Civil Defense Perspectives vol. 40 #3
The Cold War concept, reflected in novels and films, involved a trigger of some sort, followed by massive retaliation and counter-retaliation, and the end of civilization. Two strategic triads facing each other, the U.S. and U.S.S.R., resulted in an uneasy standoff. The picture is now much more complex, with about nine nuclear states (U.S., Russia, China, UK, France, North Korea, India, Pakistan, and probably Israel). Iran has reportedly been on the verge of getting the Bomb for years.
How could these arsenals be used advantageously? Perhaps their main purpose is insurance against invasion by a non-nuclear power. Possibly their existence limited recent hostile encounters between India and Pakistan, which both have nuclear weapons.
Wars in Ukraine and the Middle East are forcing a change in strategic thinking—and challenging the assumption that the “world’s only superpower” is invulnerable.
Ukraine claims to have destroyed one-third of Russia’s long-range nuclear-capable bombers in drone attacks (Operation Spiderweb) on six air bases deep inside Russian territory (probably a huge exaggeration of the damage). These were launched from trucks with retractable tops, driven close to the bases by Russian drivers. Ukraine president Zelenskyy claims to have directed the operation personally, but U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has acknowledged that “Frankly, it’s a proxy war between nuclear powers—the United States, helping Ukraine, and Russia.” (https://tinyurl.com/pvcuj7vw).
While Western headlines celebrated Operation Spiderweb as a daring feat of Ukrainian ingenuity, a closer look reveals that this wasn’t just a strike on Russian airfields. “It was a test—one that blended high-tech sabotage, covert infiltration, and satellite-guided timing with the kind of precision that only the world’s most advanced intelligence networks can deliver, writes Dmitry Kornev, founder of the MilitaryRussia project. But Russian investigators are already analyzing mobile traffic around the impact sites. If they find that the drones weren’t connected to commercial mobile networks, but rather were guided through encrypted, military-grade links, it would expose the full extent of how Western assets operated inside Russia without detection (https://tinyurl.com/43hdk7jc).
Russia raised concerns about why the U.S. did not promptly respond to the attack. President Trump told Putin that he had no prior knowledge of it. Trump told reporters, according to RT.com, “Well, they gave Putin a reason to go in and bomb the hell out of them last night” (https://tinyurl.com/47wx9zhv). The Russian military carried out large-scale strikes against Ukrainian defense industry sites, using air-, sea-, and land-based missiles as well as unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), according to the Defense Ministry. The targets included “design bureaus, enterprises involved in the production and repair of Ukraine’s weapons and military equipment, workshops for the assembly of attack drones, flight training centers, as well as warehouses of weapons and military equipment.” (ibid.).
Consider what would happen if a Russian proxy launched drones against several Strategic Air Command bases. Would most be shot down by air defenses, as in the attack on Russia? What is the U.S. nuclear doctrine for responding to an attack on part of the strategic triad? Would ICBMs be launched? Targeted against the proxy—or against Russia?
Suppose that Ukraine uses a long-range German Taurus missile, which newly installed Chancellor Friedrich Merz has agreed to supply, to strike a target in Moscow. Would Russia retaliate against Berlin? What if the missile was assembled in Ukraine with Ukrainian markings? (tinyurl.com/bd23rkdy)
As escalation continues, Gen. Michael Flynn warns: “The Deep State is boxing Trump in, pushing the U.S. toward ‘final military conflict’” (https://tinyurl.com/53b7xz6t).
Ukraine’s dirty war of sabotage and strikes outside its boundaries is only getting started, opines the Washington Post (https://tinyurl.com/2uenynfn). Its “daring drone attack [which the Post credits to Ukraine’s spy agencies]…delivered “a serious slap in the face of the power…of the Russian Federation.”
The drone attacks did not affect Ukraine’s rapidly deteriorating position on the battle front. Just during the last week of May the Russian forces captured another 18 settlements and villages and more than 200 square kilometers of territory, meaning that the Ukrainian army is no longer able to hold its defense lines and that the end is near, writes David Stockman (Contra Corner 6/2/25). But it broke the rules of the strategic deterrence game and what remains of the 2010 New Start arms control agreement that nominally remains in effect through February 2026 (https://tinyurl.com/n7h4wz5w).
Could the attacks have been timed just before the Istanbul meeting to stall movement toward peace? Recall that Eisenhower’s attempt at détente failed after he misinformed the Soviets that the U-2 spy plane they had shot down was a weather plane that had gone off course. Like Trump, Ike had been kept in the dark (https://tinyurl.com/3sfp66f2).
‘War Lab for the Future’
Ukrainian officials have started to describe their country in these terms as battlefield experience there reflects a shift toward unmanned systems. Many companies in Europe and the U.S. have tested their drones and other systems in Ukraine, striving to gain “battle-tested in Ukraine” credentials for their products.
We are said to have entered the “seventh generation of warfare,” with profound implications for the military-industrial complex. So far, human oversight remains critical, but AI-enabled autonomous systems are under development.
Both Ukraine and Russia are on track to make around 1.5 million drones this year, mostly small “first-person view” (FPV) vehicles that cost a few hundred dollars apiece and can be piloted remotely to identify and attack enemy targets. Ukraine is claimed to have the fastest innovating military-industrial sector in the entire world right now (https://tinyurl.com/vv57dsu9).
The French defense ministry is attempting to persuade Renault, its largest auto manufacturer, to set up production lines for drones in Ukraine, operated by Ukrainian workers. The drones would also be used by the French Armed Forces for “tactical and operational training” (https://tinyurl.com/mvfybex4).
Western military doctrine as well as its equipment may be obsolete. Is the threat of mass destruction our only card?
Allies or Albatross?
