Military Review

Overton window, or How to legitimize US military aggression

38
Why does a famous Russian military expert try to equalize the legal status of the Russian Federation and the United States in Syria?




Some time ago, more precisely, a couple of days before the next US missile attack on Syria, an interview with a very difficult military expert — a member of the public council at the Russian Defense Ministry, director of the strategy and technology analysis center Ruslan Pukhov — was published in one of the once most prolific Russian publications. During which the analyst said: "... I do not think that shooting down American missiles would be a good idea."

As it is known, in Syria and, quite possibly, in the RF Ministry of Defense indirectly represented by the same Pukhov, they reasoned somewhat differently and did not begin to sign in advance their own powerlessness before the supposedly all-powerful American "Tomahawks." Who are this expert? expressed in the spirit that it is better not to get involved with them:

"Americans are preparing to launch cruise missiles" Tomahawk ", which can fly at low altitude, skirting the terrain. They are extremely difficult to intercept. C-300 and C-400 are optimized for intercepting primarily aircraft.
On the approach to the target, cruise missiles can be shot by the “Panther”, but they will manage to shoot down no more than three or four. While one American destroyer is able to launch the Tomahawks 70 immediately.


There is also an electronic warfare, electronic jamming, but their capabilities are classified. However, the Americans make their missiles taking into account the overcoming of such systems. ”

I am not going to go into discussion with such a competent master. For me, it is enough that the Russian Ministry of Defense is not a stranger to him completely refuted the myth of the invulnerability of this American “vundervaffe”, reporting the destruction of the Syrian air defense 71 from the 103-launched missiles towards Syria. So now let Mr. Pukhov himself refute the Russian military department, since he is so sure of the unsurpassed perfection of the American weapons.

In general, it is limited to this horror story, I would not even take up the pen. But in the same interview of R. Pukhov, one of the largest Russian publications, which still has a mass audience, was voiced by another topic, which is impossible to ignore. For the power hurt! The Russian (!) Military expert tried to substantiate the legality of the stay of the American armed forces in Syria! And, accordingly, to legalize everything that they do there! Here is the phrase:

“Syria is still not a military ally of Russia, it is a battlefield where a fierce civil war is taking place. We acted on one side of this conflict, the Americans - on the other. When there was a civil war in Russia, until the Bolsheviks defeated the “whites”, Kolchak was just as legitimate a ruler as Lenin. And until the end of the civil war it was impossible to say that the one who supported the Bolsheviks supported the legitimate power, and the one who was for the “whites” supported the illegal one. In civil wars, the norms of international law act somewhat differently. ”


Agree, it is said not without some grace. An expert, after all! Here you and Syria are “not a military ally of the Russian Federation”, and “this is a battlefield” and that the rules of international law are not applicable to civil war. And even Kolchak, like Lenin, is the legitimate ruler of Russia. And all in order to drown in this verbal casuistry one simple and indisputable fact - in Syria there is only one legitimate government, headed by President of this country Bashar Assad.

And do not identify the current Syrian situation with Russia since the revolution and the civil war. For in Russia both Lenin and Kolchak really had about the same, that is, very distant, relation to the legitimate Russian power, which, in fact, ended after the abdication of Tsar Nicholas II. And, accordingly, they could equally claim to the vacant Russian throne.

In Syria, the situation is exactly the opposite. Here, no one overthrew the legitimate authority, although they tried. She, as she was, is in the person of President Assad. And there is absolutely no reason to put it on a par with all sorts of "booths" and "Vorlords".

It is at the official invitation of this legal authority, that is, on 100% legal grounds, that the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation are deployed in Syria. In turn, the United States did not receive any invitation or permission to deploy its troops from the legitimate Syrian government. And even more so for the conduct of hostilities in the territory of this country.

What follows is an absolutely indisputable conclusion that, from the point of view of the fundamental norms of international law, which are by no means so “volatile” as Mr. Pukhov thinks like, the US troops are and operate in Syria absolutely illegally. That is, they commit armed aggression against this country. What is strictly forbidden to do by the UN Charter and qualifies as an international crime.

Therefore, there can be no question of equating the role of Russia and the United States in Syria, the difference between which, according to the military expert mentioned, is that the two countries have taken different sides in the Syrian war. But these parties, they say, are absolutely equal and have the same right to be considered legitimate.

