Alleged strikes in a nuclear war. How to survive a nuclear strike

In general terms, strategic weapons are systems capable of delivering warheads (usually nuclear) to targets located at an intercontinental range from the launch site, i.e. launch a nuclear strike.

So it is known that there are three ways of possible global use of strategic weapons.

Doctor of Technical Sciences, Professor Yuri Grigoriev talks about the possible use of strategic weapons on the pages of the Russian Arms news agency.

Nuclear explosion

Results of the Nuclear Bombing

The pilots who carried out the first nuclear bombing

First (pre-emptive) nuclear strike, the purpose of which is to destroy, first of all, all strategic weapons of the enemy, thereby eliminating any possibility of a retaliatory nuclear strike.

When American President Truman ordered a nuclear strike on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, he was well aware that there would be no retaliatory strike and therefore demonstrated such heroism in conditions of complete impunity.

The subsequent targets were Moscow and other major cities of the USSR, but the rapid creation of an atomic and then a hydrogen bomb in the USSR put everything in its place - the fear of retaliation cooled the hotheads.

It became clear to everyone that in real life, a nuclear power that has been attacked will retain some of its strategic weapons for a retaliatory strike, after which the aggressor side will find itself in approximately the same position as its victim.

Therefore, launching a nuclear strike against a state that has nuclear weapons is tantamount to suicide, since a crushing retaliatory nuclear strike will turn the aggressor's largest cities into nuclear dust.

Russia is developing a new ICBM in a highly secure silo

Retaliatory strike (strike of retaliation, intimidation) inflicted by missiles that remained after the aggressor launched the first nuclear strike.

The technical basis for an effective retaliatory strike is, first of all, the high survivability of strategic weapons, ensuring the combat effectiveness of such a number of missiles after an attack by the aggressor that is sufficient to inflict unacceptable damage on him.

With all the reductions, the USSR had the most important parameter of strategic weapons - the throwable weight was 2.8 times greater than that of the United States, which guaranteed a crushing retaliatory strike to the aggressor in any development of the situation.

The thrown weight is understood as the total weight of everything that the missile is capable of placing on the trajectory of the maximum firing range.

This is the weight of the last stage of the rocket, which carries out the operation of disengaging warheads, means of overcoming missile defense, engines, fuel, control system equipment and structural elements inseparable from this stage.

Throw weight is the main and main parameter that determines the combat effectiveness of a missile.

Mobile missile systems are the main combat means of a retaliatory strike

Mobile ground-based missile system (PGRK) "Yars"

Combat railway missile system

Counter strike is launched upon receipt of a signal from a missile attack warning system, while our missiles must launch and leave position areas before the aggressor’s warheads approach these areas, and the aggressor, who actually fired at already empty launch silos, receives almost simultaneously a nuclear strike on his military and industrial objects.

Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee, candidate member of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee, Minister of Defense of the USSR Dmitry Fedorovich Ustinov

Discussions regarding the priority of these three types of nuclear strikes began a long time ago, back in the USSR, and they were conducted at the highest level. Then some of the highest military officials reported to the Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee, candidate member of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee D.F. Ustinov, who coordinated the work of all institutions of the military-industrial complex, that there is no urgent need to increase the security of silo launch complexes, because a retaliatory strike can be used, and then our missiles will leave the silo structures even before the arrival of the aggressor’s warheads, which increases their security useless.

At the same time, the director of the head rocket and space institute (TsNIIMASH), Lieutenant General Yu.A. Mozzhorin,

relying on in-depth research of the institute, he reported to D.F. Ustinov that in 10 minutes it is unrealistic to make a decision and press the button to launch nuclear missiles based on the report of some general looking at the cloudy radar screen. What if there is a mistake? After all, behind it stand hundreds of millions of human lives, including women and children, primarily citizens of the Soviet Union, since in the event of a mistake this will be followed by retribution from a potential enemy provoked by us. You can't return the missiles. What if this is radio interference or a provocation?

Our institute, he said, has worked in detail and simulated all cases of combat use of nuclear missile weapons in conditions of preventive (first) and retaliatory strikes. In these cases, victory cannot be achieved.

In a report to the General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee L.I. To Brezhnev, Yu.A. Mozzhorin stated that the defense doctrine is interpreted by some major military leaders, at times, loosely and ambiguously. He briefly justified that only the doctrine of guaranteed retaliatory strike will deter aggression and ensure stability and peace. He showed that the doctrine of a pre-emptive (first) strike against an aggressor preparing to attack or retaliatory missile strikes do not ensure the defense of the country and lead only to the mutual destruction of conflicting states.

He substantiated his point of view at the Defense Council, which took place at the end of July 1969 in Crimea, at Stalin’s former dacha near Yalta. When the commander-in-chief of the missile forces, Marshal of the Soviet Union N.I. Krylov stated that the military was not going to sit and wait until they were hit, but would use missiles first or, in extreme cases, in a retaliatory strike, he received a serious reprimand from the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR A.N. Kosygina.

At this Defense Council, the doctrine of a guaranteed retaliatory strike - the doctrine of deterrence - was approved by the highest political and state leadership of the USSR. The priority of nuclear missile strikes was firmly established: only a crushing retaliatory strike, as a means of preventing nuclear war, as a means of deterrence.

Structure of Russia's strategic weapons

Strategic nuclear submarines with missiles

Strategic Missile Forces (RVSN)

Russian strategic aircraft

The entire structure of the USSR's strategic weapons was formed to ensure a guaranteed retaliatory strike. Submarines armed with ballistic missiles were built, which in those years found themselves outside the control zone in the ocean.

Mobile ground-based soil and railway missile systems were deployed, the location of which was impossible using the then existing satellites with optical monitoring equipment.

The security of stationary missile silos was increased, and the missiles themselves were improved so that they could be launched in the event of a nuclear attack on a positional area.

The Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation, approved by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of April 21, 2000 No. 706, states that the Russian Federation maintains the status of a nuclear power to deter (prevent) aggression against it and (or) its allies.

US President Ronald Reagan USA

The United States gradually finally came to a similar decision. Back on February 26, 1986, US President R. Reagan, in his address to the country, formulated his position as follows: “Our goal must be to deter and, if necessary, repel any attack without resorting to nuclear weapons.” .

In 2013, the US Secretary of Defense, acting on behalf of the President of the country, sent to Congress "Report on the United States Nuclear Employment Strategy".

