Igor Korotchenko, editor-in-chief of Natsionalnaya Oborona magazine: I turned on the news today and the main subject was President Trump starting his morning by posting new threats against Russia and China on his Twitter. Bolton came to the meeting apparently to warn us that the INF Treaty is dying. That START III might also die. We must be ready for the worst outcome of this situation. We must act wisely and go slowly, calculating our chances to understand what to do, how to do it, and what the sequence of our actions should be.
First, it's important for us to not plunge into an arms race even if Trump, as Nikita Khrushchev used to say "is producing missiles like sausages". A basic and extremely important aspect of our strategy is the preservation of our second strike capability. The second strike scenario is the worst, where we were hit by the joint nuclear forces of the US and the UK and struck by Tomahawks, so the only thing we can do is avenge ourselves. It's an extremely important matter.
In this regard, the first military-technical measures that the Kremlin would be supposed to propose would be the following: First, we must resume the development of the military railroad missile system. We must be ready to establish serial production if the situation demands it. Right now, we must allocate the appropriate funds and conduct a series of tests, including actual launches on test ranges, to have five military railroad missile systems armed and ready for if the situation becomes catastrophic in terms of strategic consequences of the actions perpetrated by Washington. Five missile trains positioned in the area between Moscow to Vladivostok. The Americans won't be able to track and locate them in any scenario. And if we actually get attacked one missile train will launch a salvo towards the UK and the other four will attack the US. I'd like to stress one more time that it's only if they attack us first. The mere fact that Russia possesses such a weapon won't allow Trump or the operation planning officers from the Pentagon to realistically consider a scenario of attacking us. It'll be a great cold shower that'll sober them up.
- It's a technology of the past. According to what Trump said, I believe he's going to resume the nuclear race, tests in three environments, and move the nuclear race to space. And it'll be a different reality with a different amount of time to make a decision. A human mind won't be fast enough to assess the situation. That increases the probability of mechanical errors that'll lead to a reenactment of the Terminator movie. That's scary.
- Still, America's plans to create a Strategic Nuclear Forces Group are based on the idea that until the 2080s the US is going to bet on the classic nuclear triad. Next, we must concentrate our efforts on creating solid-propellant ICBMs and SLBMs such as the either mobile or silo-launched RS-24 Yars and the submarine-launched Bulava.
- Let's not expose all of our secrets at once. I just…
- Another prospective system that was announced by President Putin is the Poseidon, which I believe to be crucially important. An underwater strategic nuclear torpedo. The Arctic and Kamchatka are the places where we can position such strategic systems in order to deliver a second strike.
- Sakharov's project…
- I'd like to stress one more time that we mustn't engage in a full-frontal confrontation with the US. If we're able to negotiate, we must do that. But the best way to sober up our American partners would be to have a second strike capability. In that case, they'll be willing to talk. We might even reach some agreement.
- We can't discuss our military capability while ignoring the economic aspect. Our current production is much more efficient than the Americans'. But as long as our economy depends on the dollar they'll be able to inflict heavy damage on it by turning off the switch, so to say. If we don't start thinking strategically, checking the stress resistance of our economy, and understand that we must switch to other payment systems, if we don't look at what we can't produce in Russia, if we don't calculate every step of our survival strategy, every one of our responses will be late. We must stop lying in wait hoping that it'll go away. We're perfectly aware of the new reality. It won't go away. It's not that I disagree with you. I'm elaborating on what you said.
- I absolutely agree with you. But the key measure that we need to take to have a chance to do what you said is to create a second strike potential. It'll guarantee our invincibility in any nuclear war scenario.
- But we'll need our own electronics, our own material engineering our own production of materials and components. We'll need to resurrect the Soviet science and invest in it. It's an entirely different mentality.
- First, it's worth mentioning that the USA's withdrawal from the INF Treaty is a bad thing. Don't try to comfort us by saying that it's obsolete. It's not. And it would've been up-to-date for the next 50 years. We shouldn't blame China but the geopolitical and military ambitions of Washington. It destroyed the 1972 ABM Treaty. Now, it's destroying the INF Treaty and may also withdraw from START III.
- Bolton says it doesn't fit the new reality.
- It does. All that blabber is to evade responsibility and make China a scapegoat together with Russia. That's first. Secondly, we must establish a new kind of relationship with China. Yes, we're pushed into each other's arms but what we need is targeted measures. Due to the fact that we both feel the danger that the US poses we need to conduct the first-ever joint exercise of the Russian and Chinese Nuclear Forces with the participation of our political leaders. We may also consider adjusting our nuclear attack warning system so that it could warn China too if it's attacked by, say, the US Strategic Nuclear Forces. It's a sensitive subject that must be discussed. But theoretically speaking, I don't see why we can't discuss it.
- So you are proposing to create a unified Eurasian defense system?
- Yes. But we're not fusing our defenses, it's not a military alliance it's a pragmatic alliance. Today, when Trump keeps waving his club we must carefully tell him, "Mr. President, under the present-day circumstances we've decided to conduct a joint exercise of the Russian and Chinese Strategic Nuclear Forces." Later, we can connect China to the Russian early-warning system so it would warn China if the US fires a nuclear missile at it. Nikolay, don't…
- We'll invite whom we please. I remind you that Pakistan was your ally until you messed up your relations.
- Nikolay, please, don't tell us that a computer might make a mistake and accidentally launch the missiles. Once again, even if the current Russian version of the Perimeter System is triggered, God save us but it might happen, it won't do anything until the Supreme Commander-in-Chief sanctions it according to the corresponding protocol, even if it's our final protocol. But it will be manual. No computer will launch anything until it's manually told to do that. And it will be told. And it'll get really bad for the Americans. Even under the current circumstances, we hope that the Americans will be pragmatic, realize the possible fatal outcome, and refrain from any aggressive actions against Russia.
- Following your line, I'd like to quote an Arabic saying: "Act not in response to what America tells you, but in response to how America acts."
- The US will share the fate…
- It could take a long time.
- The US will share... I'd like to quote a statement by the lead engineer of our strategic nuclear weapon systems, Yury Solomonov from his famous article published in the Natsionalnaya Oborona magazine: "The US will share the fate as Ancient Rome. It will be crushed by its own ambitions and destructive tendencies in its social and foreign policies supported by no one." In this situation, we must act wisely and adequately without succumbing to militaristic rage. We must carefully build our relations with Europe. Merkel has already announced she's ready to buy American liquefied gas and build a terminal for that.
So if America begins deploying its missile systems in Europe we must respond asymmetrically. We mustn't scare or push Europe away but tie it to us economically and show them an example of stable and responsible conduct against the craziness demonstrated by Donald Trump.
In this regard, I'd like to repeat my main thesis. We have potential, but we must also recognize other threats. The threat of internal destabilization the threat of launching the processes imposed by other states. It's extremely important to nationalize our elite. It's unacceptable when A-class state officials and other prominent representatives of our establishment believe that giving in or surrendering might be the right thing to do. There are such trends. They come to the President and tell him to make a deal. The main idea is that we mustn't give in. We mustn't succumb to pressure. Any concession on our part would lead to new demands. If we surrender the international arena they'll come here to teach us democracy and demand that we let them interfere in our domestic affairs. The main principle is to never surrender anything. We can listen and we can discuss but we can't make concessions on any substantive issue. In conclusion, I'd like to say that I hope that we still have a chance to somehow return to Cuba.
