It seems that NATO’s A2/AD strategy involves fighters and air control more than it does with SAMs. But I would think that Russia would use long range cruise missiles and ballistic missiles (like the Kalibr and Iskander) to neutralize SAM sites and air bases. They can have a secure launch area for that if they have ships in proper locations away from the target area. But Russia possibly knows that it couldn’t win that fight and achieve air superiority or degrade a NATO air superiority blanket enough to achieve air superiority or parity. So my guess would be that they would rely more on artillery.
It really depends on the target and the theater, but generally, I would assume that Kaliningrad would be a central launch base for operations including missile strikes against SAM sites and air bases. Again, assuming that eastern Europe is the theater. If it’s Ukraine or Georgia, it’s different. Ukraine and Georgia use a similar A2/AD strategy to Russia in that it’s focused mainly on ground based SAMs. In that case, Russia operated somewhat effectively in 2008, but they’ve made leaps and bounds since then (probably…). .
Buks and S-300s would give Russia some problems but Russia has a robust EW capability that, when integrated with SEAD operations could effectively neutralize Buk batteries spread throughout a theater. Theoretically, of course.
It all depends on the target, the theater, and the goal for Russia. Those three things have such a wide range of answers that finding out how Russia would deal with A2/AD is nearly impossible. We just have their doctrine to look at. I could spitball more, but without a defined scenario, it’s tough to come up with anything.
Sign In
