Military Review

Does Russia need the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) in its current form? (Poll)

111

Does Russia need the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) in its current form?

Yes, it is necessary to increase the country's defense and as a counterbalance to NATO. - 780 (45.53%)
45.53%
Yes, it is, but on the basis of other principles of cooperation. - 662 (38.65%)
38.65%
No, Russia needs to militarily integrate with more powerful countries. - 184 (10.74%)
10.74%
No, military blocs are remnants of the Cold War. - 67 (3.91%)
3.91%
Other, in the comments. - 19 (1.11%)
1.11%
Today, as is known, the Russian Federation is in such a military-political alliance as the CSTO. In addition to our country, the Collective Security Treaty Organization includes such countries as Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Armenia. Uzbekistan last summer decided to suspend its membership in the CSTO. And the suspension of Uzbekistan’s membership is far from being one of a kind. At one time, the entrances, exits and suspensions of membership already took place.

Does Russia need the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) in its current form? (Poll)
Picture by Alexey Merinov (http://www.mk.ru)


A whole series of Russian political scientists today are wondering whether the CSTO is a truly efficient and effective organization, and whether it is really a single military-political bloc. Such a question arose not only due to the fact that the heads of some countries allow themselves to quite quickly manipulate the possibilities of “to be or not to be” as part of the CSTO, but also due to the financial component of the issue, as well as what is called the real combat potential of the organization.
If we talk about the budget of the Collective Security Treaty Organization, it is about 160 million rubles. The sum seems to be not the most impressive for the military-political bloc ...

50% of this amount - the money of Russia, and the remaining 50% in equal proportions are divided between other participating countries. Without considering Uzbekistan having suspended membership in the CSTO, it can be concluded that the rest of the countries contribute to the budget for 16 million rubles. However, many members of the organization are trying to use these funds in a very peculiar way. The meaning of this method is approximately the following: we give our 16 millions to the common pod, and you can figure it out with our security. In other words, if you please, spin as you wish, but we want to be protected ... The position is very simple. And if we take into account that, for example, the same Kyrgyzstan, in addition to contributions in the form of a specified amount, does not actually take any productive actions within the framework of the CSTO, then the position in general becomes like a frankly opportunistic one. The Tajik authorities often manage, being within the framework of the CSTO, to openly wag their tails towards other military-political alliances, using such a provision for political bargaining and obtaining additional guarantees and preferences from the Russian Federation. And the economic disagreements that sometimes arise between the CSTO member states, strangely, are grounds for demarches or frowning of eyebrows on the part of certain politicians who boycott the organization’s summits and decisions made on them.
In this regard, the question arises even more acutely: does Russia need today such an organization as the CSTO? Isn't the CSTO merely an attempt to consolidate the countries that were once part of one big state?

On the one hand, all the demarches, exits, entrances, boycotts of summit decisions, refusals to participate in military exercises, etc., make us think about the feasibility of having a CSTO in general. But on the other hand there can be another conclusion. Yes, the CSTO does not have such a military budget in 1,4 billion dollars like NATO. The CSTO does not have such powerful from a military point of view states as the North Atlantic alliance. However, the CSTO does not have such political heterogeneity as NATO.

All those countries that today are part of the CSTO, despite their apparent unpredictability, are in fact much closer to each other in spirit than, for example, Greece and Turkey or Poland and Germany, which are members of the North Atlantic Alliance. The states of the CSTO are united not only by the slippery rules on military mutual aid, but also by a practically common social field, which, although it has been dubbed in recent years, has nevertheless been able to preserve its foundations. If we talk about external disunity, it is more connected with the activities of top leaders who come and go, but the common interests of the peoples remain.

The problem here lies, rather, in the fact that the CSTO does not have a clearly defined strategic goal. If this goal is readiness in a difficult situation to support countries that are in a difficult military-political situation, then such readiness is now more declared than fulfilled. In some cases, it is completely incomprehensible how the member countries of the organization are going to behave if one of the states turns out to be involved in a military conflict with a state that is not a member of the CSTO. Such a question was clearly manifested in 2008, when Georgian troops calmly shot Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia. At the same time, the position of the member countries of the Collective Security Treaty Organization was more than neutral, and even aimed at the clear support of the Georgian authorities ...