The purpose of nuclear weapons is defined in report 4 in this form. The US Congress approved this nuclear weapons strategy in August 2013.

Everything seems clear, but in our media various discussions constantly appear about the priority of missile strikes, which are conducted, however, not at the highest level, but at the level of generals and so-called experts.

Of course, in the 21st century the situation has changed in many ways, but these changes should be taken into account wisely, without blindly repeating all the dogmas of the last century, since the world is changing quite quickly, but also without denying everything achieved previously.

PGRK "Yars" takes up combat duty

So it is said in source 1, mobile ground-based missile systems, together with sea-based ballistic missiles, due to their high stealth and ability to disperse, ensure a retaliatory nuclear missile strike, when the launch command is given only after the fact of a massive enemy nuclear missile strike on the territory of one’s country has been recorded , i.e. after the warheads fall on the target.

A similar statement in relation to ground-based mobile missile systems was true in the 20th century, when control over these complexes was carried out by space systems that operated in the optical range and were not able to see through clouds and fogs.

Then our mobile soil and railway systems were truly invulnerable and suitable for delivering a crushing retaliatory strike. For example, our railway missile system, capable of traveling thousands of kilometers, could be under the clouds about 80% of the time and inaccessible to space control.

However, in the 21st century, when space-based all-weather radar reconnaissance systems are widely used, any mobile ground-based soil or railway-based missile system is no longer capable of remaining invisible, and therefore, from a retaliatory strike weapon, it turns into a weapon that can only be used in the first or counter-attack strike, and therefore becomes unnecessary for us, and its production and installation on combat duty is meaningless.

Over the years, as space and other control systems improve, this senselessness will become more and more obvious.

Massive missile attack

Many people understood this, but drew strange conclusions. Thus, source 3 states: “The task of placing the first regiment of a mobile ground complex with standardized missiles on combat duty is now being solved. The task is very difficult, because this is also the first year of mass production of these weapons. But overall, national defense will benefit from having one of the components of strategic weapons that has greater survivability in the face of a retaliatory strike.”

Source 1 also states that silo-based missiles in protected launchers operate in a retaliatory strike, when the decision to launch is issued by the political leadership after recording a mass launch of missiles from enemy territory, even before the bulk of the warheads reach their targets .

It is impossible to agree with such statements, but it is also impossible to imagine that such statements by the authors are simply the result of their illiteracy. Of course, they understand everything, but, apparently, they do not see other ways to justify the huge costs of deploying new mobile missile systems, and therefore are silent about their original purpose for delivering a retaliatory strike, which they are currently, and even more so in the future, pursuing. not suitable.

That is why they are proposing a retaliatory strike, which could lead to a worldwide catastrophe. Of course, the technical level of modern strategic weapons, in principle, makes it possible to carry out a retaliatory strike, but the concept of such puts the top leadership of the state in an extremely difficult position, faced with the need to make a decision of an unusually high level of responsibility in conditions of acute shortage of time, possible technical problems in the missile early warning system attacks and operator errors.

A new ballistic missile is being tested in Russia

The flight time of missiles from another continent is about 30 minutes, and when launching missiles flying along flat trajectories from submarines located near our territory, it takes no more than 10-15 minutes. Under these conditions, it is unrealistic to carry out a retaliatory strike, and also dangerous, because in such a turmoil, various kinds of errors are not excluded, both in determining the reliability of the very fact of the launch of enemy missiles, and in the implementation of a retaliatory launch.

This does not exclude the possibility of an inadequate assessment of the situation by the leader of the attacked state and his adoption of a decision leading to a worldwide catastrophe. The Americans have repeatedly reported various types of malfunctions and errors in their early warning systems, we also had similar cases, but they were not reported, but such information is available in foreign sources.

For example, source 2 states that on September 26, 1983, shortly after midnight at a nuclear attack early warning center near Moscow, equipment issued a warning that the United States had fired 5 ballistic missiles into the territory of the Soviet Union.

However, the operational duty officer did not believe the new automation; he contacted his superiors and reported a false alarm. A subsequent investigation into such an act by the operational duty officer confirmed the correctness of his actions, and he was awarded. Any kind of speculation about the power of our strategic weapons in a retaliatory strike is senseless and dangerous.

And what will we achieve by launching a retaliatory strike? We will not be able to somehow reduce, or even more so eliminate, the destructive power of the aggressor’s first nuclear strike with our retaliatory strike. It will be exactly the same as with our orientation towards a retaliatory strike. Of course, during a retaliatory strike, more of our missiles will reach targets on the territory of the aggressor, and the nuclear dust there will be smaller than during a retaliatory strike, but can this have any significance in the light of the death of civilization?

Beginning of negotiations on the reduction of strategic offensive weapons

Adopted in the USSR, and now in the USA, the priority of methods of delivering nuclear strikes should remain unchanged in our time: only a crushing retaliatory strike, as a means of preventing nuclear war, as a means of deterrence, a means of intimidation.

Focusing on a retaliatory strike does not mean that in this case we do not need early warning systems about the launch of the aggressor’s missiles. On the contrary, we certainly need such systems, but not so that the leadership would have time to give the order to launch our missiles in a retaliatory strike, but so that they could have time to give the order to take the necessary measures to deliver a retaliatory strike after the explosion of nuclear weapons. charges of the aggressor on our territory.

We must develop a strategic weapons structure and implement it in a short time, which is capable of delivering an effective retaliatory strike, in any development of the situation, including if the aggressor has effective missile defense systems. To do this, it is urgent to develop and deploy missile systems with air-to-ground ballistic missiles (ASBMs), as reported in source 5 and source 6, since heavy bombers with cruise missiles with nuclear warheads or with atomic bombs are unsuitable for a retaliatory strike.

Aircraft with air defense systems, following a signal from early warning systems, will be able to leave the permanent airfield in a few minutes and, once outside the affected area, wait for either an order to retaliate or to return to base if the signal from the early warning system turns out to be erroneous.

The creation of ASBMs was prohibited by the SALT-2 and START-1 Treaties, however, currently, due to the expiration of these treaties, this prohibition has lost force.

It is also possible to use non-aerodrome aircraft of the EKIP type to deploy missiles, the fundamental principles of which were developed under the leadership of Professor Lev Shchukin. Such a device with a carrying capacity of up to 100 tons is capable of not only flying like an airplane, but also moving near the surface of the earth and water in ekranoplane mode.

