map
Our Affiliates
Listen In 28 LanguagesRFE/RL Radio
In 28 Languages

CNN: RFE/RL is "World Changing Radio"

CNN International reports on RFE/RL's role in Czechoslovakia's Velvet Revolution, and its continuing mission to spread free media More
More Articles

Features

Military Expert Says Russian Missiles More Bark Than Bite

An Iskander missile system on display during a military equipment exhibition in the Siberian town of Nizhny Tagil (file photo)

November 06, 2008
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has pledged to deploy short-range Iskander missiles in Kaliningrad, a western exclave that is surrounded by European Union countries. Is this a new initiative, and what are the missiles' capabilities?

RFE/RL correspondent Kathleen Moore spoke to Duncan Lennox, editor of "Jane's Strategic Weapons Systems," and started by asking him to describe the different types of Iskander missiles.

Duncan Lennox: There are two basic types of Iskander, one that they've offered for the export market, which has a range of 280 kilometers, and that's normally referred to as the Iskander-E, and one which they're believed to have incorporated into their own service, the Russians, which is sometimes called Iskander-M, and has occasionally been called Tender, and that is reported to have a range of up to 400 kilometers. There's no clear statement from the Russians as to the range of their present Iskander missiles.

Duncan Lennox
RFE/RL:
These are meant to be highly precise missiles, is that right? What are their capabilities?

Lennox: Yes, very accurate, within 30 meters [of the target] and to carry a single warhead, which can vary from about 480 kilograms up to about 700 kilograms and would expect to be high explosive, either a unitary high explosive or submunitions.

RFE/RL:
Can they be upgraded to give them a longer range?

Lennox:
It's unlikely because the Russians fell foul of the INF [Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces] treaty in 1987, which bans the U.S. and Russia from having short-range ballistic missiles with a range greater than 500 kilometers, and they had to scrap their SS-23s because they exceeded that range. So I would think they would be reluctant to increase the range with that treaty still in place.

RFE/RL: Could they potentially reach the proposed missile-interceptor site in Poland that's to be part of the U.S. missile-defense system?

Lennox: Yes. Could they do any damage? Probably not.

RFE/RL: Why do you say that?

Lennox: Because if the Americans ever put missiles in Poland, then they would be in silos and a high-explosive warhead probably wouldn't do a lot of damage. It would have to be incredibly accurate and a very lucky shot to actually cause any problems.

RFE/RL: What about the proposed radar site in the Czech Republic?

Lennox: I doubt if it could reach that far.

RFE/RL: Given that, what is the likely aim of the Russian plan?

Lennox: I think the aim is to express Russia's anger and disappointment with the Americans for continuing with the proposals to put missiles in Poland and the radar in the Czech Republic.

RFE/RL: This is not a new initiative either, is it?

Lennox: No, we've heard this over the last nine months at least, from various senior Russian officers and people in the government. It really is just an expression of anger and disappointment at the American decision.

RFE/RL: There had been some problems with the development of the Iskander missiles, with delays and a lack of funding, is that right?

Lennox: There have been a lot of problems because of financial stringencies in the Russian armed forces, but they appear to have been overcome now. If you remember the Dutch [government] said quite clearly that the Iskander had been used in Georgia in the summer, though the Russians said it wasn't.

RFE/RL:
And what's your view?

Lennox:
I can't believe the Dutch got it wrong. They made a very detailed inquiry into the death of one of their reporters, and the Dutch [issued] quite a comprehensive report. So I would assume that Iskander is in service with the Russian miiltary.
    Next 
Comments page 1 of 2
by: Ivo
November 12, 2008 17:28
*sigh*

Cyborn and unfortunately most other Russians will never understand (even when they live outside the Motherland and have access to non-Kremlin information) that there is no external threat to Russia, that NATO is not after Russia, rather it's a defence against it, that us in Russia's Near and not so Near Abroad are the ones who have all the right to fear. When did Bulgarian, Czech, Latvian or Hungarian tanks rolled over Russian soil? When did any foreign country imposed any type of regime on Russia!?

Needless to mention the failure to realize that the Czechs and the others decided themselves who to befriend, it's like the (in)famous voting with feet — if Socialism was THAT good why were those countries so heavily guarded? Heavily guarded against those who wanted to LEAVE not like the say US-MX border. If it was just a joy being 'allied' to Moscow why did all people who had the power to choose chose to join the EU and NATO?

Why Russia's military allies are oppressive regimes such as the ones in the Central Asia where people do NOT live well?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only reason why Russians tolerate Putin is because they're enjoying relative prosperity not because of some inherited hatred for freedom and democracy, all normal people want to be free.

Yes, Jeff, it's the high rolling paranoia indeed.

by: Jeff from: USA
November 11, 2008 16:32
Is that Russian paranoia I'm hearing? Cyborn who? Cyborn what? In case if you ahven't been in the loop, although the US never called itself the "big brother" the unipolar system left the us as the "big brother." The US inherited the title after early 1990s and didn't ask for it. Don't ask me the questions that have obvious answers, read the papers, watch global news, and you will see who is spreading the propaganda. Have free speech and free press and a democracy and then we can talk. Long live Lenin. Stalin. Beria. Gorbachev. Putin. Medvedev. Putin Again! You can't have a face-to-face conversation while being in different floors. Putin did that, Medvedev continues it(he has no choice). It wasn't our idea, so easy on the blame game.

