samedi 10 mars 2018

Hassan Nasrallah's tribute to Ahed Tamimi

Speech of Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah on February 16th, 2018, during the commemoration of Hezbollah's martyred leaders (Sheikh Ragheb Harb, Sayyed Abbas Musawi, Hajj Imad Mughniyeh)



[...] In Palestine, the US blockade against the Palestinian people continues. (US) funding of UNRWA is blocked, the aid granted to the Palestinian Authority, which has various social, financial, everyday life responsibilities, etc., gets cut, Palestinian Resistance movements and their leaders are placed on the list of terrorist organizations, new sanctions are taken by the US Congress against Palestinian movements, and still more pressure, but what continues to give hope, and we must underline it and support it strongly, is that the Palestinians unanimously reject the decision of Trump (regarding Al-Quds/Jerusalem) and the Palestinians unanimously (reject) the submission to the so-called "Deal of the century"(sponsored by Trump). Such are their public positions.

And in recent weeks, the Palestinian people have proposed (Resistance) examples. I'll just give 3 names.

The martyr, son of a martyr, Ahmad Jarrar. It is a particularly prominent and worthy model that not only the Palestinian people but the whole (Islamic) Community should follow. One single young, (Resistance) cadre, facing the Israeli army, its arrogance and its security services, this fighter was (heroically) martyred.

Second, a young woman. The media present her as a child, but she is 17 years old, she is a young woman. The woman Ahed Tamimi, with her bold and courageous stand, she and her family (and the martyr Ahmad of course), the logic (of Resistance) of her father, we heard him in the media. This woman slapping Israeli soldiers and facing them, and facing the Court with her parents who encouraged her to continue to stay strong, to be brave and persevering.

Thirdly, Omar al-Abd, who was sentenced yesterday to four life prison sentences, and the prohibition of including him in any (future) exchange of prisoners, how did he welcome the four life imprisonment sentences? With a smile. And it angered (the Israeli Defense Minister) Lieberman. I noticed in particular the anger of Lieberman. Think of it: he gets condemned to 4 life sentences, the refuse to ever negotiate his release, and he welcomes it with a smile. This is the Palestinian people. 

Why do we always talk hopefully of the future and horizon of this conflict? Because we place our hopes in such people. These three (Resistant figures) are the children of their communities, they are not isolated but are just like all Palestinians. [...]

Hassan Nasrallah rend hommage à Ahed Tamimi

Discours du Secrétaire Général du Hezbollah, Sayed Hassan Nasrallah, le 16 février 2018, à l'occasion de la commémoration des dirigeants martyrs du Hezbollah (Cheikh Ragheb Harb, Sayed Abbas Mousawi, Hajj Imad Moghniyeh)

Traduction :

Hassan Nasrallah rend hommage à Ahed Tamimi from Sayed Hasan on Vimeo.

Transcription :

[...] En Palestine, le blocus américain contre le peuple palestinien se poursuit. Le financement (américain) de l'UNRWA est bloqué, les aides accordées à l'Autorité palestinienne, qui assume diverses responsabilités sociales, financières, pour la vie courante, etc., sont coupées, des mouvements de Résistance palestiniens et leurs dirigeants sont placés sur la liste des organisations terroristes, de nouvelles sanctions sont prises par le Congrès américain contre des mouvements palestiniens, et toujours davantage de pressions, mais ce qui continue à donner espoir, et que nous devons souligner et soutenir avec force, c'est l'unanimité palestinienne pour refuser la décision de Trump et l'unanimité palestinienne (pour refuser) la soumission (au prétendu) accord du siècle (parrainé par Trump), telles sont les positions annoncées. 

Et le peuple palestinien a proposé, durant les dernières semaines, des modèles (de Résistance). Je vais me contenter de 3 noms.

Le martyr, fils de martyr, Ahmad Jarrar. Il constitue un modèle particulièrement éminent et digne que non seulement le peuple palestinien mais toute la Communauté (islamique) doivent suivre. Un seul jeune, cadre (de la Résistance), face à l'armée israélienne, à son arrogance et à ses services de sécurité, ce combattant a trouvé le martyre.
Deuxièmement, une jeune femme. Les médias la présentent comme une enfant, mais elle a 17 ans, c'est une jeune femme. La jeune femme Ahed Tamimi, avec sa position audacieuse et courageuse, elle et sa famille (ainsi que le martyr Ahmad bien sûr), la logique (de Résistance) de son père, que nous avons tous entendu dans les médias. Cette jeune fille qui gifle les soldats israéliens et leur fait face, et qui fait face au tribunal, avec ses parents qui l'encouragent à continuer, à rester forte, à être courageuse et persévérante.

Troisièmement, Omar al-Abd, qui a été condamné hier à 4 peines de prison à perpétuité, et à l'interdiction de l'inclure dans toute opération (future) d'échanges de prisonniers. Comment a-t-il accueilli les 4 peines de prison à perpétuité ? Avec le sourire. Et cela a mis en colère (le ministre de la défense israélien) Lieberman. C'est surtout la colère de Lieberman que j'ai relevée. Voyez cela : on le condamne à 4 peines de perpétuité, on refuse de négocier sa libération, et il accueille cela avec le sourire.

Tel est le peuple palestinien. Pourquoi est-ce que nous parlons toujours avec espoir de l'avenir et de l'horizon de ce conflit ? Parce que nous plaçons nos espoirs en ces gens-là. Ces trois (Résistants) sont les enfants de leurs communautés, ils n'en sont pas isolés mais leur ressemblent.  [...]

dimanche 4 mars 2018

Vladimir Putin Responds to Trump's Nuclear Doctrine and Unveils New Russian Weapons

Presidential Address to the Federal Assembly - March 1, 2018, Moscow

The President of Russia delivered the Address to the Federal Assembly. The ceremony took place at the Manezh Central Exhibition Hall.



The operation in Syria has proved the increased capabilities of the Russian Armed Forces. In recent years, a great deal has been done to improve the Army and the Navy. The Armed Forces now have 3.7 times more modern weapons. Over 300 new units of equipment were put into service. The strategic missile troops received 80 new intercontinental ballistic missiles, 102 submarine-launched ballistic missiles and three Borei nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines. Twelve missile regiments have received the new Yars intercontinental ballistic missile. The number of long-range high-precision weapons carriers has increased by 12 times, while the number of guided cruise missiles increased by over 30 times. The Army, the Aerospace Forces and the Navy have grown significant stronger as well.

Both Russia and the entire world know the names of our newest planes, submarines, anti-aircraft weapons, as well as land-based, airborne and sea-based guided missile systems. All of them are cutting-edge, high-tech weapons. A solid radar field to warn of a missile attack was created along Russia’s perimeter (it is very important). Huge holes appeared after the USSR disintegrated. All of them were repaired.

A leap forward was made in the development of unmanned aircraft; the National Defence Control Centre was established; and the operational command of the far maritime zone was formed. The number of professional service members has increased by 2.4 times, and the availability of equipment in the Armed Forces grew from 70 percent to 95–100 percent. The years-long queue for permanent housing was eliminated, and the waiting period was cut by 83 percent.

Now, on to the most important defence issue.

I will speak about the newest systems of Russian strategic weapons that we are creating in response to the unilateral withdrawal of the United States of America from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and the practical deployment of their missile defence systems both in the US and beyond their national borders.

I would like to make a short journey into the recent past.

Back in 2000, the US announced its withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. Russia was categorically against this. We saw the Soviet-US ABM Treaty signed in 1972 as the cornerstone of the international security system. Under this treaty, the parties had the right to deploy ballistic missile defence systems only in one of its regions. Russia deployed these systems around Moscow, and the US around its Grand Forks land-based ICBM base.

Together with the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, the ABM Treaty not only created an atmosphere of trust but also prevented either party from recklessly using nuclear weapons, which would have endangered humankind, because the limited number of ballistic missile defence systems made the potential aggressor vulnerable to a response strike.

We did our best to dissuade the Americans from withdrawing from the treaty. All in vain. The US pulled out of the treaty in 2002. Even after that we tried to develop constructive dialogue with the Americans. We proposed working together in this area to ease concerns and maintain the atmosphere of trust. At one point, I thought that a compromise was possible, but this was not to be. All our proposals, absolutely all of them, were rejected. And then we said that we would have to improve our modern strike systems to protect our security. In reply, the US said that it is not creating a global BMD system against Russia, which is free to do as it pleases, and that the US will presume that our actions are not spearheaded against the US.

The reasons behind this position are obvious. After the collapse of the USSR, Russia, which was known as the Soviet Union or Soviet Russia abroad, lost 23.8 percent of its national territory, 48.5 percent of its population, 41 of the GDP, 39.4 percent of its industrial potential (nearly half of our potential, I would underscore), as well as 44.6 percent of its military capability due to the division of the Soviet Armed Forces among the former Soviet republics. The military equipment of the Russian army was becoming obsolete, and the Armed Forces were in a sorry state. A civil war was raging in the Caucasus, and US inspectors oversaw the operation of our leading uranium enrichment plants.

