User Answers


Yesterday, you'll recall, I blogged about my theory of "GMO geopolitics" and Russia, offering the speculation that Russia is engaged in a strategy of soft power and cultural critique that is quite deliberate, well-thought-out, and that the "GMO geopolitics" was only a small component or subset of that strategy. There is, however, a "hard" component to this strategy, and a geopolitics paradigm shift, from which it must be viewed, in my opinion.

That paradigm shift, as I have indicated in previous blogs, was really foreseen around the turn of the nineteenth into the twentieth centuries by the famous British geopolitician, Sir Halford MacKinder. MacKinder is, of course, most well-known for his geopolitical axioms that the Eurasian landmass was the principle geopolitical feature, and problem, for the British Empire. Those axioms are usually understood to be connected to MacKinder's three propositions: (1) that who controlled the World Island - i.e., the great Eurasian land mass - controlled the world; (2) that who controlled the East European-Euro-Russian "heartland" controlled the World Island, and (3) that this meant above all costs that an alliance of Germany and Russia had to be prevented at all costs. In this respect, there is a school of thought that Kaiser Wilhelm II's overtures to his cousin Tsar Nicholas II created such alarm in Great Britain that the latter redoubled its efforts to bring Russia into the alliance system encircling Germany prior to World War One. That effort, as we know, was successful. Its current counterpart - the Russian sanctions and shifting of US NATO bases eastward into Romania, Poland, and the Baltic States, which I have argued repeatedly is a similar game, looks to be equally successful, at least, for the moment.

There was, however, a technological component to MacKinder's geopolitical musings which many forget, or ignore altogether, and that technological component was, in fact, the real heart of his concerns. MacKinder saw, with a great deal more prescience than his contemporaries, that railroads and aircraft would eventually bind together that great Eurasian landmass, and essentially make "Oceania" as George Orwell called it, with its sea-power-based trading empire, an irrelevancy, and an expensive, and non-cost-effective one, at that. After all, over the long run, railroads are less expensive and easier to maintain than battleships and cargo ships. It was, as MacKinder formulated it, a contest between "pirates from the sea" against "robbers from the plains," and those were his characterizations. The twentieth century had, by the end of World War Two and the ballistic missile, added space into the geopolitical mix, and the secure control of communications. After all, if one wants to dominate that World Island, one has to have the ground forces, and the communications, to do so, and one must secure the "high ground."

In that context, then, ponder this disturbing article shared by Ms. K.M., which in the context of recent events that suggest Russian electronic warfare capabilities - the Donald Cook, Fitzgerald, and John McCain incidents, the failure of some US cruise missiles to find their targets in Syria, and so on - and one has a technological-geopolitical nightmare which should have the analysts burning the midnight oil in the Pentagram:

America Is Getting Outclassed by Russian Electronic Warfare

Now, as Ms. K.M. pointed out in her email to me, there's a certain statement in this article that must really have the analysts burning the midnight oil (among many other disturbing revelations in the article):

Russian daily Svobodnaya Pressa published an analysis of Russian EW capabilities as they stand today, with a possible nod towards the “Zapad-2017” military exercise and NATO’s resulting anxiety. The paper notes that Russia's qualitative EW superiority vis-a-vis the West is also quantitative—during the past decade, more than a dozen systems underwent state trials and evaluations: “Borisoglebsk-2,” “Algurit,” “Rtut-BM,” “Infauna,” “Krasuha-4,” “Moskva-1,” “Parodist,” “Lorandit-M,” “Leer-3,” “Lesochek,” “Less,” “Magnyi-REB,” “Pole-21,” “Hibini” and “Vitebsk.” Among these are systems designed for localized short-range action; those that protect aircraft, ships and soldiers in a given area of operations; along with systems that neutralize explosive detonators in IEDs and other devices. This list also includes powerful systems with an extensive zone of operation, such as “Krasuha-4” and “Moskva-1.” The paper further notes that the last two systems are built “on the principles that had not previously been used in radio engineering.” In order to suppress radio signals in their entire spectrum, a large set of radiating antennas with extensive power sources are no longer required to create powerful jamming of adversary’s signals. Today, modern means of detection and processing allow these systems to receive an exact copy of enemy signals followed by the generation of analog signal by changing the parameters necessary for the counteraction. Therefore, “a false signal in a distorted form is returned to the enemy”—such counteraction is called “nonenergy interference.”
(Italics and bold emphases added)

