Artikel von Stanislav Lunev (englisch)

Geschrieben von another am 15. Januar 2001 03:09:33:

Sowjetüberläufer Stanislav Lunev schreibt für Newsmax.com offenbar regelmässige Beiträge über die Entwicklung in der vorübergehend zerfallenen Sowjetunion und Russlands Kriegsvorbereitungen.

Der neueste davon:

Russia’s Growing Military Preparations
Col. Stanislav Lunev
Thursday, Jan. 11, 2001
Russia’s intense military preparations became more evident last week with the shocking revelation that Moscow has shifted some of its nuclear weaponry to an area bordering on a NATO member’s territory.
According to the Washington Times, Moscow re-deployed its tactical, or battlefield, nuclear weapons to the so-called Kaliningrad enclave, which is strategically located between Poland and Lithuania.

Kaliningrad, once known as Kernigsberg, the former capital of Germany’s Eastern Prussia, is a Baltic Sea port and a major military base for Russian ground and naval forces in this area.

U.S. intelligence claims that Russia has moved short-range nuclear weapons to its base in the Baltics have caused a stir. Such an action conflicts with Moscow’s stated policy of keeping the Baltics free of nuclear weapons, though it would not appear to violate any legally binding arms control agreements.

Under informal agreements reached in 1991 by President George Bush and former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, Russia withdrew its tactical nuclear weapons from Eastern Europe and promised to place them in "central storage facilities."

According to the agreements, President Bush ordered the U.S. military to unilaterally reduce the U.S. arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons, which were removed from ships and from many overseas bases.

Soviet and Russian leaders announced in 1991 and 1992, respectively, that all tactical nuclear arms had been relocated to more secure areas in central Russia. The agreements, which were never formalized by treaty, did not specify the storage sites, but U.S. intelligence sources said that Kaliningrad, the headquarters of the Russian Baltic Fleet, became a depot for tactical nuclear weapons removed by the Russian navy from its ships.

Russian officials, of course, immediately denied that any nuclear arms are in the enclave. Russian President Vladimir Putin on Jan. 6 tried to dismiss reports that Russia has re-deployed nuclear weapons to Kaliningrad in violation of Kremlin's 1991-1992 promises. "It’s rubbish," he was quoted by Russia’s news agency as telling a German journalist.

It is no surprise that Russian officials deny their violations of previous international obligations, since until recently they denied reports about Russia’s violation of the 1972 ABM treaty, denied transferring nuclear, missiles and other weapons of mass destruction technology to North Korea, Iran, Iraq and other so-called rogue states. This is a traditional practice of former Soviet and present Russian leaders, who almost never admit their violations of promises.

But re-deployment of tactical nuclear weapons in Kaliningrad is an absolutely logical continuation of Putin’s policy, which is directed at restoration of Russia’s military power and its global influence and domination.

Deployment of tactical nukes in Kaliningrad would be aimed at increasing pressure on NATO to withdraw all short-range missiles and other nuclear arms from Europe. Moscow has long argued for their removal, but NATO continues to maintain nukes in Europe.

Also by the re-deploying nuclear weapons in the Baltic region, Russia would seek to prevent NATO from expanding by providing membership for Baltic states and other former Soviet-bloc countries, after Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic joined an alliance in 1999.

While Washington’s politicians are still talking about adjustments in the U.S. policy toward Russia, Moscow is already challenging America and its friends and allies. We know that a few weeks ago Russian fighters penetrated the air defense system of the U.S. aircraft carrier’s battle group in the international waters of the Sea of Japan, where they flew over the decks of the USS Kitty Hawk and support ships three times.

At the same time, Moscow deployed its strategic bombers to Russia’s Far East, whence they could reach U.S. territory quickly and easily. Before the New Year, a third set of new intercontinental strategic nuclear missiles was deployed at a base in southwest Russia as a part of Moscow’s efforts to make the rugged, very-hard-to-detect weapons the backbone of its strategic nuclear arsenal.

As Russian military officials have reported, a regiment at the Tatishchevo base in the Saratov oblast was equipped with the Topol-M (Russian for poplar tree) single-warhead missiles.

This missile can be launched from a mobile launcher, making it harder to detect and more likely to survive a first or retaliatory strike in a nuclear war. Moscow already had two regiments with 20 Topol-M missiles in service, 10 per regiment, deployed in 1998 and 1999.

The American military doesn’t have the same weapon system, because it cannot afford to develop such a costly missile complex.

At the same time, Moscow started testing a new nuclear-powered attack submarine. As the Russian press reported, those tests took place just four months after the tragic sinking of the Kursk nuclear submarine with 118 men on board.

A new submarine, Gepard (Russian for cheetah), is designed to carry both cruise missiles with nuclear warheads and different types of torpedoes. The Gepard will be Russia’s 13th submarine in the class NATO classifies as Akula (Russian for shark). The new nuclear sub is half the length of the 505-foot Kursk and would have a crew of only 67.

The list of Moscow military preparations could be continued for many pages. But there is no doubt that under Putin Russia’s military buildup has become much more aggressive than ever, including even the hottest periods of the Cold War. And until now it’s been under the nose of the Clinton administration, which is trying to promote Putin as a strong supporter of democracy and as a reliable partner to deal with internationally.

Moreover, the United States continues its financial support to the Kremlin, where American taxpayer money is being used to improve Moscow’s military machine. At the very same time Russia’s military preparations were taking place, the World Bank approved a $122.5 million loan to Moscow, which is officially earmarked for improvement of water supplies and waste treatment in medium-size cities.

Of course, it’s a very small amount when compared with $66 billion from previous credits and loans, and it would be wonderful if this loan were really to be used for the officially stated purposes. But as has happened many times before, Moscow could use American money for the development of Russia’s military-industrial complex and its military machine, which is already challenging the United States and her friends and allies.

This situation has to be stopped as soon as possible. If the U.S can afford to provide funds to the Kremlin regime, the American people need to be sure that these funds are being used for the good of the Russian people, to support democracy and a free-market economy and not to help build Russia’s military machine, whose growing combat capabilities could be used against the United States.

Quelle: http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/1/11/101921.shtml

Die anderen gibts hier: http://www.newsmax.com/pundits/Lunev.shtml

Eine kurze Biographie gibts da: http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=1999/6/15/124657

Antworten: