Due to lack of finance, Russia cannot cope with the U.S.’s effort of researching new kinds of weapons. However, the United States has left the rest of the world back in the previous generation of warfare tactics.

            Installation of the national antimissile defense system and “stockpiling” the nuclear warheads are only tricks, concealing the main goal of the U.S.: To rearm its armed forces with high-precision weapons by 2010.

            Khokhlov: Vladimir Ivanovich, what can you say about the current situation with military potentials in Russia and the U.S.?

            Slipchenko: We are almost hopelessly lagging behind. Only now Russia’s leaders come to an understanding that we are lagging a whole generation of wars behind the United States. Our troop leaders still think with categories of “ductile” wars, employing multitudes of ground-based troops. The generals still prepare for wars waged on the land and for the land.

            Just recall our certainty that the Americans would “get stuck” in Afghanistan. Gloating comments, on the part of our generals as well, asserting that huge personnel losses in the mountains of Afghanistan would put the U.S. in its place. However, nobody attended that the United States has been waging war without casualties, without close contact with the enemy for a decade already. (…) It is nice Russia did not join this warfare. If, having yielded to the persuasion of the U.S., we had sent our tanks, which are the best in the world, to Afghanistan, we would have seen what skillful enemies the Talibs are…

            Putin realized that we have no means to wage warfare in Afghanistan. This is the only reason why Russia confined itself to the humanitarian actions carried out by the Emergencies Ministry. Russia has always had political and military interests in Afghanistan. Alas, we have no means to defend them. Soon the U.S. will “ask” Russia to withdraw from some Central Asian states of the former Soviet Union, and we would be saying once again we have nothing to do there… However, drug trafficking would run through Russia and further into Europe then. Believe my prediction: The U.S. would not be suppressing drug production in the region too severely. The heroin produced there would not reach the United States, while Russia and Europe, “hooked on drugs,” do not matter much. The “liberated” Kosovo, which has become Europe’s largest center for transferring Asian-produced drugs, is an evident example…

            Khokhlov: What is the U.S.’s military domination about?

            Slipchenko: The U.S. connected its hopes with high-precision weapons and surpassed the entire world in researching, testing, and mass production of such weapons. The U.S. does not need a cumbersome army any more, it does not need to capture the area of a victim-state and eliminate its armed forces. Application of high-precision cruise missiles, destroying key objects of economy and life support would bring success in the warfare. The military-industrial complex of the United States appointed George Bush, Jr. president in order to achieve this goal. (…) Bush has come to power to rearm America. The price of this rearmament is some $50-60 billion annually within the next 10-15 years. As my expertise shows, closer to 2010 the U.S. armed forces will be able to wage war against any state in the world for 30 days, launching at least 1,000 high-precision cruise missiles daily to hit economic objects of the given country. It would amount to 30,000 missiles, which cost $1 million each. By 2020 the U.S. would be able to wage warfare for 60 days already, by 2030 for 90 days. The new weapons must cause structural changes in the U.S. Army.

            (…) America has been reducing its ground forces without a stir. The divisions remain only formally. The Navy and the Air Force will be retained, but only as a means to transport ammunition for high-precision weapons to theaters of military operations. As regards the structure of the Army, now the U.S. has been changing from activity in spheres (surface, air, sea) to activity in accordance with functions: strategic offensive and strategic defensive forces.

            Implementing a structural change in its armed forces, at the same time the U.S. is attempting to leave the rest of the world in the previous generation of wars. Withdrawal from the ABM Treaty and “stockpiling” of the withdrawn nuclear armaments are large-scale tricks or strategic shady deals, whatever you may call them.

            Khokhlov: Why?

            Slipchenko: Installing the national antimissile defense system, the Americans care for defending the area of the United States from a nuclear attack least of all. By 2010-2015, no country in the world, with the exception of Russia and China, would be able to attack the U.S. with their nuclear weapons. The U.S. will install an antimissile defense system, but it will be a secondary, minor task. Its main goal is to erect a space infrastructure under disguise of the antimissile defense system, to wage warfare without close contacts with the enemy. America has been developing a global space-based reconnaissance-information network of 200 man-made satellites, with the aid of which it would wage war against any country by means of high precision weapons. In this case, Carlson is not as scary as his propeller. It is possible to break through an antimissile defense system, but a global space “web,” enveloping the world, its cost amounting to $50 billion, is a global threat.

            Non-elimination of the withdrawn nuclear arsenals, but “stockpiling” them in the storehouses is the second trick. The Americans have been storing the nuclear warheads with only one purpose: In order that the Russians and the Chinese, waiting for a dirty trick to be played on them, would resume spending their finances and use the brain-power of their scientists to retain their nuclear arsenals.

            As academician Sakharov said once, 500 nuclear warheads able to reach the enemy’s territory is enough to provide a nuclear deterrent. However, the U.S. strongly needs the nuclear states to remain in the previous generation of wars and not to become its rivals in the research of conventional high-precision weapons. Unfortunately, in my opinion, our leaders have “swallowed the bait…” (…)

            Khokhlov: Vladimir Ivanovich, the picture of the future order in the world you’ve depicted is terrifying. Are there any chances for Russia to avoid that?

            Slipchenko: We have good initiatives in the sphere of researching high-precision weapons; however, we have lost a decade. Perhaps, we still have time to reach the last step at the back of the last carriage of the leaving locomotive. The almightiness of the U.S. in the future is to the same degree dangerous as the threat of international terrorism. Permissiveness depraves and incites to dangerous steps. It is necessary that Russia’s leaders direct the effort of the national military-industrial complex for research of high-precision weapons. At the moment, the military-industrial complex has been working in accordance with a formulation, “We give the armed forces not the weapons they demand, but the weapons they need.” It is necessary to accept the challenge of the 21^st century. We may still hope to gain a decent position in it.

 —o—