John Quincy Adams, who drafted the Monroe Doctrine (which stipulated not only that Europeans stay out of America’s hemisphere but that the U.S. not meddle in theirs), famously asserted that “America goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.”
As Stockman points out (Contra Corner 3/25/25), from the cancellation of the treaty with France in 1797 to the ratification of the NATO Treaty in 1949, America had no alliances, no military treaties, and no allies empowered to provoke conflicts with their neighbors on the understanding that Uncle Sam had their backs. “During those 152 years everything worked out for America as well as any nation in history before or since.”
The idea that liberal alliances are needed, and must deploy force to thwart acts (or potential acts) of rogue aggression or racial prejudice is the supposed “moral” of the “good war”—the “greatest catastrophe in human history.” We need to remind ourselves, Stockman says, that “it started a couple decades earlier, by intervention rather than reticence.”
“We must assume it’s always Munich 1938…but never Sarajevo 1914. The former lesson is almost always misunderstood. The latter is frequently forgotten.” He notes that the “appeaser” Neville Chamberlain “wasn’t the peacenik they presume. He was the Prime Minister who gave the disastrous security guarantee to Poland. The ‘Chamberlains’ in the current conflict are those who would do the same for the Ukraine” (tinyurl.com/2dacbza8).
Stockman observes that NATO members are not acting as though they fear the Russian Bear. The active military manpower of the small nations is smaller than the police forces in major U.S. cities, and defense spending less than 2% of GDP.
Stockman asks what our “allies” in Western Europe, Ukraine, and the Middle East do for Americans?
Speaking against the ratification of the NATO Treaty, Sen. Robert Taft said: (https://tinyurl.com/34dvcv4b):
If we undertake to arm all the nations around Russia from Norway on the north to Turkey on the south, and Russia sees itself ringed about gradually by so-called defensive arms from Norway and Denmark to Turkey and Greece, it may form a different opinion. It may decide that the arming of western Europe, regardless of its present purpose, looks to an attack upon Russia. Its view may be unreasonable, and I think it is. But from the Russian standpoint it may not seem unreasonable. They may well decide that if war is the certain result, that war might better occur now rather than after the arming of Europe is completed….
Nuclear Arms Race Accelerates
China’s nuclear strike force has more than doubled in size since 2020, with some pointed at Taiwan. Russia’s expanding capabilities include a nuclear-capable hypersonic missile. The U.S. is expected to spend $2 trillion over 30 years on weapons development. Now Britain’s Keir Starmer proposes to spend £15 billion on nuclear warheads for four as yet un-built Dreadnought-class submarines. Britain may possibly reintroduce air-launched nuclear weapons, which might be launched remotely, using unmanned drones. Besides Iran, Saudi Arabia and others might have nuclear ambitions (https://tinyurl.com/47uxauff).
The Great Underground Wall of China
Construction of the Great Underground Wall, a labyrinthine network of tunnels 330 ft below mountains, began in the late 1960s as China first began to develop its nuclear weapons program. Today, this network features more than 3,000 miles of truck and rail routes crisscrossing the country. These routes can transport mobile missiles and launchers at speeds of up to 60 mph. The tunnels are believed to be home to the Chinese army’s secretive strategic missile unit. In rare footage released by Chinese media, troops can be seen marching alongside powerful weapons (Daily Mail 3/23/25, https://tinyurl.com/2xeduh6n).
This stunning facility was revealed with great fanfare on Chinese national television as far back as 2006. The number of nuclear warheads stored there is a matter of speculation. China has steadfastly refused to meaningfully participate in any form of arms reduction, writes Peter Navarro. It also has the full range of missiles: strategic, with a range as great as 10,0000 mi, as well as tactical and theater missiles. Additionally, cruise missiles are a huge threat. Unlike the U.S. land-based ICBMs housed in fixed silos, China’s land-based force is virtually impregnable. And none of America’s forward bases are “hardened” to any significant degree against missile attack (https://tinyurl.com/yzap5yh4).
Terror lurks beneath the sea as well as beneath the land. China has developed and deployed a whole range of new and innovative smart mines, consisting of contact, magnetic, acoustic, water pressure, remote control, mobile, and rocket-rising mines. The last can lie hidden in waters as deep as 6,000 feet, waiting for its computer to recognize the signature of a passing military ship, such as a U.S. nuclear-powered submarine. Then the mine would be lifted by rocket to close on its target through the water at speeds greater than 175 mph (https://tinyurl.com/ycy7mdnb).
Can Iran’s Nuclear Program Be Destroyed?
The world’s most powerful bunker-buster, the GBU-57, can only penetrate 66 m, while even the latest nuclear bomb can only impact up to 500 m underground. Iran is believed to have at least five sites at the depth of 800 m. Moreover, after every 50 meters, tunnels twist hundreds of meters sideways before going down again—making pinpoint strikes nearly impossible.
Iran claims to have thousands of top-secret Israeli documents with details on its most sensitive nuclear sites—like the Dimona plant—which will allow retaliatory strikes to cripple Israel’s nuclear assets in the same way that it threatens Iran’s.
Iran continues building new nuclear power plants with the aid of Russian Rosatom, with plans for up to 10 total.
President Trump does not want war with Iran, but is trying not to appear weak. Whatever a war would do, it would evidently not destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities (tinyurl.com/j736zm5b).
It’s about Germany
On Feb 14, 2022, Mike Whitney wrote, “The Crisis in Ukraine Is Not about Ukraine. It’s about Germany”—i.e., Nord Stream 2, a threat to U.S. primacy in Europe. “If Germany and Russia were friends, there would be no need for NATO.” Victoria Nuland said: “If Russia invades Ukraine one way or another Nord Stream 2 will not move forward.” Putin must be seen as a security threat to Europe: Divide and Rule (https://tinyurl.com/4nc37k56).