Cause and Effect

Russian President Vladamir Putin has announced that he intends to develop a new generation of nuclear missiles. This the country that can barely keep track of its existing nuclear weapons. They now want more.

That's not all, however:

Some military analysts said his statement could indicate the revival of Soviet designs for nuclear warheads that zigzag on their final approach to a target, confusing missile defenses. [According to Pavel Felgenhauer, an independent Russian military analyst,] research on zigzagging warheads began in the 1980s in response to Ronald Reagan's ‘Star Wars’ program.”

Fortunately, Putin assures us that “the new weapon systems wouldn't be directed against the United States.” No, the new missile-shield busters will be directed at that other superpower that recently withdrew from the ABM treaty in order to build themselves a missile shield. More proof (if any is needed) that unilateralism has costs both seen and unforeseen.

Consider me unimpressed with Putin's assurances. And concerned. This unwelcome news comes on the heels of other bad things on the Russia political front, ably related by Angua over at Tacitus. Moreover, if Russia does further modernize its missile force, it puts pressue on China to do so as well, which then puts pressure on India, which in turn puts pressure Pakistan, which is not a place that needs any more pressure put upon it (particularly to build nukes).

Remember, that we share certain enemies with the Russians does not make the Russians our friends.

Comments

[Thorley Winston]

Von wrote:

Fortunately, Putin assures us that “the new weapon systems wouldn't be directed against the United States.” No, the new missile-shield busters will be directed at that other superpower that recently withdrew from the ABM treaty in order to build themselves a missile shield. More proof (if any is needed) that unilateralism has costs both seen and unforeseen.

Or maybe it is simply more proof that it was foolish for us to ever put our faith in a treaty (with a government that no longer exists) which has done nada to prevent the number of nuclear-capable nations from going from two to over twenty.

Besides which it was hardly “unilateralism” when the treaty has a mechanism for either party to withd and we have other nations - including Australia and Israel (and Japan IIRC) - who have said that they wanted to participate in a missile defense system.

Your parting thought though was the correct one:

Remember, that we share certain enemies with the Russians does not make the Russians our friends.

No, it does not. Nor is the People’s Republic of China our “partner” just because the last President said they were, you know back when they were working to expand the range of their ICBMs, stealing our nuclear secrets, and rattling their sabers with talk about taking out a couple of cities on our west coast. This was before we officially withdrew from the ABM treaty. In which case the implication that there was some sort of “cause and effect” does not seem supported by the order of events.

The question is not whether Russia, the PRC, and other unfriendly nations are going to try and develop more lethal and sophisticated weapons systems – they are and every serious person knows it. The only question is whether we are going to be so naïve as to forgo any chance to build a working defense system to protect ourselves because we trust their good intentions.

[James Casey]

Remember, that we share certain enemies with the Russians does not make the Russians our friends.

Doesn't make them your enemies, either, right? The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my enemy.

[Sebastian Holsclaw]

Where is Putin getting the money to develop this new technology?

[heh]

He's a damn dictator, Seabass! Those who stand in his way get sent to prison.

Oh, and in case you didn't know, Russia is a very big nation, they've got the knowhow and enough resources.

Thorley-

The money could be spent stopping a far greater threat, terrorism.

Plus, the Chinese and Russians are rational. They know they'll play the price in millions of lives if the hurl a nuke our way. It worked with a far more hostile enemy.

[Edward]

er, heh

this thread is ancient...wanna join one folks are still reading?

Oh, and we let folks chose their own nicknames on this site (although if your nickname for Sebastian is from another blog and he's cool with that, OK).

[Slartibartfast]

Plus, the Chinese and Russians are rational.

Consider a career in standup comedy.

The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my enemy.

The enemy of my enemy is Schrödinger's cat.