Military Review

PMC legalization and maritime security

102
There is hardly a topic in the modern information field that is more controversial than the potential legalization of private military companies in Russia. Both President Putin and Foreign Minister Lavrov spoke positively on this topic. The idea of ​​legalizing such organizations had and has strong support among retired military, in the State Duma and in part of society.



Employees of RSB groups on the deck of a protected vessel.

However, this is Russia, and it is still there. Until. The last attempt of the deputies of “Fair Russia” to bring PMCs out of the “shadow” failed at the stage of negotiating the bill with the government, and the rationale for refusing to approve the bill was not only contrary to common sense, but was also flagrantly illiterate. However, this is the Russian government, it is difficult to expect anything else from it.

Somewhat complicates the legalization of PMCs that the public does not have a firm opinion on this issue, and instead of understanding it, wears a set of myths in our heads. The author in his time published article-educational program on private military companies in Russia, familiarization with it is strongly recommended before speaking on the topic.. Although superficial and far from exhaustive, it gives some idea of ​​the subject.

Due to the sharp increase in the activities of such formations in Africa, we can expect that the resistance of the amusing union of “system” liberals, the Ministry of Defense and the FSB “joined them” will be overcome, one way or another, with one or other reservations, but private military companies will be legalized.

It makes sense to identify those opportunities for their hiring and use, which must necessarily be legal for domestic PMCs in the future.

One of the popular activities of such organizations is the protection of ships from pirates and terrorists. Given that PMCs are able to exert a truly tectonic influence on this field of activity, it makes sense to dwell on their participation in ensuring maritime security in more detail.

Maritime security (Maritime security) or MARSEC has become one of the most desirable areas of business for any PMC, small or large. It is much easier and safer to repel an attack of pirates on boats from a high-borne ship than to guard a VIP convoy somewhere in not the most peaceful areas of Iraq, and it is not often necessary to repel attacks, the pirates, as a rule, have enough not even warning shots, but just a demonstration weapons.

With the increasing number of attacks by pirates on merchant ships in the Indian Ocean, PMC guards firmly “registered” on the decks. And although there were excesses with them (from hunting people for fun, to the “urban legend” of mercenaries — pseudo-pirate troops trained and equipped by NATO intelligence services, which no security team had yet experienced clashes with. But this may well be true) However, the statistics stubbornly asserts that the presence of such a group on board a ship guarantees security with a probability close to 100%.

But time passed and new methods were born. One of them was the emergence of the so-called "ships-arsenals." Do not confuse this with the projects of the Pentagon missile cruisers, everything is easier.

It is simply a "floating weapon".

As you know, pirates are not a global force, their attacks are seriously limited in place. First of all, it is the Gulf of Aden and the waters to the east and southeast. The second region with high risks of pirate attacks is the Strait of Malacca. Pirates and there, of course, different. The third hot spot is the Gulf of Guinea. There are other less stressful.

Arsenals of private military companies plied in the areas of entry and exit from these waters, relatively speaking, on the border of the “pirate risk zone”. At the approach of the vessel, with the owner of which PMC had a contract, a security group was brought on its board, which accompanied its entire dangerous section. At the end of the plot, the group went to another ship-arsenal.

Such tactics allowed to solve a lot of problems. For example, it was not necessary to deliver weapons to the sovereign territory of any country, solve all licensing issues and obtain licenses - the weapon was always at sea. Similarly, the fighters were also on these ships, and in the case of them there was no need to ensure their flights from countries to which the ship could make an entry after passing through the danger zone.

In fact, the presence of such arsenal ships at sea at some point would make the extensive presence of military fleets in the same Gulf of Aden almost irrelevant.

In Russia, as indicated in the article by reference, the company pioneered the organization of such a scheme. Moran group and personally V. Gusev. Unfortunately, it is the effectiveness of their tactics that has played a cruel joke on them, forcing the competitors to deal with the annoying Russian “unsportsmanlike” methods. However, the business survived, only to V. Gusev it was very expensive.

PMC legalization and maritime security

Myre seadiver, one of the ships of the "Moran Group", the "hero" of the Nigerian incident

It is worth looking at this experience.

Currently, the number of pirate attacks on ships in the Gulf of Aden is negligible. This is due to the extensive presence of warships from different countries in the region. Theoretically, however, you can do much easier and cheaper for the state.

Legalized PMCs may well be present in such regions in the same way as the Moran group was present. Moreover, it is possible to go further, and instead of sending naval warships, attract private security companies, whose task could be to impute not only finding security groups on ships, but also air reconnaissance using UAVs, helicopters and airplanes, and even the release of ships whose crews could to hide from a pirate attack in the ship "citadel."

In fact, only one task would remain for the Navy — operations to free hostages, for which ships with special forces specially trained and equipped to perform such tasks could sometimes be present in dangerous regions, no more than one per region.

What is such a scheme more profitable?

The fact that PMCs are private structures and do not use public money. Arsenal ships are bought and rebuilt at their own expense. Fighters, equipment, outlets at sea are paid by clients - shipping companies. If the state attracts private security contractors to solve some problems (for example, aerial reconnaissance), then the private security contractors will have to buy the necessary equipment (for example, patrol airplanes). Naturally, when working on the same Navy, PMC services will cost the state money, but less if you do everything yourself.

Relatively speaking, if sending some duty forces to the Gulf of Aden for several months would have risen the fleet billion rubles, then the starting price in the tender for the same, but by the hands of "private traders", would be, for example, eight hundred million. At the same time, the state would take back part of the money paid under the contract as taxes.

Even greater prospects are opening up, if we consider the mercenaries not as something alien that we have to endure, but as a certain reserve for emergency situations.

In most countries where private military companies are legalized, various restrictions were imposed on their equipment, so the structures of Eric Prince (starting with “Black Water” and on) never managed to get permission from the US authorities to buy the weapons they wanted - light armed airplanes, for example. Prince’s people, however, are still fighting in Libya on similar planes, and in an amusing way on the same client that Russia supports - Marshal Haftar. But airplanes formally do not belong to Prince ...

Nothing prevents (in theory, in practice, our mentality prevents) “spin the nuts” and give PMCs the right to have guns on ships, up to 76-mm in size, heavy machine guns, anti-sabotage grenade launchers, and “door” machine guns on helicopters and airplanes. When entering the port, it is possible to oblige them to hand over all equipment and weapons for storage, so that even technically it would not be possible to use all this on the territory of the Russian Federation (and this should be strictly prohibited). Then, in the event of some kind of emergency, all these forces could be hired organizedly as an auxiliary fleet, simultaneously on the basis of a special procedure, mobilizing the personnel into the ranks of the RF Armed Forces. In fact, by allowing the existence of such structures, Russia would have left on the shoulders of private owners the formation of a part of reserves in case of hostilities.

Similarly, on the shoulders of private owners would be the formation of anti-piracy forces, hiring personnel and soldiers, the purchase of weapons and ammunition. And those tasks that the Navy would have dumped on them would have been paid for by the state, but at a much lower price than if the fleet did it.

Naturally, it will be necessary to somehow connect this order with the same UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, but this is not such a big problem.