For a certain time, the question was not whether we would be able to develop a strategic weapon system – some wondered if our country would even be able to safely store and maintain the nuclear weapons that we inherited after the collapse of the USSR. Russia had outstanding debts, its economy could not function without loans from the IMF and the World Bank; the social sphere was impossible to sustain.

Apparently, our partners got the impression that it was impossible in the foreseeable historical perspective for our country to revive its economy, industry, defence industry and Armed Forces to levels supporting the necessary strategic potential. And if that is the case, there is no point in reckoning with Russia’s opinion, it is necessary to further pursue ultimate unilateral military advantage in order to dictate the terms in every sphere in the future.

Basically, this position, this logic, judging from the realities of that period, is understandable, and we ourselves are to blame. All these years, the entire 15 years since the withdrawal of the United States from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, we have consistently tried to reengage the American side in serious discussions, in reaching agreements in the sphere of strategic stability.

We managed to accomplish some of these goals. In 2010, Russia and the US signed the New START treaty, containing measures for the further reduction and limitation of strategic offensive arms. However, in light of the plans to build a global anti-ballistic missile system, which are still being carried out today, all agreements signed within the framework of New START are now gradually being devaluated, because while the number of carriers and weapons is being reduced, one of the parties, namely, the US, is permitting constant, uncontrolled growth of the number of anti-ballistic missiles, improving their quality, and creating new missile launching areas. If we do not do something, eventually this will result in the complete devaluation of Russia’s nuclear potential. Meaning that all of our missiles could simply be intercepted.

Despite our numerous protests and pleas, the American machine has been set into motion, the conveyer belt is moving forward. There are new missile defence systems installed in Alaska and California; as a result of NATO’s expansion to the east, two new missile defence areas were created in Western Europe: one has already been created in Romania, while the deployment of the system in Poland is now almost complete. Their range will keep increasing; new launching areas are to be created in Japan and South Korea. The US global missile defence system also includes five cruisers and 30 destroyers, which, as far as we know, have been deployed to regions in close proximity to Russia’s borders. I am not exaggerating in the least; and this work proceeds apace.

So, what have we done, apart from protesting and warning? How will Russia respond to this challenge? This is how.

During all these years since the unilateral US withdrawal from the ABM Treaty, we have been working intensively on advanced equipment and arms, which allowed us to make a breakthrough in developing new models of strategic weapons.

Let me recall that the United States is creating a global missile defence system primarily for countering strategic arms that follow ballistic trajectories. These weapons form the backbone of our nuclear deterrence forces, just as of other members of the nuclear club.

As such, Russia has developed, and works continuously to perfect, highly effective but modestly priced systems to overcome missile defence. They are installed on all of our intercontinental ballistic missile complexes.

In addition, we have embarked on the development of the next generation of missiles. For example, the Defence Ministry and enterprises of the missile and aerospace industry are in the active phase of testing a new missile system with a heavy intercontinental missile. We called it Sarmat.

Sarmat will replace the Voevoda system made in the USSR. Its immense power was universally recognized. Our foreign colleagues even gave it a fairly threatening name.

That said, the capabilities of the Sarmat missile are much higher. Weighing over 200 tonnes, it has a short boost phase, which makes it more difficult to intercept for missile defence systems. The range of the new heavy missile, the number and power of its combat blocs is bigger than Voevoda’s. Sarmat will be equipped with a broad range of powerful nuclear warheads, including hypersonic, and the most modern means of evading missile defence. The high degree of protection of missile launchers and significant energy capabilities the system offers will make it possible to use it in any conditions.

Could you please show the video.

Upcoming video

Voevoda’s range is 11,000 km while Sarmat has practically no range restrictions.

As the video clips show, it can attack targets both via the North and South poles.

Sarmat is a formidable missile and, owing to its characteristics, is untroubled by even the most advanced missile defence systems.

But we did not stop at that. We started to develop new types of strategic arms that do not use ballistic trajectories at all when moving toward a target and, therefore, missile defence systems are useless against them, absolutely pointless.

Allow me to elaborate on these weapons.

Russia’s advanced arms are based on the cutting-edge, unique achievements of our scientists, designers and engineers. One of them is a small-scale heavy-duty nuclear energy unit that can be installed in a missile like our latest X-101 air-launched missile or the American Tomahawk missile – a similar type but with a range dozens of times longer, dozens, basically an unlimited range. It is a low-flying stealth missile carrying a nuclear warhead, with almost an unlimited range, unpredictable trajectory and ability to bypass interception boundaries. It is invincible against all existing and prospective missile defence and counter-air defence systems. I will repeat this several times today.

In late 2017, Russia successfully launched its latest nuclear-powered missile at the Central training ground. During its flight, the nuclear-powered engine reached its design capacity and provided the necessary propulsion.

Now that the missile launch and ground tests were successful, we can begin developing a completely new type of weapon, a strategic nuclear weapons system with a nuclear-powered missile.

Roll the video, please.

Upcoming video

You can see how the missile bypasses interceptors. As the range is unlimited, the missile can manoeuvre for as long as necessary.

As you no doubt understand, no other country has developed anything like this. There will be something similar one day but by that time our guys will have come up with something even better.

Now, we all know that the design and development of unmanned weapon systems is another common trend in the world. As concerns Russia, we have developed unmanned submersible vehicles that can move at great depths (I would say extreme depths) intercontinentally, at a speed multiple times higher than the speed of submarines, cutting-edge torpedoes and all kinds of surface vessels, including some of the fastest. It is really fantastic. They are quiet, highly manoeuvrable and have hardly any vulnerabilities for the enemy to exploit. There is simply nothing in the world capable of withstanding them.

Unmanned underwater vehicles can carry either conventional or nuclear warheads, which enables them to engage various targets, including aircraft groups, coastal fortifications and infrastructure.

In December 2017, an innovative nuclear power unit for this unmanned underwater vehicle completed a test cycle that lasted many years. The nuclear power unit is unique for its small size while offering an amazing power-weight ratio. It is a hundred times smaller than the units that power modern submarines, but is still more powerful and can switch into combat mode, that is to say, reach maximum capacity, 200 times faster.

The tests that were conducted enabled us to begin developing a new type of strategic weapon that would carry massive nuclear ordnance.

Please play the video.

Upcoming video

By the way, we have yet to choose names for these two new strategic weapons, the global-range cruise missile and the unmanned underwater vehicle. We are waiting for suggestions from the Defence Ministry.

Countries with high research potential and advanced technology are known to be actively developing so-called hypersonic weapons. The speed of sound is usually measured in Mach numbers in honour of Austrian scientist Ernst Mach who is known for his research in this field. One Mach is equal to 1,062 kilometres per hour at an altitude of 11 kilometres. The speed of sound is Mach 1, speeds between Mach 1 and Mach 5 is called supersonic, and hypersonic is above Mach 5. Of course, this kind of weapon provides substantial advantages in an armed conflict. Military experts believe that it would be extremely powerful, and that its speed makes it invulnerable to current missile and air defence systems, since interceptor missiles are, simply put, not fast enough. In this regard, it is quite understandable why the leading armies of the world seek to possess such an ideal weapon.

Friends, Russia already has such a weapon.

The most important stage in the development of modern weapons systems was the creation of a high-precision hypersonic aircraft missile system; as you already know for sure, it is the only one of its kind in the world. Its tests have been successfully completed, and, moreover, on December 1 of last year, these systems began their trial service at the airfields of the Southern Military District.


The unique flight characteristics of the high-speed carrier aircraft allow the missile to be delivered to the point of discharge within minutes. The missile flying at a hypersonic speed, 10 times faster than the speed of sound, can also manoeuvre at all phases of its flight trajectory, which also allows it to overcome all existing and, I think, prospective anti-aircraft and anti-missile defence systems, delivering nuclear and conventional warheads in a range of over 2,000 kilometres. We called this system Kinzhal (Dagger).

Video, please.

Upcoming video

But this is not all I have to say.

A real technological breakthrough is the development of a strategic missile system with fundamentally new combat equipment – a gliding wing unit, which has also been successfully tested.

I will say once again what we have repeatedly told our American and European partners who are NATO members: we will make the necessary efforts to neutralise the threats posed by the deployment of the US global missile defence system. We mentioned this during talks, and even said it publicly. Back in 2004, after the exercises of the strategic nuclear forces when the system was tested for the first time, I said the following at a meeting with the press (It is embarrassing to quote myself, but it is the right thing to say here):

So, I said: “As other countries increase the number and quality of their arms and military potential, Russia will also need to ensure it has new generation weapons and technology.

In this respect, I am pleased to inform you that successfully completed experiments during these exercises enable us to confirm that in the near future, the Russian Armed Forces, the Strategic Missile Forces, will receive new hypersonic-speed, high-precision new weapons systems that can hit targets at inter-continental distance and can adjust their altitude and course as they travel. This is a very significant statement because no country in the world as of now has such arms in their military arsenal.” End of quote.

Of course, every word has a meaning because we are talking about the possibility of bypassing interception boundaries. Why did we do all this? Why did we talk about it? As you can see, we made no secret of our plans and spoke openly about them, primarily to encourage our partners to hold talks. Let me repeat, this was in 2004. It is actually surprising that despite all the problems with the economy, finances and the defence industry, Russia has remained a major nuclear power. No, nobody really wanted to talk to us about the core of the problem, and nobody wanted to listen to us. So listen now.

Unlike existing types of combat equipment, this system is capable of intercontinental flight at supersonic speeds in excess of Mach 20.

As I said in 2004, in moving to its target, the missile’s gliding cruise bloc engages in intensive manoeuvring – both lateral (by several thousand km) and vertical. This is what makes it absolutely invulnerable to any air or missile defence system. The use of new composite materials has made it possible to enable the gliding cruise bloc to make a long-distance guided flight practically in conditions of plasma formation. It flies to its target like a meteorite, like a ball of fire. The temperature on its surface reaches 1,600–2,000 degrees Celsius but the cruise bloc is reliably guided.

Play the video, please.

Upcoming video

For obvious reasons we cannot show the outer appearance of this system here. This is still very important. I hope everyone understands this. But let me assure you that we have all this and it is working well. Moreover, Russian industrial enterprises have embarked on the development of another new type of strategic weapon. We called it the Avangard.

We are well aware that a number of other countries are developing advanced weapons with new physical properties. We have every reason to believe that we are one step ahead there as well – at any rate, in the most essential areas.

We have achieved significant progress in laser weapons. It is not just a concept or a plan any more. It is not even in the early production stages. Since last year, our troops have been armed with laser weapons.

I do not want to reveal more details. It is not the time yet. But experts will understand that with such weaponry, Russia’s defence capacity has multiplied.

Here is another short video.

Upcoming video

Those interested in military equipment are welcome to suggest a name for this new weaponry, this cutting-edge system.

Of course, we will be refining this state-of-the-art technology. Obviously, there is far more in development than I have mentioned today. But this is enough for now.

I want to specifically emphasise that the newly developed strategic arms – in fact, new types of strategic weapons – are not the result of something left over from the Soviet Union. Of course, we relied on some ideas from our ingenious predecessors. But everything I have described today is the result of the last several years, the product of dozens of research organisations, design bureaus and institutes. 

Thousands, literally thousands of our experts, outstanding scientists, designers, engineers, passionate and talented workers have been working for years, quietly, humbly, selflessly, with total dedication. There are many young professionals among them. They are our true heroes, along with our military personnel who demonstrated the best qualities of the Russian army in combat. I want to address each of them right now and say that there will absolutely be awards, prizes and honorary titles but, because I have met many of you in person many times, I know you are not after awards. The most important thing is to reliably ensure the security of our country and our people. As President and on behalf of the Russian people, I want to say thank you very much for your hard work and its results. Our country needs them so much.

As I have already said, all future military products are based on remarkable advances that can, should and will be used in high-technology civilian sectors. I would like to stress that only a country with the highest level of fundamental research and education, developed research, technology, industrial infrastructure and human resources can successfully develop unique and complex weapons of this kind. You can see that Russia has all these resources.

We will expand this potential and focus on delivering on the ambitious goals our country has set itself in terms of economic, social and infrastructure development. Effective defence will serve as a guarantee of Russia’s long-term development.

Let me reiterate that each of the armament systems I referred to is uniquely important. Even more importantly, taken together all these advances enable the Defence Ministry and General Staff to develop a comprehensive defence system, in which every piece of new military equipment will be assigned a proper role. On top of strategic weapons that are currently on combat alert and benefit from regular updates, Russia will have a defence capability that would guarantee its security in the long term.

Of course, there are many things that we have to do in terms of military construction, but one thing is already clear: Russia possesses a modern, high-technology army that is quite compact given the size of the territory, centred on the officer corps, who are dedicated to their country and are ready to sacrifice anything for its people. Sooner or later, other armies will also have the technology, the weapons, even the most advanced ones. But this does not worry us, since we already have it and will have even better armaments in the future. What matters is that they will never have people or officers like the Russian pilot Major Roman Filipov.

