The Russian military exploded through the Ukrainian air defense network, and also exploded an unexpected outcome, the secrets the US military was hard to hide, finally unable to hide.
Although U.S. weapons are still constantly being sent to Ukraine, it can be seen that these weapons are not able to reverse the power gap between the Russian and Ukrainian countries, and even bring "problems" to the U.S. side. Recently, a former senior Ukrainian officer revealed that the iconic weapons of the U.S. military - "Patriot" air defense missiles, their interception efficiency has seriously decreased, and currently facing the interception rate of Russian missiles is only about 6%. This number is actually no different from "scrap metal"。
America's "patriots" suddenly stopped working
As we all know, U.S.-made weapons have the leading sales volume in the world, and the "Patriot" air defense missile system is one of the best. It was once touted as "the world's strongest air defense shield."
Simply put, it has demonstrated strong intercepting capabilities in numerous local conflicts in the late Cold War and beyond, especially when dealing with conventional ballistic missiles and aircraft-type targets.
However, On the modern battlefield of the high-intensity confrontation of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, the "patriots" often fail., its interception efficiency has plummeted from about 42% earlier to about 6% today, which is jaw-dropping.
According to Ukrainian analysis, the root cause of this phenomenon lies in the rapid progress of Russian missile technology, especially the software and flight of the "Iskander-M" tactical ballistic missile and the "Dagger" air-launched hypersonic missile. Optimization of control technology.
According to the Ukrainian side, these missiles have stronger mobility and higher speeds at the end of the flight, and can suddenly change trajectory when approaching the target, so that the Patriot system, which originally relied on fixed ballistic predictions, was unable to intercept.
Simply put, in the past, the "Patriots" could arrange interception points in advance by calculating the missile's predetermined trajectory, but now the Russian missile will "play out of common sense" at the last moment, suddenly turn, dive, and even release bait, which greatly increases the difficulty of interception.
Of course, even without the upgrade of Russian missiles, the Patriots themselves had insurmountable structural flaws.
For example, its radar system has a significant blind area of view and can only cover a sector of about 90 degrees, meaning that if a missile strikes from the side or behind, the Patriot may not be able to detect and respond in time at all.
In addition, the system's radar may also have a very "touching" interception rate against low-altitude and low-speed UAV targets and cutting-edge hypersonic missiles.
On the Russian-Ukrainian battlefield, it is precisely These weapons occupy the mainstream in long-range strikes, and it is not surprising that "patriots" perform poorly.
The United States actually lost completely in aiding Ukraine
This fact shows that modern warfare is no longer an era in which a single weapon determines victory or defeat, but a confrontation between systems.
Faced with Russia's composite strike model of "hypersonic missiles + drones + electronic warfare", even the "Patriot" system is unable to face multi-directional, multi-batch, and high-density saturation attacks.
Furthermore, on the surface, through military aid to Ukraine, the United States has contained Russia on the one hand, and on the other hand, it has stimulated orders from domestic military industrial companies. It has also taken the opportunity to sell weapons to European allies. Arms sales have increased significantly, and it seems that "fame and fortune". Both harvest ".
However, if you think about it carefully, you will find that The United States actually paid a huge price in this "proxy war"And the strategic gains are far less than expected, and it can even be said that "winning the face and losing the face."
First, the U.S. provided Ukraine with a range of advanced equipment, including Patriots, tactical missiles ATACMS, Hamas missiles, and anti-aircraft missiles.
Many of these weapons were captured, researched and even reverse-engineered by Russia on the battlefield, giving Russia the opportunity to deeply understand their guidance principles, flight trajectories, control systems and even electronic countermeasures characteristics.
By studying these seized Western weapons, Russia could not only find more effective ways to intercept and counteract, but also optimize its own electronic warfare systems, so as to respond more readily to similar threats in the future battlefield.
This “technological leakage” is an unacceptable loss for the U.S. military-industrial system that attaches great importance to technological secrecy.
Secondly, in order to maintain military aid to Ukraine, the United States has to continue to consume its own ammunition stocks, including core combat materials such as air defense missiles, precision-guided ammunition, and artillery shells.
However, the current military production capacity of the United States is far from keeping up with the speed of war consumption. Even if production is expanded urgently, it faces a series of problems such as aging production lines, shortage of skilled workers, and broken supply chains.
To make matters worse, the United States has been addicted to "security wars" and low-cost conflicts for more than two decades, and has already substantially outsourced or abolished its heavy industry and military manufacturing systems.
There are a number of military-industrial enterprises that can really produce high-tech weapons. Faced with the demand for a massive war, the United States has actually fallen into the embarrassing situation of being “helpless.”。
The U.S. intervention in Russia has gone deeper and deeper.
Although some people will say that the United States has gained a lot of wealth from the war, these capital expenditures essentially come from American finance, and will ultimately be borne by taxpayers, but will not feed back the American economy.
As a result, this “war economy” model is unsustainable and, once the war ends or aid decreases, the military-industrial enterprises will face the risk of sudden orders reduction, job cuts and even bankruptcy, instead of impacting the U.S. economy.
It can also be seen that the United States is one of the main drivers of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, whose goal was to maintain global hegemony by supporting Ukraine, consuming Russia, consolidating NATO.
However, this conflict failed not only to the strategic goals of the United States, but on the contrary. Let it fall into a long-term confrontation from which it is difficult to escape, accelerating its own decline。
On the one hand, the United States is trying to crush Russia through the Ukrainian battlefield, but the fact is that Russia has demonstrated strong national resilience under war pressure.
In the face of all-round Western sanctions and military containment, Russia not only did not collapse, but found new living space in the fields of energy, military industry, agriculture, etc., and further strengthened its domestic control and mobilization capabilities.
On the other hand, Russia has tested the performance of its main force equipment through real warfare, discovered the advantages and disadvantages of Western weapons, and provided valuable experience for future weapons development and strategic adjustment, which is the ability to “learn war in war” that the United States has underestimated.
In addition, the United States has used the Russia-Ukraine conflict to significantly weaken Europe's strategic autonomy and force European countries to fully rely on the United States for energy, security and diplomacy.
However, this kind of "protection" comes at a price. European countries have gradually realized that the United States is not a real "security provider", but a "warmonger" who is good at inciting conflicts and profiting from them.
In the final analysis, the United States blindly believes in force and sanctions, but is unable to propose a constructive peace plan. Its role as the "world police" is increasingly not recognized by the international community.
such The dual dilemma of "declining hard power and loss of soft power" is accelerating the decline of the global influence of the United States。