It is also necessary to create heavy liquid-propellant strategic missiles with a large throw weight, capable of launching in a retaliatory strike, for which the positional areas of these missiles must be covered with effective missile defense systems of the S-500 type to intercept aggressor missiles, as well as engineering structures protecting missile silos from high-precision non-nuclear weapons weapons.

We live in an era of strategic stability, which is based on two specific traits of human character: distrust of another person and fear of retaliation. The world has been balancing on these two pillars for many decades, maintaining the so-called strategic balance. Only absolute confidence in the inexorable inevitability of one’s own death as a result of a retaliatory nuclear strike is guaranteed to keep any aggressor from launching a first strike and save the world from nuclear madness.

Used Books:

1. The commander of the Strategic Missile Forces spoke about the structure of the nuclear shield.

http://ria.ru/analytics/20111216/518396383.html

2. Russian who prevented nuclear war.

Let's continue to analyze the hypothetical one-day war of NATO and Israel against Iran, Syria and Russia, which I described. In short, Iran and Russia are clearing Syria of ISIS and the opposition, Israeli intelligence is spamming the CIA with information about a ready-made weapon of mass destruction (atomic bomb), then Iranian missiles are discovered located in Syria under the cover of a Russian military base, meanwhile, in the United States it has been a couple of months already the stock market has collapsed and the government is looking for a way out of the crisis, everyone is putting pressure on the president, and he finally gives the go-ahead for the operation in Syria and Northern Iraq.

Israeli and American air forces destroy a Russian base in Syria, Israel launches an invasion of Syria, and the Arab coalition operates in Iraq. In the Middle East theater, strictly speaking, the war lasts more than one day, but in fact everything is decided in one day. At the same moment, the British and American Air Forces are striking at Russian troops in the Donbass (if by this time Putin is fighting in other countries, then at them too), and large bases on the border with Ukraine. Hundreds, if not thousands of victims. In response, Putin launches a non-nuclear missile attack on London and other cities and NATO bases. At this point, the active phase of the war unexpectedly ends, Russia falls into isolation.

In this scenario, you might find it counterintuitive that Russia would not launch a thermonuclear strike. In fact, everything will be very logical and actually according to the Kremlin’s plan. Putin is not ready and does not want to wage a thermonuclear war, but he is ready and wants to wage a non-thermonuclear war, knowing that he can prevent any invasion of the Russian Federation with the threat of using thermonuclear weapons. That is, Putin really needs a Patriotic War, but without a bunch of fronts and millions of casualties. The war will be fought in make-believe.

Yes, now Vova does not see the scenario that I described here. But he is already seeking such a provocation from the West. All these aircraft incursions into Turkey, underwater saboteurs in Sweden, cutting cables in the Atlantic - all these are acts pushing the West towards aggression. However, Putin does not understand that the West cannot strike by chance, it will strike only when it needs to, then it will do it without provocation.

What are Putin's plans? He sees that he cannot manage the economy, but he really wants to remain the richest and most influential man in Europe. And this can be achieved in the long term only by rallying the population around GDP. As soon as the West shows real aggression, Putin thinks that it will be a couple of downed planes or a sunken boat, the GDP immediately announces to the people that the Patriotic War has begun, carries out mobilization, puts the economy on a planned track, and Russia is fixed in this state for an unlimited period.

In the version of the war that I described, there will indeed be an attack, and a delighted Putin will finally be able to carry out an anti-capitalist coup. Moreover, the fact of aggression will be obvious and Putin’s opponents will not be able to argue with the facts. And those who can will be silenced according to the laws of war.

Our people do not like lost wars, so the media will present an essentially lost one-day war as the greatest triumph of Russian weapons. Fortunately, in the age of information, numerous real destructions of London and other European cities will be spread across social networks, from where Soviet propagandists will draw them for decades. It is obvious that in Britain and other countries there will be forces blaming their own governments, but not Russia. They are the ones who will be shown in the Russian media. And as a result, people will have this picture in their heads. Western cities are in ruins, everyone is afraid of us, they were the first to attack us, ordinary people blame capitalist governments for everything, all this will be flavored with propaganda videos about our equipment and brave soldiers. Real losses from a one-day war will be hushed up or downplayed.

On the day of war, there will be sirens in all cities, people will actually be forced to crawl into basements and bomb shelters, everyone should feel the aggression against Russia first-hand, although in reality there will be no bombing or air attack on cities. The next day there will be general mobilization. A huge number of the population will end up in the army, where they will also be processed politically. The formed troops will gradually move to the borders, but nothing significant will happen. The war will be approximately the same as in the current Sands near Donetsk. That is, regular mutual artillery duels, shelling and forays, but only on the scale of our entire western border. So it’s not in vain that the Balts are building a wall; they will still really need it.

There will still be some local operations. And not to NATO countries, but to dependent countries. If NATO does not enter Ukraine, then there will be military operations with the capture of cities, but if it does enter, then there will be hurricanes, for example, in Georgia or Azerbaijan. Short tactical operations will break out here and there. Successes in which will be inflated to the skies, and failures will be hidden. The picture of the world in the TV box and the real one will eventually diverge. They will lie to the extent of contradictory information about the fate of the cities. For example, the Russians were driven out of Baku, Yerevan fell, and for a couple of years the news will talk about the liberation of Baku and the siege of Yerevan. Then this news will gradually disappear.

Naturally, Russia will be cut off from world trade. China will be our main trading partner, but it will not and will not be able to buy as much oil and gas as we currently sell to Europe. Rather, there will be supplies of valuable and rare raw materials, of which China has little. The United States will put pressure on China to also declare an embargo, but it will refuse, then the United States will simply offer the Chinese the same thing, but for ridiculous money.

Imports in Russia will virtually disappear, only Chinese smuggled goods of the same quality will remain, but at prices much higher than current prices even for European goods, if calculated as a percentage of the average salary. Food and other cards will be introduced, not only for the poor, but for everyone. A powerful nationalization of both industry and raw materials, as well as trade, will be carried out. It is clear that people will live much poorer. As vehicles break down, traffic jams will clear up, and it will again be possible to drive around Moscow calmly even during rush hours.

