Vileika, Gantsevichi and the security of Belarus

The editorial office of Naviny.by was approached by a person who has been working at a Russian military facility in Vileika for many years. He told what is really going on behind the barbed wire fence ... Belarusian society was divided into two camps: those who are for and against Russian military bases in our country ...
The Belarusian military bases are 20 years ahead when compared to the Russian one in Vileika.

Source.

And just today we have to admit that Boris Yeltsin's decision to "exchange" the gas debts of the Republic of Belarus for the extension of the deployment of two Russian military facilities on the territory of the Republic of Belarus was not well thought out. Initially, everything looked very logical, correct and mutually beneficial. Belarus has big debts for gas, which it has nothing to pay with.

And Russia has two military facilities on the territory of Belarus. Well, let's make sure that no one is offended. Russia is extending the lease of facilities, while Belarus is writing off its gas debt. In principle, then, in the distant 95th year, it would be extremely difficult to foresee any problems associated with this "exchange". That is, simply Minsk "you live well" wrote off a billion-dollar gas debt (objects already act and do not take up much space).

But it was so easy to find dollars then (as, indeed, now) for the budget of the Republic of Belarus - this is a very big problem. You know, in principle, it would be much easier to build those very communication centers with the same money already on the territory of Russia itself. And even then "close the question" completely and completely.

How and from where would Belarusians find money to pay gas bills? Well, that's not our problem a bit. Search.

Oddly enough, this most "beautiful, elegant and mutually beneficial solution" turned into big problems for Russia. The “written off gas debt” was forgotten in Belarus very quickly and very tightly. Even Lukashenka has forgotten how! Allegedly, Russia "paid zero" for those "military bases". That is, the written off debt was lost in stories, but the "free military bases" remained.

As if I'm not exaggerating: the topic of objects in Gantsevichi and Vileika is constantly present in the Belarusian press. You know, the logic is absolutely incomprehensible: they are located there according to an intergovernmental agreement, and not anyhow. It continues to operate ... What, excuse me, do you want to discuss? When the agreement expires, a new agreement will be concluded. Or not, depending on the circumstances.

This is the business of the government of Russia and the government of Belarus. How this might affect the “general public” is absolutely incomprehensible. But the topic of bases is constantly discussed. And supposedly for Russia this is insanely important and significant. And supposedly Belarus literally "laid down its bones for Russia", providing these very bases. And supposedly all this was done absolutely free (zero for all these years, zero!).

An odd approach to agreements

A lot of things were signed between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus and a lot of things happened. To this day, Russia is the first and main sales market for Belarusian products. All these years Minsk has received gas and oil not quite at the market price. And this is already tens and tens of billions. But remembering this is somehow not accepted in Belarus. What for? After all, Belarus is such a valuable partner that all of the above is the least that Russia could do for its last and best ally.

The unpleasant truth is that in exchange Belarus did not want to do nothing at all... That is, literally. In fact, Russia has to pay literally for the fact that there is such a wonderful country as Belarus on our beautiful planet. There were no actions at all in the interests of Russia, and at the moment of the next conflict this becomes obvious.

Therefore - "two military bases" for which "nothing was paid." That is, you need to trump something, but frankly there is nothing to trump with. Nothing at all. Nothing to say, nothing to remember. Emptiness, complete zero. These are the results of the quarter-century rule of Alexander Grigorievich Lukashenko. But everything just “seems” to him that there was something “epic” and “heroic” there. Well, was it? It was? Here the referents are looking for. Unsuccessful so far.

And therefore, "suddenly" the very theme of military bases arises. As a matter of fact, AG Lukashenko (under whom this agreement was signed) should be aware of its details. I am aware that there was no smell of any special charity from Belarus. There was no such thing. Clean business.

And, in principle, until 2021, “everything is under control” and “everything is paid for”. That is, the very issue was completely closed back then, back in 1995. What to remember now? But there are no other trump cards, but you need to trump. And now, which is characteristic, a very specific approach - an attempt to sell for the second time what was paid for a long time ago.

Well, how else can you name the endless references in the Belarusian press about two Russian military installations on the territory of Belarus? Moreover, the propaganda there is built very competently: never mention the Russian economic aid, and constantly shout about the military bases. As a result, readers and listeners have a very distorted idea of ​​the realities of the world around them.

As a matter of fact, over the past 25 years, the finished products of Belarusian enterprises were mainly sent to Russia, raw materials and fuel came from Russia, and the price of hydrocarbons was significantly lower than the market price. Hundreds of thousands of Belarusians work in Russia. But this is so, little things, who might be interested? However, any "restrictions" in any of the above areas immediately caused a storm of negativity.

But the "military bases" (for which it was paid a long time ago) is, as it were, separately, it is "a completely different article." Once again: we need to talk about something, about some kind of "trenches", but this is the problem: Russia had these trenches above the roof after 91, but the Belarusians were not noticed there. Never. And you have to shout about something, because - "base".

Actually:

Objects under the Russian command operate in Belarus on the basis of intergovernmental agreements between the Russian Federation and Belarus, signed on January 6, 1995. This is the 43rd zonal communications center of the Navy, 7 km from the city of Vileyka in the Minsk region, and the 474th separate radio engineering center (ORTU), 48 km southeast of the city of Baranovichi, Brest Region.
Both military institutions are not endowed with the status of military bases. There is no lethal in their territory weapons... "These are technical objects that are engaged in reconnaissance, radar and communications," experts say, referring to the "Agreement on the use and maintenance of the Vileika radio station" and the "Agreement on the procedure for completing the construction and maintenance of the Baranovichi missile attack warning system node."

Source.

Impossible cooperation

It is precisely on the example of Vileika and Gantsevichi that the complete futility of cooperation with Belarus becomes clear. There are two military facilities (not bases!), Mostly Belarusian personnel work there. These objects are also protected by Belarusians. Lethal weapons are not there. That is, by and large, in the Hamburg score, Vileika and Gantsevichi are a trifle that does not deserve special mention. But this topic is constantly being raised in belpress. They constantly talk about the importance of these facilities for Russia, about the threat from them to “independent Belarus”.

Characteristically, NATO's eastward movement and deployment of military facilities and infrastructure near the borders of Belarus practically does not cause any serious reaction in belpress. This is passed off as the consequences of the confrontation between the Russian Federation and NATO. That is, the threat is not directly and directly considered in Belarus. not at all.

There is no such topic in the Belarusian information space. I beg your pardon, but how will these NATO armadas move to Russia, bypassing the territory of the "neutral RB"? If the "neutral RB" plans to provide logistics, then it ceases to be neutral. The Balts have the same psychological complex - after joining NATO, they continue to consider themselves small, neutral and defenseless.

From the diplomatic moves of the Republic of Belarus, from its information policy, as well as from the decisions and statements of the leadership of this beautiful country, it is quite obvious that no one there plans to defend the "western frontiers" together with Russia. "There is no such letter."

You see, you need to prepare for such things very, very much in advance. Place Russian military facilities on the territory of Belarus, conduct permanent joint exercises, have well-developed plans for joint actions in case of aggression. Have one information policy regarding NATO (NATO movement to the east - aggression) and so on. In all difficult situations Belarus is simply obliged to act together with Russia, but against NATO. And only then can we talk about some kind of "military alliance". This is approximately how Poland acts in relation to the United States.

So, in the case of Belarus, there is none of this. And not close. And in 10 minutes such things are not organized. This requires years of teamwork. Decades. Note that this is exactly how the Polish military-political leadership operates. Poles fought in Afghanistan and Iraq. And no one was indignant, even when the coffins were going back: it should be so. Nobody shouted: "We are being driven to slaughter!" This is necessary for the security of the Polish state. And no one in Poland shouted from every street lamp that we were America's best and last ally.

This is not an emotional, but a purely practical component: after the Euromaidan-2 and the coup d'etat in Kiev in the Belpress press it was designated ... as Russia's aggression against Ukraine. That is, there was no coup d'état and no fascist gangs: just Russia attacked Ukraine.

It’s clear that in Ukraine there was a clash between Russia and NATO (Punchinel’s secret), and so, Belarus officially took a pro-NATO position. In principle, as in the case of the 2008 war. To speak after that about a certain "union of sword and plowshare" is somewhat strange. De facto (whether Belarusian politicians like it or not), a real alliance with Russia completely ruled out some possibility of choice in the event of a "war of three eights", and in the event of a conflict in Ukraine, and in the event of a war in Syria. In the military-political and economic sense, the Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation are absolutely not equivalent, and, therefore, there can be no talk of any "equal" alliance.

And it is Minsk that begs for weapons from Moscow, and preferences in the economy. Consequently, "allied relations" absolutely automatically meant for Minsk support for Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Donbass and Assad. Once again: completely automatic. Don't like this union? Get out of it.

Small circus

Here is about Lukashenka's proposal to "join Russia to Belarus." The offer is certainly interesting. Quite. If the Republic of Belarus had the scale of the economy, at least several times larger than the Russian, if the Republic of Belarus had a powerful army a la Soviet, if ... then yes, it would be interesting.

The problem with telling lies is precisely that the speaker himself sooner or later begins to believe in it. Consciousness is distorted. The trouble of all those living in the informational field of Belarusian propaganda is that they already have difficulty finding their bearings in objective realities. Because in Russia such a "proposal" caused a powerful laugh. That is, the Belarusian army will cover us from Alaska to Crimea, and the Belarusian budget will help resolve the problems of Russian regions? So, what? Or how?

If not, why talk about it at all? How can such things offer incumbent head of state? The problem of “honest Belarusian proposals” is precisely that they imply completely equal cooperation between two systems, absolutely incomparable in scale, and a close union of independent Belarus ... with everyone in a row, from China to Poland.

The problem of the current government in Belarus is precisely that it does not fundamentally deal with the problems of national security (in the American formulation) or the state's defense capability (in the Soviet formulation). There is so much beautiful and nervous demagoguery around this. The construction of the army is de facto not being carried out - more money is allocated for the police and the KGB. Even small Lithuania has more defense budget than Belarus. Let's remind: the population of Lithuania is 3 times less and there is no “carefully preserved industry”. And the military budget is larger.

That is, with defense, it is about the same as with the economy: Lukashenka has been doing something strange in the economic sphere all these years and decades. All questions about the prospects were followed by a nervous answer: we are an independent country and we will figure it out ourselves (and all Belarusians in unison: yes, yes, we are such - "non-stale"). And then suddenly: let's throw off the gas price and compensate for the Russian tax maneuver. And you do not want to solve your own problems and answer for your "mistakes"? And why not?

With defense, everything is about the same: to a direct question about how you will fight back, the answer is that, in fact, Belarus is an ally of Russia. So, suddenly. In general, the idea is interesting, if the macroeconomic problems of the Republic of Belarus are de facto hanged on Moscow and the defense of the borders of "independent Belarus" is also implicitly assigned to Russia (at least, responsibility for this), then what is this "Belarusian state" ? What is its meaning? Defend "national identity" and "hang out nicely" in the international arena?

Yes, this is exactly how, in general, macroeconomics and defense are the main tasks of any state. How else? How could it be otherwise?

The cause of conflicts

And this is just an absolutely unique Belarusian geopolitical model. When talking about "equal gas prices", the topic of "essentially one state" immediately arises. At the same time, the military facilities in Gantsevichi and Vileika are simultaneously and in parallel called "foreign military bases." That is, proceeding from this, it is absolutely incomprehensible how some kind of "joint defense" should be built. You can draw anything on paper and sign it.

Real defense of borders requires real action, including the deployment of those very "evil" military bases. Moreover, the same Poland, so beloved by the Belarusians, is ready to pay the United States a billion dollars for the deployment of a military base on its territory. At the same time, this action is strongly encouraged and promoted in the media. Just compare the actions of Poland (sending a contingent to hot spots, purchasing large quantities of American weapons and full support of the American foreign policy) and the actions of the leadership of the “allied RB”. And there will be no limit to your surprise.

That is, for the Poles, the more American bases, the better, for the Belarusians, Russian bases are the main threat to sovereignty. Both those and others call themselves allies. Strange, isn't it? At the same time, the Poles behave much more modest in terms of global self-esteem and does not require US economic assistance.

You see, the problem is this: within the framework of the “magic” Belarusian state, the problem of national security is not seriously considered, therefore, Russia's contribution to its maintenance is not interesting to anyone. It's just that “Belarusians don't want to fight,” and that's it. They "will solve all problems by peace." Both the communication center and the radio engineering center are needed only by “imperial Russia”, but not by “neutral Belarus”, which lives in another galaxy. At the same time, the same Russia, as it were, is obliged to ensure the security of the Republic of Belarus (we are allies!) And at its own expense to arm the Belarusian army.

That is, in one direction we are allies, in the other - foreign (Russian) military bases are not needed by the Belarusians ... Hence the conflicts. You see, what is the trick: practically no one uses such double-entry bookkeeping anymore. I mean - so frankly. In fact, the uniqueness of the situation makes all further negotiations absolutely useless. There cannot be two completely different foreign policies in one military alliance (which is what Belarusians like to trump at).

Moreover, if the geopolitical configuration of official Warsaw, its military-political priorities have not actually changed since 1991, then official Minsk literally rushes from side to side. And he does it constantly and absolutely chaotic. The "chairman" rushes first to Europe, then to China, then to Qatar, then to Turkey, then to Ukraine, then to Russia, then to Azerbaijan, each time offering the counterpart a “strategic alliance”.

And the answer to a typical question of Belarusians about why you don't want just strategic alliance with the Republic of Belarus, sounds like this: yes, because Belarus is a "strategic ally" to everyone. It is not interesting.

"Misunderstandings" with the national security of the Republic of Belarus

The most important thing: it is absolutely incomprehensible how the national security of the Republic of Belarus can be ensured in general in such conditions of "Brownian flickering". Do you, gentlemen, really think that running around all the capitals in a row and shaking hands with everyone is the most reliable guarantee of national security? Seriously?

At least at the moment it is crystal clear that the Belarusians are not going to build a joint defense with the Russian Federation, because this must be done already here and now. Rather, it was necessary to start doing this the day before yesterday. Simultaneously in the military, political and propaganda spheres.

You cannot build a "joint defense" in a week. It’s clear that the Belarusian army is weak and small in number, despite the fact that it is the Republic of Belarus that borders NATO in the west. The only way out is to place similar Russian bases in Belarus in response to the deployment of American military bases in Poland and the Baltic states. What other solutions do you suggest? The Armed Forces of the Republic of Belarus have neither the means nor the forces to independently fend off threats from NATO.

But even that “hypothetical and theoretical” base of the Aerospace Forces was met in Belarus literally with hostility. But in general, if we take this issue seriously, then this base alone is extremely insufficient. There, in the Republic of Belarus, it is necessary to begin to deploy an entire combined-arms grouping. Thousands of soldiers and hundreds of pieces of equipment already have on Belarusian territory. Because even in the event of a strike from the Poles, the organized resistance of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Belarus can end without starting (in a few hours), the forces are so incomparable. The unmobilized Belarusian army will simply be shot from the air at the points of permanent deployment.

Considering the "popularity" of Lukashenka's regime, no one will rush to besiege the recruiting stations. In principle, Alexander Grigorievich felt that the clouds were gathering on the horizon, and began to regularly conduct "calls for reservists", which caused a sharply negative assessment of society. And the regime is already completely unpopular. And the rich-vector pacifist propaganda did its job.

And the most important thing: the modern Belarusian army has neither modern technology, nor experience in modern warfare. Thirty years have gone ... no, not in vain, in the red. Lukashenka wanted to ensure the security of the Republic of Belarus exclusively on his own (after 15 years of complete oblivion of the army), but this is impossible in the modern world, and he does not want to closely alliance with Russia.

And by the way, yes, for example, the Chinese and Arabs were allocated plots of land for a long-term lease and under full control, but no one yells or yells about it at every corner. For example, the same China has already entered Belarus very tightly, but for some strange reason Comrade Xi Jinping is in no hurry to take RB on the balance sheet. And he does not supply weapons for free.

That is, as it were, Alexander Grigorievich's “friends” are “full of room”, but in case of problems and complications, for some reason he runs to Moscow, and not somewhere else. And why, strictly speaking, such "selectivity"? The strategic partner of the PRC could well re-equip the Belarusian army according to its own standards and at its own expense, but somehow it is in no hurry to do this.

The desire of the leadership of the Republic of Belarus to preserve its sovereignty is understandable. But now is not the era of the USSR - the United States, when the Americans could not easily take and attack, for example, Yugoslavia. Neither the USSR nor the RF had any allied obligations in relation to the SFRY. Well, something like this. During the period of confrontation between the OVD and NATO, such a balancing act of different Switzerland, Sweden, Yugoslavia and even France was kind of possible. Not today.

The world has changed. The United States does not respect the neutrality of others, simply demonstratively. They trample him in the mud and spit from above. For example, the demonstrative murder of an Iranian general, and especially the strange death of a Ukrainian (!) Airline airliner after a missile attack, is proof of this. Belarus will not be able to play “neutrality”. She will not be able to run back and forth either. The world has become too cruel and concrete. It was theoretically impossible to imagine an air defeat of Yugoslavia in 1984. And yes, Russia was not at all obliged to save her in 1991. No way.

If anyone does not remember, the security service of the great country of Ukraine forced the Belavia liner to return to Kiev, threatening to destroy it otherwise. How did the proud and independent Belarus react? No way. Not at all. The Belarusians swallowed it without chewing. Are you firmly convinced that this state will be able to protect its citizens in the event of a serious military conflict? Absolutely?

Comments

[Lech from Android.]

Here's an ally ... after the latest events, it becomes clear that something needs to be changed in relations with him. It cannot last so long ... Bolivar will not stand two.

[rocket757]

Quote: Lech from Android.

Bolivar will not stand two.

and we, from the outside, know what that Bolivar wants?
I doubt very much ... all the more, one bolivar has already been overestimated and ours now get only "apples" and not at all in bloom!

[Lech from Android.]

Bolivar is a union state ... Russia is on it and Lukashenka is riding on Russia ... this is how it looks now.

[rocket757]

Quote: Lech from Android.

Bolivar is a union state

Bolivar is a little like a workhorse ... because his grooms do not work together.
One groom feeds him, and the other ...

[Sanichsan]

Quote: rocket757

One groom feeds him, and the other ...

and the other is training. and he listens to the campaign of the one who trains

[rocket757]

Quote: SanichSan

Quote: rocket757

One groom feeds him, and the other ...

and the other is training. and he listens to the campaign of the one who trains

don't tell my slippers ... another one jumps around and begs for everything, doing nothing that he should, and even puts thorns under the saddle cloth ...

[Uncle Izya]

I think the radar will remain with Russia, maybe I will charge a fee for it. Why are you silent about Kazakhstan there, too, Russia paid for it only recently refused. The Volga radar station sees 4800 km and there is no replacement for it, it is modular and digital

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Uncle Izya

I think the radar will remain with Russia, maybe I will charge a fee for it. Why are you silent about Kazakhstan there, too, Russia paid for it only recently refused. The Volga radar station sees 4800 km and there is no replacement for it, it is modular and digital

The Volga sector has already been closed by two Voronezhs (range up to 6000 km) - Armavir and Kaliningrad.

[Uncle Izya]

No, this is not so, they all do not reach the Volga. Wolf is still an aiming radar for 235 missile systems, this is the Russian generals themselves said. If there was a replacement, they would probably have abandoned it as a Kazakh

[Uncle Izya]

NOO read

[Cyril G ...]

Kazakh and Belorussian Volga in the working sector and even more in the range ALREADY REPLACED Voronezh.

[smart fellow]

The author is a provocateur.

[Lech from Android.]

The author says everything correctly ... the abscess is ripe and he just opened it.

[smart fellow]

The author tried (extremely unsuccessfully) to bring a theoretical basis under the fact that Belarus is an empty place and Lukashenko should lick Putin's ass in order to preserve the state or, even better, to annex Belarus to Russia. The problem is that Lukashenka is a national leader and is trying to preserve the independence of Belarus, surrounded by strong "friends". His biggest "friend" now is China, because it is very rich and, most importantly, cannot, for geographic reasons, reunite Belarus with China.

[Lech from Android.]

Lukashenka is an empty place ... it's a fact. I can only say good things about Belarusians.

[smart fellow]

Very convincing.

[Lech from Android.]

Well, you have to judge by deeds Lukashenka did not support Russia in the Crimea, the LPNR ... he crap on the sly at the same time ... what an ally he is to us ... such an empty place. There is no need to prove anything.

[smart fellow]

Well, he is a national leader, not a pro-Russian one. Makes as Belarus better, not Russia. Then, to make it clear, write that he is an empty place as an ally.

[Same lech]

Then, to make it clear, write that he is an empty place as an ally.

Excuse my puncture.
I see Lukashenka's role as an ally ... so far there is no reason to consider him an ally of Russia.

[Cyril G ...]

Refusal to deploy 12 Su-27 Russian Aerospace Forces on the territory of Belarus, what do you think? Blackmail regarding the supply of MZKT special transporters for the Strategic Missile Forces is not an anti-Russian gesture? And that's only for the military part ...
By the way, I inform you that a special carrier for ICBMs made in Minsk and with our motor, by the way, costs more than 2/3 of the price of the Su-30cm

[Sidor Amenpodestovich]

Quote: smart fellow

Lukashenko is a national leader and tries to preserve the independence of Belarus

Please explain to me why Belarus needs independence?

[smart fellow]

Probably for the same as Russia.

[Sidor Amenpodestovich]

Comparing Russia and Belarus is like comparing GAZelle and Belaz, with all due respect to Belarus. The scale is too different.
Russia is the largest country on the planet with a thousand-year history. This is reality. And Belarus is not even Poland. Alas, this is so.
Can you call Poland independent?
Can Belarus be independent in fact, and not in words? That is, can it exist in isolation, and not in the orbit of large states?

[smart fellow]

Therefore, Lukashenka is building a multi-vector policy and building relations with China and the United States as a counterweight to Russia. It's like the Non-Aligned Movement in the era of a bipolar world.
Will it work or not? Nothing in this world lasts forever. Germany united, the USSR collapsed. Maybe the United States will disintegrate or the dollar will cease to be the main international settlement currency.

[Sidor Amenpodestovich]

Quote: smart fellow

Therefore, Lukashenka is building a multi-vector policy and building relations with China and the United States as a counterweight to Russia.

That is, Lukashenka is trying, so to speak, to gain a foothold in a certain point of libration between Russia, China and the United States, thus maintaining immobility-independence.
But this is just a semblance of independence, which will continue exactly as long as no one really needs Belarus. And as soon as it is needed, it will be immediately taken away, and no opinion will be asked ..

[Same lech]

Yanukovych also built this multi-vector approach ... ended in failure.

[Cyril G ...]

It's a fetish so multi-vector

[abrakadabre]

It's a fetish so multi-vector

This is not a fetish. This is a price list. Like ... girls with low social responsibility. When different services are rendered for a certain fee: this way, on the other hand, and for gourmets ... But for a different amount.

[Olezhek]

Therefore, Lukashenko is building a multi-vector policy and building relations with China and the United States as a counterweight to Russia.

An old question: why should Russia finance this very "multi-vector policy"?
Let China catch up.

[Sanichsan]

Quote: Olezhek

Let China catch up.

Duc has already pulled up As a result, Belarus owes a lot of money. while they do not think about super-profitable projects with China ..

[Cyril G ...]

Quote: smart fellow

It's like the Non-Aligned Movement in the era of a bipolar world.

It ALREADY doesn't work like that ...

[gsev]

Quote: smart fellow

builds relations with China and the United States as a counterweight to Russia.

And what is the prospect for Lukashenka of betting on China to the detriment of Russia? China does not need competitors in consumer goods. He has already crushed the television industry in Belarus, Crushed the production of programmable controllers in Belarus, and crushed the tractor and machine-tool industry. The last one in the next 10 years. That is why China is getting richer, because it buys from partners only what can be bought from them cheaper and gas barter - the status of a sibling for an official does not go. Another thing is that our oligarchs privatized factories in Russia for vouchers or cheaply, and they think that in other countries they will be provided with similar conditions. But this will not happen in other countries.

[Roman123567]

Russia is the largest country on the planet with a thousand-year history. This is reality. And Belarus is not even Poland.

So what?? In general, how does this affect independence ??
Can you only want her after 1000 years of history ??

Can you call Poland independent?

I can say that in terms of living standards the Poles are definitely not worse than the Russians .. So maybe we better learn something from them ..

[Olezhek]

So what?? In general, how does this affect independence ??
Can you only want her after 1000 years of history ??

Tell your Chinese friends about it
Make them laugh

[Roman123567]

What does Chinese friends have to do with it ??
And the Chinese want to be independent, and we ... The Belarusians want the same ...
Even the Balts, who cannot be found on the map, still want it ..
So I didn't understand the message about the thousand-year history .. How it should influence ..

[Cyril G ...]

Quote: Roman123567

So maybe we'd better learn something from them ..

Worth it. How can you live at the expense of the European Union and shit on it in the name of the Washington master.

[Roman123567]

Why do we need it ??
Specifically for me - what's the difference, Putin rules me, or we "lie down to the west", and some Trump will dispose of everything in this territory ??
I think. in the second option, it could even be better .. But no .. everyone is drowning for independence ..))

PS .. although there are few people who would agree to fight for Putin now ..

[Same lech]

Specifically for me - what's the difference, Putin rules me, or we "lie under the west",

In the West, African Americans will force you to kneel ... you will repent to them ... after them LGBT representatives will come up to you with a demand to participate in a rear-wheel drive parade.

[Roman123567]

Is this Putin's TV talking about this ??)
Well, you really shouldn't stoop to believing in such nonsense ...
The same Poles / Balts do not fall to their knees (we do not take ukrov into account, they do it by itself) .. and the Japanese / South Koreans do not arrange LGBT gangs to please someone ..
It is clear that the West has been frightening us for dozens of years, that they dream of seizing our resources, and so on and so forth .. But, sometimes you have to at least turn your head away from the box and look with your own eyes ..))

[Same lech]

Is this Putin's TV talking about this ??)

No, this is what I saw with my own eyes ... in the videos laid out by this part of the society of people.
Seen enough of these nasty things before belching.

[Roman123567]

Well, they put a lot of things in the videos ..
We have over there the National Guard in the rollers kicking people worse than African-Americans ..
There are even parcels about how some of our comrades with the whole family moved from Germany and wanted to live in Siberia .. he also complained that the children there at school are taught all tolerance .. True, after a few days he somehow ran back there ..) ) And even such "videos" - one or two and miscalculated ..
But half of the world somehow lives "under the West", and do not complain ..

[Same lech]

Well, to each his own ... like to live under rear-wheel drive let them live.
Moreover, complaints against LGBT people in some countries are already considered as a violation of the law ... as an attempt on the rights of gays and lesbians.

[Roman123567]

like to live under rear wheel drive let them live.

Again .. we pass off our words as reality ..))

[Sanichsan]

Quote: Roman123567

Is this Putin's TV talking about this ??)

not. they were convinced in the 90s. it looks like you did not find it. we do not want to repeat it categorically.

Quote: Roman123567

It is clear that the West has been frightening us for decades

scare? Yes, they gave me a chance to taste .. and .. understood .. you mean yourself. Well, listen to the elders once, the idea is completely rubbish. checked.

[Okolotochny]

a big "friend" he has now China because he is very rich

And why then does he not demand money from China with a cry and cry? Or is it only possible from Russia? Kind and forgive? Remember, if China gives you money, it will take the SOUL from you for them !!!

[avdkrd]

Quote: smart fellow

The author tried (extremely unsuccessfully) to bring a theoretical basis under the fact that Belarus is an empty place and Lukashenka should lick his ass to Putin in order to preserve the state or, even better, to annex Belarus to Russia

Why is it unsuccessful, very successful. All theses of the author are correct. Lukoshenko is not a national leader, whatever you mean, but a dictator who is very afraid of losing power. As a state, apart from Russia, Belarus cannot exist, its industry and agriculture are not needed in Europe. Capitalism however. Lukashenko is a deceitful and inconsistent politician. Really, why does Russia need such an ally? There is no political support, the military-technical aspect is present, but precisely because they are given the market. The Armed Forces of Belarus are not allies in the literal sense. Trade only. In the event of a complete rupture, there is nothing that Russian industry cannot master. Of course, at first it will be difficult, but Russia will survive it, there is experience, but the Belarusian factories, having lost their customer, will very quickly end their existence. In general, Lukoshenko behaves completely Ukrainian-Russia owes him brotherly, and he does nothing in return. It is sad that the Belarusian opposition has a clearly pro-Western orientation (maybe I don’t know something), it seems to me that our diplomats will again react to events, and not shape them. The Belarusian people will remain the losers, but who will be interested? If Lukashenka leaves, we will simply have to curtail military-technical cooperation, since everything will be poured into the West.
We need Belarus, but as a military-political ally, not a beggar donor, and economic integration is needed to a greater extent by Belarus itself.

[Lara Croft]

Quote: smart fellow

The problem is that Lukashenka is a national leader and is trying to preserve the independence of Belarus, surrounded by strong "friends".

And what is the use of the Russian Federation from this "national leader"? Let them lick the ass of the protesters, and then hang them on the lantern ... whoever ... will then lick the people of the Republic of Bashkortostan I don't care, but neither the Russian Federation nor our oligarchs of the Republic of Belarus will write off the debts, that's for sure ...

[Pessimist22]

It is necessary, as Lukashenko says, to switch to partnership relations and count every penny and that's it.

[Lech from Android.]

What are you Lukashenka has enough kondrashka ... the end of the freebie will come.

[carstorm 11]

Yes, in fact, he began to hysteria when in the Russian Federation they finally decided to clearly delineate the relationship. integration so let's conduct and not chat. and at the same moment the roof of my father was completely blown off.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Pessimist22

It is necessary, as Lukashenko says, to switch to partnership relations and count every penny and that's it.

Sovereign state - sovereign prices.

© LADIES

[Vladimir61]

Don't like this union? Get out of it.

The question is logical and completely independent of the influence of the "Kremlin" on the decision. It's up to the little, to make a decision and not just "who to be with", but "for whom not to regret his belly"! And a neutral ally is worse than an enemy, since there are no traitors among enemies ... And there is a lot of fuss with such an ally. In peacetime, at least feed, at least feed, but in trouble beware and look around.

[Ros 56]

There is no need to blame the allies, our own political leadership seems to me to be kindergarten cooks. Have you not gained your mind in thirty years? Everyone believes in some kind of fairy tales about brothers, hasn't the experience of the USSR taught anything?

[Lech from Android.]

Our political leadership lives in a different reality. Sometimes it is useful for them to read what people write on social networks.

[Old tanker]

The author is probably not aware of the existence of a regional grouping of troops of the Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation and its Joint Command. The grouping includes the fully Armed Forces of the Republic of Belarus and one of our western armies. About the fact that every two years, in odd years, operational and operational-strategic exercises of this grouping are conducted. Moreover, alternately on the territory of one or another country. So there are plans for the joint use of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Belarus and the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and are being specifically worked out. He personally took part in such operational exercises. Not to mention the East European Joint Regional Air Defense System (Russia and Belarus). So the military has allied relations and interaction. But the fact that the politicians of our countries look in different directions, so it is necessary not to reproach the Belarusians, but our government. Otherwise, we are used to hearing about Putin's successes in foreign policy, but with the example of "fraternal" Ukraine and Belarus, not successes, but complete failures. As in the economy.

[The leader of the Redskins]

The author described the economic and political situation in the 90s so easily that I wanted to ask how old he was. One phrase that for that forgiven debt it was possible to build new bases, which is worth it.
However, neither this, nor the new "Crimea" was built, nor any, in general, for the same banal reason - there was no money! For people, something like enough, not to fat. And he is so light stroke of the pen - ah !.
The same Cam Ranh had to be left for Vietnam for economic reasons.

[Olezhek]

- the political situation of the 90s, that I wanted to ask how old he is. One phrase that for that forgiven debt it was possible to build new bases, which is worth it.
However, neither these nor the new "Crimea" began to be built, nor any, in general, for the same banal reason - there was no money

Money had to be taken from Belarusians
Return the debt for gas.
And everyone is happy.

[ghby]

Quote: Old Tankman

So there are plans for the joint use of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Belarus and the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and are being specifically worked out. He personally took part in such operational exercises. Not to mention the East European Joint Regional Air Defense System (Russia and Belarus). So the military has allied relations and interaction.

can the military do much if civilians do not support them, and sometimes even harm them?
Double life (the military are friends, and the civilians are pushed together) does not lead to good, schizophrenia can develop and will be packed in a mental hospital. By the way, Kazakhstan suffers from this.

[Olezhek]

The author is probably not aware of the existence of a regional grouping of troops of the Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation and its Joint Command. The group includes the fully Armed Forces of the Republic of Belarus

Yes, and to whom does it report, your "group" ???
Have you heard anything about the principle of one-man management?

[akunin]

That is, as it were, Alexander Grigorievich's “friends” are “full of room”, but in case of problems and complications, for some reason he runs to Moscow, and not somewhere else. And why, strictly speaking, such "selectivity"?

because
accept, listen, soothe + feed and drink only here (the rest do not need it). In the last interview, Gordon called Putin "older brother" - justified himself. You need to be friends with everyone, but mutually beneficial (more specifically, if it is beneficial to you). Now the position of the Belarusian is interesting society after the announcement of the election results.
announced a boycott of Belarusian goods - I stopped drinking "bulbash", eating cheese and sour cream, I don't buy Belarusian shoes.

[iouris]

We must raise the question of the preservation (survival) of the Russian people. The states in which there are more Russians (in percentage terms) than the Russian Federation are becoming anti-Russians.

[Roman123567]

"Misunderstandings" with the national security of the Republic of Belarus

The most important thing: it is absolutely incomprehensible how the national security of the Republic of Belarus can be ensured in general in such conditions of "Brownian flickering". Do you, gentlemen, really think that running around all the capitals in a row and shaking hands with everyone is the most reliable guarantee of national security? Seriously?

At least at the moment it is crystal clear that the Belarusians are not going to build a joint defense with the Russian Federation,

They don't need any defense ...
Who to defend against ?? There is no oil there, so the US will not bomb them .. And in any case, the Russian Federation would have harnessed itself in that case !!
And why spend money on weapons ?? In Europe, there are countries that are much richer, and have no defense ... even in comparison with Belarus ..
You can live not only with tanks and planes ..

[Olezhek]

They don't need any defense ...
Who to defend against ?? There is no oil there,

Is there a presence in Serbia?

[Roman123567]

And what were the reasons for the war in Serbia ??

According to the Russian Balkan historian and member of the Senate of the Republika Srpska (Bosnia and Herzegovina) E. Yu. Guskova, NATO's goals in the war were as follows:

change of leadership in Serbia and Montenegro, its reorientation to the West
division of Serbia and Montenegro, transformation of Kosovo into an independent state
elimination of the armed forces of Yugoslavia
free deployment of NATO forces on the territory of Kosovo, Serbia and Montenegro
rallying NATO, testing its military power, testing new weapons and destroying old
demonstrating to Europe the importance of NATO, creating a precedent for the use of military force without the consent of the UN Security Council.

And how could Serbia have avoided this ??

The most important thing: it is absolutely incomprehensible how the national security of the Republic of Belarus can be ensured in general in such conditions of "Brownian flickering". Do you, gentlemen, really think that running around all the capitals in a row and shaking hands with everyone is the most reliable guarantee of national security? Seriously?

Militarily counter NATO bombing ?? Seriously??
IMHO, neither Serbia nor the Republic of Belarus is the wrong level .. it's better to run and shake hands ..

PS .. I think it would be appropriate to explain .. that "defend" in this case is only logical for the president .. He is losing his chair !! No one is going to seize and conquer the people .. And Lukashenko understands perfectly well that the Russian Federation will not allow NATO to bombard Minsk .. So I don’t think he needs to spend money on defense ..
This is from the category of the Baltic states .. which invests 2% of GDP in NATO .. ​​For them, it’s nothing, but money .. But three tanks still do not play a role against us ..))

[ccsr]

In general, I completely agree with the opinion of the author of the article, but I think that some of the conclusions the author makes are not entirely correct. For example, he writes:

It is precisely on the example of Vileika and Gantsevichi that the complete futility of cooperation with Belarus becomes clear. There are two military facilities (not bases!), Mostly Belarusian personnel work there. These objects are also protected by Belarusians. Lethal weapons are not there. That is, by and large, in the Hamburg score, Vileika and Gantsevichi are a trifle that does not deserve special mention.

First, the author forgets that these objects represent elements of the strategic component of the Russian armed forces, which means that this is far from a trifle.
Secondly, such structures cannot be located on the territory of other states, and in this case, the author is right that they must be transferred to our territory in any scenario, regardless of costs, because our retaliatory strike, at least by forces, depends on them first of all. Navy.
Thirdly, we do not have the right to feed the Belarusian personnel, pay for communal services and other expenses of Belarus at the expense of our budget, because it is much more profitable for us to host all this and spend budget money inside our country.
In general, the transfer of these facilities to our territory is impossible, except for the removal of some equipment, and therefore the benefit to our military-industrial complex from the development and creation of new systems is obvious, and this is understood by all specialists who know how much it costs to modernize such unique facilities on a foreign territory.
Well, and most importantly, it's time to put the presumptuous collective farmer in his place so that he does not whine in the future that he gave us something for free - let him have the Soviet legacy, we will do without him. But how he will feel after the departure of our units, the question is certainly interesting, otherwise it may happen and will not sit out until the end of the new presidential term, like Yanukovych, for example ...

[Alexey RA]

Quote: ccsr

In general, the transfer of these facilities to our territory is impossible, except for the removal of some equipment, and therefore the benefit to our military-industrial complex from the development and creation of new systems is obvious, and this is understood by all specialists who know how much it costs to modernize such unique facilities on a foreign territory.

The communication center can still be moved (antennas + equipment). But the early warning radar, I'm afraid, can only be dismantled. Fortunately, now this can already be done - its sector is closed with two new radars, and in a few years the third will be pulled up.

[ccsr]

Quote: Alexey RA

The communication center can still be moved (antennas + equipment).

The antenna system in this range is so huge that one dismantling it will cost a pretty penny. So the question is only in the reasonable calculation of specialists - is it advisable to do this or not. I think from the experience of past years, it is cheaper to leave him than to drag him to Russia.

[Olezhek]

The antenna system in this range is so huge that one dismantling it will cost a pretty penny. So the question is only in the reasonable calculation of specialists - is it advisable to do this or not.

First, the author forgets that these objects represent elements of the strategic component of the Russian armed forces, which means that this is far from a trifle.
Secondly, such structures cannot be located on the territory of other states.

Such objects cannot be kept on the territory of unfriendly states. More dear to yourself.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: ccsr

I think from the experience of past years, it is cheaper to leave him than to drag him to Russia.

You can't throw it - you will be invoiced for recycling and reclamation.

[ccsr]

Quote: Alexey RA

You can't throw it - you will be invoiced for recycling and reclamation.

They will not put it out - there is so much good there that they themselves will gladly take it away. By the way, the Germans screamed a lot that we owe them supposedly for utilization during the withdrawal of the GSVG, and nevertheless they did not allow us to sell our scrap metal to other countries, because they knew that they would get it for free. And so it happened in the end, they then cleverly cheated us.

[sleeve]

There is an old tradition in Russia to love "friends" before committing suicide. A couple of times this suicide happened ... During the rest of the "lull", such "love" tore out of the lives of thousands of soldiers who took part in the adventures. I will keep silent about money and resources in the form of help and gifts. In the version of Belarus, it seems to me there is no content in the form of the words "ally", "union". Here is pure backwardness, thickly smeared with ingratitude. For Belarus can only emphasize its independence and solvency by showing its boorish attitude towards Russia. In its purest form, a child's adolescent syndrome of conflict with parents, and of the issue of "maintenance responsibilities". As for the Belarusians, of course, complete and reckless respect for the history of the long-suffering people. But history does not stand still and new generations are forced to prove their right to much in this world. Belarus cannot raise anyone other than Lukashenka to power. And this is her right. But then his rudeness and ingratitude towards Russia are part of the character of the electorate. Or is it a forced patience from the understanding that there is simply no other "evolutionary" leader? Well, let at least this gratitude be expressed, at the national level, it will become a factor that the authorities will have to put up with. No. It doesn't. This means that part of the public mood is the desire to "bend Russia" and spit on it, believing that this will support their own significance.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: sleeve

For Belarus can only emphasize its independence and solvency by showing its boorish attitude towards Russia. In its purest form, a child's adolescent syndrome of conflict with parents, and of the issue of "maintenance responsibilities".

By the way, yes, very similar:
That's what, ancestors - I'm an adult now, so pay me my rent, give me money for expenses, but don't dare tell me what to do!

[Cyril G ...]

Quote: Alexey RA

That's what, ancestors - I'm an adult now, so pay me my rent, give me money for expenses, but don't dare tell me what to do!

Not so much.
"I'm an adult now, but don't you dare tell me what to do! And I don't have to report to you." Well, a little later, in an undertone - "and since you are my parents, you are obliged to pay me rent and give me money for expenses" .............

[Knell wardenheart]

We had a bunch of objects in the CIS countries, and from everywhere we left in the end, because the local authorities were borzels and sucked money out of us insolently. Each such "nerve" on foreign territory is every time a trump card in some kind of hysterical writhing of neighbors in getting gesheft out of our relations. We responded with kefir-wine-milk-gas wars, which looked humiliating from any point of view.
However, is any addiction good? We disbanded the elites of our allies, and they mobilized and disbanded their own population, looking more and more westward. And while there is no war - yes, in words many of them will be "like allies" - but how will they smell fried, do you think they will harness? Or they will put pressure on the elderly authoritarians, who will instantly drive these objects at the most inopportune moment "under the pressure of the masses."

We are wasting money on this stupid paper-and-paper union. We have everything we need ourselves, on our territory. And we must spend money here, and resources. We must involve them - Ukrainian, Belarusian, Kazakh - the best minds to work for us and for us, for everything else that they have - we must put from a haystack. Let them whine and scream endlessly burrowing into history, let them demolish monuments and write disgusting articles - let them twist with the west - no need to give them a penny, no need to play an extra in their pitiful productions. We are a serious country, and we constantly sink to this level of "boys from the district".

[mace]

There is a lot of anti-Belarusian material on this resource.
Let's start with the fact that the Republic of Belarus, although a former republic of the USSR and our closest ally, is still an independent state. Do you know many independent states that will gladly place our bases and build a common missile defense system?
Don't like that an independent state? Well, say thanks to EBN and his court jester. They did everything to finally ward off the former republics of the USSR from Russia.

[Olezhek]

There is a lot of anti-Belarusian material on this resource.

Have you heard about the arrests of Russians on the territory of the "last and best sayuznik"?
What do you say, my dear?

Let's start with the fact that the Republic of Belarus, although the former republic of the USSR and our closest ally

An old question - where is she an ally ??
Where? When?

Do you know many independent states that will gladly place our bases and build a common missile defense system?

Belarus in the era of independence did not place a damn Russian bases
This is the legacy of the USSR

Don't like that an independent state?

Like. Quite. We must stop looking into our pocket. And everything will be the way.

[mace]

Have you heard about the arrests of Russians on the territory of the "last and best sayuznik"?
What do you say, my dear?

The situation is cloudy. The competent authorities will figure it out.

An old question - where is she an ally ??
Where? When?

I don't even want to comment on this. In fact, this is the only republic of the former USSR with which an official union treaty has been signed and various military exercises are being conducted in the western direction.

Belarus in the era of independence did not place a damn Russian bases
This is the legacy of the USSR

Yes, but only in the Baltics, instead of Soviet bases, NATO bases are now ...

Like. Quite. We must stop looking into our pocket. And everything will be the way.

A purely philistine position. Any state that has at least some foreign policy ambitions invests in its progress and in strengthening these very positions. In "your pocket", judging by your logic, Armenia is also getting into Syria. Can't invest? And what does he say about the United States, which generally buys everyone left and right. For beautiful eyes, no one will give their territory for bases.

[Old26]

Quote: Uncle Izya

I think the radar will remain with Russia, maybe I will charge a fee for it. Why are you silent about Kazakhstan there, too, Russia paid for it only recently refused. The Volga radar station sees 4800 km and there is no replacement for it, it is modular and digital

Why is it needed there? It was erected when there was a problem with our station in Skrunda. Now this direction is being closed by the Voronezh-DM radar in the Kaliningrad region, plus the sectors are overlapped by the Voronezh-DM radar in Armavir, the Voronezh-M meter in Lekhtusi, and in the future - Voronezh in Sevastopol.
In addition, all of the Volga's hardware is made IN UKRAINE. Are you sure she will upgrade this radar?

Quote: Uncle Izya

No, this is not so, they all do not reach the Volga. Wolf is still an aiming radar for 235 missile systems, this is the Russian generals themselves said. If there was a replacement, they would probably have abandoned it as a Kazakh

The targeting radar for the missile defense system is the Don radar in the Moscow region, not the Volga in Belarus. And the range of the Voronezh exceeds that of the Volga. There is a replacement, as there was a replacement for the Kazakh Dnipro, but ours were pulling something. And you can close the Volga at least tomorrow. This is not a trump card in the sleeve of Belarus

Quote: Uncle Izya

NOO read

Exactly. Teach the MATCH, and do not write outright stupidity

Quote: Olezhek

Such objects cannot be kept on the territory of unfriendly states. More dear to yourself.

When they were placed, it was the territory of one of the union republics.

[1536]

Quote: Lech from Android.

Here's an ally ... after the latest events, it becomes clear that something needs to be changed in relations with him. It cannot last so long ... Bolivar will not stand two.

What a "ally" there! You have to pay money and a lot so that military facilities remain, and not nod at some kind of "brotherly friendship"

[xomaNN]

But father's partner is difficult and often muddy. Therefore, it is hardly necessary to consider it as a potential allied pre-field. Rather like a blank spot in the defense lines. And the line is at the level of Smolensk ...