I hope that everything that was said today would make any potential aggressor think twice, since unfriendly steps against Russia such as deploying missile defences and bringing NATO infrastructure closer to the Russian border become ineffective in military terms and entail unjustified costs, making them useless for those promoting these initiatives.

It was our duty to inform our partners of what I said here today under the international commitments Russia had subscribed to. When the time comes, foreign and defence ministry experts will have many opportunities to discuss all these matters with them, if of course our partners so desire.

For my part, I should note that we have conducted the work to reinforce Russia's defence capability within the current arms control agreements; we are not violating anything. I should specifically say that Russia's growing military strength is not a threat to anyone; we have never had any plans to use this potential for offensive, let alone aggressive goals. 

We are not threatening anyone, not going to attack anyone or take away anything from anyone with the threat of weapons. We do not need anything. Just the opposite. I deem it necessary to emphasise (and it is very important) that Russia's growing military power is a solid guarantee of global peace as this power preserves and will preserve strategic parity and the balance of forces in the world, which, as is known, have been and remain a key factor of international security after WWII and up to the present day. 

And to those who in the past 15 years have tried to accelerate an arms race and seek unilateral advantage against Russia, have introduced restrictions and sanctions that are illegal from the standpoint of international law aiming to restrain our nation's development, including in the military area, I will say this: everything you have tried to prevent through such a policy has already happened. No one has managed to restrain Russia.

Now we have to be aware of this reality and be sure that everything I have said today is not a bluff ‒ and it is not a bluff, believe me ‒ and to give it a thought and dismiss those who live in the past and are unable to look into the future, to stop rocking the boat we are all in and which is called the Earth.

In this connection, I would like to note the following. We are greatly concerned by certain provisions of the revised nuclear posture review, which expand the opportunities for reducing and reduce the threshold for the use of nuclear arms. Behind closed doors, one may say anything to calm down anyone, but we read what is written. And what is written is that this strategy can be put into action in response to conventional arms attacks and even to a cyber-threat. 

I should note that our military doctrine says Russia reserves the right to use nuclear weapons solely in response to a nuclear attack, or an attack with other weapons of mass destruction against the country or its allies, or an act of aggression against us with the use of conventional weapons that threaten the very existence of the state. This all is very clear and specific.

As such, I see it is my duty to announce the following. Any use of nuclear weapons against Russia or its allies, weapons of short, medium or any range at all, will be considered as a nuclear attack on this country. Retaliation will be immediate, with all the attendant consequences. 

There should be no doubt about this whatsoever. There is no need to create more threats to the world. Instead, let us sit down at the negotiating table and devise together a new and relevant system of international security and sustainable development for human civilisation. We have been saying this all along. All these proposals are still valid. Russia is ready for this.

Our policies will never be based on claims to exceptionalism. We protect our interests and respect the interests of other countries. We observe international law and believe in the inviolable central role of the UN. These are the principles and approaches that allow us to build strong, friendly and equal relations with the absolute majority of countries.

Our comprehensive strategic partnership with the People’s Republic of China is one example. Russia and India also enjoy a special privileged strategic relationship. Our relations with many other countries in the world are entering a new dynamic stage.

Russia is widely involved in international organisations. With our partners, we are advancing such associations and groups as the CSTO, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and BRICS. We are promoting a positive agenda at the UN, G20 and APEC. We are interested in normal and constructive cooperation with the United States and the European Union. We hope that common sense will prevail and our partners will opt for honest and equal work together.

Even if our views clash on some issues, we still remain partners because we must work together to respond to the most complex challenges, ensure global security, and build the future world, which is becoming increasingly interconnected, with more and more dynamic integration processes.

Russia and its partners in the Eurasian Economic Union seek to make it a globally competitive integration group. The EAEU’s agenda includes building a common market for electricity, oil, petroleum products and gas, harmonising financial markets, and linking our customs authorities. We will also continue to work on a greater Eurasian partnership.

Colleagues, this is a turning period for the entire world and those who are willing and able to change, those who are taking action and moving forward will take the lead. Russia and its people have expressed this will at every defining moment in our history. In just 30 years, we have undergone changes that took centuries in other countries.

We will continue to confidently chart our own course, just as we always have. We will stick together, as we always have. Our unity is the most durable foundation for future progress. In the coming years, it is our goal to further strengthen this unity so that we are one team that understands that change is necessary and is ready to devote its energy, knowledge, experience and talent to achieving common goals.

