Beauty!
now American General In Syria Confirms US Forces Killed Hundreds Of Russians In Massive Battle51 minutes ago in other words,
Analysis: Russian ‘expendables’ further complicate Syrian war
... the rest is behind paywall at Jane's
Jan 4, 2018
A senior U.S. general appears to have confirmed that hundreds of Russians fought – and died – against American forces and their local counterparts in Syria. More importantly, U.S. Army Brigadier General Jonathan Braga, director of operations for the main U.S. military task force in charge of operations in Iraq and Syria, said he feared the situation could have escalated into an all-out conflict with Russia, something we at The War Zone have is becoming a .
Braga gave the surprisingly candid account of what had happened , who traveled with the general to visit the exact site of the incident in Syria and to see what the U.S. military was doing to improve its defensive posture.
The skirmish occurred on Feb. 7, 2018 when forces aligned with Syria's dictator Bashar Al Assad, from a shadowy company called Wagner, which are possibly under the direct control of the Kremlin, launched an attack on U.S. forces and members of the U.S.-backed Syrian Democratic Forces, a predominately Kurdish group, in eastern Syria. The opposing force consisted of tanks and heavy artillery.
After a massive American counter-attack involving air and artillery strikes beat back the opposing troops, reports emerged afterwards suggesting that as many as 200 Russians had died in the engagement, which you can read more about in detail and .
The initial attack "led to immediate phone conversations with the Russians to inquire what was going on, to cease this if they had any knowledge of this," Braga told Engel. The Russians responded by saying "those are not our forces and at that time it was confusing," the general added.
Based on the segments of the interview that NBC has released so far, Braga does not specifically say the Russian government ordered the operation or otherwise had any direct involvement in it. He does, however, clearly say the U.S. government believes it killed a significant number of Russian nationals during the battle and unequivocally says he was concerned that the situation could have spiraled into a much more serious conflagration.
"There have been reports that two to three hundred of the Russian force was killed. Is that accurate?" Engel asked him in the interview. "We've seen that in open reports as well and that's I would say close to our estimates as well," Braga responded.
"Were you worried during this firefight, during this battle that this could have become sort of real war with Russia?" Engel continued. "Absolutely concerned and that's why, again, I had a professional dialogue with our [Russian] counterparts throughout the night," the general told him.
Braga's comments are of a significant different tenor from previous remarks from U.S. military and other government officials, including Secretary of Defense James Mattis, offered in the days and weeks following the incident. Mattis in particular repeatedly deflected and downplayed the presence of Russian mercenaries and the potentially serious implications of their involvement, especially as a proxy for the Kremlin itself.
Yet, on multiple occasions he described the idea that Russia would have had a direct hand in the incident as "," despite months of publicly increasing tensions between the two countries over the situation in the region, including already . The Russian government has, of course, denied any involvement, saying that there might have been just five "presumably Russian citizens" who died in the fighting, and deflecting accusations that it played any part in the incident with unfounded .
While we don't know what the reason for the shift in tone might be, Braga's new interview with NBC does follow a fiery speech from Russian President Vladimir Putin on March 1, 2018, in which he unveiled a host and implicitly threatened the United State and its allies. It also comes after of a former Russian intelligence officer in the United Kingdom, which both the U.K. and American governments say was a Kremlin-ordered assassination attempt.
The interviews release also comes amid U.S. government reports of Russia-based cyber attacks on U.S. public and private institutions, including elements of and , all in the run-up to the 2018 U.S. mid-term congressional elections. The United States continues to investigate the extent if Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election, though the U.S. Intelligence Community says it has little doubt that the Kremlin tried to interfere with those polls.
Putin, who is almost certain to win a fourth term as Russia's president a controversial election in polls just days away, appears to have increasingly turned to proxy forces in Syria, such as the Wagner forces, in order to better avoid criticism at home and abroad. In December 2017, he and declared total victory in Syria during a .
There had been reports of in Syria, which could have given rhetorical ammunition to . Just earlier in March 2018, a Russian Air Force near the Kremlin's outpost in the western Syrian governorate of Latakia, killing all 32 individuals on board. There has been little additional information about this incident, with Russia said was not the result of enemy action.
Back in the eastern portion of the country, Braga seems to fear that another Russian-backed attack could easily come in the future. “I don’t think that’s healthy for de-escalation,” he told NBC's Engel, referring to the pro-Syrian forces still situated very close to American and SDF positions.
Whatever happens, there seems to be growing evidence that the two sides may already be in the midst of a low-level conflict, or least an uneasy standoff, whether they're actively fighting each other or not.
see? they said they had updated the article before posting itMarch 13, 2018 00:30 IST
Updated: March 12, 2018 21:48 IST
India and Russia could be just weeks away from signing one of the biggest deals between the two sides in recent history, said two senior defence sources this week.
The contract negotiations for the purchase of the S-400 Triumf long range air defence systems are in the final stages, and are expected to be closed by March 31.
India is planning to buy five systems that is expected to cost about ₹39,000 crore and is considered one of the most potent Surface to Air missile systems in the world. It can track and shoot down a range of incoming airborne targets at ranges of upto 400km.
