European Horns Threaten the Russian Nuclear Horn: Daniel 7

NATO escalates nuclear tensions with Russia

NATO’s Secretary General, Jens Stoltenberg, has issued one of the most overt nuclear responses so far to Russia’s use of nuclear threats since its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. In an interview with a British newspaper, The Telegraph, Mr Stoltenberg, said NATO is discussing putting more nuclear weapons on standby “I won’t go into operational details about how many nuclear warheads should be operational and which should be stored, but we need to consult on these issues. That’s exactly what we’re doing.”

Basing his arguments in the flawed deterrence doctrine NATO follows along with all nuclear-armed states and their nuclear supporting allies, Mr Stoltenberg, who stands down in a few weeks’ time, went on to urge the Alliance to use nuclear signalling more openly against other states: “Transparency helps to communicate the direct message that we, of course, are a nuclear alliance ….  Nato’s aim is, of course, a world without nuclear weapons, but as long as nuclear weapons exist, we will remain a nuclear alliance, because a world where Russia, China and North Korea have nuclear weapons, and Nato does not, is a more dangerous world.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov, was quick to respond: “This is nothing but another escalation of tension“.

Mr Peskov also pointed out how the NATO chief’s comments appeared to contradict the declaration at the end of the Ukraine Peace Conference in Switzerland the day before that said any threat or use of nuclear weapons in the context of Ukraine was inadmissible.

Alicia Sanders-Zakre, ICAN’s Policy and Research coordinator called on all sides to stop ratcheting up tensions: “A day after joining in criticism of Russia for its inadmissible nuclear threats, the NATO Secretary General is flaunting a nuclear response. This is the kind of dangerous escalation,  inherent to the doctrine of deterrence, that ICAN has been warning about for some time, both sides need to step back and reduce tensions.”

Ms Sanders-Zakre continued: “The NATO countries hosting US nuclear weapons should admit to their citizens that they have these inhumane weapons on their soil without their say. That’s the kind of transparency NATO should be practising. Neither these NATO members – Belgium, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands and Türkiye – or Belarus, which has been carrying out nuclear exercises with Russia, should be demonstrating their willingness to join in the killing of millions of people.”

The advocates of deterrence doctrine claim it ensures stability and keeps the peace, but it does the exact opposite. It encourages proliferation where more countries possess nuclear weapons, as the most recent case of North Korea clearly shows, as well as reckless armed engagements. History also demonstrates that it encourages the kind of brinkmanship we saw in the Cuban Missile Crisis that took us to the brink of a nuclear catastrophe that was only averted by luck.

Nuclear experts have criticised Mr Stoltenberg’s poorly thought through escalatory rhetoric.  In the current Ukraine crisis it increases dangers, especially to the European populations officials like the NATO Secretary-General are committed to protect.  

As the states parties to the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons have said, deterrence doctrine is a threat to all countries’ security and is an obstacle to disarmament. The use of nuclear weapons, and even the threat of use, is not something to be done or considered lightly as it threatens civilian populations across the globe. Mr Stoltenberg’s latest comments about NATO being a nuclear alliance clearly reveal that he, and others who support outdated deterrence doctrine, need to remember that behind these words are weapons designed to cause massive civilian harm.

What is behind Russia’s nuclear escalation threat? Revelation 16

Vladimir Putin. He is pictured inside a Russian Orthodox Church
Russian President Vladimir Putin attends the Orthodox Easter service at the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow on May 5, 2024 [Valeriy Sharifulin/Sputnik via Reuters]

Brinkmanship in the war in Ukraine might be nearing its natural limits; this could pave the way for diplomacy.

Last week, tensions between Russia and the West appeared to escalate to a dangerous new level when President Vladimir Putin ordered military drills involving tactical nuclear weapons near the Ukrainian border. The Kremlin made clear that the drills were in response to statements by Western leaders about the deployment of NATO troops to Ukraine and the use of Western weapons to strike targets inside Russia.

On May 2, during a surprise visit to Kyiv, British Foreign Secretary David Cameron pledged to keep helping Ukraine “for as long as it takes” and suggested that Ukrainians were free to use British weapons in order to strike Russian territory. This could pertain to the Franco-British Storm Shadow missiles as well as drones the United Kingdom had pledged to supply to Ukraine in their thousands.

