Nikolai Makarov is the Russian armed forces’ new Chief of Staff, and he has a mandate to reform one of Europe’s most powerful, yet backward, militaries.

Out with the old…

Markov replaces Yury Baluyevsky as chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces. Baluyevsky was pretty widely known to have had serious disagreements with Defence Minister Anatoly Serdyukov over attempts to reform the military, to cut corruption, and to sell off the military’s real estate assets. According to Pavel Felgenhauer, Baluyevsky:

“was in an open fight with the defense minister to, a fight to resist his reforms, and he was kicked out.”

Not a good formula for keeping one’s job.

Baluyevsky has a fair amount of support within the military though, so it’s no suprise that he was pushed to a desk job upstairs - Baluyevsky is now deputy secretary of Russia’s Security Council, which is technically a promotion.

…And in with the new

Nikolai Makarov has all the right credentials to be head of Europe’s largest military - he’s a career military officer who has risen through the ranks, he’s a reformer, and perhaps most importantly, he’s thought to be slavishly loyal to his new boss, the Defence Minister.

Makarov’s relentless rise of promotion after promotion will not only have given him an excellent overview of how the Russian military works from top to bottom, but can only help when it comes to gaining the respect of his colleagues. According to military analyst Ilya Kramnik, Russia’s new top officer is:

“viewed by many who have worked with him as one of Russia’s best generals. He rose through the ranks from platoon commander to head of a military district. His record includes service in Tajikistan and the special Kaliningrad region, where he was deputy Baltic Fleet commander for ground and coastal troops.”

And, when your Defence Minister is a civilian former tax collector who is almost univesally disliked by the military he is supposed to oversee, a competent and respected chief of staff is essential.

Makarov’s reformist tendencies are also thought to be impeccable - which is vital for the future of Russia’s military. Let’s face it, although Russia has been toying with the idea of military reform for a decade or more, it really hasn’t gotten very far yet - it’s high time a genuinely reform minded General was installed in the top job.

According to Kramnik:

Makarov bucks conventional Russian military thinking by putting great emphasis on training and educating troops in his commands. This was an issue that the old Soviet army and the Russian army traditionally have ignored, except for very small elite units.

Makarov also believes in having flexible armed forces that, like the 21st century U.S. armed forces, are designed to work flexibly and be interoperable with units and elements from other arms of the Russian military in specialized task forces quickly assembled to perform designated missions.

Makarov’s emphasis on flexible, well trained, armed forces are going to be vital if Russia wants to (a) achieve military success within the Former Soviet Union and (b) project its power further beyond the old Soviet borders.

I would imagine that NATO’s Generals are watching Makarov’s appointment with some very mixed feelings. On the one hand, they will relish the opportunity to work with a modernised Russian military. On the other, I’d imagine they’ll be quite nervous at having to factor a re-invigorated and well run Russian military machine into their plans. A Russian military that is able to properly project its power abroad and that can take an active part in peacekeeping missions could transform the face of humanitarian intervention - and not necessarily for the better, in their view.

And, finally, of course, it helps that Makarov is loyal to the current team in the Kremlin - Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov, President Dmitry Medvedev, and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin. The three of them have been planning Russian military reform for some time now, but been frustrated by their inability to move the implaccable old guard.

With a man of their own in charge - and, most importantly, a man of their own who is also respected within the military - they have a chance of pushing through at least a few of their reforms.

Georgia today released this amazingly detailed video footage of a Russian MiG fighter shooting down one of its unarmed drones:

Georgian authorities claim that the drone was shot down during an operation over the breakaway region of Abkhazia which is supported, of course, by Russia. Colonel David Nairashvili, commander of Georgia’s air force told reporters:

“On April 20 a Russian MiG-29 fighter jet shot down an unarmed, unmanned air vehicle which was performing basic reconnaissance over Georgian territory.

It’s absolutely illegal for a Russian MiG-29 to be there.”

Naturally, Russia has protested its innocence. A typically robust spokesman for the Russian air force said today:

“Nonsense. What would a Russian jet fighter be doing over Georgian territory?”

Interestingly, no markings are visible on the aircraft - I’m not sure if this is because the MiG was actually unmarked, or if the video’s resolution isn’t good enough to pick out the markings. But Georgian authorities are sure the plane is Russian. The Georgian airforce chief went on to add that:

“The MiG-29 has a distinctive twin-tail marking. It’s a Russian aircraft. Georgia does not possess it, nor do Abkhaz separatists.”

And, moreover, he claims, Georgian radar records show that the plane took off from a base in Abkhazia before shooting down the drone and fleeing across the border into Russia.

Clearly someone shot down the plane. But I wonder - could it have been a training exercise by the Georgian air force - presumably they have a few MiGs still knocking around. Or, does the Abkhazian military have a couple of MiGs under its control, on loan from Russia?

What do you think?

The high point of President Putin’s visit to Libya this week was the announcement that Russia was to write off Libya’s $4.6 billion debt. In exchange, a number of massive bilateral trade deals have been agreed.

A cheerful, but slightly over-heated President Putin told reports

“I am satisfied by the way we have solved the debt problem. The deal will not only employ Russian defence enterprises but will also help strengthen Libya’s defences.”

I must say, I find it fascinating that both Putin and the world’s press have been majoring on the military aspects of this deal.

True, the Russian defence industry will benefit to the tune of a couple of billion dollars worth of new business as Libya modernises its military after decades of sanctions. But in pure money terms, the $3 billion deal to build a new coastal railway line and Gazprom’s proposed gas exploration deal are likely to be far more valuable.

For the press, the attraction of explaining the deal in terms of debt for arms is obvious. But for Putin, it’s yet another opportunity to emphasise Russia’s remerging military muscle. After all, selling arms to an African country is a much better way to promote your military prowess than invading a neighbouring country. And much less risky…

But, I digress. Next stop for Putin is a trip to Sardinia, where he’ll be meeting new Italian PM Silvio Berlusconi. No debt to forgive there, and no chance of arms sales. But Italian energy giant Eni has significant business interests in Libya, and would make a useful partner.

British RAF planes intercept Russian Tu-95 Bear bombers once a week, reports populist British newspaper The Sun.

The enterprising paper filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the British Ministry of Defence which revealed that, during the seven months to January 2008, RAF interceptors were sent up to meet Russian bombers 28 times. For comparison, during the previous 6 months, RAF interceptors were scrambled just twice.

The Sun is, of course, righteously indignant at the cost to the good old British taxpayer. According to them, it costs approximately £30,000 ($60,000) per hour to keep an RAF fighter in the air. They’ve calculated that, over the past seven months, the RAF has spent more than £3.5 million ($7 million) to meet the Russian threat.

Buried mid-way through the article is the news that none of the Russian bombers have entered British airspace and, in truth, almost all of the contacts have been over the Artic or the North Sea. You would never know this from the article’s title though - “Hey you, get off of our cloud”.

Or from the over-worked ’senior RAF source who reports exactly what Russian command want to hear:

“We have to take these bombers seriously, just in case. It runs us ragged.”

I’m sure the RAF are quite right to intercept Russian bombers flying near British airspace - they are after all, flying very close - but it’s indicative of the poor press Russia is getting at the moment that hysterical over-reaction is now becoming the norm.

If you want to see the impact reporting like this is having on many in the British public, take a look at the comments to The Sun article.

Oh, and two more quick thoughts before I go. I wonder how much it’s costing the Russian air force to send these bombers out? Probably not as much as the British RAF. And, finally… I wonder if the Russian Air Force would tell me how much it costs if I were to ask???

The Russian Air Force is very keen to tell the world it’s back. This weekend alone, Russian Tu-95 Bear bombers first violated Japanese airspace and then, in their most audacious flight for a fair few years, went on to ‘buzz’ the US Aircraft Carrier USS Nimitz.

Violation of Japanese Airspace
On Saturday, a Russian Tu-95 bomber overflew the Pacific island of Sofugan, 650km (400 miles) south of Tokyo for three minutes. The Japanese air force took the incursion so seriously that they scrambled 22 fighter jets to escort the Russian bomber out of Japanese airspace.

The furious Japanese government have demanded an explanation from Moscow, but a Russian Air Force spokesman was adamant that they have done nothing wrong:

All flights of the Russian Air Force were carried out in accordance with international air space regulations without breaching the other states’ borders.

Many in Japan are suspicious that the overflight was linked to an annual rally to demand the return of the Kurile Islands to Japan - they were seized by Soviet troops at the end of the Second World War and never returned. Despite recent concilliatory moves, both Japan and Russia still dispute the status of the islands, and have as a result, never signed a formal treaty ending their Second World War conflict.

Buzzing the USS Nimitz Aircraft Carrier

The story which has really hit the headlines, though, was the Tu-95 that buzzed the USS Nimitz - flying directly over the nuclear powered aircraft carrier at a height of just 600 metres not just once, but twice.

Four US F/A 18 fighter jets were scrambled and escorted the Russian Bear until it was comfortably out of range, but US officials are playing down the incident.

Naval Admiral Gary Roughead told reporters:

“It was a very benign flight that came through, and we just latched on to them and followed them in. I know I’m not playing this up very much, but that’s the way I see it. They came out to look. We joined up (and) flew with them until they went home.”

The Russian bomber was one of a squadron of four that approached the US carrier, but the only one to actually fly directly overhead. Because it was in international waters, though, the US could not legally prevent the Russian plane from flying overhead.

A new, more assertive Russia?

Reports of provocative Russian military activity are becoming increasingly frequent, right across the globe. Russia’s military is better funded than it has been for more than a decade, and the Kremlin feels that it is time to demonstrate that Russia is not quite the military basket case it once was.

But, all the same, there isn’t much to worry about here. Flights like these make good copy for the papers, but otherwise they don’t really surprise anyone in the world’s militaries.

The last Russian overflight of a US carrier was only four years ago, and the last Russian incursion into Japanese airspace was just two years ago. Incidents like these really are relatively common.

And I’m certain that, if the Russian’s sole remaining aircraft carrier ventured out of port more often, US planes would make their own overflights from time to time…

I think Russian paper Kommersant have probably got it about right when they point out that the Japanese and American militaries should actually be thanking the Russians:

A total of 22 fighters of various type, two early-warning planes and E-3A guidance AWACS were involved, so the Japanese could thank their Russian colleagues for the drill.

They should also be thanking the Russians for giving them yet another up close view of the Russian bomber’s flight capabilities - I’m sure both the Japanese and Americans will have collected bucketloads of valuable data, which someone, somewhere will be merrily analysing.

In August 1939, just weeks before Hitler invaded Poland, the Soviet Union and Japan fought a massive tank battle on the Mongolian border - the largest the world had ever seen.

Under the then unknown Georgy Zhukov, the Soviets won a crushing victory at the batte of Khalkhin-Gol (known in Japan as the Nomonhan Incident). Defeat persuaded the Japanese to expand into the Pacific, where they saw the United States as a weaker opponent than the Soviet Union. If the Japanese had not lost at Khalkhin Gol, they may never have attacked Pearl Harbor.

The Japanese decision to expand southwards also meant that the Soviet Eastern flank was secured for the duration of the war. Instead of having to fight on two fronts, the Soviets could mass their troops - under the newly promoted General Zhukov - against the threat of Nazi Germany in the West.

In terms of its strategic impact, the battle of Khalkhin Gol was one of the most decisive battles of the Second World War, but no-one has ever heard of it. Why?

Rising Tensions
It was perhaps not all that surprising that the Soviet Union and Japan, two expansionist powers who just happened to be close neighbours, butted heads in the Mongolian borderlands.

Tensions between the two had been high for decades, and had erupted into open conflict on a number of occasions. Japan had clearly had an edge over Russia during the early part of the 20th century - it had decisively defeated Tsarist Russia in the Russo-Japanese war of 1905 (a conflict most memorable, perhaps, for the Russian Navy’s folly of sailing its entire Baltic fleet around the globe only to be promptly sunk by the Japanese Navy within days of its arrival), and had occupied Vladivostock for several years during the Russian civil war.

