be known until the system is in actual battlefield use. Only the propaganda is clear; the weapon’s use is not.
So, Putin understated the heinousness, and the danger to Russians, that was actually involved in Obama’s tricks. All that Putin did was to vaguely suggest an aggressive possibility: “It was about an attempt to destroy the strategic balance, to change the balance of forces in their favour not only to dominate, but to have the opportunity to dictate their will to all.” Most people don’t relate to such abstractions as “strategic balance.”
Obama and other agents of the U.S. aristocracy know that their public have been trained for decades, to hate, fear, and despise, Russians, and especially the Russian government, as if it were the Soviet Union, and as if its Warsaw Pact and communism still existed and Russia hadn’t ended its hostility to the U.S. in 1991 (though the U.S. continued its hostility to Russia — that rump remaining country from the former communist empire — and during Obama’s second term the hostility soared). So, for example, at the conservative website Breitbart, when that statement quoted here from Putin was posted as part of an honestly written and presented article titled “Vladimir Putin: U.S. Missile Defense System Threatens Russia”, almost none of the reader-comments indicated any ability or inclination of the readers to sympathize with the plight for Russians that Putin had just expressed. Instead, to the extent that the comments there were relevant, they were generally hostile, such as:
“Russian President Vladimir Putin said Thursday he has concerns that the U.S. ballistic missile defense system threatens Russia’s nuclear capability.”
Vlad, its supposed to, its called defense. The only way it could harm your nukes is if they were shot down…………….after you launched them!
and
How can a defense system threaten anything? Like Obama would attack Russia. That is laughable.
Most people’s minds are straightjacketed in bigotries of various sorts, preconceptions such as that a “missile defense” system, and a “Defense” Department, can’t be aggressive — even extremely aggressive and war-mongering. The first thought that comes to mind about anything that’s ‘defensive’ is that something else must be ‘aggressive’ or ‘offensive’, and that whatever is ‘defensive’ (such as an ABM) is therefore good and even necessary. That’s thinking, and receiving the term “defense,” like thinking just one move ahead in a chess-game, but this is the mental limit for most people, and every propagandist (such as the people who professionally design propaganda or PR slogans and campaigns) do precisely what Obama and the rest of the aristocracy and their agents do in order to deceive their gulls: they phrase things for one-move-ahead-limit thinkers, like that. The cardinal rule in the deception-professions is therefore, first, to find people with the desired prejudices, and then to play them as that, with one-move-ahead-limit sales-pitches, which are directed to precisely those prejudices. This report at the Breitbart site was instead presenting a high-quality news-report, to a low-quality audience, and so the reader-comments it generated were few, and generally hostile.
Obama is a master at deception. Another good example of this was 26 March 2012, during Obama’s campaign for re-election, when he confidentially told Dmitry Medvedev, “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it’s important for him [the incoming President Putin] to give me space. … This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility.” Obama was privately communicating to Putin (through Medvedev) that Obama was pushing the ABM installations only so as not to be politically vulnerable to charges from the knee-jerk Russia-haters, Republicans, and that Obama’s fakery regarding the supposed ABM-target’s being Iran was only in order to appeal to yet another Republican bigotry (against Iran), and so Obama was intending to back away from supporting the ABM system during his second term.
But actually, Obama had had Russia in his gunsights even prior to his coming into office. Two specific objects in focus were Moscow-friendly leaders of nations: Assad of Syria, and Yanukovych of Ukraine. America’s strategy, ever since 24 February 1990, has been to strip Russia of allies and friends — to leave Russia increasingly isolated and surrounded by enemies. When Obama entered the White House on 20 January 2009, there already was a plea in the pipeline from the Syrian government for urgently needed food-aid to address the all-time-record drought there, which had decimated Syrian agriculture. Obama’s Administration never even answered it. Well before the Arab Spring demonstrations in 2011, Obama was hoping for turmoil in Syria and the overthrow of Assad — lots of starving Syrians would be just the thing.