“We expect to conclude the S-400 contract within this financial year,” a defence source said.
In 2016, the two countries had concluded the Inter-Governmental Agreements for five S-400 systems and four stealth frigates after which the contract negotiations began to conclude a commercial contract.
Another defence official said they expect to wind up the cost negotiations within the next 10 days.
Officials termed the negotiations as “very complex” as there were thousands of pages of documentation to be discussed. has already conveyed to India that the deal should not have any offset clause as it is a strategic system.
For India, deploying the S-400 means that Pakistani aircraft can be tracked even when they are flying in their airspace. This will significantly beef up India’s alert levels in securing the country’s air space. The systems will be operated by the Indian Air Force (IAF).
China which has signed a $3 billion deal for six S-400 systems in 2014 has begun taking delivery of them. In December 2017, Turkey signed an agreement for two systems.
... goes on below due to size limitJust weeks after Russian President Vladimir Putin mentioned it , Russia has reportedly decided shelve development of its RS-26 Rubezh intercontinental ballistic missile system and focus on fielding the nuclear-armed Avangard using other designs. The decision suggests the Kremlin may feel the hypersonic weapon is more valuable than the missile carrying it, but also raises questions about whether the country has the necessary funds to support .
On March 22, 2018, Russian state-run that development of was no longer a feature of the state armament plan for 2018 to 2027. In an annual state of the union address on March 1, 2018, Putin had said that the road-mobile Rubezh would be the primary launch vehicle . The country had previously used the latter name to refer to , including the intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) component.
“The Avangard was included in the [state armament plan] program’s final version as more essential to ensure the country’s defense capability,” the source said, according to TASS. “All the work on the Rubezh and the was put on hold until the end of 2027. A decision on the work’s resumption will be made after the current armament program is fulfilled.”
Reportedly a smaller derivative on , the RS-26 has been in development since before 2011. It is a controversial design that some have suggested could actually violate the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, commonly known as INF. Though Russia has insisted it is an ICBM, and has demonstrated that it can reach the appropriate range, this was only because the missile involved in the launch in question was carrying a light payload or no payload at all.
Subsequent tests have the missile can’t fly beyond intermediate ranges with an actual warhead, making it a design that the INF would prohibit Russia from fielding operationally. The United States accuses Russia of having already put a treaty-breaking ground-launched cruise missile, , into service and the RS-26 appeared to be another means of skirting the agreement’s restrictions.
Without the Rubezh, the primary launch vehicle for Avangard will likely be the still-in-development silo-launched ICBM, also known as the “Satan 2.” This missile is set to replace the older , also called the SS-18 Satan, by 2020. suggest it may be able to carry as many two dozen of the hypersonic boost glide vehicles, but this remains unconfirmed.
However, separate TASS reports say that the hypersonic boost glide vehicle will be operational and that it could enter service first aboard older , also known as the SS-19 Stiletto. Russia reportedly acquired approximately 30 more of these Soviet-era weapons, in a deactivated state, from Ukraine in the early 2000s, and would refurbish and modify them in order to carry Avangard.
Since these weapons remain in Russian service already, it would be relatively easy for the country to swap out the existing weapons with upgraded versions carrying hypersonic vehicles. Per the terms of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) that Russia is party to with the United States, both countries can only have so many “launchers,” which includes , , or , as well as . However, the deal sets higher limits on the total number of warheads either side can retain in total and places no restrictions on how many missiles without warheads a country can have in storage.
This plan makes a lot of practical sense. As we at The War Zone have , the benefit of a hypersonic boost glide vehicle is that it eliminates many of the existing vulnerabilities of traditional ICBMs, which follow largely predictable signatures and flight paths after launch.
While existing U.S. should be able to detect the launch of any one of the Russian ICBMs, especially from the thermal plume of the missile blasting off, they wouldn’t be unable to monitor the subsequent flight of Avangard, which will reportedly be able to make rapid and frequent course changes at extremely high speed. By the Pentagon's own admission, the no component of the U.S. military’s ballistic missile shield would be able to shoot down such a weapon, either.
“Our defense is our deterrent capability,” U.S. Air Force General John Hyten, head of U.S. Strategic Command, during a public hearing on March 21, 2018. “We don't have any defense that could deny the employment of such a [hypersonic] weapon against us, so our response would be our deterrent force which and that we have to respond to such a threat.”
In February 2018, Hyten detailed the need for faster development of that would be able to pick up hypersonic threats, but that capability is still likely some years away. Russia, which routinely criticizes any and all American ballistic missile defense efforts, is undoubtedly aware of this, which helps explain the focus on Avangard.
As it stands now, there is no realistic means of destroying a ballistic missile the Russians would launch from within their own territory during . Coupled with the sensor- and countermeasure-dodging capabilities of the hypersonic vehicle itself, the launch platform’s job is largely reduced to just getting that system to the right altitude and speed.
The decision to abandon to the RS-26 in favor of putting Avangard on other platforms could also point to the hypersonic boost glide vehicle being further ahead in development than we might have previously understood. If that's true, it's also possible the Russians might also be inclined to look into retrofitting other existing ICBMs, such as the road mobile and RS-24 Yars, with the new warhead.
...