But, by the 1930s, the Soviet Union under Stalin was a resurgent power, and had become a major regional rival to the Japanese. The Japanese High Command were particularly concerned about the threat Soviet submarines posed to Japanese shipping, and the ease with which Soviet bombers, operating out of Vladivostok, would be able to reach Tokyo.

Flashpoint

By the late 1930s, both Mongolia and bordering Manchuria (Manchukuo) were Soviet and Japanese puppet states.

The border between the two was hotly disputed. Japanese backed Manchuria claimed that the border ran along the Khalkhin-Gol river, whereas the Mongolians argued that the border actually ran just east of Nomonhan village, some 10 miles east of the river.

Although the two countries had previously fought some minor skirmishes (most notably at Changkufeng/Lake Khasan in 1938, a battle which resulted in more than 2,500 casualties on both sides), the battle of Khalkin Gol was sparked when, on 11 May 1938, a small Mongolian cavalry united entered the disputed area in search of grazing for their horses. They were quickly given a bloody nose and expelled by a larger Manchurian unit but, within days, the Mongolians returned with greater support and forced the Manchurian forces to retreat.

The conflict slowly but gradually escalated until Soviet and Japanese forces were drawn into direct conflict. On 28 May Soviet forces surrounded and destroyed a Japanese reconnaisance unit. The Japanese unit, led by Lt Colonel Yaozo Azuma suffered 63% casualties in total, losing 8 officers and 97 men, plus suffering 34 wounded.

A month of relative quiet followed this battle. But, instead of using the time to consider a peace deal, both sides redoubled their efforts to build up their forces in the region.

Daring Japanese Air Raid

The quiet was shattered on 27 June by a daring Japanese air-raid on the Soviet air base at Tamsak-Bulak in Mongolia. The unprepared Soviets lost many planes on the ground although, once they got airborne they gave a good account of themselves. Their skill, however, could not prevent the Japanese pilots returning gloriously home, having destroyed twice as many Soviet planes as they had lost themselves.

However, their glory was short-lived. The Imperial Japanese Army Headquarters, based in Tokyo, had not been told of the attack in advance, and was not amused at the local commander’s initiative. When news of the raid reached Tokyo, furious Generals immediately ordered that no further air strikes would be launched - a decision for which Japanese foot-soldiers later paid a high price.

The Japanese ground attack

Despite their decision to withdraw air cover, Tokyo was happy to authorise a land-based operation to “expell the invaders.”

Lt. Gen. Michitaro Komatsubara, well schooled officer, planned a devastating two-pronged assault that would encircle and destroy the Soviet armies and bring him a glorious victory.

His Northern task force launched its first assalt on 1st July. After easily crossing the Khalkhin Gol river, Japanse soldiers drove the Soviet forces from Baintsagan Hill and quickly began to advance southwards. The following day his Southern task force followed them with another massive assault.

However, Komatsubara soldiers were ill-prepared, and not able to take advantage of their early success. Poor logistical planning meant that their supply line across the river consisted of just one pontoon bridge.

Seizing their opportunity, the Soviets under Zhukov quickly rallied 450 tanks for a daring counter-attack. Despite being entirely without infrantry support, they attacked the Japanese task force on three sides, and very nearly encircled them.

By 5 July, the battered Japanese Northern Taskforce had been forced back across the river.

The second Japanese attack

Following the failure of their first attack, the Japanese withdrew and planned their next move. Defeat was not an option for Komatsubara. After giving his soldiers a fortnight to recover, and restock their supplies, he conceived another assault plan - this one relying on brute force.

On 23 July, backed by a massive artillery bombardment, the Japanese threw two divisions of troops at the Soviet forces that had, by now, crossed the river and were defending the Kawatama bridge. wo days of fierce fighting resulted in some minor Japanse advances, but they were unable to break Soviet lines and reach the bridge. Despite thousands of casualties, the battle was effectively a stalemate.

Unable to progress further, and rapidly running out of artillery supplies, the Japanese decided that discretion was the better part of valour, and disengaged to plan a third assault.