Moreover, the planning for the February 2014 coup to overthrow the Moscow-friendly democratically elected President of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, started in the U.S. State Department by no later than 2011.
So: when Obama told Medvedev and Putin, on 26 March 2012, not to worry about Obama’s intentions toward Russia, he was lying. He wanted his intended victim to be off-guard, unprepared for what was soon to come.
On Obama’s way out the door, he did two things that significantly advanced America’s ABM-BMD threat against Russia.
On 10 December 2016, ‘Defense’ Secretary Ashton Carter stated, burying it in a speech he gave in Bahrain — site of a major U.S. military base — “just this week, we reached an agreement for Qatar to purchase a 5,000-kilometer early-warning radar to enhance its missile defenses,” and he said nothing more about it, as if this announcement weren’t the bombshell it actually was. Alex Gorka headlined about that at Strategic Culture, “US-Qatar Deal Threatens Russia: Reading News Between the Lines” and he explained that this system “is designed to be used as an early warning system against strategic offensive assets – something Iran does not possess.” Near the start of Carter’s speech, Carter had said that he would be talking about “checking Iranian aggression and malign influence, and helping defend our friends and allies,” including Bahrain, Qatar, UAE, and Saudi Arabia. Gorka noted, “The announced range of 5,000km (3,100mi) by far exceeds the requirement to counter a missile threat coming from Iran,” and, “There is no other reasonable explanation for the choice, except the fact that the AN/FPS-132 can monitor large chunks of Russian territory,” the objective being “to surround the Russian Federation with BMD sites and neutralize its capability to deliver a retaliatory strike if attacked.”
One of Obama’s last actions as the U.S. President was to sign into law a bill that had been quietly passed in Congress, which included a key change in U.S. law that would enable the government to spend unlimited funds on realizing former President Ronald Reagan’s dream of a space-based ABM system, “Star Wars.” On December 22nd, David Willman of the Los Angeles Times, headlined “Congress scrapped this one word from the law, opening the door to a space arms race”, and he reported that the eliminated word was “limited.” Willman explained that, “The nation’s homeland missile defense system is designed to thwart a small-scale, or ‘limited,’ attack by the likes of North Korea or Iran. As for the threat of a large-scale strike by China or Russia, the prospect of massive U.S. retaliation is supposed to deter both from ever launching missiles.” He noted: “The bill awaits action by President Obama. The White House has not said what he will do.” Willman also noted that on an earlier occasion, “the Obama administration criticized the changes in the Senate bill, saying it ‘strongly objects’ to removing ‘limited’ and to placing anti-missile weaponry in space. The statement stopped short of threatening a veto.” But then, the next day, on December 23rd, Willman bannered, “President Obama signs defense bill that could spur new space-based arms race”. Whereas Obama’s public rhetoric portrayed himself as being the type of person who had deserved to win the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize, almost all of his actual decisions in office were the exact opposite — and here was a superb example of that.
Whether Obama’s successor, Donald Trump, will continue with that longstanding (ever since 24 February 1990) plan to conquer Russia, or instead finally end the Cold War on the U.S. side (as it already had ended in 1991 on the U.S.S.R.’s), isn’t yet clear.
This is what happens when what President Eisenhower called “the military-industrial complex” takes over the country, and everything (including the ‘news’ media) serves it, rather than the military-industrial complex’s serving the public.
It fits in with the massive data which indicates that the U.S. government is run by an aristocracy or “oligarchy”, instead of run by people who represent the public — a “democracy.” Obama as President fit right in.
Additional details “Summing Up Russia’s Real Nuclear Fears” were provided by a superb article from Jonathan Marshall, on December 28th.
—————
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.