And, of course, having a controlled military force with experience of a global presence in different parts of the planet on hand to the Armed Forces is very useful in light of the growth in the number and strength of various terrorist organizations. As mentioned in the commentary on raising the flag of St. Andrew on the under-ship of the 22160 project, the nature of threats is changing around the world - purely criminal piracy is waning, while terrorism is increasing, and in some cases, non-state entities are already able to challenge national governments. In this situation, every barrel and every ship is important.

Compare this situation with what is now.

Navy thought himself flawed anti-piracy ship, extremely limited suitable for anti-piracy and almost unsuitable for anti-terrorism tasks. For thirty-six billion rubles, a series of six such ships is being built, crews are being formed that will be “turned off” from the real security of the country. Then these forces (in theory, in practice — not a fact) will be sent to the “pirate-dangerous” regions of the world and will probably do something for the money of the Russian budget.

If everything was organized “wisely”, then a tender would be announced for the fight against piracy, with qualification requirements for participants, including the need to purchase ships, vessels, aviation etc., and it’s strictly in the Russian Federation (a list of what you could buy abroad would also be - we don’t do much at all, or we do poorly, or we do it very expensive. Most often, it’s both bad and expensive). The starting price of the tender would have been calculated in advance as, for example, 75% of the cost of the military campaign of the Navy ships, after which the winning PMC would begin to prepare such an expedition. With a “patent” from the Russian Federation.

And thirty-six billion would be spent on real warships, and not useless semi-civil "ersatz."

Of course, the PMC functionality would be limited compared to the Navy - so it is unlikely that they could stop and inspect all vessels and boats that would be considered suspicious. But they could “transfer” these contacts to someone, the same Chinese, NATO, or anyone.

A separate topic is the assistance of the Navy and SSO in conducting special operations. Sooner or later, but over time, the ships of the Russian PMCs would “become familiar” in different parts of the world, and no one would notice that there were completely different people among the guards, and there were a couple of extra boats or containers on board the ship. And this, too, would not cost the state money.

In some cases, the FSB could hire such structures, for example, to dramatically strengthen its forces in a particular region.

And there is a purely economic effect from such events. If the Navy simply saved money in the fight against piracy, delegating it to “independent operators”, private clients would hire private security companies for money, which would then be taxed in Russia, and private security companies would be obliged to buy licenses and equipment in Russia , at least a little, but they would feed the domestic military-industrial complex and the sudoprom (or ship repair). In general, it is beneficial for the country.

But most importantly, unusual tasks would be removed from the navy. The fleet is an instrument of war or containment of war. To erode his already scarce resources into incomprehensible what, it is just a crime, especially in the current poorly predictable world. In such conditions, it would be a very sensible decision to dump some of the “non-core” tasks on third-party contractors, and even at their expense. It would also be very good to get almost free, even if weak, low-quality, but still organized and trained military force, which could be used as a reserve in secondary areas.

Alas, but a reasonable approach in Russia is not honored. Officials are concerned that “if something didn’t work out,” the FSB does not want to do extra work, the Ministry of Defense doesn’t understand what it wants, liberals in the Government do not want their Anglo-Saxon deities to be angry with them, and are willing to pay any price for it, people wants it to be “like in the USSR” (having forgotten for a long time, as it was there, in the USSR), and as a result we have what we have.

But if, as it is sung in one song, “the mind will ever win,” then it will be impossible to miss such opportunities.

In the meantime, one can only hope for the best.
Author:
Photos used:
RSB Group, Moran Group Inc.
102 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Andrei Nikolaevich
    Andrei Nikolaevich 24 December 2018 08: 04
    +5
    There have always been, are and will be people with combat experience. They will always be in demand. It is important that they do not violate the laws of their country. What they earn outside of it is their problem.
    1. timokhin-aa
      24 December 2018 09: 07
      +2
      Yes, that is right.
      1. Oden280
        Oden280 24 December 2018 17: 20
        +1
        So far, in our country, wild oligarchism and rampant corruption of officials cannot talk about the legalization of PMCs in our country.
  2. Gray brother
    Gray brother 24 December 2018 08: 07
    +2
    Legalization of PMCs will entail the possibility of creating private armies in Russia. Do we need it?
    Let ChOPami remain especially arsenal abroad with them, and so it is, and the author of their own security activity attributed Perata against blacks and little intelligence)))
    In fact, the activities of PMCs are somewhat broader and often fall under the article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation "mercenarism".
    1. timokhin-aa
      24 December 2018 09: 08
      0
      Read the article on the link, everything is dismantled, including your arguments. You are not the only one wearing a head))))
    2. Andrei Nikolaevich
      Andrei Nikolaevich 24 December 2018 10: 01
      +3
      Do you suggest sending people with combat experience to dig potatoes, sell seeds? Sense? .. A man wants and dares to fight. Why can't he make money on bread and pay taxes? Outside the country, let him even piracy, if the law allows. Inside the country, live strictly in accordance with the law. As for, private armies, then remember the dashing 90s .. Razltsnye Chops and so on .. Do they really affect the development of the state? ..
      1. Gray brother
        Gray brother 24 December 2018 10: 20
        +3
        Quote: Andrey Nikolaevich

        Do you suggest sending people with combat experience to dig potatoes, sell seeds? Sense? .. A man wants and dares to fight. Why can't he make money on bread and pay taxes?

        Currently, there is nothing stopping them from making a living with this and paying taxes.
        Quote: Andrey Nikolaevich
        , then remember the dashing 90s .. Razltsnye Chops and so on ..

        I remember perfectly, the bandits thus legalized their "infantry".
      2. Sirocco
        Sirocco 24 December 2018 11: 29
        0
        Quote: Andrey Nikolaevich
        .Man wants and dares to fight. Why can't he make money on bread and pay taxes?

        I think when it comes to reducing the RF Armed Forces, (here options are possible, not only reduction) then they will adopt this law in order to send those who know how to fight in the right direction.
        1. Oden280
          Oden280 24 December 2018 17: 22
          +2
          Not much further cut. And so they are trying to lure young retirees back.
          1. Sirocco
            Sirocco 24 December 2018 17: 33
            -1
            Quote: Oden280

            Not much further cut

            I've told
            Quote: Sirocco
            not only reduction)
            options are possible. And what will hit in the head God knows. After all, no one expected from the Sun that they would throw from 1010.
    3. Andrei Nikolaevich
      Andrei Nikolaevich 24 December 2018 10: 04
      0
      ,, mercenary ,, say? .. Read the article carefully ... ,, If these actions do not contradict the interests of the state ,,
      1. Gray brother
        Gray brother 24 December 2018 10: 29
        +2
        Quote: Andrey Nikolaevich
        If these actions do not contradict the interests of the state,

        And if they contradict, then what?
    4. would
      would 24 December 2018 13: 47
      0
      That is, "the legalization of PMCs will entail the possibility of creating private armies on the territory of Russia," while the private security company, according to your own words, has already led to this ... how is it? what

      Currently, nothing is stopping them from earning money for bread and paying taxes


      And they pay these taxes to the country in which PMCs are registered, that is, not to Russia.
      1. Gray brother
        Gray brother 24 December 2018 14: 06
        -2
        Quote: rait
        And they pay these taxes to the country in which PMCs are registered, that is, not to Russia.