Such a position of R. Pukhov, to put it mildly, badly fits in with the facts. If only because what is happening in Syria is considered by many to be not a civil war, but inspired by the West, in the framework of the so-called “Arab spring”, an armed rebellion against the legitimate authority. As well as foreign military intervention, carried out both in latent form, through the support of local mercenaries, and in direct - through rocket-bomb strikes of the US Armed Forces.

But what's more, this point of view completely contradicts the official position of the authorities of the Russian Federation, which has been repeatedly voiced at the highest level. In particular, Russian President Vladimir Putin in his recent telephone conversations with Western leaders, including German Chancellor Merkel and French President Macron, clearly stated that the rocket attack of the Western coalition on Syria 14 April this year. was a gross violation of international law and an act of military aggression against a sovereign state.

Meanwhile, a respectable Russian military expert close to the leadership of the Russian Defense Ministry, from the pages of one of the largest Russian publications, talks about a certain equality between Russia and the United States, which, they say, differ only in the fact that they support different parties in the Syrian "civil war"!

Needless to say, this kind of reasoning is completely correlated with the official position of Washington, which declares to the whole world that it has some kind of “exclusive right” to climb without demand into the affairs of the same Syria and any other country in the world. “Right”, which nobody gave him, which is not written anywhere and in fact is just a smoke screen for the US military aggression against any country of the world of their choice.

And it’s even more incomprehensible why a Russian military expert is pouring water on this American mill so diligently. To whom it is much better to defend the state interests of their country and the world law and order rather than open new Overton window vents, putting Russia on the same footing, having a legitimate mandate to render assistance to Syria, and the United States, which without any mandates just want to bomb another insubordinate country.
Author:
38 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Pax tecum
    Pax tecum April 25 2018 05: 44
    +16
    ... When there was a civil war in Russia, until the Bolsheviks won ... In civil wars, the rules of international law apply somewhat different.

    I forgot to mention the intervention, ghoul. And under what pretext and with whose help it was carried out.

    Practically, against the background of any civil war, an intervention takes place where the interventionists pursue their goals (territorial, economic, geopolitical, etc.), hiding their intentions under a plausible pretext, even and especially now under the pretext of peacekeeping missions. So it was in the Former Yugoslavia and after, so it is in Syria ...
    1. dog breeder
      dog breeder April 25 2018 05: 48
      +4
      Now the current generation hardly knows about intervention. Therefore, for many, the point of view of this ghoul is acceptable.
      1. Pax tecum
        Pax tecum April 25 2018 05: 56
        +5
        Here's what to refresh memory:
        Foreign military intervention in Russia (1918 — 1921) is the military intervention of the countries of Concord (Entente) and the Central Powers (Fourth Union) in the Civil War in Russia (1917 — 1922). In total, the intervention was attended by 14 States.
        1. Tatyana
          Tatyana April 25 2018 13: 01
          +3
          Great article!
          in one of the once-most-circulated Russian publications, an interview was published with a very a difficult military expert - Member of the Public Council at the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, Director of the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies Ruslan Pukhov.

          it is not clear why the Russian military expert pours water on this American mill so diligently.

          Yes, for the same reason that at one time he betrayed his homeland - Russia - Sergey Skripal!
          For money!

          For foreign intelligence, this Ruslan Pukhov is just a godsend! He also receives information directly into his hands and he exerts his pro-American influence on the public council at the RF Ministry of Defense!
          It is impossible to “poison” it, and it’s also impossible to put it in Russia! Influence agent in Russia Ruslan Pukhov got a great job!

          One should take a closer look at ch. to the editor of that same agency of a large circulation earlier publication that missed an article by Pukhov with such statements in print!
      2. Nick
        Nick April 29 2018 06: 53
        0
        Quote: dog breeder
        Now the current generation hardly knows about intervention. Therefore, for many, the point of view of this ghoul is acceptable.

        Maybe there is, but from the point of view of international law, this position is not legitimate.
    2. APIS
      APIS April 25 2018 05: 52
      +12
      Quote: Pax tecum
      ... When there was a civil war in Russia, until the Bolsheviks won ... In civil wars, the rules of international law apply somewhat different.