Then demobilization will gradually take place, Russia will actually freeze in a semi-mobilized phase. The elite will live as they always did, only without trips to the West. Although gradually the West will begin to restore ties and the offspring of elite men and women will rush with terrible force into enemy countries as ambassadors and other secretaries at embassies.

Why was the path of Northwesternization of Russia chosen? According to the elites around Putin, this is the optimal way to maintain power. The government itself, like the top of the DPRK, will live in grand style, driven into an eternal war, the people will eke out a miserable existence. Under this regime, new generations of Russian people will grow up (neo-pioneers to help), who will not think about anything other than the war with the West. Moreover, unlike the current generation, they will not have any personal impressions about the West at all, because they will draw information from propaganda media. I don’t know how all this will end, but for Putin it will end relatively well. No one will touch his palaces, mistresses and other attributes of an alpha male, at least while he is alive. Well, what else does an aging dictator need? What will happen after his death is not clear. Either the elite will continue this pattern, as happened in the DPRK, or they will begin to contact the West for détente and restructuring. Which path the elites will take depends on us. If the people silently endure all these outrages, then they can sit like this forever, but if after Putin’s death there are unrest, riots and uprisings, then the elite may be afraid of losing control over the slaves, then they will begin the Perestroika 2 project.

PS
Do not think that a one-day war will be a complete surprise for our authorities. The US never attacks on the sly. There is always a series of threats and show-offs. Saddam was threatened with the gallows for a long time. So ours also receive detailed pictures of our future defeat. It is difficult to say whether they believe in this defeat during a one-day war, most likely not. They are accustomed to the fact that the West is sluggish, no matter how much you kick it, there will be no answer. They forgot the fate of Milosevic and Saddam and Osama.

“Israeli fighter jets entered Syrian airspace and attacked the positions of the Lebanese terrorist group Hezbollah in the country - this statement appeared in the Syrian media on Saturday, October 31. According to the information provided, about a dozen Israeli military aircraft carried out this mission near the border between Syria and Lebanon in the area of ​​Mount Qalamoun."

The domestic Perimeter system, known in the USA and Western Europe as the “Dead Hand”, is a complex for automatic control of a massive retaliatory nuclear strike. The system was created back in the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War. Its main purpose is a guaranteed retaliatory nuclear strike even if the command posts and communication lines of the Strategic Missile Forces are completely destroyed or blocked by the enemy.

With the development of monstrous nuclear power, the principles of global warfare have undergone serious changes. Just one missile with a nuclear warhead on board could hit and destroy the command center or bunker in which the enemy’s senior leadership was located. Here we should consider, first of all, the US doctrine, the so-called “decapitation strike”. It was against such a strike that Soviet engineers and scientists created a system of guaranteed retaliatory nuclear strike. Created during the Cold War, the Perimeter system entered combat duty in January 1985. This is a very complex and large organism that was dispersed throughout Soviet territory and constantly kept many parameters and thousands of Soviet warheads under control. Moreover, approximately 200 modern nuclear warheads are sufficient to destroy a country like the United States.

The development of a guaranteed retaliatory strike system in the USSR also began because it became clear that in the future electronic warfare systems would only be continuously improved. There was a threat that over time they would be able to block the regular channels for controlling strategic nuclear forces. In this regard, a reliable backup communication method was needed that would guarantee the delivery of launch commands to all nuclear missile launchers.

The idea arose to use special command missiles as such a communication channel, which instead of warheads would carry powerful radio transmitting equipment. Flying over the territory of the USSR, such a missile would transmit commands to launch ballistic missiles not only to the command posts of the Strategic Missile Forces, but also directly to numerous launchers. On August 30, 1974, the development of such a missile was initiated by a closed decree of the Soviet government, the task was issued to the Yuzhnoye Design Bureau in the city of Dnepropetrovsk, this design bureau specialized in the development of intercontinental ballistic missiles.

Command missile 15A11 of the Perimeter system

Yuzhnoye SDO specialists took the UR-100UTTH ICBM as a basis (according to NATO codification - Spanker, trotter). A warhead with powerful radio transmitting equipment specially created for the command missile was designed at the Leningrad Polytechnic Institute, and NPO Strela in Orenburg began its production. To aim the command missile in azimuth, a fully autonomous system with a quantum optical gyrometer and an automatic gyrocompass was used. She was able to calculate the required flight direction during the process of placing a command missile on combat duty; these calculations were retained even in the event of nuclear impact on the launcher of such a missile. Flight tests of the new rocket started in 1979, the first launch of a rocket with a transmitter was successfully completed on December 26. The tests carried out proved the successful interaction of all components of the Perimeter system, as well as the ability of the head of the command missile to maintain a given flight path, the top of the trajectory was at an altitude of 4000 meters with a range of 4500 kilometers.

In November 1984, a command rocket launched from near Polotsk managed to transmit a command to launch to a silo launcher in the Baikonur area. The R-36M ICBM (according to the NATO codification SS-18 Satan) that took off from the silo, after testing all stages, successfully hit the target with its warhead in a given square at the Kura training ground in Kamchatka. In January 1985, the Perimeter system was put on combat duty. Since then, this system has been modernized several times; currently, modern ICBMs are used as command missiles.

The command posts of this system appear to be structures that are similar to standard missile bunkers of the Strategic Missile Forces. They are equipped with all the control equipment necessary for operation, as well as communication systems. Presumably they could be integrated with command missile launchers, but most likely they would be spaced out over a sufficiently large distance in the area to ensure better survivability of the entire system.

The only widely known component of the Perimeter system is the 15P011 command missiles, they have the index 15A11. It is the missiles that are the basis of the system. Unlike other intercontinental ballistic missiles, they must fly not towards the enemy, but over Russia; instead of thermonuclear warheads, they carry powerful transmitters that send the launch command to all available combat ballistic missiles of various bases (they have special command receivers). The system is fully automated, while the human factor in its operation has been minimized.

Early warning radar Voronezh-M, photo: vpk-news.ru, Vadim Savitsky

The decision to launch command missiles is made by an autonomous control and command system - a very complex software complex based on artificial intelligence. This system receives and analyzes a huge amount of various information. During combat duty, mobile and stationary control centers over a vast territory constantly assess a lot of parameters: radiation level, seismic activity, air temperature and pressure, control military frequencies, recording the intensity of radio traffic and negotiations, monitor data from the missile attack warning system (MAWS), and also monitor telemetry from Strategic Missile Forces observation posts. The system tracks point sources of powerful ionizing and electromagnetic radiation that coincide with seismic disturbances (evidence of nuclear strikes). After analyzing and processing all incoming data, the Perimeter system is able to autonomously make a decision to launch a retaliatory nuclear strike against the enemy (naturally, the combat mode can also be activated by top officials of the Ministry of Defense and the state).