        Why would it all be? They have an agreement with a Russian company, the salary and insurance are registered in the agreements, they carry out security activities under the agreement, and what they actually do there is, God knows, this is already outside Russian jurisdiction.
        Quote: rait
        while the private security company in your own words has already led to this.

        What did it lead to? The organized crime group is not an army.
        1. would
          would 24 December 2018 14: 14
          +4
          Why would it all be? They have a contract with a Russian company, in the contracts both salary and insurance are prescribed, under the contract they carry out security activities,


          Nothing of the kind, they cannot have an agreement with a Russian company because our legislation does not allow us to engage in such activities. If it allowed, then the question of legalization would not be raised. They have an agreement with a company that is registered somewhere in one of the offshore countries. For example, in China in Hong Kong (like Slavonic Corps Limited). In Russia, this is the maximum legal entity that is exclusively engaged in recruitment and has nothing to do with security activities, does not pay salaries, etc.

          What did it lead to? The organized crime group is not an army.


          You do not seem to understand what you are writing. You write that the legalization of PMCs will lead to the creation of private armies and therefore I must say no to legalization, and after that you write that the private security companies have already led to the creation of private armies, "they have legalized the bandit infantry" (and this is to some extent true, an organized criminal group is just an army in miniature ) and do not oppose the PSC. This is where my logic broke ...
          1. Gray brother
            Gray brother 24 December 2018 15: 08
            -1
            Quote: rait

            Nothing of the kind, they cannot have an agreement with a Russian company because our legislation does not allow us to engage in such activities.

            And no one is able to control what kind of activity they are doing there.
            I am talking about employees of Russian companies.

            Quote: rait
            , and then write that the private security companies have already led to the creation of private armies, "they legalized the bandit infantry"

            I did not write that private armies have already been created, bandits, even with weapons, this is not an army.
            Quote: rait
            OCG is just the same army in miniature


            An organized crime group is an organization created to raise money by illegal methods.

            The army is the armed forces of the state, designed to defend against an external aggressor or to attack.
            .
            A private army is an army owned by private individuals and acting in the interests of these individuals. Interests may be different.
            1. would
              would 24 December 2018 15: 20
              +1
              An organized crime group is an organization created to raise money by illegal methods.

              The army is the armed forces of the state, designed to defend against an external aggressor or to attack.


              Nothing like this. The army is, above all, a single structure, with a rigid hierarchical system, designed to perform power operations. That is why any army is like an organized criminal group, and any organized crime group is like an army. That is why the bandit infantry easily became a private security company that also looks like an army, for them nothing has fundamentally changed. Because the basis and fundamental goals and means are the same.

              I am talking about employees of Russian companies.


              Which does not exist because they are illegal?
              1. Oden280
                Oden280 24 December 2018 17: 26
                +3
                The army is primarily a structure designed to protect the country and people. And PMCs are just for earning money. And there is no smell of patriotism. For what they paid money, they will do it.
              2. Gray brother
                Gray brother 24 December 2018 19: 14
                -1
                Quote: rait
                Which does not exist because they are illegal?

                They are legal and are listed as security companies.
    5. Cheslav Tsursky
      Cheslav Tsursky 24 December 2018 15: 39
      +3
      Quote: Gray Brother
      Legalization of PMCs will entail the possibility of creating private armies in Russia. Do we need it?
      Let the chops remain,

      Why, then, are you not afraid of PSCs? CHOP, after all, CHOP is different - there are grandfathers, watchmen, there are specialists with weapons ... In this topic, you just need to be sincere and not flirt in the realm of excessive moralism. The PMC market is very promising for Russia and we have every opportunity to take a leading role in it. What actually do. PMCs are beneficial to the state? Of course! Are under strict but secret state control? Of course! A person with sufficient training, combat experience and a desire to prove himself in what he knows how to do well while earning has the right to do so? Why not?! Talking about mercenarism from a series of all the same excessive abstruse moralism. Tell me, does a volunteer have to eat, drink, smoke, have uniform, rest ... Or are volunteers extremely wealthy altruists for whom pah money? Finally, PMCs are organizations that are responsible in accordance with the law of that country in the territory to which international legislation also applies. And of course, the activities of PMCs should be fixed by the legislation of the Russian Federation, only the question is delicate and the rush here is absolutely not needed ...
      1. Gray brother
        Gray brother 24 December 2018 19: 22
        0
        Quote: Cheslav Czursky
        Why, then, are you not afraid of PSCs?

        Their activities are strictly regulated.
        Quote: Cheslav Czursky
        e, and the volunteer must

        This is not about volunteers, it's about money.
        Quote: Cheslav Czursky
        PMCs are beneficial to the state? Of course!

        If they are ordered by the state, then yes. And if they cling to colleagues for a deposit in the interests of the founding corporation, then I think not.
        1. timokhin-aa
          24 December 2018 20: 49
          +2
          Their activities are strictly regulated.


          What hinders the activities of PMCs and also strictly regulates?
      2. Nemchinov Vl
        Nemchinov Vl 24 December 2018 19: 35
        +1
        [quote] [And of course, PMC activities should be fixed by the legislation of the Russian Federation, only the question is delicate and the rush here is completely unnecessary ... / quote]. perhaps yes. The topic is generally raised by the author is not uninteresting ?!
  3. faiver
    faiver 24 December 2018 09: 51
    +2
    Outsourcing in military affairs does not shine anything good ...., in our country hi
  4. Vladycat
    Vladycat 24 December 2018 10: 22
    +1
    Explanatory article. I like it. We need to develop in various directions, the development of PMCs within the framework of the interests of the state is very convenient. Yes, there are "prestigious" (they can play naughty) but I think they are also subject to adjustment.
  5. Wildcat
    Wildcat 24 December 2018 11: 42
    +1
    “Alas, but a reasonable approach is not in honor in Russia. Officials are concerned that“ if it didn’t work out, ”the FSB does not want to do extra work, the Ministry of Defense does not at all understand what it wants, the liberals in the Government do not want their Anglo-Saxon deities to they were angry and ready to pay any price for it, the people want it to be "like in the USSR" (having long forgotten how it was there, in the USSR), and in the end we have what we have.

    But if, as one song says, "the mind wins someday," then such opportunities should not be missed. "
    You see, it's not about conspiracies or something else.
    An example of how "infantry" was legalized in private security companies has already been given. You also want the "private army" to be legalized, assuming that it can be controlled (the "infantry" is not very successful, but here ...). It is not her, but she (more precisely, several private armies) will control the state, and here the period "1990s - 2010s" will seem like an era of prosperity.
    The state is very happy with the current situation. Particularly gifted in military terms, comrades can ... "sign a contract" ... and go to Syria and other places, and if their actions do not like, they are sent to prison (for some reason the author did not say that "in October 2014 of the year, the Moscow City Court sentenced the heads of the company Vadim Gusev and Evgeny Sidorov to three years' imprisonment each, the Supreme Court of Russia upheld the sentence "and for what) .... or the issue is resolved differently. In general, while PMCs have no status, there is always "the possibility of denial."
    The author would still like to read something about such a place as the President - a hotel in Moscow, or about the Bolshoi Moskvoretsky Bridge, so that he thinks about how control over armed people is exercised in the Russian Federation and write an article "PMCs? Private armies? Yes, no for what ", but this is unlikely to happen.
    Article minus.
    1. timokhin-aa
      24 December 2018 11: 58
      +1
      An example of how "infantry" was legalized in private security companies has already been given.