      I forgot to mention the intervention, ghoul. And under what pretext and with whose help it was carried out.

      Right now, the sect of witnesses to the crunch of French rolls will prove to you that the intervention was humanitarian.
      1. Andrey Yuryevich
        Andrey Yuryevich April 25 2018 05: 55
        +3
        Why is a well-known Russian military expert trying to equalize the legal status of the Russian Federation and the United States in Syria
        Does anyone know this "famous expert"? what
        1. dog breeder
          dog breeder April 25 2018 06: 03
          +4
          Andrei Yurievich (Andrei Yurievich)
          Does anyone know this "famous expert"?

          Well, probably someone knows. Here, for example, they mentioned him. Although, I’d better bring it to the mournful commemoration
        2. Vsevolod
          Vsevolod April 25 2018 16: 51
          +1
          This iksperd is very famous. In an interview, he admitted that he says what they want to hear in the West, but not as stupidly as Felgenhauer.
        3. shans2
          shans2 April 27 2018 04: 32
          +1
          Of course, he is the head of the AST center, the one whose live logbook on the military-industrial complex and military equipment is bmpd ... stubbornly did not want to post about the new weapons presented by Putin on March 1, all readers were awesome from this ... to Russia)
      2. Mordvin 3
        Mordvin 3 April 25 2018 06: 01
        +5
        Quote: APIS
        that the intervention was humanitarian.

        Why is it humanitarian? They carried democracy. Right now, Olgovich will come and tell us everything. yes
      3. Pax tecum
        Pax tecum April 25 2018 06: 13
        +7
        ..Russian (!) Military expert tried to justify the legality of the presence of the US armed forces in Syria! And, accordingly, legitimize everything they do there! Here is this phrase:
        “Syria is still not a military ally of Russia, it is a battlefield where there is a fierce civil war. We spoke on one side of this conflict, the Americans on the other. When there was a civil war in Russia, until the Bolsheviks defeated the “whites”, Kolchak was same legitimate ruler, like Lenin. And until the end of the civil war, it was impossible to say that the one who supported the Bolsheviks stood for legitimate power, and the one who was for the "whites" stood for illegal. In civil wars, the rules of international law operate in a slightly different way. ”


        Legitimate ?! Kolchak? Recall:
        "On November 18, 1918, as a result of a military coup, A.V. Kolchak was elected the Supreme Ruler of Russia and promoted to full admiral. The coup was carried out not so much by Kolchak himself as" under Kolchak, "who was the largest known figure in Siberia The power of Alexander Vasilyevich was recognized by the leaders of the main formations of whites in other regions of Russia. In his hands was the gold reserve of Russia, he received military-technical assistance from the United States and the Entente countries".

        Yes, V. Lenin and his comrades, as a part of the Supreme Council of the Supreme Council, was in fact really legitimate at that time and in those circumstances.
        Recall:
        "On October 25 of 1917, the Military Revolutionary Committee of the Petrograd Soviet of Workers 'and Soldiers' Deputies declared the Provisional Government deposed. Later that day, the II All-Russian Congress of Soviets began work. Of the 670 delegates, 507 supported the transfer of power to the Soviets.
        The congress adopted a number of basic documents. Including The Peace Decree contained a proposal to all warring peoples and governments to immediately begin negotiations on a just and democratic peace.
        Congress confirms guarantees of convocation of the Constituent Assembly. Local authority was transferred to the hands of local Soviets. At the congress, a new composition of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee was formed - 101 people. It included 62 Bolshevik, 29 Left Social Revolutionaries. A government of Bolsheviks was formed, on a one-party basis - the Provisional Council of People's Commissars, headed by V.I. Lenin. The first Soviet Commissars were L.D. Trotsky, A.I. Rykov, V.P. Milyutin, I.V. Stalin and others, all 13 people. "

        This "expert" ... "tried to justify as much as the legitimacy of the presence of the American armed forces in ... Russia, during the civil war! It is possible to rephrase this.
        1. your1970
          your1970 April 25 2018 10: 19
          +1
          hmm .. here I am not Olgovich - but nevertheless I will support his position ..
          Neither Kolchak, nor Lenin, nor the Provisional Government — were at least a little legitimate. The dispersal of the Constituent Assembly did not allow the Bolshevik authorities to become legal. It was recognized as existing de facto first and only then de jure

