Russia’s hypersonic missile advantage
Possible peace through strength from the East
On November 28, 2024, Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke at the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) in Astana, Kazakhstan. CSTO is a military and political alliance of mutual interest of six post-Soviet states: Russia, Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan.
Putin began by reviewing recent developments. When the USA announced authorization for the Ukrainian armed forces to use long-range high-precision weapons manufactured in the West against Russia, Putin made clear that Russia viewed such attacks as direct involvement by NATO governments, inasmuch as it is not possible to deploy weapons of this type without the direct involvement of military specialists from NATO countries. However, in spite of Russia’s warnings concerning the danger of escalating the conflict, the Bryansk and Kursk regions of Russia were attacked with American ATACMS missiles and British Storm Shadow missiles.
The Russian President noted that Russia has knowledge of the relevant weapons systems that NATO possesses. “We know how many of them are kept in storage facilities. We know their exact location, how many weapons have been supplied to Ukraine, and how many more are planned to be supplied.” Russia, he observed, has its own versions of the Western missile systems, equal or superior with respect to their technical specifications and range. And he declared that Russia has ten times more of them than the combined output of the NATO countries, and Russia will be expanding production by 25% to 30% in the next year. Moreover, Russia has recently developed “the Kalibr, Kinzhal and Zircon hypersonic missile systems, which are unmatched around the world in terms of their technical specifications. Their production is also being ramped up and is going at full speed.”
Putin declared that these advanced hypersonic weapons systems were employed against targets in Ukraine in the last two days, “in response to the continued strikes by ATACMS missiles targeting the territory of Russia.” A total of 100 missile systems of different classes successfully struck seventeen targets, including military installations and defense industry sites. If the West continues with attacks on Russian territory, such retaliatory strikes will continue, Putin emphasized.
Among the new systems used, Putin declared, is the Oreshnik system, which “has no equivalents in the world, and I doubt we will see anything comparable in the foreseeable future.” The non-nuclear configuration of the Oreshnik system was successfully tested in the operation of the previous two days.
The system deploys dozens of homing warheads that strike the target at a velocity of Mach 10, equivalent to approximately three kilometres per second. The temperature of the impact elements reaches 4,000 degrees Celsius – nearing the surface temperature of the sun, which is around 5,500–6,000 degrees. Consequently, everything within the explosion’s epicentre is reduced to fractions, elementary particles, essentially turning to dust. The missile is capable of destroying even heavily fortified structures and those located at significant depths.
Putin reported that the Oreshnik system has the impact of a nuclear weapon, but it is not a weapon of mass destruction, because its high level of precision enables the targeting of precise military objectives, and because there is no radioactive fallout. Putin stated:
Military and technical experts note that when used in a concentrated, massive strike—using several Oreshnik missiles simultaneously—the resulting impact is comparable in power to that of a nuclear weapon. However, the Oreshnik is not classified as a weapon of mass destruction. This distinction is due to two key factors: first, as confirmed in the November 21 test, the system demonstrates exceptional precision; second, and most importantly, it operates without a nuclear warhead, meaning no radioactive contamination follows its use.
Let us reiterate and emphasize the advantage provided to Russia by the Oreshnik missile. It can inflict, without a nuclear warhead, destruction on a scale comparable to a nuclear weapon. But because of its capacity to precisely strike military or strategic targets, it is not a weapon of mass destruction, which inflicts death and destruction indiscriminately on a massive scale. And unlike nuclear weapons, it does not unleash radioactive fallout. Not having the moral consequences and the political fallout of weapons of mass destruction, Oreshnik is usable, much unlike nuclear weapons, which have not been detonated in combat since the final year of World War II. Moreover, because of its Mach 10 velocity, it is, with currently available technology, very difficult to intercept. And it has a range that enables it to strike all of Europe from Russian territory. In addition, at the present time, only Russia possesses it.
Putin stressed that Russia has several ready-to-deploy systems of the Oreshnik class. Russia will continue to use them in response to strikes on Russian territory by Western-made long-range missiles. The Russian Ministry of Defense and the Russian armed forces are currently identifying targets in Ukraine, including “military installations, defence industry sites, or decision-making centres in Kiev.”
Putin concluded, “The serial production of the Oreshnik system has commenced. However, the choice of weaponry will ultimately depend on the nature of the designated targets and the level of threats posed to the Russian Federation.”
The commentaries of Western observers do not contradict and tend to confirm the Russian claim that it has high-precision and high-velocity supersonic missiles with conventional warhead capacities that are very difficult to intercept and that have a range that enables them to strike nearly all of Europe from Russian territory.
