Totally Natural.

I can even name systems which are extremely "popular". 

Western countries are attempting to steal Moscow’s military technology and are targeting industry experts, Russian Industry and Trade Minister Denis Manturov said on Monday. During an interview with news agency RIA Novosti, Manturov was asked if there were instances of industrial espionage by “unfriendly countries” while Russia is ramping up defense production. “This has been the case at all times. It is occurring today and will occur tomorrow,” the minister said. “There is an active hunt not only for promising research, the data and parameters of our weapons, but also for our specialists who are especially valuable.” “It is not only the issue of espionage. I believe you’ve seen media reports that the FSB had prevented an attempt on the life of one of top managers of a defense company,” the minister said.

It is totally expected and they salivate at anything hypersonic, S-350, 400, 300V4 line of AD complexes, and a variety of munitions, not least for new generation of Krasnopol which is now in serial production and is already being used on the front-lines. And this is just a very short list, with standoff weaponry being another hot commodity. Per engineers? Too late, most of them are deeply rooted in Russia, make a very good living and, naturally, are both protected and tracked by FSB. The West, however, is more than welcome to take economists, political scientists and "experts" with degrees from most "prestigious" schools in Russia. I would start from VShE. While at it, there are also many "free thinkers" of other caliber and because most of them can hardly qualify for sweeping the streets of Russian cities, they will fit perfectly with Western academe. 

But seriously, the hunt for Russian military (and not only) technologies will not only continue, it will increase dramatically because in terms of military and some dual use technologies Russia is way ahead of the combined West and the gap grows. War does it to you--most of the time you leapfrog in combat technologies and many civilian applications which follow. In related news--attack on port Feodosia. All kinds of Ukie and Western outlets report that they "destroyed" a landing ship Novocherkassk. Could be true, but as was the case with THREE (in reality--zero) Su-34, let's wait and see what will Russian side say. Novocherkassk is an old pr. 775 landing ship built in Poland in 1987 and if it was there in repairs, possible that she sustained the damage. We'll see. As you may expect, the response will follow. Ukies are mourning the loss of Mariinka and, as is traditional now, needed some PR action to raise spirits. Wrong way to do it. Especially when two IRIS-M complexes have been taken out in the last 48 hours. 

ROFAR, Yet Again.

As TASS reports, RTI Group (give it a time for web-site to download--RTI may have incredible competencies in radio-electronics, their web-designers suck, however) tested the Radio-Photonics radar (Radio Optic Phased Array Radar) of new generation and it detects and tracks targets. This was confirmed by RTI's CEO Maxim Kuzyuk in his interview to TASS at Army-2019 exhibition. 

— Макетный образец и программное обеспечение работают, есть конкретный результат. Мы провели эксперименты, и радиолокатор уже строит траекторию движения летательных аппаратов. Следующая задача — это создание имитационно-моделирующего стенда и совершенствование аппаратной и программной части локатора, включая создание интегральных фотонных схем. 

Translation: the layout sample and software are working, we have a concrete result. We tested it, and radar already builds tracks (tracking) of flying aircraft. Next task is creation of the imitation-modelling stand and improvement of radar's hardware and software, including creation of integral photon chips.

About three years ago, famous, in certain teenage and fanboys circles, American "military expert", who was injured in Afghanistan while hanging out with US military there (that surely makes him an expert), and famous... comic creator, known as David Axe, "warned" not to "sweat" Russia's radar. Yes, he said so: Don’t Sweat Russia’s Stealth-Fighter-Detecting New Radar. Sunflower can detect, but it can’t target. 