While Western countries have been supplying Ukraine with weapons, they have explicitly made clear that they cannot be used for attacks on Russian soil. For this reason, until now, Ukraine has been using its home-made drones and missiles against civilian and military targets inside Russia.

French President Emmanuel Macron, for his part, has repeatedly suggested that NATO could potentially end up deploying troops to Ukraine. He reiterated it this month in an interview with the Economist published on May 2. The French president refused to provide more details, insisting that the European Union should maintain “strategic ambiguity” and leave the Russians guessing about its real intentions.

But the Kremlin has chosen not to play the guessing game. The announcement of military drills involving tactical nuclear weapons in its Southern Military District which borders Ukraine sends a clear message to the West.

And to make the point clearer, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs summoned the British and French ambassadors and released details of the rebukes they received.

The one addressed to France merely denounced Macron’s statements as “provocative” and “destructive”. The statement addressed to the UK was much harsher. It said that by allowing Ukraine to use weapons against targets in Russia, the UK becomes a side in the conflict. The ambassador was warned that should Ukraine proceed with strikes using British weapons, Russia could strike British targets “in Ukraine and beyond”.

This was the first direct threat of an attack against NATO targets outside Ukraine since the start of Russia’s full-out invasion in 2022. But it was not the first time Russia threatened the UK in the context of this conflict.

Back in the summer of 2021, the Russian navy fired warning shots when the British warship HMS Defender entered what Russia considers its territorial waters off the Crimean coast. It also threatened to bomb any British vessel that would attempt it again. That episode served as an important prelude to the Russian invasion.

Several factors must have contributed to the current escalatory episode. In the British case, domestic considerations did play a role. The unpopular Conservative government is nearly guaranteed to be routed in the upcoming national elections, which makes foreign affairs one of the last straws it could hold on to.

Being “tough on Russia” has been its trademark since the time when Prime Minister Boris Johnson emerged as the staunchest supporter of Ukraine and opponent of any deals with Russia while trying to salvage his post amid a COVID party scandal at home. Cameron’s visit came on the day of the UK’s local elections; his posturing in Kyiv, however, did not help his party avoid a crushing defeat.

But, of course, there is more to it than domestic politics. Western leaders generally tend to coordinate the statements and actions regarding this conflict. European leaders, especially the British, also tend to adopt the role of a “bad cop” in dealing with Russia so that the Biden administration appears more restrained and reasonable.

There is also the situation on the battlefield, which clearly worries Western capitals. Over the past few months, the Russian army has steadily advanced and more recently has extended the front line by a few dozen kilometres, attacking Ukraine from the north in the Kharkiv region.

The ongoing search for a magical solution that would turn the tables in Ukraine’s favour has so far been fruitless. The crucial US aid package, finally approved by Congress in April, will at best stall the Russian offensive at some point later this year. But the Russian army will likely seize more territory before it happens.

What Ukraine could realistically achieve is to try to make the Russian advance costlier by delivering more painful and more long-distance strikes, using Western missiles. The bridge connecting Russia’s mainland to the occupied Crimea is often named among the most prized targets.

The Ukrainians would also be very keen to target more infrastructure inside Russia proper if only to retaliate for Russia’s incessant strikes that have devastated Ukraine’s energy sector.

Western powers are willing to leave these options on the table in order to restrain Russia and make it think twice before launching large-scale operations with devastating consequences for Ukrainian defences.

Russia, on the other hand, wants to look undeterred and dead set on achieving its goals in Ukraine, no matter the cost. The Russian calculation has always been that at the end of the day, Ukraine will always be far less important for the West than for Moscow.

Against the backdrop of what might turn out to be the most decisive phase of this war, the sides are trying to set the rules of the game and draw their red lines which – they hope – the adversary will, at the very least, hesitate to cross.

But with nuclear weapons being demonstratively rolled out, it is becoming clear that the game of brinkmanship is nearing its natural limit. With most – if not all – trump cards on the table, the contours of a new equilibrium are becoming clearer which makes peace talks more likely.

As Putin made another bellicose speech during the Victory Day parade in Moscow on May 9, the recently reprimanded French ambassador was in attendance, breaking the boycott imposed by all the other major Western powers. Behind the curtain of harsh rhetoric and threats, diplomatic efforts to put an end to the war continue.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

Russian Nukes Spread Into Europe: Revelation 16

Belarus is building a facility, presumably to store Russian nuclear weapons – media

Belarus is building a facility, presumably to store Russian nuclear weapons – media

A military base is under construction in Belarus where Russia may store its nuclear weapons.