There will be those who believe that Russia now poses a serious threat to the West. Such an interpretation would follow from the false narrative of a Russian invasion of Ukraine, as against a more accurate description of a Russian military operation in Ukraine, undertaken in defense of its sovereignty and in reaction to NATO’s eastern expansionism and destabilization of Ukraine, combined with Ukrainian violent repression of the Russian population in Ukraine.
The USA and its NATO allies would not want to admit that they have lost their proxy war in Ukraine, and that Russia, with its superior missile technology, now has a strategic military advantage in the conflict. Such admissions would be a clear indication of the decline of the West during the last half century. It would be better for the NATO governments to sponsor negotiations for peace, supported by a discourse that obscures the Russian strategic advantage. The current conditions favor such a turn by the West, taking into account the success of Russia’s military operation in Ukraine, the Russian missile advantage, and the economic costs of the war to Europe. A peace settlement would likely include formal recognition of Russian occupied territory in Ukraine as pertaining to the Russian orbit, in accordance with the expressed political will of the people in said territory. Russia, in turn, would recognize the sovereignty of Ukraine, which Russia never intended to deny, but which the West could deceitfully present as its great accomplishment of the war. Russia will likely continue to insist on protecting its territory through certain restrictions on Ukrainian sovereignty, such as no NATO membership and “denazification,” and the parameters of this demand will likely be the subject of intense negotiation. Russia has legitimate concerns in this regard, taking into consideration Western and Ukrainian comportment since 2014.
A November 30 article in The Washington Post by Robyn Dixon completely misses the point that Putin was making in his November 28 CSTO address. With a headline referring to “Putin’s nuclear-capable Oreshnik missile,” the article maintains that “the Russian leader’s use of the missile against Ukraine sends a powerful signal about his intention to weaken NATO and bend Europe’s security architecture to Russia’s will.” It is, she maintained, Putin’s “most aggressive nuclear signaling since invading Ukraine.”
As is evident from the above review of Putin’s CSTO address, which is available to the international public on the President of Russia website, Putin was not “nuclear signaling” in the Russian missile attack against Ukraine. On the contrary, he emphasized in the CSTO speech the utility of the Oreshnik missile without it being armed with a nuclear warhead. His point was that the Oreshnik missile, armed with multiple conventional warheads, has the same destructive power of a nuclear warhead, but because of its precision, it does not unleash death and destruction indiscriminately on a massive scale; and when used with conventional warheads, it does not release radioactive materials in the environment. It therefore can be used as a highly effective weapon, moving too fast to be intercepted, against specific strategic targets, without inflicting indiscriminate death and destruction on the population and without environmental fallout. The Oreshnik missile, therefore, can be used, not merely as a deterrent, but in actual military combat, without the negative moral and political consequences of nuclear weapons. It indeed has been used in Ukraine in retaliation of NATO-supported military strikes on Russian territory, and it will be used again and again, Putin made clear, if NATO continues to launch missile strikes against Russian territory.
Dixon’s article is a perfect illustration of a prevailing tendency in Western journalism, in which the journalist engages in speculation on the basis of selected facts, without giving the slightest attention to what leaders of nations, especially leaders of the Global South and East, are trying to say to the world.
It is perhaps a good sign that the Western media is missing the point about Russian missile superiority, and instead, is framing Russia’s advance in military technology as a moment in the history of nuclear confrontation, rather than as a moment in which Russia has seized the advantage in the development of conventional (non-nuclear) missiles, (developing its missile capacity in response to Western imperialist overreach). This media distortion enables Western leaders to move toward a peace agreement, defending an agreement before the people through a narrative of having defended Ukraine’s sovereignty, obscuring a capitulation made necessary by imperialist overreach combined with insufficient attention to development of military defense technologies.
§
I have previously written on the Russian military operation in Ukraine. I invite readers who have not seen them to take a look at how the conflict in Ukraine is seen from Russia (and China).
“Russia, Ukraine, and the media: Invasion or defensive military action?”, February 25, 2022
“The military situation in Ukraine: Russian self-defense and media lies,” March 25, 2022
“Vladimir Putin speaks: The ongoing decline of Western hegemony is irreversible,” September 30, 2022
“China’s peace proposal for Ukraine: A sign of the emerging pluripolar world order,” February 28, 2023
A free subscription option is available, with capacity to read, send, and share all posts. A paid subscription ($5 per month or $40 per year) enables you to make comments and to support the costs of the column; paid subscribers also receive a free PDF copy of my book on Cuba and the world-system. Ten percent of income generated through subscriptions to the column is donated to the Cuban Society for Philosophical Investigations.