Obviously, David Axe, while being "war correspondent"  failed to learn the basics of targeting, including multi-band radar and optronic data fusion and protocols and mathematical tools used to resolve uncertainties (Kalman Filter, anyone, networking?) and provide predictions, so, naturally, he, as usual, failed miserably while exhibiting his utter incompetence. But, David Axe is just one of many manifestations of those "correspondents", political "scientists" and "analysts" who continuously fail to retain any grasp on modern warfare which, in peer-to-peer framework, requires way more than drawing false parallels and symmetries from much simpler times trying to apply them to today's mind-boggling and paradigm-shifting Real Revolution in Military Affairs. Yes, my next book is precisely about it. Radio-Photonics is one such development out of many which, pardon me for pointing this out, condemned the whole American concept of the warfare to the dust bin of history. 

As I stated earlier, the process of "revelation" of new technologies and, with them, new operational concepts and force structure will continue but in less dramatic fashion than it was on March 1, 2018 during Vladimir Putin's address to Russia's Federal Assembly. This latest news about ROFAR are just another in the series of Russia demonstrating military technologies of the future. But most importantly--look at the photo of RTI's CEO Maxim Kuzyuk--he is young, 43 years old. Degree in applied Physics and Mathematics from legendary MFTI.

Did anyone notice a year or so ago Chief Designer of T-14 Armata tank and Armata platforms? Young, early 40s at best. As Putin himself pointed out--the group which developed SU-57--all youngsters, some in their late 20s--early 30s. They, not some specific technologies, are the future and real treasure. I am almost forced to quote Uncle Joe (Stalin): cadres decide everything(c). As per this beaten to death "Stealth"--in cultured companies who have at least some ideas about modern radar and optronic technologies, forget ROFAR, using this term soon will become the sign of a bad taste. I guess that explains why Turkey and India are not going to refuse their S-400s, as Pompeo learned it the hard (and rather humiliating) way in Delhi.

The United States is also lobbying India not to proceed with its purchase of S-400 surface-to-air missile systems from Russia. The missile deal and Iranian oil were both discussed during their meeting, Jaishankar and Pompeo said, but mentioned no resolution of either at the news conference. "On two of the biggest issues - Iran and Russia - the difference is deep," said analyst Deo, formerly a top Indian diplomat in the United States.

Well, Duh!

Some News For Tom Rogan.

Tom Rogan of Washington Examiner is a typical product of Western so called humanities "education" (that means no education or applicable skills), who, quite expectedly ended up as a "political journalist"--a euphemism for people who otherwise wouldn't be employable in any serious capacity in any serious field. He has some BS (yes, this abbreviation seems proper in this case) degree in War Studies--an eclectic mix of military-related non-operational and non-technological courses and as a result parading himself a complete fool and ignoramus. 

Tom Rogan is hurt, badly. He needs to vent his (negative) emotions by means of some pseudo-strategic and pseudo-technological psychobabble in his piece in Washington Examiner. He laments:

Russia retains growing capability in boutique war-fighting areas. That said, Russian President Vladimir Putin's newest missile system is designed to grab American attention far more than it is to advance Russia's nuclear destructive capability.I note this in light of Russia's apparently successful Avangard hypersonic weapons test on Wednesday. The Avangard is a hypersonic warhead re-entry vehicle that is designed to outpace and outmaneuver U.S. missile defense systems. Announcing that the Avangard will now be deployed with frontline units, Putin pledged that U.S. missile defense systems are now impotent. That's because the Avangard would supposedly allow nuclear warhead re-entry vehicles to escape any kind of U.S. interceptor vehicle. The extension of Putin's confidence is that Russia can now match or overmatch the U.S. in a full-scale nuclear conflict. 

A term "boutique" by Rogan is a very good indicator of Rogan's irritation, most likely with his own ignorance, because should  have Rogan had a real education in military, which includes studying a whole spectrum of extremely complex precise science and technological disciplines (many courses with Top Secret and above classifications) and the way those translate into tactics, operational art, strategy and doctrinal development, he would have known that hyper-sonic weapons far from being boutique are fast, and inevitably, becoming a mainstay of modern warfare and are specifically designed and employed to defeat legacy systems which 20+ years ago were declared, wrongly, a foundation of a Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA). 