          Even the authorities in Kiev are more legitimate - they held at least some elections, created at least the appearance of democracy
          1. APIS
            APIS April 25 2018 13: 58
            +4
            Quote: your1970
            hmm .. here I am not Olgovich - but nevertheless I will support his position ..
            Neither Kolchak, nor Lenin, nor the Provisional Government — were at least a little legitimate. The dispersal of the Constituent Assembly did not allow the Bolshevik authorities to become legal. It was recognized as existing de facto first and only then de jure

            Even the authorities in Kiev are more legitimate - they held at least some elections, created at least the appearance of democracy


            It just so happened, but Soviet power was established democratically:
            First, the Local Councils - one delegate from 1000 people.
            Then from the Soviets, delegates to the Congress of Soviets - 670 people.
            From the composition of the delegates the All-Russian Central Executive Committee was formed - 101 people.
            The All-Russian Central Executive Committee has formed a government - SNK.

            When registering party lists for elections in the EaP VP, it was defamatory. Less than 50% of voters participated in the vote. 410 delegates (out of 716) gathered, of which 199 almost immediately left this booth, the rest sat-pop .. delhi parted.
            Immediately afterwards, the 3rd Congress of Soviets began its work, and in parallel with it, the Congress of Soviets of Peasant Deputies, which ultimately gathered 1647 delegates with a decisive vote (860 Bolsheviks) and 219 with an advisory. The Third United Congress confirmed the decisions of the Second Congress and the decrees adopted.

            We are waiting for stories about the elections of Kolchaks, Wrangels, etc. diterichsov wink
            1. your1970
              your1970 April 26 2018 09: 48
              0
              Yes Yes Yes...
              and everyone believes that, for starters, the local Soviets counted the population ... when the last census was in the Republic of Ingushetia - before the war, didn’t they take it away, who believed it was evacuated / died / who took it? three-five-ten ....
              In Soviet times, with registration and control, the error in counting the population during censuses was, and even during the WWII in the Republic of Ingushetia ...

              Exceptional democracy - a handful of people gathered, declared themselves the local Council and the authorities - and who does not agree - on the porch there is a machine gun and a sentry with a rifle ...

              "In order to win the majority of the population to their side, the proletariat must, first of all, overthrow the bourgeoisie and seize (!!!) state power in their own hands; he must secondly introduce (!!!) Soviet power, shattering the old state apparatuswith which he immediately undermines the dominance, authority, influence of the bourgeoisie and petty-bourgeois compromisers among the non-proletarian working masses. Thirdly, it must finish off the influence of the bourgeoisie and petty-bourgeois compromisers among the majority of non-proletarian working masses by revolutionary realization of their economic needs at the expense of the exploiters ”© V.I. Lenin
              Z.Y. I was taught history in 1986-1987, if that ...
              1. APIS
                APIS April 28 2018 16: 44
                0
                Quote: your1970
                Yes Yes Yes...
                and everyone believes that, for starters, the local Soviets counted the population ... when the last census was in the Republic of Ingushetia - before the war, didn’t they take it away, who believed it was evacuated / died / who took it? three-five-ten ....
                In Soviet times, with registration and control, the error in counting the population during censuses was, and even during the WWII in the Republic of Ingushetia ...

                Exceptional democracy - a handful of people gathered, declared themselves the local Council and the authorities - and who does not agree - on the porch there is a machine gun and a sentry with a rifle ...

                "In order to win the majority of the population to their side, the proletariat must, first of all, overthrow the bourgeoisie and seize (!!!) state power in their own hands; he must secondly introduce (!!!) Soviet power, shattering the old state apparatuswith which he immediately undermines the dominance, authority, influence of the bourgeoisie and petty-bourgeois compromisers among the non-proletarian working masses. Thirdly, it must finish off the influence of the bourgeoisie and petty-bourgeois compromisers among the majority of non-proletarian working masses by revolutionary realization of their economic needs at the expense of the exploiters ”© V.I. Lenin
                Z.Y. I was taught history in 1986-1987, if that ...

                Apparently poorly taught.
                The year of birth coincides with us, but I studied the history of 1980-1989
  2. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 April 25 2018 06: 52
    +3
    A strange "expert" and even under the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation. These are the advocates of interests of the United States hanging around in the corridors of the Ministry, and then personal things disappear from the offices. It’s sometimes strange to see how in some incomprehensible by whom and why created structures under the president, ministries, people suddenly bow to the West, often pouring dirt on the country in which they live. Cleaning has long been necessary.
  3. tasha
    tasha April 25 2018 08: 14
    0
    I don’t want to comment on the article somehow, because I’m not familiar with the materials of the mentioned Ruslan. Another article by Yuri Selivanov has once again turned into ... what? It looks like some kind of personal accounts .. I have such an impression ..
  4. NordUral
    NordUral April 25 2018 09: 17
    0
    There are too many bastards in and around "our" government, not to mention the liberal opposition of traitors and simply enemies of Russia.
  5. Salomet
    Salomet April 25 2018 09: 33
    0
    The author is not quite right. That bike about the omnipotence of international law, he can tell rams. The only thing any leader cares about is the support of their own population. This is the ONLY standard.
    All the facts of the violations that he cited end when the question of consequences arises. The problem is not that the USA illegally supports barmaleys there, but that they won’t have anything for it. There is no biased judge who will pass judgment. And this system never !!! not working 100%. Arab Israel War, Suez Canal, Vietnam, Korea.
    For reflection If the United States is illegally located in the territory of the Kurds, who have exercised their nation’s right to self-determination, then how legitimate is the presence of Russian troops in the Crimea? Well, if you are not biased to judge.
    I’m afraid that the only thing that still works in the world is “winners are not judged” and “strong is always right.”
    Eat good propaganda about "partners", international law, and the like. The world has come to the site of the reformation. Now who dared he ate. Everyone has to make a choice and answer for himself. hi
    1. meandr51
      meandr51 April 29 2018 11: 51
      0
      The troops of the Russian Federation in Crimea were under an agreement between Ukraine and the Russian Federation. Then the Russian Federation satisfied the desire expressed by the referees of the Crimean residents to join the Russian Federation. If, for example, the United States satisfied the desire of the Kurds to join them, then Syria and the Russian Federation would have dealt with the United States. And everything would be legal. Since the legitimacy of the US government, no one has yet been able to challenge. However, like the government of the Russian Federation. Unlike the government of Ukraine.
  6. steelmaker
    steelmaker April 25 2018 09: 38
    +1
    If Russia is in Syria on a legal basis, and the USA is not, then why are there no military operations against the invaders? None! And Turkey, on what basis in Syria? Conclusion - until the enemies are destroyed, by any means, there will be no peace! Only I do not see that someone is going to destroy them. But as? The military reception reported Shoigu on the transfer of 29 CALIBER missiles. It will not be enough!
    1. Ross xnumx
      Ross xnumx April 28 2018 06: 58
      +2
      Quote: steel maker
      If Russia is in Syria on a legal basis ...

      Do not wait for answers to your questions from those who, seeing the presence in the country of 23 million beggars legally, do nothing to rectify the situation ...
  7. Altona
    Altona April 25 2018 09: 52
    0
    In such cases, I always take the “American side”, that is, I say what consequences await such “experts” and “oppositionists” in the Western media and in the West in general, who voice the “hostile” to “genuine” democracy points of view. They will not be invited to a mass audience in the well-known news media, they may be denied "handshakes" (they will make them outcasts). If they insist on their sedition, they will go to the FBI and be tried for "attempted national security" (you can get on an electric chair there, do not forget about Snowden and Assange). Democracy also has effective enforcement tools than some dictatorships. Do not forget that the concentration camp democracy came up with, and not "creepy totalitarianism." We don’t forget about the volatility of international law, when you can arrest any person on the suspicion of the FBI, I’m silent about the sentence of an American court in some God-forgotten Fliberville. As well as greetings to frequent ownership and banking secrets, we recall how Swiss, Austrian and German banks are bending down, and at the same time as British, American and French (Gaddafi's gold) are engaged in confiscation of other people's funds. I mean, it is necessary to act more often in a mirror and tidy up the garbage near the firing wall, you never know.
  8. Altona
    Altona April 25 2018 09: 58
    0
    Quote: Pax tecum
    Legitimate ?! Kolchak? Recall:

    -------------------------------
    He also thought that by comparing Lenin with Kolchak, the author went too far in his journalism. The Soviets by that time were already a legitimate authority with all powers. And the newly-minted dictators of "free Russia" were Gauleiter of the interventionists.
  9. Aleks2048
    Aleks2048 April 25 2018 10: 11
    0
    I think that there can be only one answer to the question of the legitimacy of the armed forces of other states in Syria that have not received an official invitation from the legally elected Syrian leader Assad, it corresponds to the position of the Russian Federation and it is correct. Other options are not correct. The question is one, when in the end the international community will recall the mandatory criminal prosecution for unleashing and waging war? True, this question strikes the second question: how long will the Russian Federation actually support its participation in the structures of the international community. It is time to begin to change the format of the participation of the Russian Federation in such insolvent communities, right up to the direct denunciation of agreements and obligations that take place within the framework of the participation of the Russian Federation in international organizations. And do not say that these are platforms for negotiations, where the Russian Federation can convey its position to the whole world. These are not platforms for negotiations; these are quite specific organizations that should work.
  10. Alexey N
    Alexey N April 25 2018 13: 24
    0
    Is there no one to fill his face with?
    Hands stick on bread. Or everyone is already afraid of getting their hands dirty. Come to the editor, recall aside, and poke.
    With a verdict: You will, crap. Will you still, crap.
    Let it bring down to Washington, London and other Warsaw ..
  11. iouris
    iouris April 25 2018 13: 58
    +1
    Powerful structures built into government bodies were rebuilt inside the former USSR. All "experts" must have a certificate from Soros. And Soros is not a private person, but a power. It is not yet clear how we will get out of power subordination.
  12. BAI
    BAI April 25 2018 14: 53
    +2
    These same experts, only legal and foreign, defend Russia's interests in international courts and lose them for a lot of money.
  13. Sergey Horuzhik
    Sergey Horuzhik April 25 2018 15: 27
    0
    arrest-judge-shoot!
  14. 1536
    1536 April 25 2018 18: 22
    0
    That’s why Americans and Ukrainians and British accuse them because they feel support for their robber affairs inside the country. But in the United States, for example, the majority of the population, all the media and experts were for launching missile attacks on Syria. But nobody called the United States and its coalition to Syria. The people simply brazenly deceived. The military contingents of Russia are in Syria at the invitation of the government of this country. But what do experts need before that? Oil s'eli, the day has passed. Or have they mixed up the country?
  15. tank64rus
    tank64rus April 25 2018 19: 21
    +1
    Forged "comrade". Maybe you just need to understand that a war is being waged against Russia. That in the 90s Russia raised, enriched and brought to power people for whom the United States has a temple on a hill, and Russia is a country. You must always remember that in war as in war.
  16. timgan777
    timgan777 April 25 2018 20: 42
    +1
    Well, I think in the near future this "expert" safely fades over the hill and begins to pour mud on Russia and write memoirs
  17. Antor
    Antor April 25 2018 23: 26
    +2
    This is the next person in the ranks of traitors, who no longer hides who he is and what he is !!! The more we produce such Western licking, the more chance we have to jump to Ukraine or Armenia !!!
  18. Radikal
    Radikal April 25 2018 23: 54
    0
    Quote: Andrew Y.
    Why is a well-known Russian military expert trying to equalize the legal status of the Russian Federation and the United States in Syria
    Does anyone know this "famous expert"? what

    In the "box" often flashes ... sad
  19. Radikal
    Radikal April 25 2018 23: 56
    0
    Quote: Antor
    This is the next person in the ranks of traitors, who no longer hides who he is and what he is !!! The more we produce such Western licking, the more chance we have to jump to Ukraine or Armenia !!!

    About "we" - it's you in vain! These lovers of "chocolate popsicle" produce other, well-known people ...! wink yes
  20. shans2
    shans2 April 27 2018 04: 24
    0
    he was just a couple of weeks ago in Israel ... he goes on a consultation trip there)))
  21. meandr51
    meandr51 April 29 2018 11: 44
    0
    He must be registered as a foreign agent with the continuous wearing of a striped armband.