Global Security Newswire

The U.S. military this week failed to notice two Russian submarines near the North Pole until they fired a pair of long-range ballistic missiles in tests, RIA Novosti reported (see GSN, July 15).

Russia's Northern Fleet conducted successful trials of Sineva missiles from Delta IV-class submarines on Monday and Tuesday.

"The American radars certainly detected the missile launches but their location took them by surprise," said a Russian intelligence official.

Both missiles were reported to have hit their targets.

The two nuclear submarines were able to slip into position undetected using non-nuclear submarine traffic and arctic ice as cover. "U.S. reconnaissance satellites are unable to detect submarines under tick ice floe in the Arctic," said the Russian official (RIA Novosti, July 15).

A former Russian general said this week's long-range missile launches were standard trials meant to make sure Moscow's long-range missiles were ready for use if needed, RIA Novosti reported yesterday.

"It is necessary to periodically check the performance of randomly chosen missiles to ensure the combat readiness of the entire arsenal," said retired Gen. Makhmud Garayev, president of the Russian Academy of Military Sciences.

"In addition, submarine crews should practice launch procedures from time to time," he said. "It is an intrinsic part of their combat training" (RIA Novosti II, July 15).

As Russia looks to test its nuclear-capable, sea-based Bulava missile later this month, some analysts believe Moscow has persisted in developing the weapon for political rather than strategic reasons, the New York Times reported.

With the Cold War over and Moscow and Washington cooperating on strategic weapons reduction, some see such advanced missile technology -- whose main added value is the ability to elude U.S. missile defenses -- as an unnecessary expense.

"My view is that the government is failing to recognize current threats. This is very much an old way of thinking, when you believe that if you have better weapons you are more secure," said Nikolai Zlobin, a Russian defense expert at a Washington-based think tank.

"Every fourth ruble of government military orders goes toward atomic weapons," said Viktor Litovkin, deputy editor of the Independent Military Review. In the view of Russia's military regime, Litovkin said, "if you have strategic nuclear weapons, then you are a great power; if not, then you are no one."

This thinking has allowed the Bulava to survive despite a number of failed tests, with Russian officials advocating patience. "Deploying any new rocket is difficult, and, unfortunately, takes time," said Russian Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov in May.

Those who ascribe paramount importance to superior strategic weaponry will probably prevail in the debate over the Bulava, even if the weapon suffers another setback at this month's trial, according to analysts.

"Russia really needs this rocket to maintain its nuclear parity with the United States," said independent Russian military analyst Aleksandr Golts (Michael Shwirtz, New York Times, July 16).