ILLUSTRATIVE IMAGE
The US seeks to deploy an intermediate range conventional missile in the Pacific region within months, US Defense Secretary Mark Esper said. However, the top official noted that it will likely take some time to develop the more advanced land-based missile capabilities.
“It’s fair to say, though, that we would like to deploy a capability sooner rather than later,” Esper told reporters traveling with him to Australia on August 2. “I would prefer months. I just don’t have the latest state of play on timelines.”
The move is likely to anger China, but the US Defense Secretary said Beijing shouldn’t be surprised by it.
Mark Esper added that the US will now “fully pursue” the development of new types of ground-based missiles. Earlier, he said that the US needs to build new military bases and boost “resilient force posture” in the Indo-Pacific region to counter China.
The annoucnement came on the day of the final US withdrawal from the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty with Russia. Signed in 1987 during the Cold War, the agreement banned all land-based missiles with a range between 500km and 5,500km and their launchers.
Over the past years, the US and Rusia have repeatedly accused each other of secretly violating the INF. The US initially suspended its obligations to the agreement in February 2019. Russia responded by a similar step.
Russia and China both have to immediately bomb any American installations of offensive missiles in Asia or they will never be taken seriously.
Try stupid .
That ship has sailed. The USA has nuclear submarines patrolling these countries shores as well as aegis missile boats which could be carrying up to 96 cruise missiles each making “freedom of navigation” cruises. Then there’s the B-52 bombers in the air 24/7.
When it comes to an existenital fight the Russians already have the USA in check so what’s a few more missiles. If I was a US taxpayer I would be asking why on earth they need 20X overkill on nuclear weapons that if used means the destruction of the country.
Is this article in reference to Guam, about 3000 km from the Chinese coast? “the top official noted that it will likely take SOME time to develop the more advanced land-based missile capabilities.” And he would prefer months. What system is this, maybe just so much talk ?
The thing is they have a ton of subs and aircraft that can carry enough missiles to destroy Russia and China many times over. Why add land based missiles to the mix?
The only two reasons I can think of is perhaps the only answer they have to hypersonic cruise missiles are land based missiles whose warheads have a similar terminal velocity … or … they feel the US taxpayers need to be liberated from their hard earned money to keep them from spending it on Chinese imports. The USA makes little that consumers want any more but they do make missiles.
Most probably the systems already exist. Asian countries don’t trust USA will protect them against China if USA doesn’t have those missiles in those countries (ex: Philippines)
Lel just try
Ha ha coming to YOUR town soon terrorists .
You are the terrorist !
Asia and Africa are not United States. United States should have to stay inside their border along with their war ships etc. The United States jungle role will not work.
US exempts aviation, space exports from new Russia sanctions because the US space engines does not work. Russia should ban NASA and other US entities and should not support them.
So cancelling the treaty was aimed at China primarily since they had signed no such treaty. This is confirmation.
Think about it. The next big war is going to be surprising.
U.S. abandonment of the INF treaty was pre-planned (assignment of blame on the Russian Federation being a political move devoid of technical non-compliance) and the U.S. considered its termination as a requirement to facilitate the production of missile architecture that was prohibited by the INF:
– “the Russian Defence Ministry [said] that Washington started preparations for the production of medium- and short-range missiles prohibited under the INF deal two years before accusing Moscow of violating the accord. The Russian Defence Ministry has released satellite images of Raytheon Corporation’s plant, saying the facility has been prepared for the production of missiles prohibited under the INF deal.” (Russian MoD Shows PHOTO of US Plant Set to Produce Missiles Banned Under INF, SputnikNews, 02/02/2019)
– “The US has long planned to withdraw from the INF Treaty but it’s only now that they started seeking justifications for it…. “At first, the American side did announce its intent to withdraw from the INF Treaty, and then they started seeking justifications as to why they should do it.” [Vladimir Putin] Congress authorized funding research and development efforts to build new missile systems “before Washington announced withdrawal from the INF…. The decision had been made some time ago, but quietly – they thought we wouldn’t notice it.” However, developing new types of short-and intermediate-range missiles was an open secret as “it was set out in the Pentagon’s budget.” Next, they started to look for someone to blame,” the Russian leader went on.” (US planned to ditch INF in advance, now seeks reason why it should – Putin on Pompeo ultimatum, RT, 5 Dec, 2018)
– “The deficit of integrity over U.S. claims against Iraq regarding weapons of mass destruction and Iran and its nuclear program speaks volumes about how corrupt America’s policymaking apparatus has become. Now the United States is making the same mistake again by pulling out of the INF Treaty, which it claims Russia violated.” (US Accusation That Russia Was Violating the INF Treaty Is as Credible as the Iraq WMD Lie, Scott Ritter, 26/02/2019)
Analysts recognise U.S.-NATO missile architecture relates to the pursuit of nuclear primacy [1] (close proximity fast first strike potential with retaliatory missile interception capabilities).