This was reported by The New York Times on the basis of analysis of satellite images taken by Maxar.

The construction has been ongoing since March 2023 near the village of Osipovichi, where a military base has been located since Soviet times.

This city is located at a distance of about 190 kilometers north of the border with Ukraine.

The publication notes that some of the recently erected structures have features inherent in the storage of nuclear weapons at bases in the Russian Federation.

Construction of an alleged Russian nuclear weapons storage facility near Osipovichi in Belarus. Photo credits: Maxar Technologies

For example, a new territory that is carefully guarded. It is surrounded by three rows of fencing, in addition to the existing security perimeter around the entire base.

Another characteristic feature is the covered loading area, connected, it seems, to a hidden underground bunker from the Soviet era.

The alleged storage site for Russian nuclear weapons is located in the same city as the Iskander missile systems that Russia handed over to Belarus.

Construction of an alleged Russian nuclear weapons storage facility near Osipovichi in Belarus. Photo credits: Maxar Technologies

Missiles of these systems can be used as carriers of nuclear or conventional warheads.

To protect the site near Osipovichi, according to the images, an air defense system was also deployed. It appeared no later than mid-2023.

Osipovichi on the map of Belarus

Hans Kristensen, Director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, analyzed the facility near Osipovichi and noted that in recent weeks the construction of new structures had begun there, “The details have not yet been determined, but the construction has clearly reached a new stage.”

Iskander-M and Iskander-K systems of the military of Belarus. Photo credits: Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Belarus, February 2023

As previously reported, on May 7, Belarus, which is an ally of Russia, announced a sudden check of means, such as carriers of tactical nuclear weapons with Iskander systems. Then it was noted that it was planned to check the entire range of measures from the planning, preparation and use of tactical nuclear ammunition strikes.

The French Nuclear Horn should be part of European defence debate: Daniel 7

France’s nuclear weapons should be part of European defence debate: Macron

PARIS: France’s nuclear weapons should be part of the European defence debate, French President Emmanuel Macron told a group of regional newspapers on Sunday, in comments that drew fire from his political opponents ahead of EU elections in June.

Macron has been more strident on defence issues recently, having called on Thursday for stronger, more integrated European defences as he outlined his vision for a more assertive European Union on the global stage, saying “Europe could die”. 

In an interview set up by EBRA, a group of French eastern regional newspapers, he said a “credible European defence” should go beyond the protection already offered by NATO. 

“That may mean deploying anti-missile shields, but we need to be sure that they block all missiles and deter the use of nuclear weapons,” he said. 

Regarding nuclear weapons, while France’s doctrine has so far been to use them when the country’s vital interests are threatened, Macron said he was open to give a more “European dimension” to these interests. 

“I’m in favour of opening this debate, which must therefore include missile defence, long-range weapons and nuclear weapons for those who have them or who have American nuclear weapons on their soil,” he said.

The Growing European Nuclear Horn: Daniel 7

Europe planning new ‘nuclear umbrella’ with 300 French nuke missiles spread across continent for showdown with Russia

Russia warned it would ‘sink the British Isles’ with its nuke arsenal

Updated: 7:23 ET, Apr 29 2024

EUROPE could be gearing up to forge a bubble of nuclear protection from Russia made up of 300 French ballistic missiles.

French president Macron has suggested the submarine-launched warheads are fanned across the continent to shore up collective defence.

A French ballistic M51 missile - part of Macron's nuke weapons store
A French ballistic M51 missile – part of Macron’s nuke weapons store
Macron has suggested fanning French nukes across Europe for protection against Russia
Macron has suggested fanning French nukes across Europe for protection against RussiaCredit: Alamy
A Russian Yars intercontinental ballistic missile
A Russian Yars intercontinental ballistic missileCredit: Alamy

His offer followed a German minister urging the UK and France to forge a “nuclear shield” to deter Russia.

Leaders in Europe are worried about the ramifications of a possible Donald Trump win in the November presidential election.

And nuclear threats are coming out of Russia thick and fast as Putin’s illegal war in Ukraine drags on.