      This process is framed long ago. That is, the infantry, which is legalized through the chop there, but the negative impact of the society on this phenomenon is minimal. In 90, it was completely different.

      This is not her, and she (more precisely, several private armies) will control the state


      I wonder why millions of private security companies now do not control the state? Interesting, yes?

      (For some reason, the author did not say that "in October 2014, the Moscow City Court sentenced the heads of the company Vadim Gusev and Yevgeny Sidorov to three years in prison, each, the Supreme Court of Russia upheld the sentence" and for what)


      The author specifically gave you a reference where this story is described, and with bold dough highlighted the request to read before speaking out - your counter arguments were dismantled, by the way.

      How is control carried out now? No way. I personally know a bunch of mercenaries, I have business partners in the same country where Wagner is registered, I have an arms supplier in another country who can supply me with a NATO-standard shooter, ammunition and Chinese DShK.

      There will be a demand - I’ll organize the PMC myself, and I’ll do what I can think of, it’s just that the Russian state simply won’t find out about anything, don’t pull me at the right moment, and will not receive taxes from my transactions. That's the whole control.

      Read the article on the link.
      1. Wildcat
        Wildcat 24 December 2018 12: 14
        0
        [/ quote] [quote = timokhin-aa]
        An example of how "infantry" was legalized in private security companies has already been given.


        This process is framed long ago. That is, the infantry, which is legalized through the chop there, but the negative impact of the society on this phenomenon is minimal. In 90, it was completely different.

        This is not her, and she (more precisely, several private armies) will control the state


        I wonder why millions of private security companies now do not control the state? Interesting, yes?

        (For some reason, the author did not say that "in October 2014, the Moscow City Court sentenced the heads of the company Vadim Gusev and Yevgeny Sidorov to three years in prison, each, the Supreme Court of Russia upheld the sentence" and for what)


        The author specifically gave you a reference where this story is described, and with bold dough highlighted the request to read before speaking out - your counter arguments were dismantled, by the way.

        How is control carried out now? No way. I personally know a bunch of mercenaries, I have business partners in the same country where Wagner is registered, I have an arms supplier in another country who can supply me with a NATO-standard shooter, ammunition and Chinese DShK.

        There will be a demand - I’ll organize the PMC myself, and I’ll do what I can think of, it’s just that the Russian state simply won’t find out about anything, don’t pull me at the right moment, and will not receive taxes from my transactions. That's the whole control.

        Read the article on the link.

        I read your article, to which you gave a link, I disagree with the arguments.
        1. "I wonder why millions of private security companies now do not control the state? Interesting, right?"
        Because the country is controlled by special services and this is more effective (and better) than the attempts of private security companies in the early 90s to pretend to be power. Remember the funny conflict between the security forces and one private security company on Kalininsky Prospekt.
        2. "How is control now being carried out? Nothing. I personally know a bunch of mercenaries, I have business partners in the same country where Wagner is registered, I have an arms supplier in another country who can supply me with a shooter according to NATO standards , ammunition and Chinese DShK.
        There will be a demand - I myself will organize a PMC, and I will do whatever comes into its head, but the Russian state simply will not find out about anything, it will not pull my hand at the right time, and it will not receive taxes from my transactions. That's all control. "
        That's when you cross the road to someone you don’t need and present a problem (don’t do this, please, you will be missed on this forum! You are interested in reading, you have the style and ability to look for facts (although I do not always agree with your conclusions)) then the state (I wonder which? or other PMCs) will solve it.
        Taxes? With companies in other jurisdictions?
        Or from Russian companies in this business? Better Starbucks make a new one, right ...
        hi
        1. timokhin-aa
          24 December 2018 12: 46
          0
          Because the country is controlled by special services and this is more effective (and better) than the attempts of private security companies at the beginning of 90 to pretend to be power.


          Here you yourself said everything. This is generally an exhaustive answer to all concerns.
          1. Nemchinov Vl
            Nemchinov Vl 24 December 2018 15: 17
            +2
            perhaps that is so.

            Bravo - Alexander! that the article belongs to your pen, I understood when I got to -

            Compare this situation with what is now.

            The Navy came up with a flawed "anti-piracy" ship, which was extremely limited for anti-piracy and almost unsuitable for anti-terrorism tasks. For thirty-six billion rubles, a series of six such ships is being built, crews are being formed that will be “turned off” from the real security of the country. Then these forces (in theory, in practice - not a fact) will be sent to the “pirate-hazardous” regions of the world and, apparently, unsuccessfully will do something there with money from the Russian budget.


            Yes, "dislike for this project", you really have at the level of pathology ...
            1. timokhin-aa
              25 December 2018 11: 55
              +2
              "dislike for this project", you really have at the level of pathology ...


              I do not like arrogant cuts of public money
  6. Alex_59
    Alex_59 24 December 2018 12: 12
    +1
    I have this question. Here we pay taxes. At them, the state takes measures to defend and protect us - citizens of Russia. Including the protection of Russian business (be it not alright - with our oligarchs). Well, now what happens? Do shipping companies of the Russian Federation need to, again, again, after paying taxes which go to defense, including, fork out for the protection of their ships? Something somehow ... It’s a kind of free medicine, which seems to sparkle with unique heart transplant operations (read: returning Crimea and forcing the Basmachis to guria), but it’s better to go to a private clinic for little things, so as not to die in line.
    1. timokhin-aa
      24 December 2018 12: 50
      +2
      Shipping companies hold vessels under flags of convenience and taxes in the Russian Federation do not pay. In addition, a significant part of PMC clients are foreign legal entities, the Chinese, for example. Were previously regular customers. Maybe now they hire ours, I don't know.
      1. Alex_59
        Alex_59 24 December 2018 13: 16
        +3
        Quote: timokhin-aa

        Shipping companies hold ships under convenient flags and do not pay taxes in the Russian Federation.

        And where do sailors pay taxes?
        Well and then - shipping companies in the Russian Federation do not pay taxes, all the more it is necessary to motivate to pay with us. Like, register in the Russian Federation and the Marine Corps protection for free as a gift. At the same time, there will be no questions from law enforcement agencies of other states what kind of men these are with machine guns and what their status is - the Andreev flag is sobering. It is still sobering.
        Well and then, consider costs a little differently. Does combat training of the Russian Federation MP cost? Requires anyway. Are long-distance trips of the BDK with MP on board carried out for this purpose? Carried out anyway. Will the cost of combat training of the MP and the exits of the BDK to the BS become expensive if shipping companies pay part of their output? No, they will not. At the same time, the flag is shown.
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        In addition, a significant portion of PMC clients are foreign legal entities, for example, Chinese.
        Make a commercial battalion at the Ministry of Defense, let the Chinese conclude an agreement with them. At the same time, the Ministry of Defense will finally save up dollars to buy an Armata or Su-57.

        In 1993, by the way, there was a case with the large landing craft "Nikolay Vilkov". I think you should be aware. Very funny story. )))))))
        1. timokhin-aa
          24 December 2018 20: 51
          +2
          With PMCs there is one more focus-stateart can always "jump off", such as the hiring went berserk, the Russian Federation has nothing to do with it.
          Like the Americans with Blackwater, they just threw it away and that's all.

          This will not work with the "commercial battalion", and in general, it is one thing to weaken the restrictions on mercenarism, and another to rent your own army, it smells badly somehow.

          Like BDK Vilkov, yes.
          1. Alex_59
            Alex_59 25 December 2018 06: 59
            0
            Quote: timokhin-aa

            With PMCs there is one more focus-stateart can always "jump off", such as the hiring went berserk, the Russian Federation has nothing to do with it.

            In general, of course, with PMCs, the idea is not bad, and probably you need to put the laws in order. And wisely use both the army and PMCs. Depending on the situation. Probably something like that.
    2. g1v2
      g1v2 24 December 2018 13: 01
      +5
      A private clinic is worth contacting only if you have a lot of money, otherwise it’s better to go to a regular one. I know from my own experience. Private mid-sized clinics have only one plus - no lines. Everything else is minus. am
      And with the author as a whole I agree with everything except his attitude to 22160. I’m just for ordering 6 more of the same for Pacific Fleet.
      In general, PMC is a convenient tool for the country. Here I agree with the author. For example, ROSATOM produces cheap uranium in Tanzania. I think it’s not worth telling why uranium is needed and how important it is. And there are many countries and organizations that believe that Russian is not supposed to put cheap uranium. And they are willing to pay those who solve this problem. But the question is - do Russian citizens agree that the Russian army should guard the mines of Rosatom in Africa? And does the MO want its units to be scattered around the world in small portions? And how will the public react to the death of our military in such a mission? And will the Tanzanian government even permit Russian troops to be on its territory? request
      If, for example, private owners will protect the extraction of something valuable for our companies abroad, I support it.
      Further PMC is an additional reserve to the army. That is, in case of war or state of emergency, the country will have a trained reserve with constant combat experience. It is clear that nobody will give them heavy equipment, but trained infantry will not be superfluous. Moreover, in this case they can be used as an additional sergeant corps and instructors. I think it’s not worth talking. that in the event of a serious war, losses in the personnel army will be serious. And it will be necessary to replenish them.
      Again, the sewer aggression of violent members of society. Not everyone is ready to go to the factory, however.
      And finally, there are operations in which we are not there. For example, we have an enemy state nearby. We do not want to fight with him. Not profitable at the moment. Why, for example, do the republics not hire any guys not from our region, that is, not related to the state? Several thousand trained pros can be a significant contribution to the stability of nm enclosures. The north wind is an example of this. request
      I think that private traders should be given the opportunity to benefit the state-woo. Well, make money at the same time. hi
  7. Decimam
    Decimam 24 December 2018 12: 32
    +3
    A question to the author - for what reasons, legally available in Russia 25 private security companies with about 000 "fighters" (which is comparable to the size of the regular army) cannot perform the functions of protecting cargo during transportation, i.e. fighting pirates?
    1. timokhin-aa
      24 December 2018 12: 48
      +1
      Strictly by organizational. PSC, which was allowed to have a rifle and shoot at foreign citizens abroad is PMCs. Actually, PMCs are big PSCs with greater freedom of action + demining + training. Participation in hostilities is rather an exception to the generally accepted order of things.
      1. Decimam
        Decimam 24 December 2018 14: 28
        +2
        We are not talking about a certain foreign conditional classification, which we ourselves came up with in haste. There are no legislative restrictions on the performance of the functions of protecting goods during sea transportation with respect to private security companies. There are restrictions on equipment, but they are easily overcome. So why is PMCs here?
        1. timokhin-aa
          24 December 2018 20: 54
          +1
          PSC cannot engage in demining, and this is in principle the main work for private owners on the planet.
          PSC must comply with the law on weapons.
          PSC cannot engage in consulting, combat training, logistics in a combat zone (throw humanitarian aid off the plane to the besieged city)

          There are a lot of legal restrictions.

          If all of them cancel, the difference is really erased in many ways.
          1. Decimam
            Decimam 24 December 2018 22: 45
            +3
            So the article is about maritime security. Or do you mean sea mines?
            "A private security company cannot do mine clearance, and this is, in principle, the main job for private traders on the planet.""
            The source of this statement, as I understand it, is the same as about 1334 American paratroopers at the epicenter? Even those companies that provide such services (and there are not many), such as the British Armor Group or the American MAG Aerospace, are far from the only and far from the main activity. So do not mislead the people.
            Somehow, focus on something specific, or on maritime security issues, for the solution of which the legalization of PMCs is the tenth thing, or on the legalization of PMCs to participate in the "development" of the multibillion-dollar market of specific services, since the creation of any private military company provides exclusively financial benefits.
            1. timokhin-aa
              25 December 2018 12: 01
              +1
              Even those firms that provide such services (and they are few)


              A little, yeah. You just do not understand how many participants in this market, apparently. Most of the people working in the world under non-state military contracts are strangely sappers. And they were the first who, after the Cold War, began to be hired openly by legal players - governments, the UN, etc. Since the early nineties, before the EO.
              A large firm is usually the main contractor, it has a couple of levels of subcontractors, if that.

              Somehow, focus on something specific, or on maritime security issues, for the solution of which the legalization of PMCs is the tenth thing, or on the legalization of PMCs to participate in the "development" of the multibillion-dollar market of specific services, since the creation of any private military company provides exclusively financial benefits.


              These are not two different questions, this is one question.
              1. Decimam
                Decimam 25 December 2018 14: 51
                0
                "You just don't understand how many participants there are in this market, apparently."
                According to Montaigne, there are two kinds of ignorance. "Ignorance is of two kinds: one, illiterate, precedes science; the other, arrogant, follows it."
                Your comment allows you to determine that yours is of the second kind.
                1. timokhin-aa
                  26 December 2018 13: 51
                  -1
                  You overestimate yourself too much. Let's take a security question for ignorance - in which country is Wagner registered? AND?
                  How many fighters of the company actually died in battle with the Americans? And how much of the wounds died?

                  This information is not on the Internet, it is possible or to know if you are part of the movement, or not to know how you are.

                  Or, for example, does Eric Prince have ground combat groups in Africa right now? Not aviation? If so, where?

                  You're just an internet balabol, which has no idea about anything outside the internet, and download it here solely because I dared ( laughing ) spit in your deity - holy america, which caused you wild attacks of pain in some place.

                  But I absolutely don't give a damn about you - I will continue to spit in your star-striped icon, and I don’t care what you feel.

                  And I will not cease to consider fanatical pro-Western liberalism as a consequence of latent homosexuality, and this opinion also developed not from scratch.

                  By the way, I responded to your claims about the dumping of American parachutists at the epicenter of a nuclear explosion - please see.

                  Behind this, I consider it necessary not to waste my precious time on you and not to respond to your attacks due to pathologies. You can not respond to this comment, I, at least, will ignore you from now on.

                  All the best.
                  1. Decimam
                    Decimam 26 December 2018 13: 57
                    0
                    You have obviously hysterics. Since I cannot offer you a glass of water, valerian, I gently advise you to act in accordance with the recommendations.
                    "Let's have a security question for ignorance - in which country is Wagner registered?"
                    Let's. Only a little differently. "Is Wagner registered in any country?"
                    1. svp67
                      svp67 26 December 2018 14: 22
                      0
                      Quote: Decimam
                      Let's. Only a little differently. "Is Wagner registered in any country?"

                      Hong Kong
                      1. Decimam
                        Decimam 26 December 2018 15: 06
                        +1
                        There is still no official information. Speculation. And exclamations of pontorez like our author, posing as a "participant in the movement." You yourself understand that the real "participants in the movement" on the VO website will not be hysterical and do not share information with anyone. All the more so.
                      2. svp67
                        svp67 26 December 2018 15: 13
                        +1
                        Quote: Decimam
                        There is no official information anyway.

                        Dear, this group has OFFICIALLY worked to protect civilian ships and their cargo from pirates. And provided its services to everyone. Without proper international registration, this is not possible. So temper the ardor
                      3. Decimam
                        Decimam 26 December 2018 15: 43
                        +1
                        Dear, yes, I'm not dusty. I just want to see the official information. And the word "officially" in your comment is about nothing.
                      4. svp67
                        svp67 26 December 2018 15: 45
                        0
                        Quote: Decimam
                        And the word "officially" in your comment is about nothing.

                        So make an inquiry to Hong Kong. What is it for you now?
                      5. Decimam
                        Decimam 26 December 2018 15: 50
                        +1
                        I don't need anything. It is Mr. Timokhin who is trying to show that "only the stars are higher, and only eggs are cooler" and offers all sorts of quizzes. And here you are, with Hong Kong. So be consistent until the end, show the link to the registration of "Wagner" in Hong Kong. But if you don’t show me, I will not break up.
                      6. svp67
                        svp67 26 December 2018 15: 57
                        0
                        Quote: Decimam
                        So be consistent until the end, show the link to the registration of Wagner in Hong Kong
                        "Wagner" is not an official name, it is officially called the PMC Moran Security Group see
                      7. Decimam
                        Decimam 26 December 2018 16: 04
                        +1
                        Yes, I already looked long ago Again, all this is rumor. Whether they are connected or not connected - there is no specific information. The main source is OBS. So we will not crush the water in the mortar.
                      8. svp67
                        svp67 26 December 2018 16: 09
                        0
                        Quote: Decimam
                        Yes, I already looked a long time Again, all these are rumors

                        This was laid out by the British, in this case they can be trusted, since after that all Western countries began to "pinch" this company on all counts. Until the detention of her employees on civilian ships in the ports of Western countries
                      9. Decimam
                        Decimam 26 December 2018 16: 10
                        +1
                        Maybe you are right.
  8. Wildcat
    Wildcat 24 December 2018 13: 14
    0
    Quote: timokhin-aa
    Because the country is controlled by special services and this is more effective (and better) than the attempts of private security companies at the beginning of 90 to pretend to be power.


    Here you yourself said everything. This is generally an exhaustive answer to all concerns.

    Hmm, actually, I could not conclude that since the private security company was somehow driven into a frame (a good question in which ones) with their 9 * 17 pistols, then PMCs with "... guns, caliber up to 76-mm, heavy machine guns, anti-sabotage grenade launchers, have "door" machine guns on helicopters and airplanes "to do the same. I mind winked
    In general, the pros and cons are clear. Do you think the pros are preferable (taxes, country influence, jobs), I believe that firstly, risks outweigh profits, and Secondly, the state arranges the status quo: while the actions of PMCs are considered useful, they live when not - a prison, or worse. Example:
    Zakharova: “Materials about the deaths of tens and hundreds of Russian citizens are classic disinformation,” she said. “Not 400, not 200, not 100 and not 10 (dead) - according to preliminary data, as a result of the military clash (February 7), the reasons which is now being investigated, we can talk about the death of five people, presumably citizens of Russia. There are victims, but all this requires verification, in particular, citizenship - whether they are all citizens of Russia or other countries. "
    “I would like to emphasize that we are not talking about Russian servicemen,” the diplomat added. “The Russian presidential administration and the Ministry of Defense promptly provided explanations about the absence of Russian servicemen in the area of ​​the American airstrike.”
    Pompeo: declared at a hearing in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on the consideration of his candidacy for the post of Secretary of State that “a couple of hundred Russians” died in Syria as a result of the American strike. The incident was presented as "evidence of the rigidity of the Trump administration towards Moscow": "In Syria, a few weeks ago, the Russians met a worthy rival ... a couple of hundred Russians were killed." The head of the CIA did not specify what kind of incident he was talking about, but noted that all the dead were killed by the US military.
    hi
    1. timokhin-aa
      24 December 2018 14: 17
      +3
      Example:
      Zakharova: “The materials about the deaths of tens and hundreds of Russian citizens are classic disinformation,” she noted. “Not 400, not 200, not 100 and not 10 (dead) - according to preliminary data, as a result of the military clash (February 7), the reasons for which are now being clarified, we can talk about the death of five people, presumably, citizens of Russia.


      Now in the next room is a man whose son participated in that battle. Do not believe the media)))
      There were neither two hundred, nor a hundred, nor fifty people. Well, forty was not, etc.
  9. Glory1974
    Glory1974 24 December 2018 14: 02
    +1
    I think it’s possible to allow ChOP to perform tasks on protecting property of customers abroad. As far as I know, this is practiced. Just do not scare all PMCs.
    PMC implies participation in hostilities. This is probably superfluous. There is an army, there are special services, you can always solve the problem with the help of specialists from law enforcement agencies. And laying it on private traders is fraught. As you know, the capitalist will commit any crime because of profit. Therefore, it must be strictly controlled, constantly limited, and there will be little sense from such work. A tool for solving geopolitical problems will not work.
    The Americans created their own PMCs, but besides the fact that they "hid" their losses in these companies, they did nothing useful.
    1. timokhin-aa
      24 December 2018 14: 18
      0
      PMC involves participation in hostilities.


      As a rule - no, does not mean. This is the opposite, a rarity. Article on the link read.
      1. Glory1974
        Glory1974 24 December 2018 16: 52
        0
        If not implied, then this is not a military company, but a security company.
        1. timokhin-aa
          24 December 2018 20: 54
          0
          Not. Security is engaged only in security.
          1. Glory1974
            Glory1974 25 December 2018 09: 46
            0
            Not. Security is engaged only in security.

            Then what is the difference?
    2. would
      would 24 December 2018 14: 27
      0
      PMC involves participation in hostilities


      Not implies, but contradicts. Because under international law, direct participation in hostilities is a mercenary that is punishable under the same international law (and not only). There is even a special term - an illegal combatant.

      Therefore, all official PMCs have contracted workers sent to the combat zone for anything, but not to participate in hostilities. EMNIP even the soldiers of the "Slavic Corps" were formally sent to guard the oil rigs, but as Alexander correctly noted, this option is a rarity.
      1. Glory1974
        Glory1974 24 December 2018 16: 51
        +1
        Because under international law, direct participation in hostilities is a mercenary that is punishable under the same international law

        Is indirect participation not mercenary?
        Read who such a mercenary is. What does this have to do with private security companies or PMCs?
        at all official PMCs, under the contract, workers are sent to the combat zone for anything, but not for participation in hostilities.

        Do you know the contracts that PMCs sign?
        Personally, I don’t know. But I know that according to our laws, at one time even a person could not be protected by a private security agent, but only some thing, for example, a watch on a business hand, although this actually did not play a role.
        If you talk about the protection of some objects, it has long been. As I understand it, we are talking about PMCs, which are directly involved in hostilities and require not only small arms, but also guns, etc.
        1. would
          would 24 December 2018 17: 04
          +1
          Is indirect participation not mercenary?


          And there is no legal or indirect half-participation. You are either a combatant (legal or not) or non-combatant.

          Read who such a mercenary is.


          That is what I advise you. Who such a mercenary perfectly describes art. 47 of the first Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions.

          Do you know the contracts that PMCs sign?


          On this point, yes, more than open information.

          If you talk about the protection of some objects, it has long been. As I understand it, we are talking about PMCs, which are directly involved in hostilities and require not only small arms, but also guns, etc.


          That's just the protection of objects we have long been only exclusively within the country. Outside the country, our legislation does not allow such protective activities.

          Cannons are probably (about the specific cannons, I'm not sure myself) are needed because, for example, Negroes will be "raiding" an oil platform somewhere in Africa, not only with AK, but with much more serious weapons. And the object must be protected, it is necessary to have the appropriate weapons to adequately repulse the bandits. Exactly the same problem was faced in the North Caucasus when the pipeline was "raided" by the Caucasians, for example, with the NSVT "Utes", they say after that the VOKhR was strengthened accordingly.
          1. Glory1974
            Glory1974 25 December 2018 09: 56
            0
            And there is no legal or indirect half-participation. You are either a combatant (legal or not) or non-combatant.

            There is the concept of military operations, but there is military action. Accordingly, a PMC employee either takes part in hostilities, which, as you say, contradicts the status of PMCs, or in military operations.
            But even if he guards an object on the territory of the conflict, he is still a participant in hostilities.
        2. timokhin-aa
          24 December 2018 20: 55
          0
          Read the article on the link.
  10. VictorZhivilov
    VictorZhivilov 24 December 2018 18: 52
    0
    First you need some analogue of the regulatory organization ...

    And ... [Drum Fraction] The Legal Weapons Market. And then think about your Blackwater (Academi). smile

    And while it will only be so ...
    Alas, but a reasonable approach in Russia is not honored. Officials are concerned that “if something didn’t work out,” the FSB does not want to do extra work, the Ministry of Defense doesn’t understand what it wants, liberals in the Government do not want their Anglo-Saxon deities to be angry with them, and are willing to pay any price for it, people wants it to be “like in the USSR” (having forgotten for a long time, as it was there, in the USSR), and as a result we have what we have.
    1. timokhin-aa
      24 December 2018 20: 55
      0
      These are not related things.
    2. Alex_59
      Alex_59 25 December 2018 07: 02
      0
      Quote: VictorZhivilov
      And ... [Drum Fraction] The Legal Weapons Market.

      Drum roll - in Russia the arms market for private security companies is very legal))))))) RMBs certainly will not be allowed to buy, but all that is lower - please.
  11. rayruav
    rayruav 24 December 2018 19: 46
    0
    and that Russia has a lot of ships left :? in order to create PMCs for this, well, they did not recapture the Nord and another tanker, PMCs are toys of the oligarchic bourgeoisie
    1. timokhin-aa
      24 December 2018 20: 56
      +2
      Down with the bourgeoisie, the land of the peasants, plants robots! Damn, not robots, workers laughing
    2. strannik1985
      strannik1985 24 December 2018 20: 57
      0
      And why should ships be precisely under the flag of the Russian Federation?
  12. Doliva63
    Doliva63 24 December 2018 19: 48
    +1
    A citizen cannot buy a gun for self-defense, but can an oligarch have his own small army? When will we wake up?
    1. strannik1985
      strannik1985 24 December 2018 20: 57
      +1
      You were 25-30 years late when the first legal private security companies went.
    2. timokhin-aa
      24 December 2018 20: 57
      +3
      Enough of this nonsense about the army of the oligarchs here to drag.

      The author at one time published an article-educational program on private military companies in Russia, familiarization with it is strongly recommended before speaking on the topic.


      At the beginning
  13. Warrior2015
    Warrior2015 24 December 2018 22: 17
    +1
    Many thanks to the author, an excellent review of the current situation on the topic!

    Quote: Alexander Timokhin
    statistics insists that having such a group on board guarantees security with a probability close to 100%.
    Without a doubt. Pirates - after all, the same bandits, only at sea - they choose a victim "so that without consequences" (for them) - preferably fatter and toothless.

    Quote: Alexander Timokhin
    When entering the port, it is possible to oblige them to hand over all equipment and weapons for storage, so that even technically it would not be possible to use all this on the territory of the Russian Federation (and this should be strictly prohibited).
    And if such a "brigade" does not want to hand over everything to the gunsmith? and who will look after so many weapons? There are many problems here ...

    Quote: Alexander Timokhin
    The Navy invented for itself a flawed “anti-piracy” ship, extremely limited suitable for anti-piracy and almost unsuitable for anti-terrorist tasks. For thirty six billion rubles a series of six such ships is being built,
    You yourself answered your own question - by specifying this amount, how many of them will be different kickbacks. that is unknown, but I think the figure will be enormous ...

    Quote: Alexander Timokhin
    If the Navy would just save money on fighting piracy
    So there is no such task for the department, no (in fact, on paper it may be)
    1. timokhin-aa
      25 December 2018 08: 09
      0
      And if such a "brigade" does not want to hand over everything to the gunsmith? and who will look after so many weapons?


      Arrest, term. In Russia, the activities of these organizations should be strictly prohibited.
  14. Alexander not great
    Alexander not great 24 December 2018 23: 40
    0
    in Kiev, recruitment goes to the protection of ships, the requirements of 2 years of the army or the police, sn 500-1500 bucks.
  15. Comrade Kim
    Comrade Kim 24 December 2018 23: 54
    0
    Quote: Oden280
    So far, in our country, wild oligarchism and rampant corruption of officials cannot talk about the legalization of PMCs in our country.

    While they will release the bloody oligarchs, everything will be so:
  16. Den717
    Den717 25 December 2018 01: 32
    +1
    One of the popular activities of such organizations is the protection of ships from pirates and terrorists.

    A very primitive idea of ​​the work of PMCs. The fight against pirates is most likely the most insignificant part of the work of PMCs. In addition to ship security, these companies train US Army and Navy personnel, maintain training grounds and ranges, guard US diplomatic missions in high-risk countries, deal with logistical problems (delivering MTO items and ammunition), and act as advisers in training special forces units in third countries. Despite the fact that everything is done under a contract with the Moscow Region, the State Department, the CIA and other government agencies. For example, with the active work of the United States in Iraq, more than 100 employees of about 000 PMCs actively worked there together with army units. The security of the embassy in Iraq was guarded precisely by PMCs, and it cost several times more than the security by army units. By the way, PMC aircraft carried out the export of IS leaders from Syria. What are the advantages of PMCs? Their losses are not included in the statistics of army losses as a state structure. This means that they do not so sharply affect the mood of the electorate. In addition, not all employees are US citizens in American PMCs; the former military countries of Latin America and Europe are quite widely represented there. This is so for information. The topic is widely debated by American publicists.
    1. timokhin-aa
      25 December 2018 08: 14
      0
      So for information, I know all this, my relative fought in such a structure, my colleague's son worked for two years in Syria, also in such a structure, I knew about the adventure with the Slavic Corps four months before it began.

      And I communicated with Amer, to the extent that I know the jargon on which these people speak. You here in the know, who in amersky PMCs call TCN?

      So you don't need to be smart, you won't surprise me with Internet omniscience, but I am writing in relation to the capabilities of the Russian Federation, and in relation to maritime security. Everything else was left behind the scenes, simply so as not to overload the article. And so it was possible to mention the country where "Wagner" is registered, and how Krinitsyn's people are engaged in mine clearance in Libya, but why?
      1. Decimam
        Decimam 25 December 2018 09: 42
        +1
        Third country national (citizens of third countries) is not a slang expression and is used all over the world, although in different cases, including in "amer" PMCs, it has its own specifics. And if you, dear author, are as knowledgeable as they put facts sucked from the finger into your articles?
        1. timokhin-aa
          25 December 2018 12: 03
          0
          I like to see how the liberdy burns. Therefore, from time to time I spit in their Gods)))) To make them more painful.
          1. Decimam
            Decimam 25 December 2018 14: 35
            +1
            That is, a conscious or unconscious lie is considered a method of dealing with certain Gods of "liberdy"? But your "spits" also fall into the citizens of the completely opposite camp. Uryapatriots then why spit on it?
            I have a more plausible explanation of your "fight against the gods of liberda" - your incompetence in the issues covered.
      2. Den717
        Den717 25 December 2018 12: 16
        +1
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        It’s not necessary to be clever, Internet omniscience doesn’t surprise me, but I write in relation to the capabilities of the Russian Federation, and in relation to maritime security. Everything else was left behind the scenes simply so as not to overload the article.

        And about non-state financing ("... private structures do not use state money either ....."), too, to save space? Before submitting the article, you would balance it so that the reader has a close to objective opinion about the PMC. And so, it turned out to be noodles. IMHO. And do not be offended, I am as stupid as you are, and I am not going to surprise you. Don't explode with insults at criticism and additions. By the way, Russia is more of a land power, and it could well study the possibilities of outsourcing in the ground forces.
  17. aristok
    aristok 25 December 2018 05: 49
    0
    The very idea of ​​PMCs' is an attempt to hide military violence from the control of society, which is completely unacceptable.
    it is strictly necessary to ban PMCs in any form,
    and announce to the whole world that any member of PMCs (essentially a mercenary) of any country,
    and even more so, the organizer and the beneficiary become a war criminal in fact and is subject to the strictest inevitable punishment without statute of limitations ..
    1. timokhin-aa
      25 December 2018 08: 15
      0
      Somewhat complicates the legalization of PMCs that the public does not have a firm opinion on this issue, and instead of understanding it, wears a set of myths in our heads. The author at one time published an article-educational program on private military companies in Russia, familiarization with it is strongly recommended before speaking on the topic.. Although superficial and far from exhaustive, it gives some idea of ​​the subject.
      1. aristok
        aristok 25 December 2018 09: 38
        +1
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        an educational article on private military companies in Russia, familiarization with it is strongly recommended,

        yes, it is clear that the beneficiaries of hiding military violence from the society will order any article that justifies them.
        So far, how many have not read articles trying to justify PMCs - argumentation "for" at the level of naive impudence mixed with a muddy pseudo-intelligence.
        1. timokhin-aa
          25 December 2018 12: 04
          -1
          You just do not understand what you are commenting on, do not want to read or delve into.
          1. aristok
            aristok 26 December 2018 11: 02
            +1
            Quote: timokhin-aa
            You just do not understand what you are commenting on, do not want to read or delve into.

            Some for the loot (or rather for the illusion of receiving it) die, others for the loot justify it.
            1. timokhin-aa
              26 December 2018 13: 59
              0
              You answer for yourself, others will answer for you. Nobody forces you to die for loot. Everyone is his own master.
              Only do not distribute nonsense.
  18. Maalkavianin
    Maalkavianin 25 December 2018 12: 41
    +2
    To legalize mercenaries is the same as legalizing an organized criminal group.
    1. Warrior2015
      Warrior2015 25 December 2018 13: 27
      0
      Quote: Malkavianin
      To legalize mercenaries is the same as legalizing an organized criminal group.

      Generally close is not the same thing, apparently you do not know the question at all.
      1. Maalkavianin
        Maalkavianin 25 December 2018 15: 56
        +1
        I have no friends of mercenaries, so there is no one to ask. But I know that recently they are trying to make some kind of heroes out of mercenaries. The same Blackwater was noted and drug trafficking, all illegalness. Massacre. Why will ours be better? Just because they are ours, Russian?
        1. timokhin-aa
          26 December 2018 13: 54
          0
          I have. And not only familiar and even relatives.
          And I can say that hiring is just people, just like us, and whether they will engage in massacres largely depends on what culture they come from.
          In the amerskoy massacre - the norm, they appeared on it as a nation.
          In our - not very normal.

          Accordingly, the mercenaries will be different with us, and with them.
          1. Maalkavianin
            Maalkavianin 26 December 2018 15: 37
            0
            "For them, massacre is the norm, for us it is not. They are bad, we are good." Just like a training manual. :-) People deliberately go into mercenaries, despite the fact that they know that they are violating the law of the country. At least this no longer fits with the image of a good person.
  19. Pavelmolo1997
    Pavelmolo1997 25 December 2018 18: 10
    -1
    I would legalize PMCs. For two simple reasons. They can do all the work in the same operations in Syria, and the second money less to spend.
  20. Alexga
    Alexga 25 December 2018 21: 31
    +1
    A man with weapons in his hands can only be a representative of the state’s power structures. And only! Otherwise, private security companies, PMCs and organized crime groups - there is no difference. Whoever pays the money is the master. Right, morality is all sideways.
    1. timokhin-aa
      26 December 2018 13: 55
      0
      And who are the private security companies?
      1. Alexga
        Alexga 26 December 2018 20: 42
        0
        Private organization, isn't it clear from the name?