There is some mentioning in Rogan's background of some study of "military history" and if he really studied it, however on a pop-culture level, he should have known the great Briton, when Great Britain was still a respected power, not a joke it is today,  Arnold Toynbee's dictum:

“In our human military history the analogue of the biological competition between the tiny soft-furred Mammal and the massive armored Reptile is the saga of the duel between David and Goliath; and if take this legendary Syriac combat as our starting point, we shall find the same drama acted and re-performed in a continuous series of matches between new fangled and old-fashioned military techniques.”

But judging by today's level of education of Western "elites" I wouldn't expect knowledge from them, including in the field of military history, which long ago turned in the West into a field of competing fairy tale narratives. Many people (yours truly included) warned about new emerging paradigm in weaponry for years with Avangard being just one of many of them capable to bypass any existing and perspective defenses thus dramatically altering both geopolitical and military balance globally. But, of course, those who dared to point out the passing of the age of aircraft-carriers, "Stealth" as a panacea, or of, in general, Western outdated view on the warfare were ignored, mocked and laughed at. Well, here we are today. But Rogan doesn't stop here, he continues to parade his complete detachment from military reality:

But Putin is only half right. While the Avangard is an impressive program that outmatches any hypersonic system in the U.S. military, Russian nuclear targeting, logistics, and strike capabilities remain inferior to America's (although the targeting element is improving). That's largely because Russian fleet ballistic missile submarines are too loud, Russian strategic bomber aircraft are too old, and Russian military professionalism is too unpredictable. In turn, the U.S. would likely be victorious in a nuclear war with Russia, even if the costs of that war to the U.S. civilian population would be utterly horrific.  

I don't know who Rogan talks to on such issues, but he obviously has no idea what targeting is and how it is provided. If he talks about, I assume, Circular Error Probable (CEP) of Russia's newest strategic weapons he should know that latest of them are very competitive; in fact latest missiles, such as RS-28 Sarmat, provide accuracy which is vastly superior to US main SLBM Trident II, it is 10 meters against 90 respectively. This is what called a full counter-force capability. But, of course, Rogan never heard about it. He obviously doesn't get another crucial fact that Russia solved issues of control (comm, correction, updates, target acquisition) for a whole host of hyper-sonic weapons, be it said strategic Avangard or 3M22 Zircon, or Kinzhal. This is a rather overwhelming proof of a great technological superiority in what Rogan defines as "nuclear targeting, logistics". But he doesn't stop here and continues to throw tantrum by simply inventing things--a defining feature of modern, still residing in a tender teenage phase, British and US "elites". 

Rogan goes for jugular and provides an astonishingly stupid bravado:

1. That's largely because Russian fleet ballistic missile submarines are too loud (c). Obviously it will be difficult to explain to our "expert" Rogan what is hydrology and how sound propagates depending on the  Diagram of the Vertical Propagation Speed of Sound in Water (in Russian it is VRSZ). This may have explained to Rogan how Soviet submarines did some really incredible things in 1970s in the times when it was universally agreed upon that they were inferior in terms of quieting to US subs. Well, it is 2018. But let us remind Mr.Rogan what Norman Polmar and Jurien Noot, both top notch naval analysts, thought about Soviet submarines in 1990s.

Polmar's and Noot's predictions panned out completely--the fleet of Russian strategic missile submarines be it good ol' Delta IVs, let alone Borey-class SSBNs are not only on par but superior to NATO SSBNs in terms of quieting. But it will take a really long time to explain to Tom Rogan some things related to operations of strategic missile submarines and the way they are protected. 

2. Russian military professionalism is too unpredictable.(c) Unlike Rogan who never served a day in any position where decisions have consequences for many people, I did, I also knew personally and was privileged to study in my naval academy under command of its superintendent Vice-Admiral Arkhipov, a man universally credited with preventing a nuclear war between USSR and the US. Sure, so much "unpredictable" (whatever that means) about Russian "professionalism", that it is Russia who is today responsible for keeping the world from sliding into the global war thanks to delusions and incompetence of Western elites who are on the same level of incompetence in military affairs as Rogan is. 