Macron said he wanted to open up conversations about “missile defence, long-range weapons and nuclear weapons” across Europe.

The French premier, who has been incredibly vocal about stepping up defence in the face of Putin, said we need a “credible European defence”.

The current US-led Nato alliance, he believes, does not offer enough protection.

France, he says, “is ready to contribute more to the defence of European soil,” independently from America, offering up the 300-ballistic and cruise missile store.

Trump warned just days ago that he will let Russia do “whatever the hell it wants” to Nato members who don’t step up in giving 2 per cent of their GDP to defence.

Russia Threatens the European Nuclear Horns: Daniel 7

Alexander Lukashenko and Vladimir Putin
Russian President Vladimir Putin, right, is pictured with Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko in the Leningrad region of Russia on January 27. Lukashenko on Thursday said he would be willing to use the nuclear weapons Putin… More PHOTO BY ANTON VAGANOV/POOL/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES

Putin Ally Warns Enemies of ‘Instant Response’ With Russian Nuclear Weapons

Published Apr 25, 2024 at 9:53 PM EDTUpdated Apr 25, 2024 at 10:00 PM EDT00:58

Putin Ally Draws Red Line For ‘Legitimate Targets’ In NATO Country

By Jon Jackson

Associate Editor

Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko on Thursday warned potential enemies of his nation “that if they set foot on the Belarusian soil, they will get an instant response with all kinds of weapons,” including nuclear ones.

Lukashenko has been a close ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin for years, and he has been one of the biggest defenders of the Kremlin’s current war in Ukraine. The Belarusian leader was credited with brokering negotiations between Putin and since-deceased Wagner Group leader Yevgeny Prigozhin when the latter led an armed mutiny against Russia in June.

In sign of their strong ties, Putin deployed tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus in the summer. While speaking at a session of the 7th Belarusian People’s Congress on Thursday, Lukashenko spoke of those Russian weapons and how he wouldn’t hesitate to use them.

According to state-owned Belarusian news agency BelTA, Lukashenko said the Russian nukes are a deterrence against neighboring countries that are “armed to the teeth” and have troops deployed near the borders of Belarus.

“How can we deter them? Well, here come nuclear weapons. We do not threaten anyone with nuclear weapons. We are not attacking anyone. This idle talk about Putin placing them [nuclear weapons in Belarus], and Lukashenko not using them if a war starts against Belarus, is nonsense. You know me well,” Lukashenko said.

Begin your day with a curated outlook of top news around the world and why it matters. I want to receive special offers and promotions from Newsweek

He continued, “They also know very well that if they set foot on the Belarusian soil, they will get an instant response with all kinds of weapons from us, including from the Russian Federation. You have recently heard President Putin’s statement that an attack on Belarus will be regarded as an attack on the Russian Federation. Therefore, today we are fully determined to counter any aggressor and inflict unacceptable damage on an adversary.”

BelTA reported the head of state also said the tactical nuclear weapons Putin deployed in Belarus fit into his country’s doctrine of having the capability to destroy its enemies.

“Even before nuclear weapons were deployed in Belarus, we were intent on inflicting unacceptable damage upon them. I want them to realize that we can strike so much that it will be unacceptable for them,” Lukashenko said.

“Standing face-to-face and shooting at each other is not the idea. We understand perfectly well that it would be very difficult. Next to impossible,” he added. “This is why our previous military documents mentioned the factor of inflicting unacceptable military damage.”

Newsweek contacted Lukashenko’s office via email on Thursday night for further comment.

Nuclear Showdown in Ukraine Begins: Revelation 16

0:00Close

Nato and Russia heading for nuclear showdown as Poland vows to host US nukes on Putin’s doorstep

Poland sits sandwiched between two Putin allies but have constantly vowed to support Ukraine and Nato forces

POLAND has announced they are ready to host nuclear weapons on their borders as Nato and Russia head for a nuclear showdown.

President Andrzej Duda said his country will take up nuclear arms if they are asked to by Nato as they look for somewhere to deploy weapons and respond to the latest chilling Putin threats.