The proximity of this missile architecture to Russian borders and its integrated offensive missile capabilities (MK 41 being compatible with Mk 14 cruise missile launch canisters in violation of the former INF) clarify this reality.
Proposed Western bloc narratives (that seeks to attribute blame to the Russian Federation for pre-planned and implemented violations of the treaty by the U.S.-NATO bloc) clarify there is no comprehension of the actual threat this move poses. Indeed the foundations of an inevitable missile crisis and resultant war have been created.
– “The United States is pursuing global strategic domination through developing anti-ballistic missile systems capable of a sudden disarming strike against Russia and China, according to the deputy head of operations of the Russian General Staff….. “The presence of US missile defense bases in Europe, missile defense vessels in seas and oceans close to Russia creates a powerful covert strike component for conducting a sudden nuclear missile strike against the Russian Federation,” [Lt. Gen. Viktor] Poznikhir [Deputy Chief of the Main Operations Directorate of the Russian Armed Forces] explained….. “Applying sudden disarming strikes targeting Russian or Chinese strategic nuclear forces significantly increases the efficiency of the US missile defense system,” Poznikhir added. American ABM systems are not only creating an “illusion” of safety from a retaliatory strike but can themselves be used to launch a sneak nuclear attack on Russia. In a blatant breach of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, the standard land-based launching systems can be covertly rearmed with Tomahawk cruise missiles instead of interceptors…….” (US missile shield aims to cover sudden nuclear strike against Russia – General Staff, RT, 27 Apr, 2017),
– “the deployment of the so-called missile defense system in Romania and Poland is essentially, among others, an indirect breach of contract for missiles with a medium range. The present anti-missile systems in Eastern Europe are based on the universal platform MK-41 and its technical specifications allow launching “Tomahawk” missiles with a range of 2 500 km at any point of the Russian European territories in violation of the prohibition of the contract. There is hardly anything that threatened world security as much as this move of Washington. Even the Cuban Missile Crisis was not charged with such a high risk level. People do not understand how potentially dangerous the situation really is. “The world is pulled into an entirely new dimension, while Washington pretends that nothing happens,” Russian President, Vladimir Putin, said, adding that Western officials “blur the eyes of the news media” which in turn misinforms their audiences.” (On the Verge of a Major War: Is There a Pilot in the Cockpit?, Southfront, 17/10/2016)
The retaliatory capabilities of the Russian Federation however will continue to prevent the U.S.-NATO objective of achieving nuclear primacy.
– “We make no secret that we have military-technical means to neutralize the possible negative impact of the U.S. global missile defense system on the Russian nuclear forces,” [Russian Chief of Staff Valery General Gerasimov]
As the U.S.-NATO-Israel-allied bloc focus on the latest targets (the successive and globally wars of aggression of this bloc involving hybrid/unconventional/irregular warfare progressing towards more significant stages of conflict against Iran, the DPRK, Venezuela, China, the Russian Federation, etc.)
– “The US is actively working to withdraw from military treaties with Russia creating a pre-war situation” (Pre-War Preparations: Withdrawal From Treaties, Southfront, 21/10/2018)
– “if data on Russia-NATO power balance at the Western direction is analyzed, as well as military activity build-up rate at our borders, scale of combat equipment deployment, if the grade of Russia’s demonization is estimated, one can say that preparation to a real war is taking place. [Such] acts are usually undertaken at the forefront of a war [and it is evident] the US is preparing for a [potential] nuclear conflict……” [Colonel General Leonid Ivashov, President of the International Centre of Geopolitical Analysis]
The staged build-up of missile architecture (that comprises offensive and defensive components) adjacent to the borders of Russia and China ensures a new missile crisis is only a matter of time. In the unwanted but increasingly probable situation of a direct kinetic stage of conflict between opposing nuclear armed powers, the Russian Federation and China will logically identify nations that host allied military architecture and are likely to quietly adjust strategic policies accordingly. The concept of ‘safe’ force projection platforms is after all an illusion in the context of current missile capabilities.