Usual talking points, but this one is extremely important: "...our American partners have been given our proposals on the development of a new "security equation."
1/
"It takes into account all the factors affecting strategic stability. At the same time, special attention is paid to the instruments capable of delivering the so-called "first strike", which, in our opinion, is unacceptable in principle."
2/
And here's another interesting quote: Putin mentions 'Basic principles' signed in June, but than simplifies all the conditions to, basically, 'sole purpose': "we can use nukes, but only in response to a nuclear attack against our country".
🤔
Today, 11.11, the topic of Putin's speech at the 'military meeting' would be new battle management systems, with empashis on nuclear command and control. Afterwards there will be separate meetings with military brass.
- Mobile and stationary command posts substantially modernized; their information support, monitoring, analysis capabilities increased, as well as interference resistance
- all command posts provide real-time data acuisition, assessment and informed decision-making
- future NC3 should be modern, simple and reliable; gradually and timely upgraded based on best domestic technologies and engineering
Russian NC3 priorities:
- increase survivability
- continuously test NC3 effectiveness through regular and snap exercises
- continue the development of future NC3 systems
Well, I can't remember a case when such public attention by the highest military-political leadership was given to the NC3.
"A dual-use Common Hypersonic Glide Body would close gaps in U.S. theater deterrence capabilities and offer scalable deployment options to assure allies."
"It would give the United States a tool for assured delivery of conventional and low-yield warheads that hedges against erosion of U.S. advantages in low-observable technology"
Second #MissileDialogueInitiative by @IISS_org and @AuswaertigesAmt was as good as one can get via Zoom. Lots of frank discussions. One of the interesting things: there are different perspectives on what is a bigger/more important challenge - land or sea/air systems.
1/
It is a challenge, and no definite answer: everyone has their own threat perceptions and priorities.
Here's an example:
A relies on land, B relies on air/sea;
B has better, faster, more precise flying and floating things; in greater numbers;
A starts to...
2/
...increase all these characteristics for their rolling things+their survivability;
suddently B realizes that A can hit their flying and floating things and their infrastructure with their rollers, and gets nervous.
SCO-CIS-CSTO def chiefs joint communique (h/t @CSTO_ODKB website): odkb-csto.org/documents/docu…
- acknowledge growing number of hotspots around the world, incl. based on historical disagreements, that might lead to escalation; attention, coordination and cooperation is needed.
- regret INF Treaty termination due to US withdrawal
- call for restraint in the missile domain
- call for New START extension
- note the need for constructive dialogue to restore confidence, prevent arms race, assure strategic stability, prevent dangerous military activity
2/
Fight against terrorism and related extrimism, as well as other regional security challenges - a priority
Security cooperation - basic condition for the development of SCO, CIS and CSTO
Agreed to deepen confidence and cooperation based on bilateral and multilateral formats
3/
So, it indeed happened. Could not find a join communique, but there are several points already released (among other things):
- CIS JADS development financing for 2022 is agreed
- Joint counter-terrorism operations training planned within #Kavkaz2020 (no details yet)
- Decided to make General Staff Military Academy (RU) a main organization in charge of operational-strategic training for the CIS officers-
- Agreed that destruction of arms contol, incl. nuclear, is "unacceptable".
2/2