Polish President Andrzej Duda has said his country will take up nuclear arms if they are asked to by Nato
Polish President Andrzej Duda has said his country will take up nuclear arms if they are asked to by NatoCredit: AFP
One of Russia’s nuclear drills taking place as a potential nuclear stand off between Nato leaders and Putin ramps up
One of Russia’s nuclear drills taking place as a potential nuclear stand off between Nato leaders and Putin ramps upCredit: Alamy
Russian military equipment has been seen moving towards Belarus as Putin stocks up on his already worrying number of weapons
Russian military equipment has been seen moving towards Belarus as Putin stocks up on his already worrying number of weaponsCredit: East2West

The tyrant and his Kremlin cronies started to reinforce their armoury in Belarus and Kaliningrad recently, stocking up on their worrying warfare.

Duda spoke at length in an interview on Monday saying: “Russia is increasingly militarising Kaliningrad. Recently it has been relocating its nuclear weapons to Belarus.

“If our allies decide to deploy nuclear arms on our territory as part of nuclear sharing, to reinforce Nato’s eastern flank, we are ready to do so.

“I’ve already talked about it several times. I must admit that when asked about it, I declared our readiness.”

Poland sits in a crucial position in terms of the ongoing war in Ukraine with the Nato nation sharing a border with Belarus and the Russian military playground of Kaliningrad.

Ukraine has always been reassured they have Poland’s full support if ever needed due to their position.

Duda also revealed in the chat nuclear talks between Poland and the US have been ongoing for some time.

He told the newspaper Fakt that they would work with the US to navigate nuclear weapons if need be and keep Russia from causing anymore chaos in Europe.

Nuclear War will start in Europe: Revelation 16

Nuclear War Will Happen in Europe, Russian TV Pundit Warns

Published Apr 11, 2024 at 8:03 AM EDT Updated Apr 11, 2024 at 9:16 AM EDT

Nuclear strikes by Russia on European targets are inevitable, a political expert warned in a fiery rant on Russian state television.

“We want to change the future of Europe. You’ve f***** up the present, you gentlemen Europeans,” political scientist Dmitry Yevstafyev said on Vladimir Solovyov‘s politics show, which aired on the Rossiya 1 TV channel on Thursday.

The warning marks the latest escalation in the war of words between Moscow and Ukraine’s Western allies, ongoing since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

“You’ve chosen these morons to lead you. But we are trying to change your future, which [currently] means 200-250 million dead or maimed Europeans. That’s the price of nuclear war.”

Russian TV presenter Vladimir Solovyov
Russian TV presenter Vladimir Solovyov is seen at the Grand Kremlin Palace in Moscow on September 30, 2022. A guest on Solovyov’s state TV program on Thursday, April 11, said nuclear war in Europe was… Contributor/Getty Images

Yevstafyev specifically referenced Paris, saying that the French capital would be targeted in the hypothetical attack, and adding that Americans would be “fine.”

Your Morning Starts Here

Begin your day with a curated outlook of top news around the world and why it matters.

A video clip of the speech was shared by Ukrainian internal affairs adviser Anton Gerashchenko on X, formerly Twitter.

“And by the way, Americans are fine, they are OK,” Yevstafyev said on Thursday. “Well, maybe some cloud will reach, OK. Or maybe it won’t maybe in the ocean, and so on.

“But unfortunately, all of our attempts to turn the Europeans’ brains on are unsuccessful. But I think we should put aside our false sensitivity that there will be no European nuclear war. No, there will be. And we have to state it directly.

Russian Horn Pushes Nukes into Europe: Daniel 7

Russia relocates tactical nuclear weapons into Belarus

NEWS | 03/15/2024 00:49:00 GMT | By Lallalit Srijandorn


Western officials confirmed to Foreign Policy that Russia has moved tactical nuclear weapons from its borders into neighboring Belarus, several hundred miles closer to NATO territory. This move comes as Russian President Vladimir Putin threatens a wider military showdown with NATO over the alliance’s backing for Ukraine. 

Key quotes

“The Russians can reach any place in NATO with nuclear missiles with what they have on their own territory,” said Rose Gottemoeller, a former top US arms control envoy and deputy secretary-general of NATO.”

“It does not change the threat environment at all. So it is purely a political message.”

Russia is not ready for the European nuclear horns: Daniel 7

Destroyer USS McCampbell launches a missile for a flight test on Feb. 8 off Hawaii.
Destroyer USS McCampbell launches a missile for a flight test on Feb. 8 off Hawaii.

