The US military industrial community has become strongly concerned about intensive development of precision hypersonic weapons, which, according to them, is going in Russia and China.  

The debates held on different discussion platforms in the US the second half of the last year and early this year as well as expert publications on this topic show that they are worried about this development, claiming that it may create a serious threat to the security of the US and their allies in NATO.   

Last November, Jane’s Defence Weekly published a detailed alarmist article about six types of Russian strike weapons, President Vladimir Putin spoke about in his address to the Federal Assembly last March.      

In the early January, former Chief of Staff of U.S. Northern Command Major General Howard N. Thompson told the Hill internet publication that, “hypersonics would afford the U.S. with unprecedented rapid reach, global target access, a “fourth dimension effect” by effectively shrinking a foe’s decision-making window.” In his opinion, hypersonic weapons have already provided these advantages to Russia and China, “given the state of hypersonic weapons development in those countries.” 

Howard Thompson noted with concern that Russia and China have already been engaged in development of such weapons. As an example he mentioned the recent test of Russia’s hypersonic glide vehicle (HVG), known as Avangard. He refers to official reports, saying that the vehicle “completed a successful flight tests in which weapon purportedly reached 27 times the speed of sound.” That means that it flows with the speed above 30,000 km per hour.

According to the US military retiree, China also made attempts to achieve the similar level for its cutting edge weaponry. According to Undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering Dr. Mike Griffin, China has conducted “more tests in the past year than the United States has conducted over the past decade.”

While admitting the fact that Russian and Chinese research, test and development of hypersonic weapons have far outpaced that of the United States, people in Washington are thinking how to force Moscow and Beijing to abandon their achievements or at least to slow down further development of hypersonics.

For this purpose they used some informative, representational and diplomatic methods. 

They deliberately leaked the following facts to the US media: US Air forces are working on creation of a hypersonic glider (original name “Hypersonic Technology Vehicle” or HTV) which as they claim may have a speed five times the speed of sound and the US army plan to field a similar system, named “Advanced Hypersonic Weapon” or “AHW,” with a slightly smaller flying range than that one of the HTV of the US Air forces. But all these developments need further improvement.  

Obviously, the Pentagon tried to impress China and Russia, when last year the US Navy conducted tests of about 20 Hyper Velocity Projectiles, they plan to use both for land and sea based artillery systems. However, American engineers failed even to win praise at the U.S. Naval Institute, because the speed of such projectiles either approaches the hypersonic speed or only slightly exceeds it, but not dramatically.

In respect to Russia, in 2018, they came up with a naïve proposal implying that the U.S. will scrupulously implement the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF treaty) and in exchange for that Russia should abandon plans to put hypersonic Avangard system into service

Now it is too late and it is also too unequal.

It is too late because Moscow will not abandon this system in creation of which it outpaced Washington for decades.

It is too late trying to remedy the complicated situation, the US found itself in because of its own initiative when it withdrew from the ABM treaty in 2002 and launched an uncontrolled build-up of anti-missile weapons deploying their strike components of dual use and information reconnaissance systems near the borders of Russia and its allies.

It is too late now, when the U.S. decided to carry out deep modernization and renewal of its strategic and tactical nuclear missile weapons when maintaining the strategy on delivering first nuclear strike on Russia and China.

It is too late in conditions when the U.S. and their NATO allies baselessly initiated the build-up of heavy types of conventional weapons and significantly increased the number of military drills and maneuvers near the Russian borders.

It is also very unequal because Washington must fully observe the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF treaty), without any artificial linkages and unrelated clauses, if it still regards it as an important agreement in the sphere of arms control. It is also unequal because Russian hypersonic system Avangard is in no way subject to the restrictions under that termless agreement although the American side is trying to push it into this category. As it was earlier officially announced in Moscow, this year a regiment equipped with Avangard hypersonic system will be formed in Russia.

In this context, it is necessary to remind to the US Department of State and Department of Defense that on December 11, 2018, during the test of their global anti-missile system US Naval forces successfully intercepted a mid-range missile target, which is prohibited under the INF Treaty. This test became 96th violation of the Treaty by the American side over the last 17 years. In 2019, the Pentagon intends to violate the treaty 12 times more. Way too many violations of only one treaty by the American vis-à-vis in the situation when Russia has not breached it any single time?

The mentioned figure shows that the US de-facto withdrew from that treaty a long time ago. But it shamelessly tries to accuse the other party of failing to observe the agreement misinforming the entire global community.

Politically, the US also withdrew from that treaty when last December they spoke against the adoption of draft resolution in support of the INF Treaty at the UN General Assembly.

That is why when it comes to hypersonic systems it is unlikely that Washington can count on any tradeoffs they propose to Moscow. From this perspective Russia should prepare its response to the U.S.

Cause: a donut hole cannot be traded for a donut.