Putin explains why Russia’s new weapons can’t be stopped by ABMs

In a “Russia Insight” TV interview of Russian President Vladimir Putin that was uploaded to YouTube with English subtitles on March 10, NBC’s Megyn Kelly asked him why America’s ABMs wouldn’t be able to knock out Russia’s new missiles. He answered (16:40): “We have created a set of new strategic weapons that do not follow ballistic trajectories, and the anti-missile defence systems are powerless against them. This means that the U.S. taxpayers’ money has been wasted.”

A ballistic missile—the types of missiles at which an ABM or anti-ballistic missile is directed—is not just any type of missile, but instead is a missile with a certain type of trajectory, which goes above the Earth’s atmosphere and then comes down largely using the force of gravity instead of continuously under propulsion and strict control. Putin is saying that Russia’s new missiles, which are designed so as not to be adhering to the flight-paths that ballistic missiles do, can’t be hit by anti-ballistic missiles.

Putin referred to Russia’s largest new missile as “Voyevoda.” The missile’s manufacturer posts online about it, “33 launches in all were conducted, 97.4% of them successful.”

She then asked him whether these weapons will be used only if Russia comes under a nuclear attack, or against any attack; he answered it would be either a nuclear attack “or a conventional attack on the Russian Federation, given that it jeopardizes the state’s existence.” He implied that if an ally of Russia gets attacked, Russia will respond only with non-nuclear forces.

Then, he volunteered to say, in response to a question about what the issues would be that Russia would want formal negotiations with the U.S., that “today, when we are acquiring weapons that can easily breach all anti-ballistic missile systems, we no longer consider the reduction of ballistic missiles and warheads to be important.”

She asked whether the new weapons he was referring to could be “part of the discussion,“ and he said they “should, of course, be included in the grand total.”

This interview continued with non-nuclear matters, such as the accusations that he had interfered in America’s 2016 presidential contest, or tried to. His answers were very direct, but viewers who support the ongoing Russiagate investigations will probably not believe his answers.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910–2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

One Response to Putin explains why Russia’s new weapons can’t be stopped by ABMs

  1. TonyVodvarka

    As the ten aircraft carrier groups that we have accumulated at the cost of trillions of dollars suddenly become completely useless for anything but attacking helpless countries, we might contemplate on how those trillions might have been used to renew our decrepit infrastructure, establish a universal healthcare system, pay off the student debt that is crippling a generation of young people and ensure that everyone has a decent standard of living. But that’s not what our country is about, is it? I can easily imagine those greedbags of the MIC slapping each other on the back and saying, “Oh well, it was a good run while it lasted, what’s next?” Perhaps financial collapse.