WASHINGTON, April 5 (UPI) -- Recent pronouncements by senior Bush administration officials that Russian nuclear capabilities are now neutralized for U.S. security because the Pentagon can destroy Russia's nuclear arsenal in a single strike without fear of retaliation, have reverberated in the Russian government. Russia now has 3,500 nuclear warheads compared with 4,500 American ones.
BBC Monitoring reported that on April 2 Ren TV in Moscow interviewed a number of Russian specialists about the assertion.
Independent military observer Pavel Felgengauer noted, "The Soviet nuclear missile potential is indeed being gradually eroded in our country. Although, superficially, it would appear that we still have many delivery vehicles and warheads, their combat readiness is diminishing."
To support his assertion, Felgengauer cited failed Sineva missile launches from nuclear submarines in February 2004.
Vladimir Dvorkin of the Center for International Security had a more positive assessment of Russia's nuclear retaliatory capabilities.
Dvorkin said: "Normally it would be mobile land-based missile systems and submarine-launched missiles which survive. Russia currently has 291 mobile Topol launchers equipped with powerful combat systems. This fact alone means a disarming strike -- i.e. one which would leave Russia nothing to retaliate with -- is out of the question."
Ren moderator Igor Prokopenko observed, "It is hard to say why the Americans needed to publicize their information about Russia's nuclear impotence. As a rule, such reports -- especially if they are authentic -- remain top secret. But maybe this is revenge for Iraq or for Iran, or for Georgia, the Dniester region and Belarus. Who knows? However, Washington should definitely appreciate that these days anything could result from improvisation on the nuclear theme, even a revision of the Russian military budget. Moscow might calmly announce the deployment of additional nuclear forces, and who would have the audacity to say that Russia is not entitled to do this?"
Unmanned aerial vehicles are becoming increasingly useful in the U.S. military deployment in Iraq.
While the Air Force has labeled its newest UAV the "Desert Hawk," according to commander of the 407th Expeditionary Security Forces Squadron, Air Force Maj. Benito Barron at Ali Base outside Nasiriyah, "We call it 'the flying beer cooler.'"
The Lockheed Martin Force Protection Airborne Surveillance System is designed to assist in securing U.S. military installations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Desert Hawk is remotely controlled via a touch-sensitive computer screen and transmits video or infrared images in real time back to its operators.
Stars and Stripes reported on April 4 that the Desert Hawk flies at roughly 60 miles per hour.
Barron said, "When a patrol isn't close enough to see what's going on, we're still able to say, 'Oh, it's just a camel herder, or, yes, it is a white Toyota truck.'"
The three-foot-long $40,000 Desert Hawk is built from mold-injected polypropylene foam and is assembled in a modular snap-together method. The Desert Hawk's wings and fuselage are attached with strips of Velcro and packing tape and it is launched using a long bungee cord. As the Desert Hawk has no landing gear, it glides to land on its Kevlar-reinforced underside. The drone can either fly a preprogrammed course or be operated manually.
The Desert Hawk's simple construction allows it to endure a lot of punishment. If it crashes its components are glued or taped back together.
Staff Sgt. Jennifer Simmons said, "For every one crash, we have 20 successful missions."
Ali Base intelligence officer Capt. Joshua Camp said, "For us, this little whirlybird is very valuable. It saves us a lot of time and manpower to determine what's going on out there."
Balochistan, Pakistan's largest province, has been gripped by rising violence since December 2005 when insurgents attempted to assassinate President Pervez Musharraf in the provincial capital Quetta. Islamabad responded by sending in troops, who now total more than 40,000.
The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace has issued a report on the Balochistan unrest. Frederic Grare, who served as a French diplomat in France's embassy in Islamabad, authored the study.
Grare writes, "In the absence of foreign support, which does not appear imminent, the Baloch movement cannot prevail over a determined central government with obviously superior military strength."
Grare concludes that Baloch nationalists are using the turmoil to strengthen their negotiating position with the central government. Baloch leaders have stated that they aspire to a generous amount of autonomy. As Balochistan is rich in natural resources, including gas, it is becoming increasingly important to the national economy.
Grare believes that if the Pakistani government denies the local requests for increased autonomy, then the medium- and long-term consequences of the struggle for independence will be hard to foresee, with the situation possibly degenerating into civil war.
The Daily Times reported on April 4 that Grare wrote, "Almost six decades of intermittent conflict have given rise to a deep feeling of mistrust towards the central government. The Baloch will not forget Gen. Pervez Musharraf's recent promises and the insults hurled from time to time at certain nationalist leaders. The projects that were trumpeted as the means to Balochistan's development and integration have so far led only to the advance of the Pakistani military in the province, accompanied by the removal of the local population from their lands and by the intense speculation that benefits only the army and its henchmen."
Grare postulates that Baloch nationalism is a "reality" that Pakistan's government cannot ignore forever or fob off with unmet promises of development.
"For the moment, with little certainty about the conclusion of an agreement between the central government and the nationalist leaders, the province is likely to enter a new phase of violence with long-term consequences that are difficult to predict. This conflict could be used in Pakistan and elsewhere as a weapon against the Pakistan government. Such a prospect would affect not only Pakistan but possibly all its neighbors. It is ultimately Islamabad that must decide whether Balochistan will become its Achilles' heel," Grare wrote.
During the last three decades, the conflict in Balochistan has resulted in 8,000 deaths, 3,000 of them military personnel.
