Russian Military Analyst Goltz: 'The Russian Bosses Are Raising The Stakes In The Deterrence Game, Hoping To Bring Washington To The Negotiation Table'

On February 23, 2017, the well-respected Russian military analyst Aleksandr Goltz published an article in the Russian independent media outlet Ej.ru, titled "Let's Just Hope They Don't Start A War."[1] According to Goltz, Russia needs to "scare" Washington with something other than "nuclear deterrence." Goltz wrote that under the Obama presidency, Moscow got used to the fact that "any hint at raising the stakes in the nuclear standoff will resolve the conflict in its favor." However, the new U.S. President Donald Trump has demonstrated that "the intricacies of the deterrence theory are of no interest to him." For this reason, with the approach the February 23, 2017 Defender of the Fatherland Day, the Russian military chiefs began speaking in unison about the possibilities of "non-nuclear deterrence." Goltz wrote: "The Russian Army's chief problem today is the fact that, in the Kremlin's opinion, it is the main foreign policy tool in the hands of the Russian leaders… Now, the Russian bosses are raising the stakes in the 'deterrence' game, hoping to bring Washington to the negotiation table. In this situation, a small victorious display of muscle somewhere on the periphery may become necessary." Goltz voiced his hope that this military policy will not induce Russia to start another "small war", as it did in Syria, since small wars could develop into something bigger than originally planned.

Below are excerpts from Goltz's article:

Aleksandr Goltz (Source: (Youtube.com)

'According To The Sociologists, The People Are Experiencing Permanent Patriotic Ecstasy'

"Our Armed Forces are celebrating their 99^th anniversary (according to the Soviet chronology, that currently [enjoys] fervent Kremlin approval) accompanied by the deafeningly loud thunder of victory. Somewhere far away, far away in distant Syria, Aleppo has been captured, and very soon the result of our military successes will ensure comrade Assad Jr. long sojourn in power. The (officially confirmed) death of about three dozen soldiers cannot, of course, be compared to these wonderful geopolitical achievements by the Kremlin in the Middle East. After all, if we are talking about the fallen heroes, it was their job to defend their homeland (which is something we'll be told many times from our TV screens by Vasily Lanovoi [a popular actor – the phrase refers to a line from a popular movie about army officers]. Even if they so it at a very distant frontier, as defined by V. V. Putin.

"It is not enough that the Russian army is precision bombing Syrian terrorists. It is also ever increasingly deploying new units in the 'freely united' Crimea (not without the help of very polite and very green men).  During the reporting period, anti-aircraft defenses were set up there that will secure Sochi from the American missiles, which, according to the Russian General Staff's invention, threaten our core values. Additionally, four divisions and a tank army have been deployed in the west of the country. We can only guess how the General Staff managed all that, taking into account that our armed forces have increased in size by only 10 thousand men –representing the size of one, not four divisions.

"According to the sociologists, the subordinate people are experiencing permanent patriotic ecstasy from all this and are simply chafing with desire to serve their Fatherland (what remains a puzzle, though, is why, for two years already, nobody has been able to carry out the Supreme Commander-in-Chief's strict order to increase the overall numerical strength of our armed forces up to one million). Stunned by the thunder of victory, Russian bosses compete with each other on who could humiliate 'the Yanks' in the coolest way. The Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin promises that Russian missiles will 'tear apart' the American ABM system. Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu first reprimanded his American colleague James Mattis for his promise to talk with Moscow 'from a position of strength'. And then he had a field day attacking the British Defense Secretary Michael Fallon, who, according to the mass media, had recommended 'the bear' 'not to stick his paws' into Libya. Shoigu immediately defended the bear's ambitions: 'While we're on the animal topic… What do they have on their coat of arms? A lion, I guess. There is an old saying: every lion is a cat, but not every cat is a lion. Everyone should mind their own business. And we do not think that there is a grown in their zoo that can tell a bear what to do'.