To those who've been following the work of U.S. Army Lt. Col Tom Bearden (Ret.) and his research into Russian electronic warfare capability over the years, this will sound very familiar: waves are returned to a target, exactly out of phase with the signals it is broadcasting. And it is important here to understand that "broadcasting" doesn't mean what conventionally most people think it means, for any electrical system - including organic life and therefore humans - broadcast small signals; they have an "electromagnetic" signature which, while minute, is nevertheless very real. The same holds true with electrical systems on ships, military equipment, and so on. Broadcast, in this context, means more than just a crew operating a radio or radar equipment. It means all electronic equipment, period. And provided one can develop a technology to read even the smallest signals, then the ability to "jam" them and shut them down follows in course. Depending on what broadcast signal one wishes to target, from the actual broadcast of a radio or radar transmission, to the "small broadcasts" of electronic systems on ships, military vehicles, aircraft, or their human crews, one can target that specific system.  Granted, I'm indulging in a lot of reading into this paragraph, based on some familiarity with the claims of Lt. Col. Bearden made decades ago, but in my high octane speculative interpretation, this appears to be what the Russians are saying. "After decades of work and research, we've finally made it work, and to develop operational and deployable technologies to do so."  The Russians, it would appear, have developed a technology to read the broadcast signals of electrical circuits precisely and remotely (remember that UFO incident at Malmgren USAF base, and the Boeing aircraft company was brought, and was eventually able to shut off flights of ICBMS remotely, just as the UFO did?  Remember the UFO-ICBM incident at Byelokoroviche in the Ukraine in the early 1980s, where a UFO allegedly started the launch sequence remotely? Hmmmm...)

Given this capability, what does it mean? Well, think of it as a kind of "targetable EMP or electromagnetic pulse" weapon, sans the nuclear explosion typically understood to be needed to create the effect. This means, in short, that any space-based communications system  - global positioning satellites or financial clearing - can not only be shut down, but presumably, this might also permit the distorting of the information modulated into a signal (which, again, the article suggests). In other word, information "x" is the input signal, but what pops out at the other end is not "x", but "y," or even no signal at all. To put this high octane speculation country simple, this system might be capable of shutting down even those systems based on quantum communications (after all, they're broadcasting a signal too).  There's another wild and woolly and off-the-end-of-the-twig speculation here, but I'll save that one for another time, perhaps.

Of course, all of this is high octane speculation, and very high octane at that. The Russian systems described may or may not be related to those systems outlined by Bearden, and under investigation in the Soviet Union. They may or may not work on the same principles he was trying to reverse engineer from the intelligence data he was sifting. But in any case, they're demonstrating capabilities which, if extrapolated, lead to some stunning operational and strategic capabilities.

Bottom line: one can rest assured that the US, France, the UK, Germany, Italy, Japan, China, India and Brazil(for those who've been paying attention, remember Richard Hellman?) will attempt to understand the Russian capabilities, and as it once coaxed and lured Russian pilots to fly their MIGs to Western airbases, or even to steal the Russian equipment right out from under their noses in covert operations (remember the Clint Eastwood film Firefox?) or off the ocean floor (remember that CIA operation to bring up a Russian submarine from the bottom of the ocean?). The problem now is that Russia is no longer Communist. It may be many other things, but it is no longer Communist, and there will be fewer people with access to this equipment that would be willing to defect. And that means covert ops...

See you on the flip side...



10 thoughts on “ THINGS THAT MAKE YOU GO “HMMM…”: RUSSIA’S ...”

  1. This would explain the ridiculously rabid anti-Russian frothing at the mouth in the US, and the constant wars in the Mid East. If the elites want to rule the world based on MacKinder’s premise, that would explain the desire to conquer Russia.

    It would also explain the attempts to draw Russia into a shooting war in Syria – they are playing at the old “fox and hounds” game of trying to stimulate the enemy’s defense forces in order to assess their battle capabilities and make them use the weapons so we can gather data on them (since our own science was so heavily compromised by the breakaway group and the fascist international).

    This would also explain Russia’s great patience and lack of immediate response, even to the assassination of their diplomats. They are too good at chess to fall for such an amateurish ploy any more. They are almost certainly thinking of asymmetrical responses in unrelated areas, to make the trail hard to see, except for those in the know. Beware the man with a slow fuse . . . .

