Conditional scenario: in the USA they assessed the army’s need for ground-based missile systems in case of a conflict with the Russian Federation in the Baltic

The US Congressional Budget Office (CBO) evaluated a number of existing weapons systems that the Pentagon could quickly re-equip if necessary to strengthen its position during potential military conflicts with Russia and China. The relevant document, prepared by the federal agency on the order of the leadership of the Senate Committee on Armed Forces, relates to long-range ground-based missile systems. The authors of the study separately note that it does not contain any recommendations, but only an objective analysis based on available data.

As noted in the report, which RT read the text, the relevant work was carried out in connection with the Pentagon’s expressed concern that in future conflicts, opponents such as Russia and China could prevent the United States from gaining air and sea supremacy, and thus limit opportunities Washington's military campaigns. It is clarified that we are talking about potential scenarios of hostilities in the Baltic region and in the South China Sea.

The authors of the document state that in the military conflicts of the 1990-2000s (including the campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan and the operation in Yugoslavia), the US military initially focused on the rapid establishment of overwhelming dominance in the air and at sea, which was then used in ground operations. However, in future conflicts, a number of likely opponents, including Russia and China, could seriously complicate the implementation of a similar scenario, according to the CBO.

“At the moment, among the planning scenarios defined by the Ministry of Defense, those that involve conflicts with Russia and China are associated with the greatest costs and efforts. Both of these countries have invested a large amount of money in weapons systems, capable of depriving the United States of the unhindered use of its air forces and naval forces with high potential in the border areas, ”the congressional administration said.

As emphasized in the document, the introduction of long-range ground-based missile systems into the US Army would mitigate the problems arising from the lack of support by the Air Force and Navy. It is noted that in the event of a probable armed conflict with Russia and a clash with China, we are talking about the fact that Washington will have to confront more technologically advanced opponents than before.

As regards the American scenarios of the conflict in the South China Sea, it is usually assumed that the PRC will try to use its control over the disputed territories, including the Paracel Islands and the Spratly archipelago, to expand its influence on neighboring states - US allies, because of which either Washington or Beijing may initiate a military campaign.

As regards the Pentagon’s assumptions about the scenarios of the conflict in the Baltic states, we are talking about a hypothetical attack by Russia on one or several states of the region. Moreover, scenarios of such a conflict are conditionally divided into “fast” (direct military aggression with the seizure and retention of territories) and “slow” (using local proxy forces or “green men”).

According to the document, in “quick” scenarios, Russian forces can take advantage of the territorial proximity to the capitals of the Baltic states, access to the territory of Belarus and the limited presence of NATO troops in order to capture the Baltic countries in a short time. In this case, according to the congress administration, NATO will be forced to either accept this aggression and establish a new status quo, or go on a counterattack to liberate the Baltic countries.

However, as noted in the CBO, many factors can prevent the North Atlantic Alliance from operating in the Baltic states. In particular, they point out that Russia "can send long-range missiles designed to attack ground targets to virtually any important NATO target in the area."

In addition, attempts to harness NATO's naval resources in the Baltic Sea would be fraught with “big risks”. Russia has significant potential in the field of air-to-surface missiles, and the Baltic Sea is a relatively small and isolated area in which the NATO naval forces face limited maneuvering capabilities, the report said.

The document also indicates that large NATO forces are not deployed on a permanent basis in the Baltic countries, while Russian air defense systems can threaten Poland’s airspace as well. Thus, the use of the NATO Air Force can be dangerous until the Alliance forces can suppress Russian air defense. However, as the CBO points out, such a campaign is likely to “be accompanied by attacks on Russian territory, which Moscow can regard as steps to escalate the conflict.”

• NATO forces exercises in Latvia
• Reuters
• © Ints Kalnins

The Russian authorities have repeatedly emphasized that Moscow is not going to attack anyone, and in November 2019, Vladimir Putin called the notorious “Russian threat” an invention.

“Everyone understands that Russia is not going to attack anyone. How many inhabitants in the European Union? How many inhabitants in NATO countries? What is the total economic and military potential? This is just bullshit, bullshit. “The Russian threat” is an invention of those who want to cash in on their role as the advanced detachment in the fight against Russia, to receive some bonuses and preferences for this, ”the president said.

In February 2020, the Russian Foreign Ministry emphasized the counterproductiveness of the inflated military budget of the North Atlantic Alliance and stated that NATO did not respond to Russia's proposals to de-escalate tensions in Europe.