The Soviet Counter-attack

Planning for a third Japanse assault went well, but the Soviets under Zhukov beat Lt Gen Komatsubara to the punch.

By August 20th, Zhukov had amassed a force of more than 50,000 men, 498 tanks and 250 planes. Matched against him was a similarly sized, but not well armoured Japanese force, that had no idea the Soviet counter-attack was coming.

A classic combined arms assault followed, as thousands of Soviet infantry attacked the Japanese centre, Soviet armour encircled the Japanese flanks, and the Soviet air-force and artillery pounded the Japanese from long-range.

By August 31st, the encircled Japanese force had been decimated and surrounded. A few Japanese units managed to break out of the encirclement, but those who remained followed Japanse martial tradition and refused to surrender.

Zhukov wiped them out with air and artillery attacks.

The conflict ends

Just one day later, half way across the world Hitler and Stalin invaded and carved up Poland.

Despite technically being an ally of Nazi Germany, it became prudent for Stalin to ensure that he Eastern flank was also secure. Rather than advancing to push home their tactical advantage and escalate the conflict, Zhukov’s armies were ordered not to press home their advantage. Instead, they were ordered to dig in and hold their position at Khalkhin Gol - the border they had previously claimed as theirs.

The total number of casualties suffered by each side is far from clear, particularly as neither Imperial Japan nor the Soviet Union were particularly ‘open’ societies.

Official statistics report just over 17,000 Japanese total casualties, compared with around 9,000 on the Soviet side. Some historians claim that Japan lost more than 45,000 men, while the victorious Soviet armies lost a ‘mere’ 17,000 men.

Most likely, as always, the true figure lies somewhere in the middle.

How Khalkhin-Gol changed the course of history

The battle of Khalkhin-Gol decisively showed the expansionist Japanese military that it was not a match for the Soviets - particularly while Japanese forces were still bogged down throughout China. The Soviets under combined their forces to stunning effect, while Japanese tactics remained stuck in a pre-modern mindset that valued honour and personal bravery more highly on the battlefield than massed forces and armour.

When Hitler finally invaded the Soviet Union in 1941 the Japanese, although tempted to join the attack, remembered the lessons of Khalkhin Gol and decided to remain on the sidelines, ensuring that the stretched Soviet military could focus its forces on just one front. This, in turn, meant that Nazi Germany was forced to fight a four year war on two fronts - against the Soviets in the East, and the British and Americans in the West.

Defeat at Khalkhin-Gol can also be seen as a major factor in the Japanese decision to expand into the Pacific. As expansion to the North-West was no longer an option, ill defended and scattered colonial territories made far easier targets. Even the United States was deemed a less formidable adversary than the Soviet Union and, if the Japanse had not lost at Khalkhin-Gol, they would surely have never attacked Pearl Harbour.

However, although the Japanese probably took the sensible strategic course after Khalkhin Gol of targetting a ‘weaker’ opponent, they didn’t learn the combat lessons dealt out by the Soviet army. Honour and bravery remained central to the Japanese military mentality and, once they had recovered from the initial onslaught, the United States and Britain were able to mass their forces and push the Japanese out of the Pacific and back to the Home Islands in one brutal battle after another.

Americans might well be evil, says Yuri Baluyevsky, Russia’s top General, but it ain’t Russia’s job to save the world!

“Today, there is no need to be afraid of the Russian Armed Forces. However, I do not believe that the Russian military is obliged to defend the world from the evil Americans”.

Probably just as well. Evil George Bush doesn’t think much of the Russian military:

I really don’t view Russia as a threat, a military threat. I don’t think — I’m pretty confident President Putin does not want to have any military conflict.

And he’s spot on in his assessment of Russia’s view of its role in the world…

The BBC has put together a fascinating statistical analysis of Russia during the Putin years.

The analysis has graphs aplenty, covering the Russia’s economy, Energy, Population (including a revealing statistic about HIV prevalence in Russia) and the Military.  Sometimes the stats are standalone, sometimes in comparison to other countries.  But all are well worth a quick look.

Wow - Russia really is starting to strut its military stuff on the world stage again.

