I am sure, I am 146% positive that this guy and his team in Moscow are in this position:
Because once your balls are in this thing (Europe's virtual balls):
It is really difficult (almost impossible) to extricate your extremity from this, when the grip, by the virtue of geography, history, resources and this proverbial COFM, is so tight that you are left with two options only: get into scrambled eggs business or submit. The dynamics (huge growth) or Russian LNG sales to EU tell us about Europe's predicament. But then again, those could be last vestiges of the common sense among people who cannot repeat their, once a century event--invade Russia and get destroyed. This time Russians may not be so magnanimous and will turn Europe into the parking lot. Very many Russians want to end this once and for all. I don't blame them.
... are good only at fighting civilians. Meanwhile, Mr. Lavrov pours some very cold water over Witkoff's hopes and the details about discussion of larger NATO issue between Russia and the US emerge. Root causes, again. As correctly was noted--Russia wants peace, Trump wants ceasefire. Also, the level of coping with a humiliating failure of the NATO armor in 404 reaches a fever pitch--Russian BMP-3 almost died from a Homeric laughter after being compared to IFV Bradly. ATGM Kornet is scratching its ... whatever they can scratch in a complete bewilderment from this coping pseudo-military BS by some US journo.
It would have been absolutely naive to think that Trump would scare China, China can cause the US a tremendous economic pain. But here is the thing--commercial airspace is where China is very vulnerable and depends very much on the West's technology. It is true--Chinese airlines prefer Airbus planes but as I pointed many times--look at what is considered nominally "Chinese" C919:
Immediately, the issue of LEAP (France-US) engines maybe brought to bear by the US and that can create a serious obstacle for C919 which IS needed considering a gigantic scale of Chinese air travel market. If you think, however, that everything is in the clear with Airbus, well ... What if I tell you that even A320 NEO flies on either LEAP or Pratt and Whitney engines--all could be immediately sanctioned even for Airbus. So, this one is not easily resolved. But China had no other option but to try hit the US via Boeing. So, we have to wait and see where it all goes, because this one is not about consumer goods--it is about strategic industry, maybe top 2-3 which defines a true superpowerdom.
But by the looks of it and by the yet another mess in your national security team still dominated by neocons and warmongers, you learned absolutely nothing in terms of foreign policy the first time around. Now, you are issuing risible "deadlines" being the head of a loser in this war and you are on your way of making this war yours.
Meanwhile, one of the greatest statesmen of our time responds:
You see, reality is a bitch and the only thing being discussed today, once all of the layers of diplomatic pigeon speak, pathos, protocols and PR are peeled off, is how much Moscow is willing to save whatever remains of the American face in this conflict which the US lost by a mile.
We live in the now, and no matter how we convulse--it is the COFM (Correlation of Forces and Means) which defines global dynamics. We better learn to live with this. Modern world is nothing but an entangled web of differential equations and probabilities thrown at us and we better grasp its complexity.
... if you follow a direct conversion of currencies. I know, I know, but still. In this case R 8.4 trillion issued for the Russian Navy to the end of this decade converts roughly to $100 billion. Take a look at this, as an example from 2016.
Project 11356 frigate at the signing of the acceptance documents came out at the prices of 2010-11 with R to $ rate then at 30 to 1 ...
... at roughly (let's round it up) R 14, 000, 000, 000 which when divided by 30 gives you a rough price of about $ 467, 000, 000 which is reasonable (more than reasonable) for the frigate of this class with the state-of-the-art AD complex and 3C14 VLS capable of launching all modern Russian cruise missiles, including 3M22 Zircon. Most likely the actual price for this type is somewhere around $400,000,000 and this is for the ship whose strike power in Surface Warfare makes ANY surface combatant in frigate class rather underwhelming.
Now comes the issue of the pr.885M SSGN of Yasen class (all of which are capable of launching hypersonic 3M22 Zircon) and here we have the price range of R 47,000,000,000, but again in prices of 2011-2014, give and take (in Russian).
To not complicate matters, let's assume that the newest (floated out a few days ago) Perm SSGN is around $1 billion give and take. For comparison, latest Virginia-class SSN-800 USS Arkansas (its latest class's Block) will cost already in excess of $4 billion. So, we are beginning to see this "magical" ratio of 1 to 4 or 6 whenever comparing Russian and American technology. Let's omit here venturing into qualitative characteristics.
Now, let's take a look at pr. 22350M ("improved" Gorshkov-class). For some reason WiKi gives the actual cost of the first hull of the class as $250 million. It is unrealistic, especially for the ship class armed with extremely advanced AD suite (Poliment-Redut) and being a carrier of all types of weapons, including Zircon. The likely cost of it is around $500 million, with much larger "Super" Gorshkov cost being around, give and take, $700 to 800 million. Comparison with the US Navy's mainstay Arleigh Burke-class DDGs (Flight III DDG-51) is also rather startling because the cost of a single hull will cost the US Navy in excess of $2.5 billion. Her we make qualitative comparison--DDG-51 is no competitor with ANY (earlier or "super" version) of Gorshkov-class in Surface Warfare. Simple as that, in ship-to-ship engagement DDG-51 will not know what struck it and will not be able defend against the salvo of super-sonic 1,000-kilometer range P-800 Onyx or 1,500-kilometer range hypersonic 3M22 Zircon. Here we arrive to the main point, not only Russian ships are much less expensive than any US main sub and surface combatant, but they are simply much better armed, while being highly competitive in terms of sensor and signal processing suites. In other words--Russian Navy gets much-much more bang for a proverbial buck.
Which brings us to a very rough shopping list through 2030-2032. The white elephant or proverbial 800-pound gorilla. Will Russian Navy get new aircraft carrier(s). No doubt, Admiral Kuznetsov which is now a completely new ship in propulsion, sensors and air wing, will return to the fleet probably this year. Russians are not in a hurry; they just want to do it right. But the question is--what about new ones? Something tells me that Russia may consider couple of the new carriers and those will be nothing like what combined West operates. Each of them will likely run into the $5 to 6 billion range, including proper basing, and that gets us immediately over $12 billion in costs: 100-12 = $88 billion. Still, a lot of dough left. And that is when it all becomes interesting.
Russian Navy plans to procure first Husky (Laika) class subs sometime after 2030. We can only guess what those subs will be, but by the time Russian Navy will be ready to procure the first one, it will have continuation of the pr. 885M SSGNs and, highly likely, yet another "improved" Yasen-class, call it "super" Yasen if you wish and the fleet of these subs will be much larger than officially adopted run of 12 contracted hulls. Maybe 20? Take additional 8, which gives you roughly $8 billion and that gets us: 88-8=$80 billion. Still, a lot of dough. Laika (Husky) class is this unknown which may modify SSGNs construction. But no worries, Lada-class SSKs with AIP are already coming online and they are needed despite improved Kilo's (pr. 636) entering the fleet at a good pace. How many Ladas will be there? Again, the plan is for 12 but likely more. The guess for Lada's price is around $300-400 million.
Per Gorshkovs, the only thing I can say is--many. Especially 64 cell "super" Gorshkov and, eventually, turning into DDG territory. But a rough estimate for 10 "super' Gorshkovs--$8 billion, and don't torture me with all those "Lider" class DDGs--I don't know. And then we enter the territory of Poseidons, underwater drones, newest weapon systems (new hypersonics, new SLBMs et al), additional AD for naval bases, possibly new carrier combat aircraft, complete update of ASW/Patrol aviation and financing of the new R&D among many other things. Mind you, these $100 billion DO NOT include salaries and benefits, those are covered by other programs. But one thing is clear--it is a dramatic boost for Russian Navy which already shapes itself as a mighty alternative to carrier-centric navies of the past and we may only guess how it will look like even 5 years down the road.
In conclusion, again--Perm is NOT the first sub capable of launching 3M22 Zircon. All previous Yasens can also do that, but Perm is the first purposely built for using those hypersonic missiles, even all 32 of them))
... is possible only with victors--combined West is a loser in the war. Keith Kellogg's wet dreams about dividing 404 are directly from the WW II and Yalta 1.0 in which the US and GB were VICTORS. But then again--Kellogg is old, neocon and, most importantly, he is an American general which makes him not fit for any kind of real war activities. I make an excurse into wonderful London War Diaries of Mollie Panter-Downes to contrast attitudes in WW II and today. Recall famous Truman's inhuman remark: “If we see that Germany is winning, we ought to help Russia and if Russia is winning, we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible, although I don't want to see Hitler victorious under any circumstances.” This is how Anglo-Saxon "elites" think. And these are almost exactly the words of Minister Colonel Moore-Brabazon--it created a shitstorm among regular hard working and hard fighting British folks in 1941.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
