Russia’s Latest Sarmat Test Sent Three Messages
The overarching one is that Sarmat deters a NATO invasion of Russia.
Russia recently tested its Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile (known as Satan II by NATO), which can carry several nuclear-armed hypersonic glide vehicles for penetrating all missile defense systems, in a move that Putin described as ensuring his country’s national security for years to come. It also sent three messages, the first of which was explicitly conveyed by Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov, who hinted that France was the intended participant more so than the US like many observers assumed.
In his words, “We must confidently, calmly, firmly, and responsibly demonstrate our capabilities to cool down the hotheads, of which there are many along our western borders, who are playing with various umbrella concepts.” This follows the announcement in late April in Gdansk, coincidentally the same city where World War II began, that France and Poland will hold regular nuclear drills, which expands France’s nuclear umbrella and could thus embolden Poland to threaten Kaliningrad and/or Belarus.
The second message sent by this test builds upon the abovementioned and was arguably meant to deter Germany amidst its accelerated remilitarization that former President and incumbent Deputy Chair of the Security Council Dmitry Medvedev recently warned about in his magnum opus on the subject. It already has a base in Lithuania and optimized military logistics to there through Poland due to their “military Schengen” so its 1941-like military buildup veritably poses a threat to Kaliningrad and Belarus.
The final message is admittedly speculative but concerns the possibility of Sarmat’s successfully tested defense of Russia’s national security interests partially justifying (potentially painful) mutual compromises with the US over Ukraine. About that, it was earlier explained how “Russian Media’s Unprecedented Criticism Of China Sets The Stage For This Summer’s Game-Changer”, which will either be a de facto alliance with China on equal terms or what was just described in the preceding sentence.
If Xi rejects Putin’s expected proposal for whatever reason, then he’ll likely settle matters with the US over Ukraine through (potentially painful) mutual compromises aimed at finally establishing the resource-centric strategic partnership that they’ve been negotiating for a year already. In the event that the special operation ends without achieving all of Russia’s maximalist goals, then its people can be reminded that Sarmat – which will enter service by year’s end – already ensures their national security.
The conventional military threats posed thereto by NATO’s clandestine expansion into Ukraine before the special operation, which was the reason why it was authorized after diplomatic efforts to resolve their resultant security dilemma failed, are therefore neutralized by Sarmat according to this narrative. Accordingly, fully demilitarizing and denazifying Ukraine along with restoring its constitutional neutrality would no longer matter in that sense since Sarmat now suffices for deterring a NATO invasion of Russia.
It remains to be seen whether this third message will indeed be sent after Russia’s latest Sarmat test, but it’s the logical conclusion of the first explicitly described one towards France and the second reasonably inferred one towards Germany, albeit only in the scenario of Russian compromises over Ukraine. If Putin goes that route, then it’s foreseeable that the Sarmat’s role will be presented by Russian officials, media, and “Non-Russian Pro-Russians” in the Alt-Media Community in the way that was just described.



I'm seriously considering limiting comments to paid subscribers to prevent trolls, who've become increasingly sophisticated in their passive-aggressive insults, from toxifying the conversation.
I don't have the time, nor always the energy, to closely monitor my comments even after reimposing my policy of instantly banning trolls and explaining afterwards (which is back in effect).
The only way that I'll definitely keep the comments open all summer at least is if there are at minimum five more paid subscribers to recompense me for the abuse that I occasionally receive.
I sincerely enjoy responding to comments here, but it's so draining nowadays since I'm going on long walks midday in the Moscow heat only to return to this nonsense on a semi-regular basis.
I can't keep it up if everything remains the same so something has to go, and I'm not cutting out my midday walks nor reducing my workflow, but likely restricting comments for paid subscribers.
1) " Putin described as ensuring his country’s national security for years to come":
nuclear arms do not ensure national security; they only assure mutual destruction of the nation and her aggressor. Not a cheerful prospect! Modern wars are not fought with army groups or invading tank divisions. They aim to deny the adversary the capability to sell its resources and obtain essential supplies from outside the country. Other components of modern warfare are equally important: information wars, color revolutions (see Armenia, more recently), and denial of access to resource-rich countries that could facilitate productive investment and optimal geopolitical positioning. The latter, the Soviet Union, understood it very well and used it masterfully.
When taking these aspects into consideration, Russia, among the Big Three powers of the globe, is the weakest and most easily subjected to modern warfare. Her oil exports through the Baltic and the Black seas are fully under NATO (or EU) control. Her North-South Corridor is only on paper, and there is doubt that it will ever become reality. Furthermore, her current southern border partners or allies (?) are equally targeted through various means by her enemies.
The nation is anything but secure.
2) The choice between a resource-sharing deal with the (Anglo-)Americans and a junior position in the relationship with China—I believe the latter is many times more attractive. Russia needs to develop her Far East territories and secure her access to the wide open seas. The alternative is to keep building defensive positions against zwergs like Finland, Poland, and the rest. NOT WORTH IT.