For example, if the system detects multiple point sources of powerful electromagnetic and ionizing radiation and compares them with data on seismic disturbances in the same places, it may come to the conclusion of a massive nuclear strike on the territory of the country. In this case, the system will be able to initiate a retaliatory strike even bypassing Kazbek (the famous “nuclear suitcase”). Another scenario is that the Perimeter system receives information from the early warning system about missile launches from the territory of other states, the Russian leadership transfers the system to combat mode. If after a certain time there is no command to turn off the system, it will itself begin launching ballistic missiles. This solution eliminates the human factor and guarantees a retaliatory strike against the enemy even if the launch crews and the highest military command and leadership of the country are completely destroyed.

According to one of the developers of the Perimeter system, Vladimir Yarynich, it also served as insurance against the top leadership of the state making a hasty decision on a retaliatory nuclear strike based on unverified information. Having received a signal from the early warning system, the country's top officials could launch the Perimeter system and calmly wait for further developments, while remaining in absolute confidence that even if everyone who has the authority to order a retaliatory attack is destroyed, the retaliatory strike will not succeed prevent. Thus, the possibility of making a decision on a retaliatory nuclear strike in the event of unreliable information and a false alarm was completely excluded.

Rule of four if

According to Vladimir Yarynich, he does not know a reliable method that could disable the system. The Perimeter control and command system, all its sensors and command missiles are designed to operate under conditions of a real nuclear attack by the enemy. In peacetime, the system is in a calm state, one might say in a “sleep”, without ceasing to analyze the huge array of incoming information and data. When the system is transferred to combat mode or in the event of receiving an alarm from early warning systems, strategic missile forces and other systems, monitoring of a network of sensors is launched, which should detect signs of nuclear explosions that have occurred.

Launch of the Topol-M ICBM

Before launching the algorithm, which involves the Perimeter delivering a retaliatory strike, the system checks for the presence of 4 conditions, this is the “rule of four ifs”. Firstly, it is checked whether a nuclear attack actually occurred; the sensor system analyzes the situation for nuclear explosions on the territory of the country. After this, it is checked whether there is a connection with the General Staff; if there is a connection, the system turns off after a while. If the General Staff does not respond in any way, “Perimeter” requests “Kazbek”. If there is no answer here, the artificial intelligence transfers the right to make a decision on a retaliatory strike to any person located in the command bunkers. Only after checking all these conditions does the system begin to operate on its own.

American analogue of "Perimeter"

During the Cold War, the Americans created an analogue of the Russian “Perimeter” system; their duplicate system was called “Operation Looking Glass” (Operation Through the Looking Glass or simply Through the Looking Glass). It came into effect on February 3, 1961. The basis of the system was special aircraft - air command posts of the US Strategic Air Command, which were deployed on the basis of eleven Boeing EC-135C aircraft. These machines were continuously in the air for 24 hours a day. Their combat duty lasted 29 years from 1961 to June 24, 1990. The planes flew in shifts to various areas over the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans. The operators working on board these aircraft monitored the situation and duplicated the control system of American strategic nuclear forces. If the ground centers were destroyed or otherwise disabled, they could duplicate commands to launch a retaliatory nuclear strike. On June 24, 1990, continuous combat duty was terminated, while the aircraft remained in a state of constant combat readiness.

In 1998, the Boeing EC-135C was replaced by new Boeing E-6 Mercury aircraft - control and communications aircraft created by the Boeing Corporation on the basis of the Boeing 707-320 passenger aircraft. This aircraft is designed to provide a backup communications system for US Navy nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs), and the aircraft can also be used as an airborne command post for US Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM). From 1989 to 1992, the US military received 16 of these aircraft. In 1997-2003, they all underwent modernization and today are operated in the E-6B version. The crew of each such aircraft consists of 5 people, in addition to them there are 17 more operators on board (22 people in total).

Boeing E-6 Mercury

Currently, these aircraft are flying to meet the needs of the US Department of Defense in the Pacific and Atlantic zones. On board the aircraft there is an impressive complex of radio-electronic equipment necessary for operation: an automated control system for ICBM launches; onboard multi-channel terminal of the Milstar satellite communication system, which provides communications in the millimeter, centimeter and decimeter ranges; a high-power ultra-long-wave range complex designed for communication with strategic nuclear submarines; 3 radio stations of the UHF and meter range; 3 VHF radio stations, 5 HF radio stations; automated VHF control and communication system; receiving tracking equipment in emergency situations. To ensure communication with strategic submarines and ballistic missile carriers in the ultra-long wavelength range, special towed antennas are used, which can be released from the aircraft fuselage directly in flight.

Operation of the Perimeter system and its current status

After being put on combat duty, the Perimeter system worked and was periodically used as part of command post exercises. At the same time, the 15P011 command missile system with the 15A11 missile (based on the UR-100 ICBM) was on combat duty until mid-1995, when, as part of the signed START-1 agreement, it was removed from combat duty. According to Wired magazine, which is published in the UK and the US, the Perimeter system is operational and ready to retaliate with a nuclear strike in the event of an attack; the article was published in 2009. In December 2011, the commander of the Strategic Missile Forces, Lieutenant General Sergei Karakaev, noted in an interview with Komsomolskaya Pravda journalists that the Perimeter system still exists and is on combat duty.

Will Perimeter protect against the concept of a global non-nuclear strike?

The development of promising instant global non-nuclear strike systems, which the US military is working on, is capable of destroying the existing balance of power in the world and ensuring Washington’s strategic dominance on the world stage. A representative of the Russian Ministry of Defense spoke about this during a Russian-Chinese briefing on missile defense issues, which took place on the sidelines of the first committee of the UN General Assembly. The concept of a rapid global strike assumes that the American army is able to deliver a disarming strike on any country and anywhere on the planet within one hour, using its non-nuclear weapons. In this case, the main means of delivering warheads could be cruise and ballistic missiles with non-nuclear equipment.