Sur ordre du président Vladimir Poutine, la Russie a lancé des missiles balistiques intercontinentaux terrestres Yars, des missiles navals Sineva
L’article Poutine dirige des exercices de la triade nucléaire est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Après des consultations difficiles, nous avons reçu de Kiev des garanties de sécurité pour le rétablissement de l’alimentation électrique externe
L’article Moscou annonce que Kiev a donné des garanties de sécurité pour rétablir l’alimentation de la centrale de Zaporojié est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
L’un des exercices de préparation au combat les plus importants de l’OTAN a débuté cette semaine : l’exercice Steadfast Noon.
L’article L’OTAN lance ses exercices de dissuasion nucléaire Steadfast Noon est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
La Biélorussie s’est dotée d’une industrie nucléaire, sa première centrale nucléaire est opérationnelle et le 80e anniversaire de l’industrie nucléaire
L’article Poutine et Loukachenko discutent de leur partenariat nucléaire est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
L’Organisation iranienne de l’énergie atomique (AEOI) et Rosatom ont signé un protocole de coopération pour la construction de petites centrales
L’article L’Iran signe avec Rosatom un protocole pour la construction de petites centrales nucléaires est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
L’Iran a commencé à se préparer à divers scénarios en réponse à l’intention du Conseil de sécurité de l’ONU de
L’article L’Iran rompt de nouveau avec l’AIEA après l’échec de la levée des sanctions à l’ONU est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
La Grande-Bretagne, l’Allemagne et la France (E3) ont notifié au Conseil de sécurité de l’ONU l’activation du mécanisme de «
L’article Berlin, Londres et Paris lancent le compte à rebours pour rétablir toutes les sanctions contre l’Iran est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Michael von der Schulenburg: Alaska Meeting Was a “Game Changer”
Excellent discussion and correct preliminary conclusion. “Trust-building” was leitmotif, to halt the runaway train to nuclear war. Reality between the two who count are now materially different. Europeans stand alone, and will cast off by Empire. “The Peace” is gonna be imposed on the crazed Europeans, and others fueling Forever Wars. Russia is recognized as peer power that must be negotiated with, sans diktat or derision, as they hold the cards.
Rosatom, qui a remporté l’appel d’offres en juin 2025 et dirige le consortium international pour la construction de la première
L’article Le russe Rosatom lance les travaux de la première centrale nucléaire du Kazakhstan est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Le 4 août, les dirigeants iraniens ont rejeté la perspective de négociations directes avec les États-Unis, interrompues par l’opération israélienne
L’article L’Iran anticipe une nouvelle escalade et crée le Conseil de défense est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Preparing for aggression and “just in case” exercises.
By Rostislav Ishchenko at Ukraine.ru.
(machine translation)
Trump found himself in a difficult situation. He failed to convince Russia to sign a peace treaty (or rather, a ceasefire) with Ukraine on American terms.
As far as I can tell, Trump’s confidence that Moscow would quickly accept his proposal was based on an incorrect assessment of the overall damage inflicted on Russia by its confrontation with the West. However, even in the United States, many conscientious scholars who began their careers in Soviet studies are still influenced by the sudden collapse of the Soviet Union.
To understand what Americans think, remember the phrase that is popular with us today: “Everything that was written in Soviet newspapers about the West turned out to be true.” In the early 90’s, American Sovietologists were shocked by the fact that everything that American propaganda, with their help, invented about the USSR turned out to be “true”.
It should be understood that the Americans’ fascination with the applied nature of science (research should be profitable) often plays a cruel trick on them, and in the field of political and social sciences, it happens all the time. At first, American politicians, using a flexible system of grants, give political and social research the desired propaganda bias. As a result, regardless of the outcome of these political efforts, whether they are successful or unsuccessful, political and social researchers do not have a clear understanding of the processes that actually led to the specific result.
The fall of the USSR was an impressive geopolitical catastrophe, and the Americans, who did not have a clear understanding of the internal processes that led to this outcome, concluded that their propaganda was correct and that the American system was the ideal that humanity aspired to, but that was not attainable for everyone. It was like in the joke: “I can only imagine what’s happening in America!””The only thing the Americans decided was that if Europe has been so affected by the sanctions war with Russia, and even the United States has felt some discomfort, then Russia, which is also fighting in Ukraine, must be feeling even worse!
Nowadays, it’s rare to find revelations from foreign agents and relocants in the media, but if you recall what they said and wrote in 2014-2022 about Russia’s “inevitable defeat by the collective West,” you’ll realize that the West itself was thinking about this, and in many ways, it’s still thinking about it. After all, these foreign agents adopted their ideas from their Western partners.
Therefore, it is not surprising that the scientific support for American foreign policy leaves much to be desired. And this is not limited to Russia. Similarly, Trump’s concept of quickly suppressing China by shifting the focus of American efforts to this direction is also failing. The threat of imposing draconian sanctions on trade with Russia has prompted a strong response from China.
Now the US has to either pretend that this was a bad joke, but in this case, the entire building of Trump’s foreign policy is crumbling: Ukraine has been surrendered, China has not been defeated, there are no results, the systemic crisis of the West is deepening, the US’s authority is declining, the midterm elections are getting closer, and the fate of Trumpism is becoming increasingly uncertain. Alternatively, the US must engage in a sanctions war with China, which, according to their own calculations, will be a two-way street and will cause at least as much damage to the US as it does to Beijing.
But there is a caveat. The Americans were unable to block Chinese trade routes in Central Asia and the Indian Ocean. The Americans were unable to organize a major war on the Chinese borders. The Indian-Pakistani conflict died down due to the inability of the Indian Air Force to adequately counter the Pakistani ones. The clash of the western aviation fleet, technologies and techniques of air combat (India) and Chinese (Pakistan) showed the convincing superiority of the latter. As a result, India’s previously wavering focus on BRICS and the SCO has strengthened. New Delhi is trying to maintain neutrality, but while this neutrality used to be more in favor of the West, it is now aligned with the interests of Russia and China.
There are ongoing battles with rebels in Myanmar, and there is unrest on the Thai-Cambodian border, but overall, these crises are not severe enough to pose a direct threat to China.
The United States has failed to create critical problems for China in the region and on its trade routes, which means that the United States has not gained a tangible advantage in a potential trade war. Washington cannot count on a rapid collapse of Beijing. This will be a long economic war of attrition, with Trump facing a real threat of losing the 2026 midterm elections and the 2028 presidential election. They may not even make it to the “final” by losing the Republican primaries.
The problem is that an economic war will lead to a severe shortage of goods in the U.S. consumer market, and many U.S. businesses will lose their supply of components. Neither India (which the U.S. is also threatening with a sanctions war, thus pushing it towards a closer alliance with Russia and China) nor anyone else can fully replace China in the U.S. market.
Initially, it was assumed that China would be quickly broken by imposing a trade blockade, and that a quick strategic victory for the United States would overshadow the short-term difficulties. However, it is now clear that there will be no quick victory, and the domestic economic challenges that a trade war with China could pose could be fatal for Trump, Trumpism, and the Trumpists.
We have already seen in the Iranian example that in a difficult situation, “peacemaker” Trump, like his predecessors in the White House, chooses war. Europe should fight Russia, and it is preparing to do so, while Israel, which attempted and failed, is preparing for a second round.
The US is assembling a bloc of Pacific countries to fight China. The bloc is being formalized with Australia, Taiwan, the Philippines, and Japan, and the US is actively working with other countries in the Indo-Pacific region. However, despite having a strong naval presence, the US has not been able to establish a land-based foothold against China that could be used for a proxy war, similar to Ukraine’s role against Russia.
Meanwhile, in the event of a war at sea, the U.S. Navy is almost guaranteed to be involved in military clashes (at least during the delivery of military aid to its allies, without which they will not be able to fight for long). China, on the other hand, possesses a nuclear arsenal (albeit not as impressive as Russia’s, but still the third-largest in the world), and Washington does not want to take any risks.
The Republic of Korea has recently been considered as a potential land bridge from which a proxy war against the People’s Republic of China could be launched due to the failure of other options. Along the way, Kim Jong-un could be punished for his assistance to Russia in the special military operation.
It’s not an ideal option, but it’s the best we have right now. Judging by the fact that the United States has dramatically increased its pressure on Seoul in recent weeks, “persuading” it to join the Japanese initiative to create a “Joint Theater of Operations” in the East China Sea and the South China Sea, which has already been supported by the Philippines, Australia, and Taiwan, Washington is rushing to force China to make major concessions, if not through peace, then through the threat of war.
Trump needs at least some kind of “victory” before the midterm elections, otherwise he risks losing control of Congress (one or both chambers). Therefore, the Russian-Chinese and Russian-Korean exercises (both land-based and naval) are conducted with a specific goal in mind: to show a potential aggressor that China is not alone.
AHH: a reminder of his column of a year ago, and how finely the onion has been sliced ever since (A nuclear provocation…)
L’Administration nationale de la sécurité nucléaire, responsable de la sécurité de l’arsenal nucléaire du pays, a été l’une des victimes
L’article L’arsenal nucléaire américain victime d’une attaque informatique est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
By Peter Koenig
How wise is it to blast out threats of nuclear war, almost non-stop? The financial investment advisory Guru, Martin Armstrong, has just issued another such warning to the world: 100% Chance of Nuclear War – Martin Armstrong | Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog, by Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com (Saturday Night Post).
Six weeks ago, legendary financial and geopolitical cycle analyst Martin Armstrong was signaling a big turn toward war. Now, Armstrong says, “The chances of war with a nuclear exchange is at 100%. . .. Plan on it, this is coming.”
The continuous yelling, “Wolf”, is obnoxious in many ways, because it has the intention to bring fear to the people, to make them morally weak, as they are afraid. The long-term effect is that people do not believe the warning anymore, even if and when it could become true.
Which it will not.
In the case of Armstrong, who introduces his reputation by pretending to have predicted every major (financial) crisis in the past, it may have to do with attracting investors into the war industry or any associated high-yielding investments.
In any case, I dare say, scaring people without any solid evidence, i.e., “The chances of war with a nuclear exchange is at 100%. . .. Plan on it, this is coming,” is outright criminal.
Fear achieves making people submissive, obedient, as they are afraid of authorities, of the unknown, their beloved authorities may bring, and so they give in against their own interests. In the case of yelling “Nuclear war is coming” – people, suddenly turn to NATO for fake security, as they believe war will bring them Peace.
Armstrong is part of the “controlled opposition”, though not much opposition is seen, just aberrant warnings. He may get his instructions from the Deep State – or some military industrial monster. Who knows, maybe NATO.
See this for Armstrong’s full article and “100% nuclear warning” – https://usawatchdog.com/100-chance-of-nuclear-war-martin-armstrong/ .
——-
NATO is the world’s largest most dangerous war and killing machine. Wars and conflicts initiated or participated in by NATO have caused at least 30 to 35 million deaths since the creation of NATO in 1949.
People are so scared that they lose reason and act not only against their own interests, but against the interests of the world at large.
This phenomenon of senseless- and mindlessness has been well-studied and softly propagated by Tavistock, the world’s foremost social and mind engineering institute based in the UK (https://www.amazon.com.be/-/en/Daniel-Estulin-PhD/dp/163424043X?language=en_GB ), and illustrated in George Orwell’s book “1984”, where logic was turned upside down, literally into War is Peace and Peace is War.
When recently President Trump bombed Iran, he said something to the effect, he hopes his bombing of Iran will lead to lasting Peace. And surely, more than a handful people believed him.
Worse, NATO, sort of abandoned by the US, is becoming a European “force de frappe” – where every country is investing their resources – stretching to huge indebtment – into armament, into the war industry – and mostly the US weapons manufacturers, because they are not (yet) very important in Europe.