Regarding the US "terrorizing" other countries. G.W. Bush and his administration is a group of maniacs that will leave office in 10 weeks. Don't blame all Americans, or me. Not all of us voted for him, especially myself.

by: Cyborn
November 08, 2008 14:16
to Jeff. Russia just don't want to be a next victim of "democratization" by bombs and cruise missiles.
Reason why United States have a greatest military budget in a world - is a need to terrorize countries, which don't want to do, what you tell them to do. It's americans, who needs to wake up! Uncle Sam is watching? So Uncle Sam now a Big Brother, huh?

by: Cyborn
November 08, 2008 13:26
Anton - you must adress this question to Georgians. They take these photos. And they clame, what missiles had a cluster warhead. Cluster munition was scattered midair, so remaining parts can continue their flight on some distance before fall.
It is unclear, if missile really broke into building, or was deliberately placed this way by Georgians to make more impression on public.

by: Anton from: Auckland
November 08, 2008 09:27
Cyborn, I am no expert in military stuff, but so far the only threat I can estimate via these images is the danger of this thing falling on one's head from the sky. I just can not understand how a missile can explode and the same time remain almost in one piece - even a gunpowder keg seems to be able to blast this tail part in pieces. Or maybe it separates in the flight?

by: Jeff from: USA
November 07, 2008 19:51
This is rather amusing. The sad part is that, after listening to Medvedev making laughable comments and issuing lame threats, now I can help but wonder why would Russia get ahead of itself. Those missiles are toys compared to what the US military has in it's arsenal. Yet you never hear the US issue threats against Europe or Russia. The US can contain Russia from the other side of the Atlantic, it doesn't really need the proposed missile defense shield in Eastern Europe. Those sites are far more important to Poland and Czech Republic than the US. Russia is acting very impulsively, threatening Poland with a possible nuclear attack is incomprehensible. After all, neither the Poles, nor the Americans are going to stand on the side by letting the drunk Russian generals making stupid remarks. Remember that Uncle Sam is watching, and very carefully. It's been a couple of years that Russians have been lifting themselves out of poverty, no need to get so cocky prematurely. Our military budget alone is half the amount of the entire Russian budget. Haven't you been taught to never write checks your bank can't cash! Medvedev is a puppet president and Putin's pet. Putin himself is a nationalist who thinks that everyone is out to get them, and spreads his KGB style propaganda to the Russian people, who having blindly fallen in love with his personality cult, remain in denial and don't see the direction to which Russia is heading. Wake up people!

by: Cyborn
November 07, 2008 14:35
Anton, do you see any warheads on this pics? It's just a tail parts. Also you can find a photos of exploded "Tochka-U" missiles:
http://www.ljplus.ru/img4/s/c/scrolllock/28.jpg
http://www.ljplus.ru/img4/s/c/scrolllock/29.jpg
Where is a warheads?

by: Anton from: Auckland
November 07, 2008 08:15
Hahaha, Cyborn! Looking at those photos must add courage to the Poles, as they would know that these terrible warheads are not exploding! At least some good news:)

by: Anton from: Auckland
November 07, 2008 08:07
One must be pretty naiive to suggest, that the Russian President may fall so low that starts to threaten with installing some lousy "explosive" warheads. Of course he was talking nuclear, someone who can't figure this out must change occupation and start writing on parking violations themes.

They fit tactical nukes in an artillery shell, why can not they fit it in a missile? And, given the general hatred to the Poles, why would some Russian defense operative even suggest bombing Poland with TNT-loaded charges? The more fallout, the less Poles left! I mean, a call for a conventional attack on Poland at the moment would be probably seen in Russia as a treason, after they agreed to house the ABM system. I am actually surprised, seeing some people still being in doubts about Russia's intentions - not that I support Medvedev, but as a Russian myself I simply understand how he thinks. If I were in his shoes, I would be talking exclusively nuclear, why bother wasting money on some other response?

by: VytautasB from: Vilnius
November 07, 2008 08:04
One should not make too light of this event. Especially if you put it in the context of the negative Russian foreign/domestic policy since Putin appeared on the scene as leader in 2000. Russia now has a nice "pair of pliers" in which too squeeze and cause discomfort to its neighbors (especially its European neighbors). One is the economic-energy squeeze and now we have the military threat directed at two NATO/EU members (not to mention the indirect threat to NATO member Turkey which watched the recent events across it's border with Georgia during the recent Russian-Georgian crisis). Yes a dog barks but one has to keep in mind that it can bite soon after.
    Next 
Comments page 1 of 2
TEXT SIZE - +

Editors' Picks

'Religious Hatred'

Russia Buries Slain Priest Photogallery

President Van Rompuy

'How's That Again?!' Audio

Arresting Images

Photos Of The Week Photogallery

Follow Us On Twitter

Keep up-to-date on all the latest news from RFE/RL's broadcast region by following us on Twitter:
~ You can find our instant news feed at @RFE_RLNEWS.
~ An obsessive Kremlin watcher? Follow our blog at @PowerVertical.
~ Human rights abuses chronicled at @RightsWatchdog.
~ News, comment, and the odd silly dictator story at @TransmissionRFE.

Products and services:

RSSMail SubscriptionMobile