Launch of a Tomahawk missile from an American ship

AiF journalist Vladimir Kozhemyakin asked Ruslan Pukhov, director of the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies (CAST), how much an American instant global non-nuclear strike threatens Russia. According to Pukhov, the threat of such a strike is very significant. With all the Russian successes with Caliber, our country is only taking the first steps in this direction. “How many of these Calibers can we launch in one salvo? Let's say there are several dozen units, and the Americans - several thousand Tomahawks. Imagine for a second that 5 thousand American cruise missiles are flying towards Russia, skirting the terrain, and we don’t even see them,” the specialist noted.

All Russian long-range radar detection stations detect only ballistic targets: missiles that are analogues of the Russian Topol-M, Sineva, Bulava, etc. ICBMs. We can track missiles that take to the skies from silos located on American soil. At the same time, if the Pentagon gives the command to launch cruise missiles from its submarines and ships located around Russia, then they may well be able to wipe out a number of strategic objects of paramount importance from the face of the earth: including senior political leadership and control headquarters.

At the moment we are almost defenseless against such a blow. Of course, in the Russian Federation there is and operates a dual redundancy system known as “Perimeter”. It guarantees the possibility of delivering a retaliatory nuclear strike against the enemy under any circumstances. It is no coincidence that in the USA they called it “Dead Hand”. The system will be able to ensure the launch of ballistic missiles even with the complete destruction of communication lines and command posts of Russian strategic nuclear forces. The United States will still be hit with retaliation. At the same time, the very presence of the “Perimeter” does not solve the problem of our vulnerability to an “instant global non-nuclear strike.”

In this regard, the Americans’ work on such a concept, of course, raises concerns. But the Americans are not suicidal: as long as they are aware that there is at least a ten percent chance that Russia will be able to respond, their “global strike” will not take place. And our country is only able to respond with nuclear weapons. Therefore, it is necessary to take all necessary countermeasures. Russia should be able to see the launch of American cruise missiles and respond to it adequately with non-nuclear deterrents, without starting a nuclear war. But so far Russia does not have such funds. With the ongoing economic crisis and cuts in military funding, the country can skimp on many things, but not on our nuclear deterrent. They are given absolute priority in our security system.

Information sources:
https://rg.ru/2014/01/22/perimetr-site.html
https://ria.ru/analytics/20170821/1500527559.html
http://www.aif.ru/politics/world/myortvaya_ruka_protiv_globalnogo_udara_chto_zashchitit_ot_novogo_oruzhiya_ssha
Open source materials

However, knowing the character of the Russian people, we can assume that capitulation will not follow and you need to be prepared for anything.

In 2003, Eksmo publishing house published Nikolai Yakovlev’s book “CIA vs. USSR,” which aroused the interest of the reader. Russian citizens learned from it about the US planned nuclear strikes on the Soviet Union. Their order was distributed in a certain order.

The first missiles carrying nuclear weapons were supposed to hit the capital of the state - the city of Moscow. It was followed by attacks on Gorky - present-day Nizhny Novgorod, Kuibyshev - present-day Samara, Sverdlovsk - present-day Yekaterinburg, Novosibirsk, Omsk and Saratov. The eighth city on the list of planned attacks was Kazan.

Significant changes have taken place since the times described by Yakovlev. Atomic weapons have undergone major modernization. Russia adopted a new military doctrine, military space forces appeared, NATO approached the country's borders. The aggravation of the international situation has put the world before the line beyond which the Third World War could begin.

A nuclear strike on Nizhny Novgorod and Sarov is the No. 1 threat in the event of the outbreak of World War III

The Nizhny Novgorod region has a large concentration of military units, schools and military-industrial complex enterprises on its territory. One of the closed cities in the region, Sarov, is the nuclear center of the country. This is the place that is known to many under the code name Arzamas 16. Academician Sakharov was once exiled to this city.

It has always been under the close attention of all intelligence services in the world, and was subjected to various sabotage attacks in peacetime, one of which in 1988 led to an explosion at the Arzamas railway station, which claimed the lives of 91 people and destroyed 1/3 of the city. If World War III breaks out, a nuclear strike on Sarov will also be carried out.

The center of the region itself, Nizhny Novgorod, is the fifth most populous city in Russia. More than 1.2 million people live here. It is of strategic importance as a center for transport communications and stands at the junction of two great rivers of Russia - the Volga and Oka.

The city is home to military-industrial complex enterprises, military schools and serious formations of the Russian Armed Forces.

Possible nuclear strike on Nizhny Novgorod

According to media reports, Polish pilots are practicing attack skills against Russia, including a nuclear strike on Nizhny Novgorod using bombers.

A nuclear strike on Nizhny Novgorod is planned only against air defense units. It will be carried out by cruise missiles from surface-based ships and submarines located in the northern seas and the Mediterranean. Taking into account the high level of equipment of the air defense troops, it can be assumed that a large part of the population will be able to survive as a result of a partial repulse of the attack.

Nuclear attack on Chelyabinsk and Magnitogorsk

In the declassified US plan to launch a nuclear strike on the USSR, which is now widely available to the reader, Chelyabinsk, along with Magnitogorsk and Miass, was included in the list of South Ural targets to be destroyed. At the time these plans were drawn up, atomic weapons were somewhat different from those now available to the warring parties. The US nuclear arsenal was 10 times greater than that of the USSR.

Many residents of Chelyabinsk know firsthand what nuclear weapons are. Here, during the Second World War, the nuclear shield of modern Russia began to be forged. The danger of an attack on the city is enhanced by the fact that an underground storage facility for nuclear waste has been built near Chelyabinsk, the location of which is well known to all intelligence services in the world and not only to them. This information, as they say, has long become an “open secret.” Disputes about the reliability and strength of floors in the event of an atomic charge have been going on for the second decade. The conclusion of the majority is that they will not withstand a nuclear strike on Chelyabinsk. There is talk about possible reinforcement of the vault sarcophagus.

What will the nuclear strike on Chelyabinsk be aimed at?

Today, more than 1.1 million people live in Chelyabinsk. Turbines for the Armata, Iskander and Vladimirov, protective equipment and much more necessary for the country’s defense complex are produced here. The city is a major transport hub on the road connecting Europe and Asia. There is no need to wait for a miracle if the Third World War breaks out.

Nuclear strike on Yekaterinburg

Ekaterinburg is the fourth most populous city in Russia. It is home to more than 1.4 million people. The city stands at the intersection of 6 federal highways, and the Trans-Siberian Railway passes through it. The majority of urban industry consists of military-industrial complex enterprises.