Today, an extremely nervous situation is observed around relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan. If we admit the fact that, God forbid, blood will be shed again in the region, then the CSTO countries should, by definition, support Armenia. But will such support lead to the extinction of the conflict? Obviously not. And it is also obvious that such a conflict, certain forces that are already completely in other countries, will be subject to excessive cultivation in order to achieve their political goals and put the situation in a convenient form ...

If we talk about the development of material and technical base, then it is completely unclear why many strategically important objects, which are designated as components of the cooperation of the CSTO countries, are more like abandoned grounds that are unlikely to make an impression on a potential enemy. It is very difficult to say whether financing from the budget goes there or it works in the interests of a narrow circle of people.

It turns out that the CSTO seems to be there, and the community of countries here is practically at the genetic level, but with an understanding of the purpose of this organization, even among its members, not everything is in order. Someone openly sits in the CSTO, someone is ready to sign any papers in order to create the appearance of the organization’s work, and someone “enters and exits,” proceeding from the foot from which he himself and his political partners got up ...

The most amazing thing is that today the CSTO disease is also characteristic of NATO. There, the leitmotif of the organization’s effectiveness has long been lost. Today, the main and obscure goal of the North Atlantic alliance is mindless expansion and unconditional support of a key player.

I would like to hope that the CSTO will take a more constructive path.
Author:
111 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. vadimus
    vadimus 6 September 2012 08: 50
    +4
    It is worth increasing the number of countries participating in this program. The more fingers, the heavier the fist.
    1. Forget
      Forget 6 September 2012 08: 57
      +16
      Less is more smile
      1. tronin.maxim
        tronin.maxim 6 September 2012 09: 08
        0
        Quote: Forget

        Less is more

        But this is doubtful! Alone in the field is not a warrior, especially in war!
        1. afire
          afire 6 September 2012 14: 20
          +10
          you might think the CSTO members will come to our aid .... yeah, but you guys - everybody except the Belarusians will leave.
          We have only two supports and they are the most devoted and no organizations will save us. Themselves, themselves, themselves soldier
          But these countries can’t be left to chance, it’s all the same our underbelly and we need to guard it
          1. I-16M
            I-16M 12 September 2012 14: 05
            +1
            I agree. Let us recall 2008, when the whole pro-Western world was barking at us, Nazarbayev was being persuaded for support for a long time. Not military but verbal. There is no need to talk about other participants.
        2. Rowicz
          Rowicz 6 September 2012 17: 28
          +3
          Alone in the field is not a warrior, this is a proverb ..... however, life sometimes shows that this proverb is not always applicable soldier
          1. v53993
            v53993 7 September 2012 10: 36
            0
            I agree, but no one will betray at the last moment.
        3. kush62
          kush62 7 September 2012 10: 56
          +1
          Alone in the field is not a warrior, especially in war!
          It is better to be alone, knowing that there is no ally behind who will let you down at any moment.
      2. Tirpitz
        Tirpitz 6 September 2012 09: 42
        +14
        Quote: Forget
        Less is more

        I put you +. So kat also believe that the main quality and not quantity. In addition to all Belgium and Luxembourg, NATO has an economically powerful country with a powerful defense industry and economy (France, Germany, Britain ...). Which, if necessary, can significantly strengthen both the fleet and aviation and the ground forces. And the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) is, apart from the Russian Federation, half-poor countries without modern armies and the military-industrial complex, apart from cannon fodder, they cannot give money or modern aviation and navy. Kazakhstan and Belarus is still where but all sorts of Kyrgyzstan is just a burden. It is necessary to look for more powerful allies.
        If you will be minus - argue!
        1. Vasily79
          Vasily79 6 September 2012 10: 15
          +8
          Maxim + you want to add sluts like uzb there are not needed. But I don’t understand if we are asked to take it again, and we ourselves will become ?????? by whom. For me, it’s profitable for Russia to pay any large reasonable price for Ukraine’s accession.
          1. kush62
            kush62 7 September 2012 11: 00
            0
            But I don’t understand if we are asked to take it again, and we ourselves will become ?????? by whom.
            There is still politics involved. Sometimes it’s necessary not to score a goal, but not to let others do it.
        2. Фокус
          Фокус 6 September 2012 11: 08
          +9
          I agree with you that states with weak armies are a burden and an additional responsibility, but such states will look for military allies, and what alternative is NATO, and this is worse for us. It should be added that taking an obligation to protect a weak state, we get a market for our military products (even on credit), and influence on the region, and this is the security of our borders. Of course, I completely agree with you that we need strong allies, military cooperation within the SCO will help in solving this problem.
        3. karimbaev
          karimbaev 6 September 2012 11: 30
          -1
          I think I didn’t have to include KYRGYZSTAN in Tajikistan, Armenia, Uzbekistan. they are a burden. enjoys only benefits when buying and repairing military equipment.
          1. Nir
            Nir 6 September 2012 11: 44
            -10
            Quote: karimbaev
            I think I didn’t have to include KYRGYZSTAN in Tajikistan, Armenia, Uzbekistan.

            But Uzbekistan is not in the CSTO wink And what privileges do you speak of? This is junk and so no one even buys the army of R.F. already refused such technology lol CSTO is one of the ways and chances to sell it all under the guise of allied rhetoric lol And so in front of the persecution of those who remain from the union, you look at three you can deal with NATO, you will throw some hats wink
            1. Forget
              Forget 6 September 2012 14: 18
              +5
              And what are you doing on this site? You left the CSTO, so goodbye. Go to some American similar site, and we can do without you. And let now your compatriots go to work in the USA for work, there is nothing to go to the CIS countries.
        4. Praetorian
          Praetorian 6 September 2012 13: 33
          0
          I will not minus, it is better to a plus! Right
        5. INTER
          INTER 6 September 2012 14: 06
          +3
          Quote: Tirpitz
          The military-industrial complex, apart from cannon fodder, cannot provide money or modern aviation and the navy

          But the weak are always looking for a strong defender, and what if the west expresses a desire to be one?
        6. Focuser
          Focuser 6 September 2012 14: 47
          +1
          Quote: Tirpitz
          It is necessary to look for more powerful allies.

          NO Russia has more real allies! (this is talking about countries, not about the army and navy of Russia) Yes, while the allies from the CIS countries are peculiar, but we have to work! .. We have to work.
        7. REPA1963
          REPA1963 6 September 2012 22: 28
          0
          Serve in allies ov and fat!
      3. Nir
        Nir 6 September 2012 10: 51
        -9
        Quote: Forget
        Less is more

        Better nothing at all wink At R.F. but there are no allies except the army and navy lol Why do you need any ODECABE SHMODEKABE? We have the coolest lol
        1. Vasily79
          Vasily79 6 September 2012 11: 17
          +2
          Quote: Nir
          Better nothing at all

          And YOU in whom do you see allies (Wahhabis, Taliban, Iran, or Americans)?

          Quote: Nir
          At R.F. but there are no allies except the army and navy


          We definitely have an army and navy, and you?
          1. Nir
            Nir 6 September 2012 11: 29
            -3
            Quote: Vasily79
            And YOU in whom you see allies

            In the interests of their own independent state. I emphasize "own" and "independent". The interests of the state and the people are above all unions combined if they run counter to interests.
            Quote: Vasily79
            We definitely have an army and navy, and you?

            But our people do not die out and will have someone to leave the state. And who will you leave? To the Chinese? wink
            1. Vasily79
              Vasily79 6 September 2012 11: 37
              +5
              Do you have any oil?
              Libya too.
              Do you have a son for the father in power?
              Syria too.
              You are a proud and independent people - a fact.
              What does not remind.
              1. Ataturk
                Ataturk 6 September 2012 11: 58
                +2
                Quote: Vasily79

                Do you have any oil? - Russia is one of those with huge reserves..
                Libya too. - Happy for them.
                Do you have a son for the father in power? Putin-Medvedev-Putin. In power for each other!
                Syria too. - I'm glad for them too.
                You are a proud and independent people - a fact. - The forum was convinced of this.
                What does not remind. -and you?
                1. Nir
                  Nir 6 September 2012 12: 08
                  +1
                  [quote = Ataturk] Quote: Vasily79 Do you have oil? - Russia is one of those who has huge reserves. Libya, too. - Glad for them. Do you have a son for the father in power? Putin-Medvedev-Putin. In power for each other! Syria, too. - For them, too, glad. You are a proud and independent people - a fact. - I was convinced of this at the forum. What does not remind me of. What about you? [/ quote]
                  [quote = Ataturk]
                  You are a huge plus ... for sobriety of the mind and not reticence wink
                  1. Ataturk
                    Ataturk 6 September 2012 12: 33
                    +1
                    Quote: Nir
                    You are a huge plus ... for sobriety of the mind and not reticence


                    Thank you.

