Developing: Pakistani Plane Escorted by UK Fighter Jets — 2 Men Arrested

Doc Thompson’s 24-hour radio marathon, ‘#24forok,’ continues until 9 am ET — Listen Live!

Russia Heats Up: New Challenges to U.S. National Security

Jun. 15, 2012 1:00pm

Dr. Earl Tilford is a military historian and fellow for the Middle East & terrorism with The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College.

[ x ]

Author's Website

With U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reporting that Russia is sending attack helicopters to Syria for President Bashar Assad’s regime, analysts are speculating on issues ranging from a proxy war with the former Soviet republic to the readiness of air defense systems and U.S. national security implications.

The news program “60 Minutes” recently interviewed two F-22 Raptor pilots who, without Air Force approval, announced they would no longer fly the Raptor due to unresolved problems in its oxygen system resulting in a number of cases of hypoxia. The Boeing F-22 is a “fifth generation,” multi-purpose combat platform and the most sophisticated and capable aircraft of its kind. As such, it’s complex and expensive, with a fly-away cost of $155,000,000 each; the total program amounting to over $66 billion, limiting the original procurement goal of 750 planes to 195, with 187 operational.

Conceived during the Cold War, the F-22 met resistance in the early 1990s due to its escalating expense and the deescalating tensions between Washington and Moscow. Then, in 2001, came the War on Terror. The focus changed to fighting an elusive enemy using asymmetric strategies and tactics irrelevant to the F-22. Now, as U.S. policy pivots from the quagmire in Afghanistan, simultaneously new and old challenges reemerge.

Three days after “60 Minutes” hatched the Raptor, the Russians marked the 67th anniversary of the end of World War II with a Victory Day celebration in Red Square. More than 20,000,000 Russian deaths during the Great Patriotic War and their contribution to victory over Nazi Germany certainly justify celebration. What happened in Moscow more recently, however, amounted to a bold announcement: “We’re back.”

The day after the celebration in Red Square, Vladimir Putin initiated his third term by backing out of the G-8 summit scheduled for Camp David on May 18 and 19, a meeting supposedly set so President Obama and Putin could test whether the “reset” policy between the White House and the Kremlin is on track. Putin’s dispatch of Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev carries an important message: “I’ve got better things to do. You deal with my number two.” It’s a move meant to establish the parameters of a new relationship and put the United States in its place. That is, second place.

During his election campaign, Putin’s rhetoric reflected his animus toward Washington. Recent actions reinforce a growing disdain for a U.S. foreign policy built on apologies and undergirded by military uncertainties. These uncertainties issue from what are sure to be significant national security budget cuts. The cuts will come from the “peace dividend” resulting from self-proclaimed “victory” in the War on Terror, and from the pending $600 billion in cuts due if Congress can’t come to an agreement on the budget.

As regards the F-22, Russia’s Sukhoi T-50 fifth-generation stealth fighter seems headed for deployment and export. Iran is probably is on the list. Meanwhile, federal law prohibits the export of the Raptor, despite the fact that Japan and Australia have expressed their interest.

As long as the United States and Russia are constrained by nuclear deterrence, American and Russian pilots are unlikely to meet in combat, but it could be inevitable that U.S. and Russian planes will one day clash. Then it will be too late to learn that the cost of having the world’s second-best Air Force far exceeds the price of maintaining the world’s best Air Force.

Russia has been flexing its muscles in other areas as well. Washington and Moscow remain locked in a dispute over a U.S. missile shield for Europe. A top Russian general recently warned of a preemptive strike if the U.S. went ahead with deployment plans. Add that to the infamous “open-mic” faux pas when, in March, at the recent Seoul meeting between Obama and Medvedev, President Obama assured his counterpart of increased flexibility on missile defense after his reelection. Dmitri responded with a chummy, “I will tell Vladimir.”

Add to that Russian non-cooperation on Syria, where Moscow’s client Bashar al Assad continues his murderous crackdown on dissidents. Russian military support flows to the Syrian government despite United Nations efforts to broker a ceasefire. The Assad regime, which is tightly connected to Iran, continues to back Hezbollah’s threat to Israel and, by extension, peace in the Middle East.

Russia also persists in blocking efforts to stop the Iranian nuclear program. Moscow has a “cash cow” in Iran, where S-300 surface-to-air missiles, if deployed, would make an Israeli strike too costly, meaning only U.S. stealth platforms could do the job. Putin and the Iranians are betting the Americans won’t.

Al Qaeda’s fanatical ideology will threaten the United States for years, if not decades. Nations like Russia and China, however, tender a greater challenge. Either can, through military superiority, dominate the world stage politically and economically. And they will if the United States fails to pivot from its West Asian quagmire to meet these emerging and very real challenges. It is time to rethink our assumptions about the end of the Cold War. More F-22s make sense.

— Dr. Earl Tilford is a military historian and fellow for the Middle East & terrorism with The Center for Vision & Valuesat Grove City College.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (5)

Pigpen
Posted on June 17, 2012 at 3:00am
Well, you tried, Dr. Telford. But, the Left doesn’t want the American Bourgeoisie catching on to the fact that the Cold War never ended, and the American Bourgeoisie doesn’t seem that interested in fighting Iran. Let Israel (you know, Israel “the Nuclear Power” Israel) fight Iran. Who cares how much it costs? Let Israel use some of the BILLIONS of dollars in foreign aid that the USA has sent them ANNUALLY to pay for it.

And as for the PINKO posters here on theBlaze who are so predictably anxious to defend Ivan: SORRY, but the upgraded Topol M missiles recently fielded by your “friendly” Russia ARE pointed at American cities, and Russian Bombers have recently taken to their old Cold War Era Arctic Circle patrolling. So to all of you wannabe “fifth members of the Cambridge Spy Ring” I say, “Keep up the B.S. P.R. for the Russkies. Because the more outrageous lies you tell like ‘those Russian bombers are only doing important arctic research,…’ the faster my fellow cr@ckers will wake up to the ENORMOUS acts of treason that you have committed against us: the USA.”

Oh, and Dr. Telford, stop mentioning Iran. If ISRAEL can have nukes without signing ANY of the nuclear arms limitations treaties that have burdened the rest of the Western World, then Iran can have nukes too. It is only fair. **** Tel Aviv and their whining. If they want to hit Iran, then let the IDF lose lives and treasure to do it!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Earl Tilford
  Posted on June 17, 2012 at 3:23pm
  PIGPEN. At the risk of sounding egotistical, It’s “Tilford” and not “Telford.” You made the mistake a couple of times. Don’t do it again. Second, are you calling me a “communist”? If so, it’s not to be unexpected from libertarians who see anyone whose mind has wrapped itself around the fact that the USS Constitution is no longer on the cutting edge of continental defense. But still, I can’t see how you think anything I’ve ever written might give away my supposed party card number. Anyway, get your facts straight. Meanwhile, I’ve got to get to this afternoon’s tea with Mikhail, Henry, and all the boys down at the Carlyle Club.
  
  EHT
  
  Report this comment
giopa2
Posted on June 16, 2012 at 3:52pm
There’s nothing new about Russia’s Syria policy. Syria was an old ally of the Soviet Union.
As for Iran, Russia offered an old radar installation in Azerbaijan to track Iranian missiles. This was snubbed by the Americans and no doubt proof positive to Putin that American missile installations in eastern Europe (which at any rate extemely raise Russian blood pressure) are directed at Russia. The choice for Putin was an ally and an Iranian thorn in the side for American policy or expansion of an extremist subversive Muslim state in Central Asia. Putin has obviously concluded that the former is more important and that America is the bigger threat. BTW Russian and American planes have fought each other, in Vietnam and Korea and possibly some Russian pilots were shot down by Americans and both sides deliberately refrained from escalating the issue due to the neuclear deterrant. At present neither side has missles targeting the other’s cities but that could change if there is a direct military confrontation between the two. I think this Georgia ******* commentator is ignorant.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Shamrock241
Posted on June 16, 2012 at 7:19am
Muslims killing Muslims, Whats wrong with that? My gut feeling is to side with the Russians on this conflict, we have no business in syria they are not a national threat to the US. Russia has a Naval port there for their subs, so ofcourse they will protect syria. If some country were attacking a stratigic jumping off point in the pacific (ISLAND) that the USA needed, then you can bet your A$$ America would be all over them So bottom line is if Hillary Clinton and barack O nothing are involved this can only benifit the Muslim Brotherhood, So i say KICK A$$ Ruskies!!!!!!!!!!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
KidCharlemagne
Posted on June 15, 2012 at 10:40pm
“Add to that Russian non-cooperation on Syria, where Moscow’s client Bashar al Assad continues his murderous crackdown on dissidents.”
=====================================

I hate to burst your bubble in this particular case……however, those “dissidents” in Syria that you refer to here are none other than Al-Qaeda:

—————————————————-
“‘Dead’ al Qaeda’s No 2 backs rebels in Syria
Wednesday, June 13, 2012

It was not immediately clear whether the posting of the video was an attempt to show Libi had survived the attack. The US-based SITE said the video production date only indicated it had been produced by al Qaeda’s media arm as-Sahab sometime after November 2011, and the film was only dated with the current Islamic year 1433.

Libi’s video surprised those expecting a scathing message against the West.

Without any mention of drone attacks, he called on its fighters outside Syria to join the rebels in their fight against President Bashar al-Assad, calling him a “tyrant” and his government a “criminal regime”, according to SITE’s translation.

“We call on our brothers in Iraq, Jordan and Turkey to go to help their brothers. If your revolution was to be peaceful, God would have chosen it that way, but now the illusion of peaceful means after these great sacrifices … would show weakness,” Libi said, addressing Syrians.”
http://zeenews.india.com/news/world/dead-al-qaeda-s-no-2-backs-rebels-in-syria_78151

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.