14.07.2014 Views

Russian Nuclear Weapons: Past, Present, and Future

Russian Nuclear Weapons: Past, Present, and Future

Russian Nuclear Weapons: Past, Present, and Future

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

troversy over missile defense. In his view, however,<br />

the system does not need to be fully integrated <strong>and</strong><br />

instead could be built on dividing responsibility for<br />

different sectors. 70<br />

The proposed <strong>Russian</strong> contribution is still S-300<br />

<strong>and</strong> S-400 systems, which are now in a more advanced<br />

stage than they used to be 10 years ago. In fact, the<br />

S-400 entered test deployment in 2007 <strong>and</strong> is expected<br />

to go into mass production later this year or in 2011,<br />

following long delays with development of a new interceptor.<br />

Moreover, Russia is conducting R&D on a<br />

still more advanced system, S-500 Triumphator, which<br />

is supposed to be ready for production in 2015 (given<br />

multiple-year delays with S-400, this official timeline<br />

does not sound very realistic, though). With S-500,<br />

Russia could reach the parameters proposed by Yesin<br />

(7 km/second for incoming missiles; S-400 can only<br />

intercept missiles with less than 5 km/second speed).<br />

All in all, solution to the issue of missile defense<br />

remains elusive. Perhaps the biggest challenge is lack<br />

of any clarity with regard to a final solution; thus, it is<br />

difficult to decide which way dialogue should steer.<br />

The <strong>Russian</strong> preference seems to be for a new ABM<br />

treaty of some sort that would regulate missile defense<br />

to guarantee mutual vulnerability of the United<br />

States <strong>and</strong> Russia. Such a solution is hardly feasible in<br />

the near future. Furthermore, the <strong>Russian</strong> position on<br />

missile defense is limited by its close cooperation with<br />

China, whose criteria for a new international regime<br />

in missile defense are likely to be even more restrictive<br />

than those of Russia. While a new politically or legally<br />

binding regime on missile defense seems improbable,<br />

it is nevertheless still advisable to discuss it, perhaps<br />

unofficially, to enhance predictability <strong>and</strong> promote<br />

better underst<strong>and</strong>ing of the positions of all parties.<br />

237

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!