                    But in one thing this comrade was mistaken.

                    Quote: Vasily79
                    Syria too.


                    and the oil itself is barely barely enough, they also buy. And now they should soon end.

                    Shell, the main foreign operator in Syria, also believes that Damascus will soon have to switch to oil imports. In turn, the International Monetary Fund, in a recent report, noted that Syria’s oil revenues will drop from an excep- tion of $ 700 million in 2005 to a deficit of $ 4,4 billion in 2015, and their share in GDP by that time will drop from 8,8 , XNUMX% to zero.


                    now is 2012. 7 years have passed. The figures are deplorable.
                    1. Vasily79
                      Vasily79 6 September 2012 22: 15
                      +2
                      Quote: Ataturk
                      But in one thing this comrade was mistaken.

                      Please read komenty carefully Syria was compared with the government and not with oil

                      Quote: Ataturk
                      comrade

                      And comrade to you a wolf of Tambov
                      be a delicate watchman you are our
                2. Vasily79
                  Vasily79 6 September 2012 22: 10
                  +1
                  Work could not answer earlier
                  Quote: Ataturk
                  The forum was convinced of this.

                  No, we have enough different.

                  Quote: Ataturk
                  What does not remind. -and you?

                  Yes, it reminds us of Chechnya and Dagestan and the Georgian conflict, but you can (although only on the forum to find out which of you and the Armenians are to blame for the Karabakh conflict)
            2. Forget
              Forget 6 September 2012 14: 20
              0
              your interests, to deceive someone and that's it.
            3. INTER
              INTER 6 September 2012 14: 43
              0
              Quote: Nir
              But our people do not die out and will have someone to leave the state. And who will you leave? To the Chinese?

              Yeah, with shovels and arrows)))))) Against miserable drones)))))
            4. mark021105
              mark021105 6 September 2012 18: 33
              0
              Quote: Nir
              But our people do not die out and will have someone to leave the state. And who will you leave? To the Chinese?


              Do you, dear, feel the ground under your feet? Descend to our sinful earth from heaven ... The people are not dying out, but starving. It is necessary to go to the region more often and watch how the people live. And to whom will you leave your "INDEPENDENT" state ??? Pin_do_sam? Or his poorly educated, culturally backward PEOPLE ??? It is not by chance that I speak so confidently about this. I travel to Uzbekistan regularly. Over the past 20 years (independent existence), the republic has rolled back 60-70 years.
              1. Nir
                Nir 7 September 2012 12: 56
                +1
                Quote: mark021105
                It is necessary to travel to the region more often and watch how people live.

                Here, dear, just leave those ka outside the Moscow Ring Road or St. Petersburg. and understand what and how lol And see how everything is "stable" and "solid" all around. Do you think we are in ruin? Come on, drive them to Russian villages, look into the outback and see what happened to the country after the privatization and the years of the "stabilizer" of the light-faced ... and don't forget to drive the "recipient" to the Caucasus. wink Only here is the conclusion I wrote to you, at least we are not dying out, and we will leave the country to our descendants, but who will you leave it to? To migrants? I think yes.
            5. not good
              not good 7 September 2012 21: 47
              0
              Sorry, I didn’t understand, but from whom your state does not depend yet ?? lol
      4. Bismark
        Bismark 6 September 2012 11: 25
        0
        I will support both quality and quantity. From a large number there is something to choose.
      5. red 015
        red 015 6 September 2012 14: 09
        0
        I agree, it is necessary to redraw the CSTO and it should consist of Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Armenia, the Central Asian republics are not reliable, often look towards the west, and how many wolves do not feed ........
    2. DIMS
      DIMS 6 September 2012 09: 16
      +2
      How is the current NATO? Where the main part of the defense spending was shared by the partners in the United States. And as we had with the ATS during the Cold War.

      Do not pull such a burden.
      1. esaul
        esaul 6 September 2012 10: 03
        +3
        In general, the Collective Security Treaty Organization for Russia is the inevitable inevitability! If you want to survive in today's mobile and speedy, conflict world, be kind - secure your borders at distant approaches. And how can this be done now, if not having secured the allied obligations of the border states and not having secured them an understanding of all the advantages in this alliance. The only way.
        And to draw an analogy between the CSTO and NATO is somewhat inappropriate. In NATO - the overwhelming dictatorship of the United States and many decisions contrary to NATO’s European allies, one hell - are made through the teeth of a white-toothed grin and wide smiles. The CSTO is formed somewhat on other principles, taking into account the will of individual participants. Hence all sorts of undesirable inconsistencies - in a large family everything will never be able to go perfectly smoothly. At one time, the USSR lost as a reliable ally - the SFRY, due to the fact that it became too dictatorial to dictate its will.
        1. DIMS
          DIMS 6 September 2012 10: 16
          +2
          Quote: esaul
          And to draw an analogy between the CSTO and NATO is somewhat inappropriate. In NATO - the overwhelming dictatorship of the United States and many decisions contrary to NATO’s European allies, one hell - are made through the teeth of a white-toothed grin and wide smiles.

          The one who pays is the one who dances. The CSTO will be the same. After all, NATO is also a "big family" in which all decisions in favor of the United States are made by consensus
          1. esaul
            esaul 6 September 2012 10: 38
            +1
            Quote: DIMS
            The CSTO will also be.


            Only time will tell, colleague. hi
      2. Manager
        Manager 6 September 2012 10: 11
        +4
        Quote: Tirpitz
        Tirpitz

        I agree with you! Also voted for the quality! And that's why. More or less fraternal countries such as Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Belarus, one way or another, in a serious military conflict will take our side. But we need global players. For example, India and China. Then our power block will have weight. In the meantime, it's like an elephant with pugs and against them a mammoth with tigers.
        1. Tirpitz
          Tirpitz 6 September 2012 12: 41
          +1
          Manager,
          I put you +. You're right. And if you worry that poor paratroopers like Kyrgyzstan will join NATO, then this will not happen. And that's why. In Ukraine, the military-industrial complex is much more powerful than the Kazakh and Belarusian. The past authorities actively sought accession to NATO and achieved nothing like Georgia and Moldova. And why?. Yes, because NATO is already at the limit of its financial capabilities, and it does not make sense to include all new countries. It's like a ball that bursts if it is constantly inflated. They are the Baltic states (which does not have an army) patrol with the planes of Germany and other members of the alliance.
          1. shkodnik
            shkodnik 28 September 2012 22: 20
            0
            They are the Baltic states (which does not have an army) patrol with the planes of Germany and other members of the alliance.
            since NATO does not have its own armed forces, in principle, alliance members have armies, and NATO operates with them
    3. NICK
      NICK 6 September 2012 09: 53
      0
      Quote: vadimus
      The more fingers, the fist is heavier

      What a mutant it turns out.
    4. Evil Tatar
      Evil Tatar 6 September 2012 10: 00
      0
      Why did the author deliberately not indicate that the CSTO, besides those mentioned in satyah, includes China and Brazil (oddly enough)?
      After all, these countries, Russia and Belarus, IMHO, are the backbone, because of which the CSTO does not look so frail, as shown in the article ...
    5. INTER
      INTER 6 September 2012 14: 04
      0
      Quote: vadimus
      It is worth increasing the number of countries participating in this program. The more fingers, the heavier the fist.