3. Discussion of a sheer idiocy of Rogan's statement on Russian strategic bombers is a waste of time. 

The rest of his piece is a butt-hurt lament and continuation of inventing bizarre things which are not even there, but the fact that this boy even decides to discuss American "victory" in the nuclear exchange with Russia is another, tangible, proof of a complete corruption and incompetence of Anglo-American media, who are responsible for fanning the flames of anti-Russian hysteria in the West, the likes which history simply has no record of, other than Nazi Germany dehumanizing Soviet people prior to operation Barbarossa unfolding in June of 1941. But I am sure they taught this in Rogan's "military history" classes, together with theory of operations, modern sensors, operational art and physical and mathematical principles on which modern weapons operate.  But, seriously, Tom Rogan, being out of his depth completely, should really find himself a more appropriate for his level employment in some local newspaper editing obituaries and For Sale section. Or, maybe dedicate himself to a career of Traffic Accidents lawyer, after all, he did obtain degree in law--I think he should try practice it and leave military and geopolitical analysis to real professionals. 

Moscow-Beijing "Axis".

I seldom refer anyone to Russia Insider but the material they presented about possible Russo-Chinese (military) alliance is thought-provoking and is worthy of attention.  The review of Chinese attitudes towards such an alliance is interesting and "pro" arguments do make sense. But these are "con" arguments which are especially interesting and require elaborations, especially against the background of recent events, especially around North Korea--a completely contrived international crisis which carries a threat of a major escalation. 

It becomes increasingly clear that Donald Trump decided, both under "deep state" (neocon) pressure and out of own volition and his business acumen, to approach, wrongly, international relations as a bully and the bullying is to be done against China. Bullying Moscow is useless because Moscow can bully back, as recent Rex Tillerson's visit to Moscow demonstrated. As I stated not for once, Russia is not a good place for bullying since Russians saw bullies who (adjusted for the time period) would make US look like amateurs. We all know where those bullies ended. China, though, is a totally different case. Unlike Russians, who are extremely well acquainted with the peculiarities of being a superpower, China is only starting her ascent to this position and has no relevant experience with handling herself as a superpower. Nowhere it manifests itself more than in a military field. And here is a rather candid admission by Chinese:

A theme discussed widely in the paper is the possibility that the alliance would not be viewed as a defensive reaction, but rather as an offensive [具备一定的攻击性] and aggressive step. On the one hand, the author identifies a classic “entrapment” argument against alliances, noting that China could get pulled into unnecessary military conflicts. On the other hand, the author notes that Russia hardly requires the assistance of Chinese military forces.

Moreover, the point is made repeatedly in the article that China’s conversion of economic power into military is a relatively slow process [经济实力向军事实力转化的速度相对更慢] resulting in a lag, even as its economic ascendance is more obvious.

Pay attention to what is highlighted in yellow. While I constantly use Correlli Barnett's definition of the national power which states that military might alone can not be used as a criteria for assessment of nation's power, there is no denial either of the fact that military might is one of the pillars of that power. Ability to convert economic power into military might, which in today's insane chaotic world is a must, is one of the major criteria which makes one a superpower. China does fail in this regard. While Chinese economic growth and her absolute size of economy are truly impressive, once viewed from the position of military-industrial complex the picture becomes much less optimistic. 