Two Tu-95 bombers flew to the US island of Guam in the Pacific Ocean, paying a surprise visit to the US military base there. Shocked US pilots on the base were forced to scramble to intercept the Russian bombers.

The BBC has this quote from a beaming Russian General:

“It has always been the tradition of our long-range aviation to fly far into the ocean, to meet [US] aircraft carriers and greet [US pilots] visually. Yesterday [Wednesday] we revived this tradition, and two of our young crews paid a visit to the area of the base of Guam. I think the result was good. We met our colleagues - fighter jet pilots from [US] aircraft carriers. We exchanged smiles and returned home.”

The media are, of course, reporting it in rather sensationalist terms (”Russia sparks Cold War scramble” was the BBC’s uninspired effort), but yesterday’s “raid” shouldn’t really come as a surprise to anyone. Russia has been steadily raising the international profile of its military, popping up all over the place, from Scotland to the North Pole to the Pacific, reminding its old NATO adversaries that it is still around and, when grumpy enough, is still a force to be reckoned with.

What it really means is that the Russian military now has enough money in its budget to do things like actually fly its planes and to sail its maintained and more or less ship-shape navy out of port. To my mind this is infinitely preferable to having an uncared for fleet slowly rotting away and poisoning the world’s oceans with glowing nuclear waste.

Update: A US General, on the other hand, says that the Russian planes didn’t even get within 500 kilometers (300 miles) of Guam: “U.S. planes went to an orbit point in preparation for an intercept that never occurred because the Bears didn’t get close enough”.

Russia is to increase its military and intelligence spending again:

“The situation in the world and internal political interests require the Foreign Intelligence Service to permanently increase its capabilities, primarily in the field of information and analytical support for the country’s leadership,” said Putin.

Or, to put it another way: ‘we need more spies’.

Which is probably a good idea, considering that Spain have just uncovered a Russian double agent operating within Spanish intelligence:

The suspect, Robert Flores Garcia, was arrested Monday morning at his home on Tenerife Island in Spain’s Canary Islands. He passed secrets in exchange for hefty payments from December 2001 to February 2004, said the spy chief, Alberto Saiz, head of the National Intelligence Agency (known by its Spanish initials CNI).

[…] The suspect allegedly revealed the names of dozens of Spanish spies, possibly including the seven Spanish spies killed in an ambush south of Baghdad in November 2003, Saiz said.

Yet another EU country with soon-to-be frosty relations with Russa.

The Russian Duma has today voted in favour of allowing Gazprom to form its own private army. Reuters reports:

A law backed by 341 lawmakers in the 450-seat State Duma lower house of parliament gave Gazprom, and oil pipeline monopoly Transneft, special exemption from strict limits on private businesses wielding arms.

The two state-controlled companies will for the first time be allowed to employ their own armed operatives instead of contracting an outside security firm. Their armed units will also have access to more weapons and more freedom to use them than private security companies.

The stated reason: to ensure the protection of gas pipelines and facilities from militants.

My cynical response: so much for the mighty Russian army.

Anyway, opponents of the bill are warning that today’s move risks opening a pandoras box, as they believe that where Gazprom leads, other Russian companies are sure to follow.

The only silver lining, I suppose, is that the bill still has to pass the Federation Council, and be approved by Putin before it becomes law.

More Russian servicemen are dying in combat this year than last, but overall deaths in the armed forces have fallen:

Battle casualties in the Russian Armed Forces continue to rise. They accounted for only 10 percent of all deaths in the Armed Forces in 2006, when 57 servicemen were killed in Chechnya. In the first five months of 2007 alone, however, 30 combat casualties in Chechnya accounted for 16.3 percent of all deaths in the armed forces.

RFE/RL headlines this story (translated from an original Nezavisimaya Gazeta story) as “Military Deaths on the Rise“. But actually, a closer look at the figures reveals the opposite.

(Bear with me through the gory maths).

If 30 soldiers have died in combat in just five months this year then, if we extrapolate over the course of 12 months, we can assume that 72 soldiers will be killed in action.

But, as those 72 soldiers will make up 16.3% of the total who can be expected to die this year, then the total number of deaths in the Russian armed forces this year should only be 442 - a reduction of 128 over last year’s toll.