Challenges and big goals give special meaning to our lives. We must be bold in our plans and actions, take responsibility and initiative, and grow stronger, which means being of use to our families, children, the whole country; changing the world and our country for the better; and creating the Russia that we all dream about. Only then will the next decade and the entire 21st century undoubtedly be an age of outstanding triumphs for Russia and our shared success. I believe it will be so.

Thank you.

vendredi 2 mars 2018

Vladimir Poutine répond à la doctrine nucléaire de Trump et dévoile les nouveaux armements russes

Adresse de Vladimir Poutine à lAssemblée Fédérale, 1er mars 2018

La Russie surclasse les Etats-Unis et devient la première puissance militaire mondiale. 

Transcription :

[...] Chers collègues,

L’opération en Syrie a prouvé les capacités accrues des forces armées russes. Au cours des dernières années, beaucoup a été fait pour optimiser l’armée et la marine. Les forces armées ont maintenant 3,7 fois plus d’armes modernes. Plus de 300 nouvelles unités d’équipement ont été mises en service. Les troupes de missiles stratégiques ont reçu 80 nouveaux missiles balistiques intercontinentaux, 102 missiles balistiques lancés par sous-marins et trois sous-marins nucléaires Borei à missiles balistiques. Douze régiments de missiles ont reçu le nouveau missile balistique intercontinental Yars. Le nombre de transporteurs d’armes de haute précision à longue portée a été multiplié par 12, tandis que le nombre de missiles de croisière guidés a augmenté de plus de 30 fois. L’armée, les forces aérospatiales et la marine se sont aussi considérablement renforcées. [Applaudissements]

La Russie et le monde entier connaissent les noms de nos derniers avions, sous-marins et armes antiaériennes, ainsi que de nos systèmes de missiles guidés terrestres, aériens et maritimes. Tous sont des armes de pointe et de haute technologie. Un champ radar solide visant à avertir d’une attaque de missile a été créé le long du périmètre de la Russie – c’est très important. D’énormes failles sont apparues après la désintégration de l’URSS. Toutes ont été réparées.

Un bond en avant a été fait dans le développement d’avions sans pilote; le centre de contrôle de la défense nationale a été établi; et le commandement opérationnel de la zone maritime lointaine a été formé. Le nombre de membres des services professionnels a augmenté de 2,4 fois et la disponibilité de l’équipement dans les forces armées est passée de 70% à 95-100%. L’attente pluriannuelle pour l’obtention d’un logement permanent a été éliminée, la période d’attente ayant été réduite de 83%. [Applaudissements]

Maintenant, sur le problème le plus important de la défense.

Je vais parler des plus récents systèmes d’armes stratégiques russes que nous sommes en train de développer en réponse au retrait unilatéral des États-Unis du Traité sur les missiles anti-balistiques (ABM) et au déploiement sur le terrain de leurs systèmes de défense antimissile, à la fois aux États-Unis et au-delà de leurs frontières nationales.

Je voudrais commencer par un bref rappel du passé récent.

En 2000, les États-Unis ont annoncé leur retrait du Traité sur les missiles anti-balistiques. La Russie y était catégoriquement opposée. Nous considérions le Traité ABM américano-soviétique signé en 1972 comme la pierre angulaire du système de sécurité international. En vertu de ce traité, les parties avaient le droit de déployer des systèmes de défense antimissile balistique dans une seule de leurs régions. La Russie a déployé ces systèmes autour de Moscou, et les États-Unis autour de leur base ICBM basée à Grand Forks [Dakota du Nord].

Avec le Traité de réduction des armements stratégiques, le Traité ABM créait non seulement un climat de confiance, mais empêchait également l’une ou l’autre des parties d’utiliser inconsidérément des armes nucléaires, ce qui aurait mis en danger l’humanité, car le nombre limité de systèmes de défense balistique rendait l’agresseur potentiel vulnérable à une frappe de riposte.

Nous avons fait de notre mieux pour dissuader les Américains de se retirer du Traité et préserver léquilibre stratégique. Tous nos efforts ont été vains. Les États-Unis se sont retirés du Traité en 2002. Même après cela, nous avons essayé de développer un dialogue constructif avec eux. Nous avons proposé de travailler ensemble dans ce domaine pour apaiser les inquiétudes et maintenir l’atmosphère de confiance. À un moment donné, j’ai pensé qu’un compromis était possible, mais ce n’était pas le cas. Toutes nos propositions, absolument toutes, ont été rejetées. Alors, nous avons dit que nous allions devoir améliorer nos systèmes de frappe modernes pour protéger notre sécurité. En réponse, les États-Unis ont déclaré qu’ils ne créaient pas de système de défense balistique mondial contre la Russie, qui était libre de faire ce qu’elle veut, et que les États-Unis présumeront que nos actions ne sont pas dirigées contre eux.