As recent deliveries by Russia of advanced "russified" SU-35  fighter jets and S-400 air defense complexes to China demonstrate--competing with Russia or US in advanced military capabilities is not easy, to put it mildly. China is by no means a military pushover but, for a number of political and ideological domestic reasons in the US, Chinese military capabilities were greatly overstated.  This was done in support of the "pivot" to Asia where China is viewed by the US as a strategic threat. Yes, China benefited tremendously from American de-industrialization and produces a bulk of things ranging from everyday consumer goods to vast numbers of ships, but it is modern warfare where China is still in its infancy. Even a brief look at China's aerospace industry allows to immediately see a difference: after so many years China is still not capable to produce world-class jet engine, be it civilian, let alone military. China's COMAC C919 civilian jet will still be powered by GE-Snecma JV engine CFM International LEAP 1C--this is US-French engine. This is immediately where the enclosed technological cycle breaks down. We all know how "principled' "West" can be in shutting down the access to high end technology. Unlike Russia, who produces a whole line of good civilian engines ranging from reliable PS-90 to upcoming PD-14. Even Sukhoi Super Jet -100 flies on JV engines between Snecma and Saturn, which is a legend in jet engine design. China simply has no competitive engine. In military aviation it is even worse and there is no real aviation without full proof domestic engine production, by that I mean not just some engines, but modern cutting edge ones. 

The same picture is across the board in Chinese military. While building a large surface fleet (a correct decision) China lags generation or even two in modern nuclear submarines' design. Chinese nuclear subs are notoriously noisy and are not a competitor to a world-class US Navy's submarine force, which, in addition to qualitative edge, is simply larger. Most of the Chinese air defense are knock-offs of venerable Russian S-300s of early 1990s. So, once one makes even a brief review of China's capabilities the conclusion is inevitable: while not a second rate military by any means (and improving) China is still not in the same league technologically as Russia or US, despite both Russia's and US' large issues with force structure. But above all, China's military thought and organization have not been tested in real combat, even if against inferior opponent. US has an edge over China here, and a serious one, while Russia's military history and military school simply dwarfs that of China. This factor alone may account for at least a half of military might measure. Chinese learn, there is no doubt about it but are they ready to stare Donald Trump and his brass down? I doubt it at this point but we'll see soon enough. 

If the United States makes China look as if she backs off in the case of North Korea, this will be viewed as a humiliation in the nation which saw a lot of it in her 19th and 20th Centuries' history. This also may move China closer militarily to Russia and allow her become potentially a much larger recipient of Russian military technology and there are, certainly, things in Russian arsenal China really wants to get her hands on--be it latest missile technologies or even repeating India's experience with leasing one (or two) Russian SSNs. China will need them if she blinks today. If, however, China will be able to not yield to US military blackmail....well, who knows. It is a very fluid situation as of now and we may only hope that Donald Trump and his advisers will not run themselves into the trap from which they will not be able to escape without losing face completely and thus opening the possibility for a major conflict which will go out of control.      

     

     

Run To The Hills, The US Military Is Doomed. No, Wait....

Ah, the panic, oh, the suffering of the armies of flag-waving uber-"patriotic" fanboys. US Military is in "ruins" and evil Russkies are about to encircle Chicago and bomb the hell out of Detroit, which, at this point, will make no difference for Detroit whatsoever. That is what armchair "strategists" take from Lt. Colonel (Ret.) Daniel L.Davis' piece in The National Interest:

The Sobering Truth About the Pentagon’s Acquisition Failures 

Before those who read this piece and are about to commit seppuku or go apoplectic, I would suggest--do not leave this world as of yet. And here is the reason, or, rather reasons.

1. US Armed Forces still remain the most potent force in the world, especially US Navy. 

2. American soldiers and sailors are among the best in the world. 

3. Lt. Colonel Davies said NOTHING new what has not been known to anyone with even the modicum of analytical ability and knowledge of modern (20th-21st Centuries) military history. In fact, this phenomenon, which Lt.Colonel Davis refers to, is endemic in the American system. And I don't mean just the process of acquisition and procurement of the weapons. I also mean US media-military-industrial complex which acts totally within Hollywood paradigm of Dream Factory or, in layman's lingo--BS. Granted, that it takes sometimes Paul Verhoeven's tongue in cheek genius to bring a piece of reality into the contemporary la-la military toys' world of media universe. 