Russia isn’t ready for the surprise NATO attack its strategists foresee

Michael Peck 

Mar 9, 2024

  • Russian strategists believe their country must be ready for NATO conventional missile strikes.
  • Russian media publicized their article just as NATO war games began.
  • The missile strike they think NATO is planning is a mirror of how Russia itself would fight a war.

Russian strategists argue its military needs more robust systems to defend against a NATO surprise attack that would come in the form of conventional missile strikes, a warning that comes as NATO conducts a massive exercise near Russia’s northern border.

A recent article in Voyennaya Mysl (“Military Thought”) argues that a likely scenario is a “likely enemy” — presumably the US and its NATO allies — launching a massive barrage of missiles at vital Russian facilities, a strategy that looks a lot like Russia’s. “An attack might begin with a rapid global strike alongside several massive missile and aviation strikes on the country’s administrative-political and military-industrial infrastructure,” according to an official TASS news agency summary of the article, which recommends expanding the missions and equipment of the Russian Aerospace Forces, or VKS.

How exactly NATO would attack Russia in this scenario is unclear, though the Russian analysts seem to be describing what the US military would call “multi-domain operations.” The article speaks of “joint operative formations” that consist of “compact, highly mobile combined multi-role groups of troops capable of inflicting heavy losses on the administrative-political and military-industrial infrastructure in all spheres: on the ground, on the high seas, in the air, in outer space and in cyberspace.”

The attack would be preceded by “provocations” to justify a war, as well as the deployment of forces near Russia. “The enemy will take potentially aggressive action, including provocations, for the purpose of controlling the situation, as well as intensify all types of intelligence activity. In addition, it may start deploying aircraft carrier strike groups and ships with guided missiles under the guise of exercises. Enemy aircraft, including strategic bombers and drones, will begin to perform regular flights near Russia’s national borders.”

The attack itself would begin with a massive air offensive (and by 2030, attack from space), “consisting of a rapid (instant) global strike and several (from 2-3 to 5-7) massive missile and air strikes,” the article warned.

This perceived NATO strategy of massive strikes risks compelling Russia to use its nuclear weapons, especially tactical nukes, to defend itself. But it is not without some grounding. In October 2022, the former CIA director and retired Army Gen. David Petraeus warned Russia that the use of a nuclear weapon against Ukraine would prompt a heavy NATO response that would sink the entire Black Sea Fleet and “take out” the ground forces in Ukraine “that we can see and identify.”

Perhaps not coincidentally, Russian media publicized the article just as NATO began Nordic Response 2024, a large, 11-day exercise involving more than 20,000 troops, 50 ships, and 100 aircraft operating across Norway, Finland, and Sweden. It will also be notable by the presence of new NATO members Finland and Sweden, whose accession to the alliance has Russia worried over the security of its vast northern frontier. In 2020, the US flew B-52 bombers in the Barents Sea, which abuts Russia’s Arctic territories.

Predictably, the Russian experts urged more defense spending. This would include expanding the equipment and missions of the Russian Aerospace Forces, including the development of more advanced UAVs and other weapons, creating an automated fire control system (presumably AI-based), and “the improvement of reconnaissance, aviation engineering, airfield and other types of comprehensive support.”

Advertisement

The call to boost spending on airpower comes as Russia’s defense spending explodes, with the Kremlin diverting one-third of the national budget to finance the military and the war in Ukraine. That’s triple the amount in 2021, before the war began, by some estimates. While the Russian Air Force has had some success in supporting ground troops — albeit at a heavy cost — during recent Russian offensives, its overall performance in the war has been surprisingly ineffective.

Ironically, the missile strike that Russian military experts accuse the West of planning is a mirror image of how Russia itself would fight a war. “Russian military thought has broadly cohered around the idea of ‘active defense’ in the event of a NATO-Russia war,” Julian Waller, a Russia expert at the Center for Naval Analyses think tank in Arlington, Virginia, told Business Insider. “Such that due to expectations of overwhelming kinetic strikes in the initial phases by the West, Russia needs to be able to withstand these while also striking back at critical military and civilian infrastructure. This involves heavy usage of missiles, long-range fires, and VKS assets.”

Michael Peck is a defense writer whose work has appeared in Forbes, Defense News, Foreign Policy magazine, and other publications. He holds an MA in political science from Rutgers Univ. Follow him on Twitter and LinkedIn.