The head of NATO, who has been put in his position by Washington and the World Economic Forum (WEF), will make sure that the US, inventor, and creator of NATO (in April 1949, in Washington DC), also benefits from the European fear- and war machine.
All means are good to create fear and submissiveness. It is one of the first steps towards full enslavement and tyranny. Armstrong and his ilk are just one “civilian” branch. More important are all those European heads of government, implanted, literally with fake elections, all trained by the WEF’s Academy for Young Global Leaders (YGL), and the chief backers of the WEF.
They include US and international financial institutions, such as BlackRock / Vanguard and StateStreet – and others, lesser-known financial interests – all eventually leading to the City of London, an independent enclave within London, where most if not all, of the financial and economic manipulations originate.
And guess who controls the City of London? – Yes, you are right. Those people who are not to be mentioned, lest you are ready to be prosecuted for discriminatory remarks.
The current Secretary General of NATO, Mark Rutte, former Dutch Prime Minister, is one of them, a WEF YGL. He makes sure that the 30 European NATO members [the other two are the US and Canada) – most of them also European Union members, follow the trend of War is Peace and Peace is War – as a doctrine that after one or two generations can hardly be erased from the minds of the populace at large.
The US has a 1.3 trillion-dollar budget foreseen just to renew and build up their nuclear arsenal by 2035. The EU wants a trillion Euros military budget by 2030, literally to go to war with Russia. This is openly said by Madame Ursula Von der Leyen, unelected President of the European Commission (EC).
All this is made public to scare you.
Or does anyone really believe that European leaders are so stupid to plan a nuclear war that may wipe them out as well?
As Fidel Castro already said (see this https://www.globalresearch.ca/video-fidel-s-message-against-nuclear-war-in-a-nuclear-war-the-collateral-damage-would-be-the-life-of-all-humanity/21541 ) and many before and after him, including President Putin, a nuclear war is unpredictable and has no winners.
What leader in his most submissive mode wants really to wipe out himself, his children, grandchildren, and his loved ones? – This sounds like a camouflaged suicide pact. And frankly the world is not quite there yet.
So, People and Humanity of this world, stay away from this war propaganda. Think for yourself. Think in the first place Peace, always Peace – and Harmony. War has no place in such a scenario, in a world of peaceful cohabitation.
You may be amazed to know about the hidden, invisible power of your mind, how it can shape the future, a future that we, The People, choose on our own, and step away from what an unnamed elite pretends to choose for the good of Us, the People. Our spirituality is the most powerful means towards harmonious cohabitation we have.
Use it. Open your Eyes and Ears and Act for your and humanity’s interests of Peace and harmonious and prosperous togetherness.
————–
Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst, regular author for Global Research, and a former Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020).
Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). He is also a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.
Les États-Unis ont débloqué la construction par la Russie de la centrale nucléaire de Paks-2 en Hongrie. Son ouverture permettra
L’article Washington débloque la construction par la Russie de la centrale nucléaire prévue en Hongrie est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
La France et le Royaume-Uni ont convenu de coordonner plus étroitement leurs actions en matière de dissuasion nucléaire à l’avenir,
L’article Londres et Paris veulent coordonner leurs dissuasions nucléaires est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Le parlement iranien a approuvé un projet de loi visant à suspendre la coopération de Téhéran avec l’AIEA, rapporte Nour
L’article Le Parlement iranien décide de suspendre la coopération avec l’AIEA est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Les frappes américaines contre les installations nucléaires iraniennes n’ont retardé son programme d’armement que de quelques mois, selon un rapport
L’article Le renseignement américain remet en cause l’efficacité des frappes sur les installations nucléaires iraniennes est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
WAR ON IRAN: Rania Khalek’s Dispatches w/ Elijah Magnier
Veteran war correspondent Elijah Magnier joins Rania Khalek for a special live episode of Dispatches to break down what just happened, what’s coming next, and whether the region is now spiraling into all-out war.
Israel has launched an all out war on Iran, with hundreds of strikes across the country on military, nuclear and civilian infrastructure as well as assassinations of military commanders and scientists. This shocking escalation comes as the U.S. publicly distances itself, even as prominent American politicians cheer it on and while Washington pretended to pursue nuclear negotiations with Tehran.
Ed. comments:
L’échange de frappes aériennes sans précédent entre Israël et l’Iran, qui a débuté le 13 juin au matin, a déjà
L’article L’Iran prêt à des concessions sur le nucléaire est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Poutine a déjà exprimé sa volonté de jouer un rôle de médiateur dans la résolution du conflit entre Israël et
L’article Macron s’oppose à ce que Poutine joue le rôle de médiateur entre l’Iran et Israël est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
George Galloway interviews Pepe Escobar in the capital of the Last Rome
In the space of eleven days, the disintegrating USUK Empire nearly caused nuclear war in two separate regions of our world.
Their forces snuck drones into the Russian Federation and tried to attack all five strategic bomber bases of Russia. The START Treaty obligated Russians to leave one third of their nuclear triad vulnerable under the open sky, subject to remote satellite monitoring.
This was an unconscionable betrayal of several layers. They broke an oath, signed under this stringent bilateral treaty, which helps uphold the international peace.
They weaponized international commercial cargo, rendering all nations hostage to a new hybrid war tactic where cheap ubiquitous drones can degrade the most expensive pillars of national and international security; this will force gridlock as all countries scramble to protect themselves from every seemingly innocent cargo container crossing their border.
They forced Russia’s back against the wall – for Russia was obligated, per the new updated nuclear doctrine, to respond to even conventional attacks on their nuclear forces with a nuclear response – especially if proxies were used at behest of another nuclear power. Russia chose circumspection for now, and has not yet responded as of today, June 12, 2025, to this shocking development which one former Russian general admits brought the two nuclear super powers to the closest point of a nuclear exchange since the Cuban Crisis of 1962.
In the last day, the disintegrating USUK Empire nearly caused nuclear war in West Asia.
They ostentatiously “evacuated their nonessential and familial service forces” in the region. In addition to these diplomatic moves in most countries surrounding Iran, they raised their military readiness and breathed fire. The US War Minister Hegseth, and the US Senator Cotton in charge of their intelligence committee, both indicated Iran was nearing completion of “nuclear weapons” and that this was unacceptable, and by implication would be stopped. The President himself has kept alternating threats with offers of peace with Iran, as if haggling over an real estate block, and not the lives of billions.
The fragmenting West mobilized the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to urgently issue any statement indicating Iran was “in noncompliance” with her obligations under the defunct JCPOA nuclear deal torn up by Trump in his first term, and subsequently sidelined by the other European “E-3” of Germany, Britain and France. However, accordingly to terms within that same JCPOA, Iran WAS in compliance, and had remained so throughout, as a forced gradual walk-back, in response to western perfidy and noncompliance.
Implicit behind these criminal moves, as they lack the conventional wherewithal to meaningfully attack and degrade Iran, is the use of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) chiefly aimed at the huge Iran civilian population – the main unhardened target. All the military and nuclear research centres are located at least a mile beneath their mountains, beyond reach of even nuclear weapons…
Mankind is forced to observe the spectacle of naked gangsterism taking hold in the imperial core – thrusting ever more wildly towards Armageddon in her agony. The Old Order, with the exorbitant privilege of free lunches via the usurious fiat petrodollar, is becoming ghost. It wanes by the day, as the sane flee to safer non-western havens, bilateral currency and barter exchanges, in the effort to escape “tariff” extortion, really a shameless highway heist dressed up as unjust taxation.
Those who perfected the Vampire Ball, in which all Others are the meal, including their own oppressed deplorable masses, in a screaming fit of silent rage threaten to bring down the very pillars of the sky rather than endure witnessing the birth of a new harmonious multi-nodal world system in which they do not keep their exceptionally unjust position at the top of the heap.