 

Russian President Vladimir Putin attended a gala concert marking Defender of the Fatherland Day. (Source: Kremlin.ru)

'I'd Like To Wish All Of Us… That Our Leaders Will Decide Not To Start Another Small War As A Means Of Solving Their Problems'

"Needless to say that in anticipation of the holiday, the bosses have reported on their great successes in the military art. Note that they, as always, don't even attempt to coordinate their lies. Thus, General Vladimir Shamanov, Chairman of the Duma Defense Committee, reports: 'We confidently expect to increase the equipment of strategic nuclear forces with modern models by up to 72% and more by 2021, which will ensure the ability to maintain our nuclear deterrence potential at an adequate level'. On the same day, the Defense Minister, after pulling the 'British lion' by his whiskers, informed us of his intention to 'increase the equipping of the strategic nuclear forces with modern weaponry by up to 90% until the close of 2020'.

"Still, Moscow's nuclear power is not the only thing to scare the insidious West with. The bosses, one after another (obviously after coordinating it in advance – something they failed to do regarding the modernization of nuclear arsenals), have reported that in the near future, Moscow will be able to exercise deterrence with the aid of certain 'strategic non-nuclear forces.' We can only guess what exactly is meant by this.

"Russian views have undergone a rapid transformation in only three years. In the summer of 2013, the Kremlin indignantly rejected the offer of the then US president concerning further (beyond the limits of the START treaty) nuclear disarmament. The underhanded Americans, as Dmitry Rogozin assured us then, were preparing a 'prompt global strike'. Strategic carriers, ballistic and cruise missiles, armed with conventional, non-nuclear warheads, would destroy the nuclear arsenal of Russia in a first strike, our Deputy Prime Minister explained. But, since this would not be accompanied by heavy destruction or radioactive contamination, Washington could hope, Rogozin argued, that the Kremlin would lack the political will to carry out a retaliatory strike. Apparently now, thanks to mysterious successes in the development of military equipment, Moscow thinks it has suddenly acquired the ability to launch a prompt global strike itself.

"This is where the most interesting part begins. The U.S., as opposed to Russia, never said that readiness for a prompt global strike ensures 'non-nuclear deterrence.' Because it was obvious from the start: a non-nuclear attack against a nuclear power can only be used in the first disarming strike, i.e. during an act of aggression. Washington was talking about a prompt global strike only with regard to terrorists or a rogue state that would suddenly start threatening with a weapon of mass destruction. [Such speeches] were considered hypocritical by the Kremlin, but at least they sounded logical. If Moscow has suddenly started talking about the 'non-nuclear deterrence' of the U.S., this logically suggests a threat to carry out a first strike. In other words, the Russian military department now repeats the ideas it used to impute to the United States only a short while ago.

"It looks rather dangerous under the current circumstances. In the years of Obama's presidency, Moscow has gotten used to the fact that any hint at raising the stakes in the nuclear standoff will resolve the conflict in its favor. Trump has demonstrated that the intricacies of deterrence theory are of no interest to him; he considers the latest START treaty to be disadvantageous. Hence this necessity to scare Washington with something else. That's why, on the threshold of the Defender of the Fatherland Day, Russian military chiefs started to speak as one man about the possibilities of 'non-nuclear deterrence.'

"The Russian Army's main problem today is that, in the Kremlin's opinion, it constitutes the main foreign policy at the Russian leaders' disposal. That's why they are burdening with more and more new tasks. Acting in Syria, it was supposed to ensure that the international isolation brought about by Moscow's actions in Ukraine would be overcome. Now, the Russian bosses are raising the stakes in the 'deterrence' game, hoping to bring Washington to the negotiation table. In this situation, a small victorious show of force somewhere on the periphery may become necessary. For example, in Libya.

"On this day, when passionate speeches about Russian military might are heard from every corner, I'd like to wish all of us, Russian citizens, military and civilians alike, that our leaders will decide not to start another small war as a means of solving their problems, because the devil know what that war may grow into …"