    

And here I am forced, yet again, to deviate from writing Military Power and write something which was, otherwise, planned for that series of the posts. Let's, for starters, give definition to all those terms: Hyperpower, Superpower etc.

"The truth is, the United States is nowhere near as powerful and dominant as many believe."(c)   

If we will look in the history of the term "Superpower" we may see how it came to be defined as it is defined in Wiki:

Superpower is a word used to describe a state with a dominant position in international relations and which is characterised by its unparalleled ability to exert influence or project power on a global scale. This is done through the combined-means of technological, cultural, military and economic strength, as well as diplomatic and soft power influence. Traditionally, superpowers are preeminent among the great powers (e.g., as the United States is today).        

Superpower

Is the United States a superpower? Absolutely! There is no even discussion about that, what discussion MUST be about is how much "super" is in this "superpower", what the doughnut, so to speak, is filled with. That MUST be the focus of a discussion. Since this blog is driven mostly by military-political and geopolitical issues, let's start with....yes, military power. A Hard Power, so to speak, as defined by late Samuel Huntington. 

Here, Davies makes (almost) a correct observation. 

"In the aftermath of Operation Desert Storm in 1991, there was great celebration in America that the crushing military victory over Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, “kicked the Vietnam syndrome once and for all” and demonstrated the United States was now the world’s sole military superpower. That was no empty bluster. Even Beijing and Moscow were impressed and openly lamented they were militarily inferior. Americans across the board were optimistic and proud. However justified that pride might have been at the time, it quickly mutated into distasteful arrogance. Now, it is an outright danger to the nation."

Why almost? Here is why. This statement proceeds from ignoring the state of development of the Soviet Armed Forces circa 1990 and here we have a problem. The problem is in what, by that time, Gorabachov and his "team" represented both metaphysically and in terms of their "activity". Long since discredited both at home and abroad, and thrown into the dust bin of history, this "statesman", due both to his incompetence and cowardice, followed a path of destruction which resulted in the geopolitical shock of the millennium. While US side tends to emphasize, for obvious reasons, as Lt.Colonel Davis does, that Moscow was impressed (I don't know how China even factored in here--it wasn't even a first rate military power then), the term "Moscow" must be explained. And here what was happening then:

1. Moscow by 1991 was not a homogeneous (or monolith) entity. The de-sovietization was in a full swing and the first and  strategic goal was to ultimately discredit Soviet Armed Forces as one of the main pillars of the Soviet State. This absolutely doesn't mean that Soviet Armed Forces didn't have issues--they did and some of those were huge and required serious reforms. But nobody in Soviet military circles, who had a minimum of professional common sense, had any illusions about staying power of Saddam's Army. The military reputation of Arab "allies" in the Soviet Union was approaching zero. So, the question was not if Saddam could  resist coalition, which comfortably pre-deployed without any interference from Iraq, but how fast will it collapse. It was the speed with which Iraq was defeated that impressed "Moscow". That was a military anomaly. And so it remains even today. Traditional Arab militaries' utter tactical and operational incompetence, inadequacy in operating even the "monkey models" of weapons were legendary and very few in the Soviet Armed Forces had any illusions.  

2.  While trailing in some issues related to communications and computers behind US military, Soviet Armed Forces by 1980s were fast closing the gap, for some it was too fast. Massive "digitizing" started as early as mid-1970s. By 1980s the gap was narrowing very fast and was becoming extremely narrow. It was precisely then, in 1980-1982, when MiG-29s and SU-27s started to be procured in large numbers for Soviet Air Force. Arguably the best strategic bomber of generation, TU-160 Blackjack, went into the production. Other, new and capable, weapon systems were being deployed, including first rate ECM and ECCM capabilities. Computerization was in a full swing. Nowhere this state of the affairs manifested itself more than in the Soviet Navy. Introduction of the submarine launched S10 Granat (SS-N-21 'Sampson' GRAU:3M10) cruise missiles, with the range of 3000 kilometers, in 1986 was one of such many developments. By mid-1980s Soviet Navy was deploying one of the best submarine force in the world and led some of the most advanced research in cutting edge technologies. In the army, the procurement of very advanced T-90 tanks was expected in early 1990s.  Here is some CIA report on one of many Soviet Precision Guided Munitions developments:

Soviet Artillery PGMs 

So, to put it mildly, talks of Soviet military "inferiority" were greatly exaggerated. But, most importantly, all these military technologies and ability to conduct operations by modern Russia, which became both the subject of admiration and jealousy (and hatred) in the West lately are ALL, without any exception, results of Soviet military technological and operational development of 1970s and 1980s. In the mayhem of Perestroika, which unleashed massive destructive forces in USSR and, eventually, resulted in the collapse of the country, the fact of the Soviet Armed Forces undergoing deep modernization, was forgotten or grossly misinterpreted by the self-proclaimed Cold War "victors" in their own favor against the background of the victory over utterly incompetent, third rate, however large, Arab army. The event almost repeated itself on 08-08-08, during Russian-Georgian War, when it took elements of Russia's 58th Army roughly 60 hours to demolish Georgian Armed Forces (trained and partially equipped by the "West" and Israel) and to open the road to Tbilisi and, eventually, to a partition of Georgia. A lot of rumors and criticism ensued but, with all Russian shortcomings, both real and many others very much fabricated, the result was pretty impressive. Nobody, however, celebrated anything in Russia, Russian Armed Forces in general were subjected to great domestic criticism for not doing the job even faster and more efficiently. Nobody also talked about overcoming Afghan "syndrome", if one ever existed to begin with. Nobody also filled the streets of Russian cities in jubilation when perpetrator of many atrocities terrorist Shamil Basayev was liquidated. The reason for these very much tame attitudes was very simple--most Russians did not and do not consider Georgia a serious military power. They also view Chechnya wars as tragic necessity.

Being "impressed", which did take place, and resigning as the prime military power are two very different things. It took Yeltsin and his coterie of criminals, overt and covert, who put in place suicidal economic and foreign policies which effectively demolished the remnants of the Soviet Armed Forces without creating new Russian ones. That came to tragic "fruition" during First Chechen War, when badly trained, supplied and constantly betrayed at the top political echelons of Russia, Russian Army still managed to take Grozny, while paying a steep price. However, even during those grim times, Russia remained a nuclear power which was still unassailable by anyone, including "sole military superpower" which came to all the wrong conclusions out of its triumph in Iraq. Self-proclaimed "victors" in the Cold War still never conquered Russia, never marched at the Red Square in parade of the victors (except on 9th May 2010 as dear guests and WW II Allies), never fought Russia, yet, for some inconceivable reasons equated, even weakened and humiliated, Russia to Iraq. A massive, and very dangerous, misjudgement, amplified greatly by triumphalist and incompetent US media, on part of US military and policy makers occurred.  

The issue in early 1990s was not that the volume of Russian arms deliveries collapsed, for obvious reasons, the issue was that wrong conclusions were made on the account of this collapse. Evidently many, not all, Western analysts based on their, often wrong, perceptions of Russia's realities in 1990s, concluded that American conventional superiority was a given and that Russia was a done deal. What they didn't see was an enormous Soviet scientific and industrial potential behind Russian military development. True, Russia's military-industrial complex was left to fight for its survival alone. But by 1994 Russia opened new export markets, such as UAE or Malaysia, or even South Korea. Weapons which went there were effectively Soviet weapons and those should have given a very serious shock to the Desert Storm triumphalists. That is when the issue of, in the words of Lt.Colonel Davies' "the truth is, the United States is nowhere near as powerful and dominant as many believe", should have taken a center stage at US doctrinal and political discussion. But this didn't happen and having a human and political buffoon in Kremlin seemed to define West's perception and vision of Russia. 

