Berlin, FRG (Weltexpress). “Thanks” to Western provocations, the Ukraine conflict has become the most dangerous crisis since the Second World War. Even units of Russia’s Strategic Rocket Forces (RVSN) have now been deployed. The message to NATO was unmistakable. But was it understood?
On November 21, 2024, a new chapter was opened in the history of Russian military strategy. On this day, the Russian Federation deployed its Strategic Missile Forces (RVSN) in a real combat mission for the first time. This step marks a historic escalation and shines a spotlight on the strategic importance of this special unit, which has been known as the “Troops of the Apocalypse” since its creation in the Soviet Union.
The RVSN, an independent branch of the Russian armed forces, is responsible for the intercontinental missile arsenal. These “soldiers of the apocalypse” are equipped with firepower that is theoretically capable of triggering a global catastrophe. During the Cold War, they were on high alert several times, especially during crises such as the Cuban Missile Crisis and the RYAN/Able Archer crisis in the fall of 1983. Until this November day in 2024, the RVSN had never been used in a real combat mission.
The context of using “Oreschnik” (hazelnut)
The Ukraine conflict had developed into one of the most dangerous security crises in modern history in the preceding months. The Western Ukrainian side repeatedly ignored Russian warnings to cease long-range attacks on undisputed Russian territory such as Bryansk and Kursk. Provocations by NATO, which acted as Ukraine’s main supporter, helped to further escalate tensions. Faced with these developments, Moscow decided to use one of its most powerful weapons – but initially in a non-nuclear form.
The target of the attack was a huge Ukrainian arms factory in Dnipro (Dnipropetrovsk), where missiles were already being manufactured in Soviet times, without interruption until last week. The weapon used was the newly developed Russian hypersonic missile codenamed “Oreshnik”. This missile had previously only been tested in theory and now proved to be extremely effective in a real combat scenario. Up to 36 warheads separate from the launcher in the final phase of the un-calculated trajectory, which in turn use their own rocket propulsion to independently head for their own targets. The destructive power of the respective warheads is multiplied by the kinetic energy of the extremely high impact velocity. Apparently, the “Oreshnik” had the effect of a small tactical nuclear weapon on the large and widely dispersed area of the Ukrainian armaments company, despite its conventional armament.
With its impressive speed and destructive precision, the “Oreschnik” has therefore caused a stir even as a conventional weapon on the previously blind and deaf government floors of the European NATO countries. Western warmongers now have to reckon with the fact that these missiles, with a range of 6000 km, can reach any location in Western Europe – whether conventional or nuclear – in the shortest possible time using hypersonic technology and, at the same time, there are no Western weapons that can stop the “Oreschniks”.
Messages to Ukraine and NATO
From a Russian perspective, the deployment of the “Oreshnik” probably had two central objectives. Firstly, it served as a test to confirm the efficiency of this new technology under real conditions. Secondly, it was a “final warning” to Ukraine and its Western supporters. Moscow wanted to demonstrate that it had the means and the will to respond adequately to the escalations, but without immediately resorting to the use of nuclear weapons.
The message to NATO was unmistakable: there is no existing military technology that could stop Russia’s intercontinental missiles. If nuclear options were chosen, the targets would certainly be hit – regardless of the defensive measures of the Atlantic Alliance.
For Ukraine, the warning was even more direct. The attack was intended to make it clear that no one would protect the Kiev regime from the consequences of its actions. Washington, which had allegedly been warned by Moscow 30 minutes before the launch of the “Oreshnik” that it was not a nuclear-armed missile, chose inaction.
Despite thousands of experts trained to respond to nuclear crises, the US government did not initiate any countermeasures. This reluctance could indicate a fear of further escalation or the assumption that the target would only affect Ukrainian territory.
Strategic and political implications
The US decision not to react has also sent a clear message to Kiev: Russia will not shy away from retaliatory measures against Ukraine, and in the event of a nuclear attack, Ukraine would have to bear the consequences alone. This stance also raises questions about NATO’s collective defense strategy. If a member or close ally such as Ukraine is not protected by direct support, doubts could arise about the unity and reliability of the alliance.
However the New York Times (NYT) reported on Monday, November 25, just days after the deployment of the “Oreshnik”, that some of the neoconservative string-pullers in the White House have learned nothing. According to the NYT, several administration officials even suggested that US President Biden had allegedly considered “giving Ukraine nuclear weapons. That would be an immediate and enormous deterrent” against further Russian attacks, the officials said. These people are referring to a senile president who can’t even find his way to the bathroom on his own.
The situation in Washington is outrageous, because in view of the danger of nuclear war, no one knows who is supposedly making the decisions in the White House on behalf of Biden. Even the NYT, which has always advocated “Ukraine-over-all”, seems uneasy, writing: “Such a move (nuclear weapons to Ukraine) would be complicated and have serious consequences.”
Meanwhile, former Ukrainian defense minister and Zelensky adviser Andriy Zagorodnyuk, already familiar to RT-DE readers, is also drumming up support for more firepower for Ukraine in the NYT, arguing that Ukraine and its allies must first reverse the dynamic on the front in order to create the conditions for talks for a successful ceasefire. At the same time, he called on the West to have a sufficient arsenal of longer-range weapons to inflict immediate damage on Russia if the Kremlin resumes hostilities.
Obviously, many warmongers still haven’t understood and “Oreschnik” still has more lessons to teach. However, these seem to have already reached parts of the alleged “quality media” in the mainstream. We see that there are now increasing calls for diplomatic peace efforts and talks with the Russians, something that would have resulted in a shitstorm just a few days ago.
Conclusion
The deployment of the “Oreshnik” missile and the involvement of the Strategic Missile Forces in the Ukraine conflict show Moscow’s determination to defend its strategic interests while at the same time attempting to avoid a nuclear escalation. November 21, 2024 will undoubtedly go down as a turning point in Russian military history. By deploying the RVSN in an active military operation, Russia set a precedent that could redefine the dynamics of modern conflict. The decision to initially rely on conventional missiles shows the Kremlin’s strategy: to demonstrate strength without immediately risking the worst consequences of a nuclear conflict. However, the use of this “last warning” also underlines the potentially catastrophic consequences should diplomatic efforts fail.
The future of the Ukraine conflict remains uncertain. The decision-makers in Kiev would do well to remember the motto of the Russian Strategic Missile Forces (RVSN): “After us – only silence.” This motto is a reminder of the devastating force that these troops could unleash. These events highlight just how fragile global security has become. The coming weeks and months will show whether it is possible to correct this dangerous course and create a basis for negotiations and long-term peace.
