Nuking the Moscow Air Defense: The Realities and Implications of Defeating Russia's Multi-Layered Missile Defenses
Ukraina's repeated successes against Russia's air defenses is a clear indication of their relative effectiveness despite the heavy rhetoric. It is crucial to understand that Russia, on closer inspection, is not as formidable as the mainstream media and certain politicians would have us believe. The true question thus becomes one of how weak Russia actually is, rather than simply questioning their strength.
Russia’s Air Defense Capabilities and Limitations
While Russia has dedicated significant resources to developing air defense systems, they remain clearly behind the United States in terms of ballistic missile defence technology. Ballistic missiles, such as ICBMs, pose the greatest challenge, with reports suggesting a 60% success rate for systems like the U.S. SM-3 and GBI. Exoatmospheric and terminal defense systems come into play later in the missile's trajectory.
Fact: Russia relies on a Soviet legacy system, A-135/235, for endoatmospheric terminal defense using PRS-1M missiles with a nuclear warhead, but lacks hit-to-kill capability.
The S-400, while formidable in many aspects, falls short when it comes to defending against long-range ballistic missiles. In reality, Russia's best defense against a nuclear attack remains its own nuclear arsenal.
Understanding the Moscow Air Defense System
The air defense system around Moscow is a complex network of multiple layers, each specialized in different stages of the missile's trajectory. This system is part of the critical infrastructure and operates under military doctrine that allows for a nuclear strike as a countermeasure. The doctrine is clear: any nuclear attack on the Moscow defense system would trigger a nuclear response not just on the attacking country, but also on the USA and other NATO members. This would likely lead to a full-scale nuclear war and a subsequent nuclear winter.
Warning: Any nuclear attack on the Moscow defenses would result in a nuclear counterstrike, which could involve an escalation to a nuclear war involving multiple nations.
Conversely, a non-nuclear attack from Baltic States might lead to a conventional arms response and regime change in those regions, as previously stated by various politicians.
Strategic Considerations for Defeating Russia's Air Defenses
Given the complexity and the likely nuclear counterresponse, the most practical approach to defeating Russia's air defenses around Moscow would be to launch a preemptive nuclear strike. While this strategy offers a higher chance of successfully neutralizing the defenses, it also increases the risk of a full-scale nuclear war and potential nuclear winter.
Alternatively, a conventional arms attack could be employed, but it might necessitate subsequent nuclear retaliation or a full-scale military response. Both options carry significant risks and are not advisable unless the geopolitical context and objectives align.
Conclusion
Given the relative ineffectiveness of conventional and non-nuclear methods, it is highly advisable for potential attackers to target the air defense systems of non-nuclear powers instead of Russia. This approach would reduce the risk of nuclear escalation while still weakening Russia's defensive capabilities.
Read More Explore Related Topics