In the space of eleven days, the disintegrating USUK Empire nearly caused nuclear war in two separate regions of our world. The maddened careen from deepening conflagration to deepening conflagration, without sign of course correction. The unbridled escalation to totalen krieg rendering especially their own hemisphere a thermonuclear desert, indicate both a continuity of deep state governance since at least 1991, and the possession of madness at the elite level.
The civilizational-states are messaged by the neo-Carthage on the Thames that they remain between two choices: between dignity and humiliation. Dignity equals Armageddon, whereas humiliation is the return to bestial prehistoric slavery and annihilation that continues to be unrolled in Gaza.
Prof. Jeffrey Sachs is a world-renowned economics professor, an advisor to political leaders around the world, a bestselling author, and a global leader in sustainable development. Prof. Sachs discusses the decline of diplomacy, rationality and self-preservation in the West. As Russia’s nuclear forces were attacked, Western political leaders and media reacted with glee.
[Ed Note: To describe this at the brink of nuclear war is an overstatement. The experts need to comment here, but nuclear war has precursors. One has to see something, for example nuclear silos opening. From the US side, nuclear infrastructure is old and we’ve seen the reports that as other infrastructure has deteriorated, so has the nuclear infrastructure. On Russia’s side the infrastructure is maintained and they have had excercises in Moscow with their civil population as to what to do. Then, I do not believe Russia intends anything of this nature, despite the nuclear war doctrine being updated. We are also not sure what Russia’s stockpile of Oreshniks are and this is a nuke killer weapon. The US is now factional and they warring against themselves. That some part of the factional structure knew of the attack on Russia’s airfields and nuclear bombers is almost a certainty. Currently Europe is no good, as they are preparing for war but does not have the wherewithall. It will take years to build up forces. The concept that Trump has lost control of his administration and the many tentacles is also almost a certainty yet, unless there is a Wag the Dog scenario, I believe in a crisis situation Trump will pick up the phone and call Putin because he will want to be just like Kennedy during the Cuban Nuclear Crisis. Bear in mind that during that crisis, the US stepped back, and removed their nuclear infrastructure in Turkey.
It is not a comfortable place to be, but the distance between where we are now and an all-out nuclear war, although alarming, is still off in the distance. That small nukes may be used tactically may be closer to a real scenario. This war in its many manifestations is still conventional in terms of weapons, in terms of economics it is a dog-eat-dog world and we’ve seldom seen such brutality as we see now.]
Information on the US Sentinel program has been filtering through and Andrei Martyanov decoded it. It simply means that the US (most probably) lost or is in the process of losing one one of the pillars (ground) of its nuclear triad.
Martyanov says: “And this one is not about losing yet another F/A-18. Shit happens in combat. Nope, this one is massive and most consequential–Sentinel Program, the program for new American ICBM is not going ahead, it is bankrupt not only financially, it is a technological failure of an immense scale. Is it conceivable that the US will lose one of the pillars (ground) of its nuclear triad? Not only it is possible now, it is likely. Alex Vershinin delivers a strange article–it can only be explained by an acute grief. Russians know what Trump is up to.”
He talks about the fake US attempts at a ‘cease fire’ which we knew from the outset was gaslighting.
In addition to this, here is a video from China in terms of an “Iran Dome” (defensive), now installed in Egypt. The military advances are staggering.
Professor Mohammad Marandi joins TMJ News for an in-depth analysis on the current ongoing Iran–U.S. nuclear negotiations. As a former advisor to Iran’s nuclear negotiations team, he offers an insider look into Iran’s present position as a regional power and a nation that is refusing to bargain its national sovereignty at the negotiating table. He also sheds light on public opinion about the nuclear talks: do Iranians have hope for sanctions relief and do they trust the U.S. will stay committed to a deal?
Lateo.net - Flux RSS en pagaille (pour en ajouter : @ moi)