The fact that even in 1990s Russia was selling abroad some of the most advanced weapon systems which were on par, and, sometimes, better than the best US could offer not only abroad but for itself, generally, went missing on many people. Post-Desert Storm triumphalism reigned supreme both in media and in political establishment. The obvious fact that fighting non-existent Iraqi Air Force, which was nothing more than hodge-podge collection of basic aircraft, the core of which were 236 Mig-21s, "monkey versions" of 1950s design jets, was not the same as fighting trained and determined Air Force which operated MiG-29s, SU-27 and monster of an interceptor MiG-31s also went missing on many. Iraq's "Integrated Air Defense", a favorite cliche by US media, was nothing more than a collection of outdated, easily suppressed, obsolete missile systems. All that, and much more, was lost on people who declared the "end of history",  the unfolding of "New World Order" and other cliches for the consumption of a jubilant public. The very notion that what Russia was selling on the global weapons' market place being as good, if not better, than what US had to offer seemed blasphemous for some. The "American Way Of War" was pronounced to be the only way and US military technology to be the best and that was it. 

Well, many people in US, actually, thought otherwise. Especially those who bothered to at least check on state of Russia's military once in a while and who had real military experience. It was Colonel Douglas Macgregor's Breaking The Phalanx, which came out in 1996 which rang some bells. There were others, such as, later in mid-2000s, Professor Roger Thompson with his, shocking for some, Lessons Not Learned.
    
                   

 

But no matter how many, or, rather, few professionals were trying to address some serious doctrinal, operational and technological issues, the post-Desert Storm delusion endured and resulted:

1. In horrendous strategic miscalculations which led to Iraq catastrophe, among many others;
2. A complete loss of situational awareness on the account of emerging or "returning" superpowers, who, like Russia were able not only to narrow or even close military-technological capability gaps but to come up with the lead in some crucial areas. 

All it took for the shit to hit the fan in US was a salvo of, actually, very mature Kalibr complex from small missile ships of Russian Caspian Flotilla at the terrorist targets in Syria, plus demonstration by the "rusty" elements of Russian Air-Space Forces an operational tempo and  the range of Precision Guided Munitions which US thought only its forces had. The question here is not in the fact of US mainstream media having an aneurysm from this fact or, the fact that most of US political establishment resides in geopolitical la-la land, or, if one may, parallel universe, no. The question here is that it was happening all along, in the open, since mid-1990s not only Russia demonstrated its military development openly, in fact, Russian Military Industrial Complex aggressively promoted its technologies and tactical and operational concepts which came with those at the international weapons markets, it was done in the best marketing way possible. What, didn't US military know that Kalibr and Onyx missile complexes were in production since early 2000s? Didn't they know that super-maneuverability in aircraft development was becoming a mainstay and that new development radar technologies (yes, pioneered by Russia) were making stealth even more vulnerable? I don't doubt for a second that US military was aware of that. But maybe, just maybe something wrong is not with Russia but with this whole US leviathan military-industrial-media complex. This monster thought that the future of war is still in blowing badly trained Arab pilots in their badly maintained obsolete aircraft from the sky, or fighting in the ECM (ECCM) free environments, or with the opposition which never had any stand-off weapons. Well, should they have studied real Russian/Soviet military history, they should have known better. 

Now, we all face a hysteria in US media, when it became obvious that military capability gap not only closed or narrowed, but some non-US weapons, such as game-changer Zirkon hyper-sonic missiles to be procured, together with revolutionary Armata platforms or with S-500 coming online soon are simply beyond current US technological capability. Yes, this is not Arab military, it is from the country which smashed Wehrmacht at the peak of its might. But I will elaborate more on that back in my Military Power series. As for now, US still remains a military superpower and will remain one for a long time but it will be more and more constrained by emerging advanced military technologies and operational concepts which will require US "response" on such a financial scale that F-35 or LCS will look like a pocket change and how US will be able to afford it--it is not for fainthearted to understand.