Artillery weapon systems are produced in the city of Yekaterinburg. The Ural Optical-Mechanical Plant is the largest manufacturer of electronic systems that are used in military and civil aviation, surveillance systems, thermal imagers, satellite equipment and other areas important for Russia.

The former Sverdlovsk has been of great importance for the domestic defense industry since the Second World War. The loss of industry and transport infrastructure, if the Third World War happens and a nuclear strike is delivered to Yekaterinburg, could take the country out of the global economy for a long time. Therefore, the protection of Yekaterinburg from a nuclear attack is of great importance.

When delivering a nuclear strike on a city, cruise missiles will be used, which should hit air defense units and Trading ICBMs aimed at the strategic nuclear forces of the Russian Federation. Likely strikes could come from submarines and surface naval vessels. The type of hypothetically planned attack on Yekaterinburg is ground.

The convenient location of the city in the interior of the country gives a small head start in time to take measures to save the population. You need to understand that air defense systems will shoot down missiles at distant approaches. This does not exclude the possibility of defeat and destruction of the city, but provides a chance for salvation.

Nuclear attack on Kazan

A possible nuclear strike on Kazan has not lost its relevance. Today the population of the capital of the Republic of Tatarstan is more than 1.2 million people. The city has one of the largest river ports on the Volga. Kazan is a large transport and logistics center. 3 federal highways and 2 highways pass through it.

Probable targets and scenario for a nuclear strike on Kazan

In the event that World War III breaks out, 4 nuclear warheads will probably be dropped on Kazan. Air defense units should come under attack. Cruise missiles from surface ships and submarines are aimed at them. Their estimated arrival time is 30 minutes. An aircraft factory, a gunpowder factory, a railway station and a port may be attacked. They will be attacked by aircraft based in Europe and Turkey.

During Soviet times, quite a lot of bomb shelters were built in the city, many of which are abandoned and littered. Those shelters that are intended for the evacuation of a certain circle of people are in excellent working condition. They include the leadership of the city and the republic, the military command and some groups of specialized specialists and their families.

In addition to the local elected elite, guest workers have a chance to escape. Many of them are settled in shelters by employers who save on the costs of their resettlement. Some shelters after the liquidation of the USSR were privatized, repeatedly resold and turned into warehouses, shops and cafes. According to journalistic raids, the city prosecutor's office carried out its inspections and came to shocking conclusions for the common man - strategic federal property was illegally sold to individuals and various types of companies.

Those who think that a nuclear strike on Kazan will lead to 100% death of the population are mistaken. At least half of the residents will survive.

The best place for evacuation may be sparsely populated settlements far from large cities, highways and military installations. You need to be prepared for long pedestrian crossings.

The safest source of food after the defeat will be canned food. You can independently combat the received dose of radiation by taking iodine and calcium. This will significantly support the body. It is unlikely that anything else will be available to the majority of the population.

Nuclear attack on Novosibirsk

Novosibirsk is rightfully considered the center of Russian science. It houses military-industrial complex enterprises engaged in the production of rocket, space and aviation equipment. It is the third largest city in Russia by population and thirteenth by area. It is among the targets that would be targeted by a nuclear attack in the event of the outbreak of World War III between the United States and Russia.

The location of the most powerful scientific and industrial potential in the interior of the country is not accidental. Russia's significant size, compared to other states, gives it a chance to retain part of its production and intellectual potential. Military-industrial complex enterprises have not only a ground part. Many production facilities and laboratories are located at considerable depths from the earth's surface. They are capable of withstanding the destructive force and power possessed by atomic weapons.

A significant part of the population will die if a nuclear strike is carried out on Novosibirsk. Missiles aimed at Siberian cities have a flight time of 15 minutes. Radars scanning regions of Russia located east of the Urals.

The list of objects to be destroyed in the city probably includes a telecommunications center and repeaters. A nuclear attack would most likely be launched by three-stage solid-fueled Trident-type ballistic missiles. The mass of the charge that this atomic weapon has is 100 kT and 475 kT. The flight range of the missiles, depending on the type of carrier, is 7400 km, 7600 km and 11000 km. Such nuclear weapons are in service with US Ohio and Vanguard class submarines.

Nuclear attack on St. Petersburg

Speaking at a conference in St. Petersburg in 2011, former NATO chief Anderson Von Rasmussen assured its participants that an attack on the northern capital of Russia by the bloc with atomic weapons was unlikely. But is it worth believing those who are building up their military power near the borders of Russia, calling it their enemy No. 1 and modeling options for World War III? The entire history of the existence of a state indicates that it must always be ready to repel any blow from potential opponents.

NATO forces located in the Baltic countries pose the greatest threat to the northern capital of Russia. Territorial proximity to these states significantly reduces the time for defense and retaliation. Five kilometers from Lithuanian Siauliai there is a military base where the aircraft of the North Atlantic bloc is located. Estonia provided NATO with an airfield in Ämari, Latvia - in Narva and Liepaja. The flight time from these bases to St. Petersburg is 15 minutes! The speed of a missile with nuclear weapons is significantly higher than that of bombers. Russia has only 1-2 minutes to strike back.

What targets are planned to be attacked?

The plan for World War III, developed by the Americans, provides a list of targets and cities subject to mandatory destruction. When delivering a nuclear strike on St. Petersburg, the following will be hit first:

1. air defense facilities and military bases;

2. telecommunication centers and repeaters;

3. transport (highways, railways, airports) nodes;

4. strategic heat, water and energy supply facilities.

The concept of a nuclear strike on St. Petersburg includes a cruise missile attack. Type of explosion - ground.

The precision of nuclear weapons makes it possible to carry out a ground explosion within the boundaries of Nevsky Prospekt. This form of impact somewhat reduces the radius of damage compared to explosions that occur on the ground. Its main damaging factor is heat stroke caused by a light flash. The damage radius is 10-15 kilometers. In the area of ​​the explosion, it will be possible to take shelter at the Ploshchad Vosstaniya, Spasskaya, Ligovsky Prospekt and Dostoevskaya metro stations. The stations Nevsky Prospekt, Akademicheskaya, Moskovskie Vorota and Lenin Square will be completely crushed, along with other structures located in close proximity to them.

