On February 28, Russian military expert Viktor Baranetz, a retired colonel and former defense ministry spokesman, published an article in the Russian tabloid Komsomolskaya Pravda titled "Trump-Pump-Pump And Our Big Bang." In the article, Baranetz asserted that Russia has asymmetrical responses to the increase in the U.S. military budget. According to Baranetz, Russia is "quietly 'seeding' the U.S. shoreline with nuclear 'mole' missiles" that "dig themselves in and 'sleep' until they are given the command" to detonate.
However, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov dismissed these claims. In response to a journalist's question on Baranetz's article, Peskov said: "This sounds strange, to say the least, and so I would suggest that you not take newspaper reports like this seriously."
Following are excerpts from Baranetz's article:
Viktor Baranetz (Source: Oxpaha.ru)
"Our Asymmetrical Response Is Nuclear Warheads"
SUPPORT OUR WORK
"The U.S. is the permanent 'world champion' in the size of its military budget – almost $600 billion, which is 10 times more than Russias. Even if we add together the military budgets of the top ten countries in the world, they would not reach the American budget! Now it turns out that even that is not enough for Donald Trump. He intends to increase defense expenditure by $54 billion. This money would be enough to maintain five Polish armies. Or 10 Ukrainian ones.
"The American public is already grumbling at Trump, who prefers guns to butter. But cunning Trump understands what his trump card is: He is 'buying' the support of the army, as well as of military industry corporations. Former Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Army Yuri Baluyevsky is certain that 'the idea to increase defense expenditure was presented to Trump by the U.S. military, who argue a lot about the power of the Russian army, realizing this is an opportunity to get new money.' But how will Moscow react to the growing military budget of the U.S.? Baluyevsky answers: 'Russia will not compete with the U.S. in defense expenditure. We are in a different weight class. For us, the main question is how to ensure Russia's defense at a lower cost. I am sure that we have already found asymmetrical responses. I don't see a big problem here.'
"What are these mysterious 'asymmetrical responses' that our politicians and generals speak about so often? Maybe it's a myth or a pretty turn of phrase? No! Our asymmetrical response is nuclear warheads that can modify their course and height so that no computer can calculate their trajectory. Or, for example, the Americans are deploying their tanks, airplanes and special forces battalions along the Russian border. And we are quietly 'seeding' the U.S. shoreline with nuclear 'mole' missiles (they dig themselves in and 'sleep' until they are given the command)[...]
"Oh, it seems I've said too much. I should hold my tongue.
"In short, we have something to provide an 'asymmetrical' (and cheaper) response to the Americans. But if Trump has money to burn, let him spend it on weapons that the U.S. may never even need. And they say Trump is a good businessman..."