Les raisons de cette position sont évidentes. Après l’effondrement de l’URSS, la Russie, connue sous le nom d’URSS ou de Russie soviétique à l’étranger, a perdu 23,8% de son territoire national, 48,5% de sa population, 41% de son PIB, 39,4% de son potentiel industriel (presque la moitié de notre potentiel, je tiens à le souligner), ainsi que 44,6% de sa capacité militaire en raison de la division des forces armées soviétiques entre les anciennes Républiques soviétiques. L’équipement militaire de l’armée russe devenait obsolète et les forces armées étaient dans un état pitoyable. Une guerre civile faisait rage dans le Caucase, et des inspecteurs américains supervisaient l’exploitation de nos principales usines d’enrichissement d’uranium.

Pendant un certain temps, la question n’était pas de savoir si nous serions en mesure de développer un système d’armes stratégiques – certains se demandaient même si notre pays serait capable de stocker et de conserver en toute sécurité les armes nucléaires dont nous avons hérité après l’effondrement de l’URSS. La Russie avait des dettes considérables, son économie ne pouvait pas fonctionner sans des prêts du FMI et de la Banque mondiale, et il était impossible de soutenir la sphère sociale.

Apparemment, nos partenaires ont eu l’impression que dans le futur prévisible, il serait impossible pour notre pays de relancer son économie, son industrie, son industrie de défense et ses forces armées à des niveaux soutenant le potentiel stratégique nécessaire. Et si tel était le cas, [se disaient les Etats-Unis], il ne servait à rien de compter avec l’opinion de la Russie, et il était nécessaire de rechercher davantage l’ultime suprématie militaire unilatérale afin de dicter ses termes dans toutes les sphères à l’avenir.

Fondamentalement, cette position, cette logique, à en juger par les réalités de cette période, est compréhensible, et nous sommes nous-mêmes à blâmer. Pendant toutes ces années, les 15 années écoulées depuis le retrait des États-Unis du Traité sur les missiles anti-balistiques, nous avons constamment essayé de réengager les Etats-Unis dans des discussions sérieuses pour parvenir à des accords dans le domaine de la stabilité stratégique.

Nous avons réussi à atteindre certains de ces objectifs. En 2010, la Russie et les États-Unis ont signé le nouveau traité START, contenant des mesures pour poursuivre la réduction et la limitation des armes offensives stratégiques. Cependant, à la lumière des projets de construction d’un système mondial de missiles anti-balistiques, qui sont toujours en cours aujourd’hui, tous les accords signés dans le cadre du nouveau START commencent à devenir obsolètes, car tandis que le nombre de porteurs et d’armes est en train d’être réduit, l’une des parties, à savoir les États-Unis, permet une croissance constante et incontrôlée du nombre de missiles anti-balistiques, améliore leur qualité et crée de nouvelles zones de lancement de missiles. Si nous ne faisons rien, cela aboutira finalement à la rétrogradation complète du potentiel nucléaire de la Russie. Cela signifie que tous nos missiles pourraient simplement être interceptés.

Malgré nos nombreuses protestations et plaidoyers, la machine américaine a été mise en mouvement, et la bande transporteuse a avancé. De nouveaux systèmes de défense antimissile ont été installés en Alaska et en Californie. A la suite de l’expansion de l’OTAN à l’Est, deux nouvelles zones de défense antimissile ont été créées en Europe occidentale : une a déjà été créée en Roumanie, tandis que le déploiement du système en Pologne est maintenant presque achevé. Leur portée continuera à augmenter. De nouvelles zones de lancement doivent être créées au Japon et en Corée du Sud. Le système de défense antimissile américain mondial comprend également cinq croiseurs et trente destroyers qui, à notre connaissance, ont été déployés dans des régions proches des frontières de la Russie. Je n’exagère pas le moins du monde. Et ce processus s’accélère rapidement.

Qu’avons-nous donc fait, en plus de protester et d’avertir ? Comment la Russie répondra-t-elle à ce défi ? Voilà notre réponse.