Is this just a statistical blip, or does this signify that Russia’s armed forces are beginning to get serious about protecting their own soldiers from bullying, exploitation, and working in unsafe environments?

Of all the things about the Russian military that need modernising, I’m not sure this is the most pressing:

According to Gen. Isakov, the new uniforms are being designed with active participation of the heraldry department and leading Russian fashion designers including Valentin Yudashkin. The project is under the supervision of the Central Research Institute of Sewing Industry.

Watch out - before you know it, Miss Russian Army will be upstaged by Mr Russian Army…

This beautiful map from Kommersant graphically demonstrates why Russia is concerned about the proposed US anti-missile system in Poland and the Czech republic.

If the US plan goes ahead as expected, high powered radars from Poland will be able to cover all of European Russia, and a good chunk of Siberia as well:

At the same time, it illustrates just why Central/Eastern Europe is such a perfect site for this anti-missile system.

• It’s directly in between any missiles that may be fired from Iran towards the US.
• It’s almost directly in between any missiles that might head towards Western Europe.
• It’s sufficiently far enough away to allow interceptors to be launched in good time.
• It’s perfectly placed to mesh with US-based radars covering the Atlantic and Arctic oceans.
• Oh yes - and it just happens to have a bonus feature allowing sneak peaks into Russian airspace…

(Hat tip: Cyrill Vatomsky, who posts his thoughts on the issue here).

So, after spending the past few weeks ratcheting up the pressure, Putin has made an about turn and offered to work on a ‘joint’ missile shield with the United States.

Details of exactly how such a scheme would work are a little sketchy at the moment, to say the least, but it seems as though the Kremlin envisage a system built primarily around the radar station they currently rent in Azerbaijan.

Dmitri Peskov, Mr Putin’s spokesman, insisted that a radar base in Azerbaijan would be sufficient to cover the whole of western Europe and that the use of Poland for interceptor rockets should be reconsidered. “The two sides could completely share the technological data of that station with equal control of the station . . . It would lead to a substantial easing of tension and it will solve the problem.”

In principle, I think it’s a good idea - and, with the benefit of my 20-20 hindsight - makes Putin’s brinkmanship of the past few weeks seem much more logical. Lets face it, Russia is at much at risk of missile attack from ‘rogue’ nations or terrorist groups as Western Europe and the United States - if not more so - and a joint missile shield does seem the logical way forward.

But will it happen in practice? I can see plenty of potential problems.

For starters, there is the whole trust issue. An effective joint shield would require a lot of actual joint working, and there isn’t a lot of evidence to suggest that Russia and the US could work well together on such a politically charged project. Although, having said that, there’s always a first time for everything…

Technical issues are also going to come to the forefront. NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, although welcoming Russia’s joint missile shield proposal, argued that a shield located in Azerbaijan wouldn’t be able to react in time to incoming missiles:

“It’s a bit close to the rogue states we are discussing.”

A shield located primarily in Azerbaijan wouldn’t cover all of NATO’s member states either.

I suppose this could be overcome by stationing the main radar in Azerbaijan, and the interceptor missiles somewhere else - say, in Poland - but for this would not only require phenomenal co-ordination, but would still probably require radars to be stationed too close to Russia’s Western borders. And wasn’t the whole point of Azerbaijan to avoid that…?

Ultimately, I don’t think this is anything more than a good idea, destined to failure - but I’d be happy to be proved wrong.

Update: For the true cynics among us, here another explantion as to why Putin offered to develop a joint missile shield based in Azerbaijan:

I think that the Russian base, there in Qabala [Azerbaijan] is getting ready — they’re going to lose the base, the lease on the base is going to expire, and they’ve already been making plans to relocate the radar to Krasnodar [Krai, in Russia]. And so what they’re trying to do here is legitimize their presence in Azerbaijan at the expense of the Azerbaijanis. And they will also permanently make the United States a target of the Iranians, and the Azeris, and it’s designed to divide the United States and Azerbaijan. And it creates a Russian military presence there, if I understand the statement correctly.

Cunning, or what?