As a professor at the Academy of Military Sciences, senior researcher at the Center for Political Studies of Russia Vadim Kozyulin, said in an interview with RT, with the help of such documents that American government agencies are preparing, Washington continues to heat up anti-Russian sentiments in the Baltic states.

"This report suggests that the United States continues to consider the option when Russia carries out aggression in the Baltic states, and this is complete stupidity and just another attempt by the West to warm up the anti-Russian sentiments that are and are cultivated in the Baltic States by American proteges in the leadership of these countries," stressed the expert.

Do not restrain yourself in anything

In its report, the US Congressional Budget Office considers four types of existing long-range missile systems that the Pentagon could acquire and modify for use as ground-based systems in order to prepare the army for the described conflict scenarios. Each option involves the adoption of seven batteries of missile launchers and the purchase of 550 missiles of the corresponding types.

The first and most budget option is the JASSM-ER extended-range air-to-surface cruise missiles. This option will cost $ 1.3 billion, but the effectiveness of the use of this system in ground-based performance will also be minimal. In addition, as indicated in the document, the range of missiles of this version can reach 925 km, that is, their deployment on land is likely to prevent the conclusion of a new treaty between Russia and the United States on arms limitation.

At the same time, the document expressly states that after withdrawing from the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles (INF Treaty), the US Army is exploring options for creating new systems whose range exceeds 500 km. At the end of 2019, Vladimir Putin pointed out the need to monitor the US deployment of medium- and shorter-range missiles in different regions of the world.

The head of state added that Moscow is ready to work on new agreements in the field of arms control. However, until this process is launched, the Russian side will continue to strengthen its own nuclear forces.

• Vladimir Putin
• RIA News
• © Evgeny Biyatov

As Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov previously stated, the arms control crisis is deepening due to Washington’s actions. The Minister noted that the measures proposed by Moscow, which could ensure the viability of the agreement, were rejected.

As military expert Alexei Leonkov recalled, it was the United States that initiated the termination of the INF Treaty, and now they do not intend to limit themselves in this direction.

“The Americans are going to manufacture missiles that were previously banned by the INF Treaty. For example, ground-based cruise missiles are a direct violation. But, as we know, it is the United States that broke the agreement, so now the Americans are not restraining themselves in anything, ”the expert said in a conversation with RT.

According to him, the United States is currently relying on offensive weapons, and in order to justify this, any arguments, even those that are not true, are used.

Billions to prepare

Returning to the options for missile systems that the Pentagon could convert into ground-based systems to effectively counter Russia in the development of the Baltic scenario, the CBO report mentions SM-6 anti-aircraft missiles. According to the authors of the report, this option will cost the budget about $ 4.6 billion. The federal agency believes that such systems could deprive Russian aviation of support by means of early warning.

“The Russian armed forces will not be able to support their aircraft with the help of early warning and control systems (DRLOU) and, therefore, will not be able to take advantage of the increased range of their anti-aircraft missiles with respect to most targets, with the exception of NATO aircraft DRLOU. In addition, having lost support by means of AWACS, Russian aviation will become severely limited in the possibilities of defeating NATO aviation, ”the report says.

In this situation, management experts believe that Russian artillery will also be significantly less effective, while the United States could resort to using tactical aircraft to “destroy” Russian units.

The most expensive option ($ 6.3 billion) will be the purchase of a combination of SM-6 and land-based LRASM long-range anti-ship missiles for the US Army. The former may be suitable both for the Baltic scenario and in the event of a conflict with the PRC in the South China Sea, and LRASM systems will primarily be designed to confront China.

According to Alexei Leonkov, the above materials do not reflect the real situation, as the SM-6 missile proposed for ground deployment is not able to withstand modern Russian weapons.

“The SM-6 missile is their last missile, which flies at a speed of Mach 3.5, and they boast that they have hit it there for hundreds of kilometers. Of course, it does not reach our missiles, which are on the S-400 complex, but not the point. The fact is that any deployment of such weapons in the Baltic does not make sense: if we take our Iskander systems, from which missiles fly at a speed of 6 Mach numbers, then this missile simply will not intercept it, ”the source said.

In addition, as the expert emphasized, there are other systems, as well as electronic warfare systems, which the American air defense systems have not yet encountered.