    Unfortunately, the sense of privilege, corruption, and arrogance at the higher levels of our government, not to mention the compromised health of our population (hmm, part of a plan?) is a guarantee that we would lose any real war with the Russians. They are tougher, much more unified, and much more used to hardship than weak, privileged American elites and their chubby slaves. (Hence the rush to robot soldiers.) Add in their ability to render virtually all of our big fancy (read expensive) weapons inert, and you have a recipe for a slaughter.

    An instructive story is the one about NASA spending a million (1960s) dollars to develop an ink pen that would write in zero gravity – the Russians simply used pencils. Pragmatism versus a corrupt, spoiled, opulent mindset.

    If the Russians have technology which can render explosive mechanisms inert, that would explain the incredible success of their sapper units in cleaning up so many IEDs in Syria so quickly with almost no casualties. The stories of how quickly they cleaned up thousands of devices just amazed me, and I thought it might be hyperbole. Now I think otherwise.

    One wonders if that technology extends to cartridges in small arms . . . .

    It would certainly be of use in the “war on terror . . . ,” and could radically alter battlefield and gunfight scenarios.

  2. Around 15-20 years ago, there was a great flurry of articles published in “Aviation Week” about ‘active electronically scanned array’ (AESA) radars. These were originally touted as the radars of the future, offering not only increased range but the ability to ‘infiltrate’ an opponent’s radar with finely-crafted emissions to do who-knows-what mischief.

    However, some wise person eventually noted that the ‘reverse’ was also possible. The very ‘exquisiteness’ of those emitters & receivers also allowed an opponent’s finely-crafted emissions to enter an AESA radar’s receiver and do who-knows-what mischief. Turn-about is fair play.

    The latter realization produced a wave of hand-wringing in technical publications, followed by the topic disappearing from public view. Oops.

    I believe that THIS vulnerability is what is at the core of many of the Incidents mentioned in Joseph’s blog. It turns out that AESA radars have been made mandatory for all 5th-generation US fighter jets (and retrofitted to many older ones). They are at the core of all AEGIS ships of the USN. They are even in those huge land-based radars. They are all ‘inject-able’. And Russia & China (and Israel) know this…

  3. This is a fascinating thesis by Thomas Bearden from 2000, that has been developed by the Russians into a series of miracle working healing device called SCENAR/COSMODIC, or ”The Star Trek Device’ and ”Doctor in your Pocket”. Dr. Jerry Tennant, an American, improved on the Russian tech with his device called The Biomodulator, which I have used successfully in my healing practice for six years.

  4. The Nazis didn’t go away, nor did their science. Some was shared; and not evenly. Some was kept and further developed. Reinhard Gehlen kept that intelligence apparatus supposedly under the West’s thumb. But I doubt he was a 100% committed. I think they kept some aces up their Nazi sleeves to play into the long game. Though the players passed; their progeny has kept the science and overall strategies in play; adjusting for unforeseen events along the stream of time.
    All this prelude to say, this third hand in play has switched sides. Of course, their whole strategy is playing the two major sides against each other. This is just a given. But one side was favored. The financial card played against the Bear in 1989 didn’t end well.

    1. Did someone welch on a deal?
      Or, has the Silk Road caused a choice that meant changing the game plan? Because, the third player is definitely flexing some exotic science muscles, in ways, that are game changers for all concerned.

      Whoever fields the best electronic/robotic warfare commands the electronic 21st Century battlefield.
      A field were there is no financial incentive to win[assuming that private power is in the driver’s seat].

  5. My, one might think being “indispensable” and “exceptional” breeds arrogance and complacency leading to incompetence and corruption in many fields. The reliance of the West on its’ “high technology” is proving to be its Achilles heel.

  6. Phase disconjugation.

    Of course while the Russians have developed all this nifty anti-tech, the Empire has been pushing them against the wall and whacking their diplomats and tossing sanctions upon sanctions at them and destabilizing former Soviet client states, and even though “two can play the black-ops game,” it’s a mysterious third party that must actually be using the stuff!

    1. Agreed. This goes much higher & deeper than just the USA/NATO against Russia.
      It’s the ultimate Divide & Conquer by this third party.
      Play off East against West and you walk away with the spoils.
      It’s fairly clear this is the pattern.

  7. Do we also presume that this non-energy interference technology will be subject to influence by astronomical objects and/or alignments ?

Comments are closed.