Within a radius of 3-4 kilometers from the center of the explosion, evaporation and incineration of organic bodies will occur. If possible, when diving in the subway, you should take drinking water with you. Within a radius of 20-25 km, all wooden surfaces will burn and plastic will melt. Forest fires will occur outside the ring road.

If there is a nuclear strike on St. Petersburg, the city will be lost forever. Rescue efforts will involve relocating survivors beyond the 100-kilometer affected area. The restoration of the city will not be possible for several decades, or even hundreds of years (remember the Chernobyl tragedy at the nuclear power plant).

Nuclear attack on Moscow

Most likely, a nuclear strike on Moscow will be delivered around 18:00.

This assumption is explained by the following reasons:

Eighteen o'clock in Moscow corresponds to 10 o'clock in the morning in Washington. At this time, all civil servants are at work and ready to begin solving combat missions. An earlier start to the operation could attract the attention of intelligence services in other countries. In a war where all calculations take place in minutes and seconds, it is very important not to attract the attention of enemy special services ahead of time.

The later period of the attack is complicated by peak load on telephone lines. In the morning hours of Washington time, the bulk of American citizens are at work and can be compactly evacuated. Russians are on their way home from work at this time. Transport arteries are overloaded, the city is stuck in traffic jams. A nuclear strike on Moscow at this time would result in maximum losses and lead to greater chaos.

The most likely yield of a thermonuclear weapon that could be used in World War III is in the range of 2-10 megatons. In general, the power of nuclear warheads is limited by the possibility of delivery vehicles for the latter, and is also determined by the large power of the city of Moscow itself and the fact that central intelligence and defense enterprises and units are concentrated here, and along the perimeter of the capital there are belts of aviation and missile cover systems and, at the same time, primary the fact that the shelters of both the government and presidential apparatus and services of the Ministry of Defense have a high degree of security, because they will be the main target for the alleged enemy, which the United States can become.

Let us note how much time will pass from the moment of notification of the “Nuclear Alert” signal until the most damaging strike:

About 14 minutes, if ground-based nuclear weapons launch vehicles are launched from the territory of the American continent;

About 7 minutes, in the case of launching atomic weapons from naval missile carriers, which are based under water and located in the Arctic Ocean and the North Atlantic.

The data above coincides with the approach time of ballistic missiles, which are sent in supra-atmospheric space along ballistic trajectories with a speed of 28,000 km/h or 7.9 km/sec, that is, the first cosmic speed. In fact, in combat conditions, it is possible to predict some fights and communication delays, which can reduce the warning time to a couple of minutes.

No later than 6 minutes after the first warning signal of a nuclear strike sounds, all entrances to the shelter will be closed and blocked, even if there are people who will not have time to get into them and there will be a large number of them. When trying to delay the closure of entrances by any persons, it is recommended to use any means, including the use of firearms, against everyone without exception or delay.

Note that the Moscow Metro is the best option of all possible shelters.

Due to the accuracy of modern guidance systems, the epicenter of the explosion will be located within the boundaries of the Boulevard Ring, the affected area is the Kremlin-Lubyanka-Arbat area. This particular area is key for the United States in neutralizing Russia during the Third World War, since the main administrative and military control centers in the state are concentrated there.

Within a radius of 20-25 km from the epicenter of a nuclear explosion in Moscow, all plastic, wood and painted surfaces and plants facing the explosion will ignite, metal roofs will burn out, stone, glass, brick and metal will be melted; Glass will evaporate, window frames will burn, asphalt will catch fire, and wires will melt. The city of Moscow within the boundaries of the Moscow Ring Road will be engulfed in an active fire, and a ring forest fire will occur outside the Moscow Ring Road. Forest park areas and well-developed areas will be fully ignited. The reservoirs of the Moscow and Yauza rivers will evaporate, and the upper layer of the Khimki reservoir will boil.

Based on materials from http://www.3world-war.su/

Back at the end of May, at the economic forum in St. Petersburg, I constantly asked high-ranking government speakers: “Does the country control currency risk and the risk of investing in American assets?” Officials mostly avoided answering, laughed it off, and said that the United States would not agree to financial sanctions, since this would hit America itself. And only A. Kudrin said that no, the Russian Federation does not control this risk.

As it turned out, by the time of the St. Petersburg forum, the country had actually removed US Treasury bonds (Treasuries) from its balance sheet. A portfolio of $100 billion has been liquidated at an accelerated pace since April of this year. Probably, our financial authorities only sold securities of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac faster in 2008, by the way, for almost the same amount.

Obviously, in addition to market conditions, which really force many to play for lower treasury prices and higher yields, there were other reasons that forced the authorities to hastily sell US Treasury securities.

Probably, already then preparations began for the most unfavorable scenario of relations with the United States. As an element of preparation, simultaneously with the sale of treasuries, Russia demonstrated missiles, submarines, new laser weapons and other non-life-affirming things.

However, the main, most difficult question remained the currency component of relations - what to do if the American authorities deal the most powerful, I would say, thermonuclear blow to Russian finances, namely, they begin to freeze the assets and transactions in dollars of Russian banks? Given the current state of the Russian economy, this step is the most painful for the financial system; even sanctions on government bonds look like a minor nuisance against this background. Few people believed in such a development of events.

And now in the US Congress lies a draft law, which was initiated by both Democrats and Republicans, in which it is written in black and white about the freezing of the assets of the seven largest Russian banks, a ban on transactions in dollars and the blocking of all accounts. This is not even a disconnection from SWIFT, but a complete blocking of the movement of dollars for our banks and, more importantly, for the clients of these banks, for companies and citizens.

It feels like our financial authorities still don’t believe this. They pretend that nothing is happening. The Ministry of Finance continues to take dollars on the market, even on August 8, when the whole world was already making noise about freezing the dollar transactions of our banks and the ruble went into free float, or rather into free immersion, the Central Bank dealer calmly completed his task - he bombed the ruble for 16.7 billion.

For what? Why? Where do they store the dollars they buy? Well, maybe they can at least change it to euros? Maybe cash in the USA is ordered by plane. Even if the rats eat up 3 percent of the cash, at least something will remain for the population, who will inevitably go to demand their dollars, which they were saving for a wedding or funeral. What people don’t understand at all is that all non-cash dollars are in the United States and, on the command of the same Trump, the American authorities close all correspondent accounts of our banks in 2 minutes.