US Carrier Strike Group and How Russia Hopes to Cope with its Power

The US Carrier Strike Group (CSG) is the most powerful weapon in the US, with its capability projecting an unparalleled firepower across all seas of the planet causing terror to US adversaries.

The CSG consists of a formation of surface vessels and under surface vessels. The formation of the CGS includes an aircraft carrier, a combat wing of fighter aircraft, a guided missile cruiser, a squadron of cruise missile destroyers and a specific number of attack submarines.

by Thanos S. Chonthrogiannis

©The law of intellectual property is prohibited in any way unlawful use/appropriation of this article, with heavy civil and criminal penalties for the infringer.

Carrier strike group - Wikipedia
US Carrier Strike Group
Photo by the website https://en.wikipedia.org

CSG is the most recognized symbol of American military superiority. Both the USSR during the Cold War and today Russia does not have CSG and there is no chance of acquiring it in the future.

Over time and through the prism of history, Russia, and other countries such as Germany, China, Turkey, have always belonged to the category of land forces and its military doctrine was built around the development of their land forces.

Their navy had a deterrent force designed to threaten its adversaries if they intended to encroach on the then Soviet and present Russian territory. The primary mission of the Russian Navy is to secure Russia’s huge Euro-Asian border.

The USA, a country located between two Oceans, is a maritime nation that relies on its Navy to project US power on a global scale, historically continuing to exercise the heritage of all maritime nations that in their time were the dominant powers of the then world such as Ancient Athens, the Serene Republic of Venice and of course the British Empire.

Russia’s military doctrine does not require the unique capabilities provided by CSG. On the other hand, however, the Russians have great respect for the formidable firepower and unique capabilities of the US CSG.

Whatever army a country has, no matter how large a country it is and a single US CSG if ordered, it can not only destroy a country’s infrastructure but also send it back to the Stone Age. Coastal, island and more generally inland states cannot be protected from the power of US CSG.

The Russians’ hope to deal with the US CSG as well as China’s is the 3M22 Zircon anti-ship missiles of Russia and China respectively the Dong Feng DF-17 which both countries have called “aircraft carrier killers”. Zircon with a range of 1000-2000 km, a top speed of 8 Mach and in-flight maneuvering capability, enables Russia to believe that such a missile can easily bypass the surface-to-air systems of the US CSG.

Russia Poseidon Nuclear Attack Drone Test Video
Russia Poseidon nuclear attack drone
Photo by the website www.popularmechanics.com

Due to economic costs, Russia cannot follow the US in building CSG as well. Instead, it juxtaposes the Poseidon system – a nuclear-powered underwater drone armed with a payload of two megatons of atomic power.

Its purpose is to destroy the enemy’s coastal cities while creating a radioactive tsunami infecting the entire region.

Russia has developed and equipped this Poseidon weapon with systems that can escape the CSG Anti-Submarine Warfare. That is why Russia is increasingly confident in expanding its interests and defending them around the world.

But let us hope that such a conflict between the US and Russia will only remain on the cards and will not be acted on because of the disastrous global consequences it will cause.

About the author

The Liberal Globe is an independent online magazine that provides carefully selected varieties of stories. Our authoritative insight opinions, analyses, researches are reflected in the sections which are both thematic and geographical. We do not attach ourselves to any political party. Our political agenda is liberal in the classical sense. We continue to advocate bold policies in favour of individual freedoms, even if that means we must oppose the will and the majority view, even if these positions that we express may be unpleasant and unbearable for the majority.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *