Military Review

Few of the new NATO strategy


The other day, Russian officials announced that from August this year, the first military facility of the North Atlantic Alliance will start operating in Russia from 1. Transportation of US military cargo to the territory of Afghanistan through Russia began in 2009 year. And only after almost three years, the first object of the transatlantic alliance was opened in the center of Eurasia.

Experts say that on the one hand, it can be considered a great achievement for the Western military bloc, but as for Russia ... What kind of success can you say if a military-political and socio-economic network has emerged and is actively developing on Russian territory, which will contribute promoting American interests.

The project, launched in Ulyanovsk, became a kind of continuation of the military network that the United States jointly created in NATO in the Central Asian region. But if we compare it with what was happening and is happening in Syria or Libya, then in this case a different approach takes place. This time, instead of bombing and assisting opposition forces, NATO and the United States decided, roughly speaking, to buy the enemy (which, by the way, turned out to be more effective and less painful than a military conflict). Moreover, the NATO side put forward very weighty arguments, in particular, the fact that Russian business earns additional income, good funds are received in the state budget, and people receive new jobs.

As is known, America and NATO are seeking to promote their interests in the Eurasian zone with the help of two main projects - the Northern Supply Network and the Modern Silk Road.

Initially, the Northern Supply Network was formed to transport non-military goods to Afghanistan that were intended to supply coalition troops, as well as to restore the state. This path passed through the territory of Russia and the countries of Central Asia. However, the Taliban made periodic attacks on cargoes shipped through Pakistan, which resulted in significant delays in the supply of equipment, supplies and food. Therefore, more and more NATO strategists turned their attention to the North Asian states, where the situation looked stably calm.

NATO got the opportunity to use the northern route more actively for deliveries only after Barack Obama was elected as the head of state in the United States, and also after the warming of relations between Russia and America. So, judging that relations are improving, it is possible by the fact that in July the government of Kyrgyzstan (Russia at the same time was prudently silent) made the decision to preserve the American military base in Manas and its subsequent transformation into a transit point of transportation. Also, after the meeting between the presidents of the United States and the Russian Federation took place in July, during which agreements were reached on the transit of military cargo, it was also possible to transport them through Russian territory using ground and air transport. In October last year, the first test flight was already carried out.

In addition, according to a statement by Tom Tanner, the official representative of the US Embassy in Astana, the US government also entered into contracts for the transportation of goods through the territories of Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. In addition, an agreement was reached in February on the use of roads and railways in Tajikistan to transport nonmilitary goods. But, nevertheless, they are not planned to be used yet, because the situation in certain regions of the country is not very favorable. Thus, the only state that has not yet concluded contracts for transit with the Americans is Turkmenistan. According to information from hotel sources, the official Turkmen authorities have so far given permission only for the transportation of large quantities of fuel for NATO air forces.

As the special representative of the Secretary General of the Alliance for Central Asia and the Caucasus, Robert Simmonson, notes, transportation of cargo through Turkmenistan is quite possible, but it is unlikely to be needed, since there are whole 8 direct railway routes passing through Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan to Afghanistan.

In addition to agreements with the United States, Russia also allowed the transportation of goods through its territory to other member states of the military bloc - Spain, France and Germany.

France concluded an agreement on military transport with the Kazakh government back in October, when Nicolas Sarkozy arrived in the country on an official visit. Expectations for the extension of agreements between Spain, France and Kyrgyzstan should be expected. As for the agreements with the government of Uzbekistan, according to US Assistant Secretary of State for Asian Affairs R. Blake, despite the absence of signed documents, the negotiations can be considered successful.

Thus, it is obvious that the northern supply network, which is designed to secure the position of the alliance in Afghanistan, takes certain outlines. The key links of this network are Russia, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan.

But with such a scenario, according to Paul Queen-Judge (director of the project of the International Crisis Group for Central Asia), the new network will become the main goal of Islamic militants. Therefore, new, more serious problems may arise, in particular, the transition of Central Asia into one of the components of the zones of military conflict. As a result, the situation may destabilize not only in the northern regions of Afghanistan, but also in neighboring states, in which the internal political and socio-economic situation is unstable.

According to experts, the reorientation of NATO from the south to the north is the main reason for the intensification of the Islamic opposition forces in Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, which could be observed last year. This is an attack on the building of the National Security Service and the Department of Internal Affairs in Uzbekistan, a series of explosions in Andijan, which the Union of Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for. By the way, it is this organization that was involved in the terrorist attacks in Tashkent in 2003-2004, when several dozen civilians were killed.

Experts suggest that the increased instability in the Central Asian region is associated with the activities of the armed Islamic opposition forces that are stationed in Pakistan and Afghanistan. The exact number of participants in these forces is unknown.

Nevertheless, the destabilization of the situation directly affects the interests of the Russian Federation, because four countries - Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan - are joining the Treaty Organization and the Collective Security Rights Organization. One of the articles of this treaty states that an attack on one of the participants of the Organization will be perceived as an attack on all member countries, so they will be forced to assist the affected ally, including military.

Signs that the situation in Afghanistan has destabilized are already very visible. So, for example, last September, militants seized tanks with fuel, in response, the US air force conducted a series of rocket-bombing attacks on militant bases. Not without casualties among the civilian population, killed about 60 people. A little later, an attempt was made to attack the Uzbek militants who were in the north of Afghanistan, but the operation had very modest results. The official reports very vaguely spoke of a certain number of disarmed militants and the discovery of several warehouses. weapons.

In addition, in the northern provinces of Afghanistan there is also an internal political inter-ethnic conflict, which is clearly not conducive to stabilizing the situation in the country.

If we take into account that the events in Afghanistan and other Central Asian states are interconnected, and this connection will consist not only in common, very weak borders, but also in interethnic, religious and clan relations. Thus, there is a real threat of the transformation of all these states into a single zone of military conflict with an increasing deterioration of the military-political situation. Therefore, the efforts that Russia is making in the framework of the CSTO to strengthen the military component and create a powerful army in the near future may be very useful.

Modern Silk Road has repeatedly become the topic of discussion and heated debate at the international level. It is a gigantic network of all kinds of communications, from pipelines, transportation and power grids to telecommunications. It must be immediately emphasized that America is particularly interested in building this route bypassing the Russian Federation, and thus preventing any other state from having a monopoly on the infrastructure of the states of Central Asia. The project provides for the connection of transport and energy lines of South and Central Asia, railways and highways, gas pipelines. As such, it is mutually beneficial, both for China and for the United States. But if China was guided primarily by economic interests, the American government has a great political interest.

Note that the Silk Road project is not new. It appeared back in the Middle Ages, when the Chinese delivered their goods to Europe. The route was in effect until the Ottoman Turks cut it. Currently this beautiful historical America and NATO are actively using the image to achieve their goals: to lead a transport corridor bypassing Russia through the territory of Central Asian states.

And although in economic terms, the benefits for Russia from cooperation with the alliance are small, the countries of Central Asia receive significant increases in their national budgets from the contract of NATO contracts, which, of course, causes dependence akin to drugs.

Thus, both the Northern Network and the Silk Road pursue very important goals: they not only help NATO and America gain access to unlimited resources of the Central Asian states, to further build their infrastructure there and export, but also contributes to the active establishment of anti-Russian sentiments in the region.

In addition, the alliance gets another strong argument in favor of building new military bases to protect the infrastructure.

Obviously, America’s strategy is to separate Asia from Russia. And if the presence of the United States and the alliance in the region is long-term, it will be possible to forget about the Eurasian Union.

And when Russia provides its territory for the construction of new NATO bases, it thereby helps the enemy to strengthen his position. After all, it is known that today Central Asia is the main platform for establishing superiority over potential adversaries - Iran, Russia and China.

Maybe the Russian government should think about joining forces with the states of Central Asia and creating a worthy alternative to the NATO infrastructure?

Materials used:

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:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. xmike
    xmike 8 August 2012 09: 31
    "Recently, Russian officials announced that the first military facility of the North Atlantic Alliance will start operating in Russia from August 1 of this year." am What's this ? warm the snake?
    They will fill us with drugs and weapons am
    1. Yars
      Yars 8 August 2012 12: 58
      stop whining and panic, the base is just a cargo transfer point and a good tool of pressure on the United States. Kohl do not know the geopolitics of the state, then there is nothing here to valat. Stop thinking straight, it's your degradation
      1. valton
        valton 11 August 2012 19: 03
        What the fuck pressure on the United States. Do you realize what you wrote? You look at how the United States, the Council of Europe and the whole of Europe are watering Russia with slops in droves. Why is there no pressure now, while this base is not open yet ??? And what pressure can we talk about later, when they are deployed here in full force?
    2. Yeraz
      Yeraz 8 August 2012 21: 03
      Yes, what does it have to do with? ?? Recently, in the company of friends I met a guy who came to us from the Altai to settle down. I asked him about border security. So he said what kind of security there are border points in several places and that’s all. and as you want and transport whatever you like, there is no control. And you are still someone in America. The border is not stupidly guarded.
  2. Vanek
    Vanek 8 August 2012 09: 34
    Today is Ulyanovsk. Tomorrow Novosibirsk. The day after tomorrow ?????
    1. Sandov
      Sandov 8 August 2012 18: 58
      Why help amers, I can’t imagine. Yes, let them all remain in the ground in Afghanistan.
      1. Vanek
        Vanek 9 August 2012 05: 38
        Quote: Sandov
        Why help amers, I can’t imagine. Yes, let them all remain in the ground in Afghanistan.

        They need help, to stay there (in the ground) am
  3. click80
    click80 8 August 2012 09: 44
    Again about the Ulyanovsk base
    Yes!!! This is the betrayal and shortsightedness of our bureaucrats.
    Yes!!! I don’t like it either, but talking about this issue will not solve anything. Everyone has already decided for us.
    And we must be ready, in constant readiness for the fact that the enemy is already among us. We must clench our fists and wait, wait, and strike at the first opportunity, and strike from the heart, so to speak with a Russian scale.
    The NATO strategy has long been clear. They cannot destroy Russia as it is, therefore they want to divide Russia.
    1. Inzhengr
      Inzhengr 8 August 2012 10: 01
      Quote: click80
      the enemy is already among us

      the enemy has long been among us, this is the one who made the decision on Ulyanovsk
    2. Andron24
      Andron24 8 August 2012 14: 30
      I do not quite agree! I still think you need more of these articles! On TV, as always, they don’t negotiate much, and the situation around the US transshipment point in Ulyanovsk received a great response only on the Internet. Despite the fact that I do not believe in terrible stories about the transfer of US troops to Russia, I still think that there is nothing good for Russia in transit of American cargo. And the agreement on these transits is nothing but a betrayal! By the way, why are there so few views? The article is worth it!
      1. Sandov
        Sandov 8 August 2012 19: 01
        Few views because it infuriates the toothlessness of our power. But we cannot influence their decisions.
  4. werr17
    werr17 8 August 2012 09: 57
    Shame ... what a shame .... crying
  5. gerome
    gerome 8 August 2012 10: 31
    On the one hand, on the other hand, it is beneficial for Russia that Afghanistan is pacified by NATO soldiers, not ours. Therefore, the provision of such a base by the United States may also meet our interests. Although, the question is of course very controversial.

    "And although in economic terms the benefits for Russia from cooperation with the alliance are small, the countries of Central Asia receive significant increases in their national budgets from contracting NATO contracts."

    In Mamontov's film "Base" about the American base in Kazakhstan, it was said that the money received by Kazakhstan from this base is actually not very large, and most of the local business serving this base belongs to American generals. I do not know how reliable this is. And the Americans behave like invaders there, which does not contribute to their popularity among the locals.
    1. marshes
      marshes 8 August 2012 10: 39
      Quote: Gerome
      Mamontov's film "Base" about the American base in Kazakhstan said

      It was about Kyrgyzstan. laughing
    2. Samovar
      Samovar 8 August 2012 11: 36
      Quote: Gerome
      And the Americans behave there like invaders, which does not contribute to their popularity among the locals.

      We would try to behave like that. Then they will score all democratic ambitions together with the M-16 in one well-known place with the butt upwards. The Germans still shudder at the mere mention of "russishen partisan", so why is America worse? And Afghan is not necessary to pacify. Close the borders, instruct the fortified areas with minefields and let them calm down there themselves.
    3. wolverine7778
      wolverine7778 8 August 2012 18: 24
      Where did you get that in Kazakhstan, and that the money received by Kazakhstan. Or are you talking about the future ???
  6. in reserve
    in reserve 8 August 2012 10: 46
    The author is right. The main goal is to separate Russia from Asia, chaos is already there and what will happen when we leave. These are even larger crowds of migrants than this hour of drugs, and Tajikistan will soon become a province of Afghanistan altogether. These specific principalities of Central Asia with their princes cannot but know how to live independently; they constantly need control.
    1. dmitreach
      dmitreach 8 August 2012 12: 45
      Tajiks are an occasion for a civil war in Afghanistan. On the basis of what will Afghanistan unite? Hate and jihad ideas? Drug production? Amers will leave and Afghanistan will turn into Somalia.
  7. Kolyan 2
    Kolyan 2 8 August 2012 10: 51
    Full scribe, they need to be driven by a filthy broom.
  8. Barrel
    Barrel 8 August 2012 11: 19
    Give Anu, remind us of the joint teachings with America!
  9. Alex_dnepr
    Alex_dnepr 8 August 2012 11: 52
    In my opinion, the last phrase is the most important and correct in this article:
    "Maybe the Russian government should think about joining forces with the Central Asian states and creating a worthy alternative to NATO's infrastructure?"
    1. dmitreach
      dmitreach 8 August 2012 12: 41
      The CSTO and the CIS and also the "union state" and the common economic space of Belarus / Russia / Kazakhstan. Isn't that enough?
      Ukraine - stop sleeping.
  10. dmitreach
    dmitreach 8 August 2012 12: 36
    What is NECESSOUS SPILL 2012? Finkinton, Paris, Berlin, Rome, M. Britain.
    With which of them is Russia not really friends economically? With whom does he have interesting military cooperation programs or plans to develop them? - Paris, Berlin, Rome.
    Obviously, NADO is not the monolithic bloc that opposed the USSR. Especially after the second entry of France into the bloc. And Russia is not the USSR. The political alignment has changed somewhat since the collapse of the country ... The leaders of Russia really do not want to live in the past, and want to see Europe as allies, in the face of the main countries. Without hatred and realistically assessing their capabilities, they pursue Russia's interests.
    Nor is it a revelation that Russia is too tasty a morsel for many "Democracies". What is your "recipe": how to be a Real Country included in the UN Security Council, following the Second World War? Not like France and China, in the sense that they were added at the beginning as "wedding generals" in order to "dilute the Troika". (However, over time, they began to represent an independent force and defend their own interests.) So, what is your plan, so that not turning into North Korea, threaten all enemies with Kuzka's Mother? Should we oppose the Block (as it was) or cooperate (while it is profitable) with key players? With the CSTO behind. After all, France and Germany are not America. And if you do not develop cooperation (except for space, mistrals, lynxes, German ideas with an air-independent power plant (VNEU), French avionics with thermal imagers, etc.), then HOW?
    The helmsmen of Russia have long decided that Europe is an ally today, because at this stage of the development of the country it is more profitable than the eternal confrontation.
    Offer a recipe for loosening NADO more tricky, in the conditions of modern Russia and without tantrums. Union within the framework of the CSTO and the CIS? So it seems like serious plans in this direction. The theme is developing. In dealing with Europe, we are not “at a loss” - we do not ask alms, we cooperate from an equal footing. Or strive for that.
    1. dmitreach
      dmitreach 8 August 2012 12: 37
      The Americans in Afghanistan are not Muslim brothers in Egypt. From amers and their allies, you can expect anything, but at least some stability in the near future. The Middle East is already blazing. We near Kazan appeared supporters of the ideas of radical Islam. If Russia breaks out, it will be the Civil War already in the Volga region, and not just in the Caucasus. How to counter, do you have a recipe for GDP? And if America falls into insanity on the background of its own debt and prefers “to write off its debts at the expense of the world community” (or the Global War), will the same French and Germans be on its side, especially in the context of Russian attempts to undermine NADO?
      The base in Ulyanovsk, of course, is not "ice", but also "not a guard." Of the two evils, so to speak, they chose "European Civilization". We have our own interests in Asia and cannot be solved alone. The same example of Syria says a lot - it sucks to be alone against the whole world. And if China is a “dubious ally” for us, then Europe is not the best gift either. To be alone? In the actions of the government, one can see pragmatism, not colabocyanism.
      1. dmitreach
        dmitreach 8 August 2012 21: 01
        guard and ahtung !!!!!!
        1. The Yankee military boot in the Holy Russian Land.
        2. Russia is overwhelmed with drugs.
        3. Shame, betrayal and collaboration.
        4. Putin = ПЖИфф.

        That's how many I have not read comments on the topic: The NADO base in Russia, it all comes down to these 4 points. Worthy of Zhirinovsky.

        And now the question is: does anyone like to look without hysterics at the fait accompli in the life of the Country? Or was the site created for the exchange of negative emotions, in the spirit of "Yaroslavna's Cry"?
  11. Nubia2
    Nubia2 8 August 2012 13: 05
    Quote: xmike
    They will fill us with drugs and weapons

    that’s not enough drugs with us)
  12. cool.cube2012
    cool.cube2012 8 August 2012 13: 37
    people watch the meaningful video "He fell"
  13. Ruslan67
    Ruslan67 8 August 2012 14: 48
    I would also place a couple of Ameri aircraft carriers with us at the right time, a company of marines on board and no need to spend money on the construction of their take and take advantage!
    1. dmitreach
      dmitreach 8 August 2012 15: 06
      yeah, and in the case of truvoyna - take and grab.
      1. Ruslan67
        Ruslan67 8 August 2012 19: 10
        I actually mean it by using
  14. tan0472
    tan0472 8 August 2012 15: 53
    The base in Ulyanovsk is the promised asymmetric answer: you spoil us, but we help you,
  15. Oleg Rosskiyy
    Oleg Rosskiyy 8 August 2012 18: 06
    It would not work, as in the Russian proverb, "Let the goat into the garden."
  16. EBGEN
    EBGEN 8 August 2012 18: 22
    Base of potential enemy on the territory of Russia this is a scribe :(
  17. SoVIet ZiMBo_O
    SoVIet ZiMBo_O 9 August 2012 03: 06
    Tru patriots, are you going to fight the Taliban in Afghanistan? Now the Yues are dying for supposedly controlling everything and everyone, but at the same time they are digging an economic hole for themselves. In principle, what’s the difference, after all, they’re not building a military base there, right? and if the Americans wanted to conduct some illegal business in Russia, then you will excuse me, but during the period of the nineties they studied Russia from head to toe and even if they want to, they will arrange without bases, for example: the Caucasus.
  18. SenyaYa
    SenyaYa 9 August 2012 05: 43
    Home so that the Taliban didn’t include Russia in the black list of enemies with such a situation, otherwise terrorists will be added to Chechnya, and this was not enough for us !!
  19. dobrik10
    dobrik10 9 August 2012 19: 52
    I agree with some comments, there is very little information about this "fait accompli".
    What, how, where, on what conditions and for how long it wasn’t said anything intelligible, as if some sort of a cabal was being arranged ...
  20. Kostyar
    Kostyar 9 August 2012 22: 13
    Yes, do not send hysterics, Putin crooked not plant !!!