      The principle of the rod and broom! I also think that the organization needs to be developed, but not by the principle of financing from one center (Russia), but by joint support. America uses this principle seems.
    6. REPA1963
      REPA1963 6 September 2012 22: 26
      +1
      Dependents who will throw us at the first opportunity will be all the more expensive for us.
    7. Isr
      Isr 7 September 2012 01: 02
      -1
      The problem of this organization is not in the large or small number of "fingers", but in inequality, which is clear to everyone. Russia has organized this organization and is behaving like a master, telling everyone: you are my satellites, you will do as I say. Russia has never treated the Central Asian republics, and now countries, with respect, as an equal to an equal. Therefore, the attitude is the same, since you are in command here, then do whatever you need there, and we have handed over our contribution and that's enough, otherwise would you like us to shed blood for you?
      Russia has its own goals and understanding of "collective security", which is not entirely "safe", while other countries have their own understanding, not the same as that of Russia. Russia can get into a war, say, with Georgia, but why should the rest? If Russia begins to force them to participate with this agreement, then everyone will scatter altogether.
      1. Kamilla
        Kamilla 7 September 2012 08: 44
        0

        everything is truly respected ... you correctly assess the situation .. and why, only, you have such a low rating? what I think ... is it because of the flag ??
        1. Isr
          Isr 7 September 2012 10: 57
          +2
          my rating is my greatest achievement. Indeed, in fact, I am saying trivial things here, but people on this site are not ready to hear a different opinion, they are comfortable living in the Soviet past, believing in the infallibility of their leader. I'm trying to make a difference on this site. For example, most of the minuses were put to me when I said that the USSR treacherously attacked Finland and took over part of it, like Georgia today. They do not know their own history, they are afraid of it, not without reason archives of the times of the 30-40s are still banned.
          1. Kamilla
            Kamilla 7 September 2012 11: 36
            0
            Quote: Isr
            They do not know their own history, they are afraid of it, not without reason archives of the times of the 30-40s are still banned.


            it’s true that someday it’ll come out anyway, history will put everything in its place ... and everyone will get what they deserve ... and the rating ... well, it’s not here because of the rating ... it’s just insulting, if not deserved , or on a national basis ... that’s what they said to me about supporting you ... hi
          2. Piligrim
            Piligrim 7 September 2012 14: 50
            +1
            Where is the Russian Federation treacherously invaded Georgia?
            So what do you say then for all the last 2-3 years of the war and coups arranged by the USA? Is this not treachery?
            And the republics that once belonged to Georgia determined independence. And they are for your information not part of the Russian Federation.
            so you flood, and in this way you will not change anything on this site.
            I don’t like the same cheers from the Stalinist patriots, but I need to use good arguments for my position and not, like many here, look for a black cat in a dark room, especially if it’s simply not there!
          3. aquatic
            aquatic 7 September 2012 15: 29
            -1
            a story? we read history) there was no Finland before the USSR) this territory was part of Sweden until 1809, then this part was conquered by Russian troops and in 1917, a country appeared .... Finland .....

            so no need to talk about the USSR treacherously attacked, so judging by your logic, they returned part of their territory ... or do you admit that Georgia treacherously attacked South Ossetia)? could not occupy well part of its territory)

            cons you set clearly clearly and minus catch from me, learn history
          4. KaPToC
            KaPToC 15 November 2016 19: 54
            0
            Quote: Isr
            my rating is my greatest achievement

            To consider a lie - an achievement this is so in Western
        2. Piligrim
          Piligrim 7 September 2012 14: 45
          0
          Due to the lack of a common vision of the picture. The one-sidedness of the assessment of judgment is definitely a minus.
      2. Piligrim
        Piligrim 7 September 2012 14: 44
        0
        The same can be said about the USA and NATO, do not you think? Word by word!
        And about the war game, or rather not one war game.
        So what did you discover here ???
      3. KaPToC
        KaPToC 15 November 2016 19: 53
        0
        Quote: Isr
        Russia has never belonged to the Central Asian republics, and now countries, with respect, as equal to equal.

        You have confused Russia - with the world hegemon - the United States, who doesn't respect anyone anywhere. And how should "respect" for Russia be expressed? Arrange color coups like in Turkey - if the ally kicks up? Or keep an ally under occupation like Japan and the US for decades? The Americans became a superpower by destroying the empire over which the sun never set - this is "respect, so respect"
    8. I-16M
      I-16M 12 September 2012 14: 01
      +1
      In this case, quantity will not go into quality wink
  2. Su24
    Su24 6 September 2012 08: 58
    0
    The CSTO should become much more centralized, in its current form it is ineffective. The organization should be a military reflection of the USSR.
  3. erased
    erased 6 September 2012 09: 01
    +3
    A suitcase without a handle - throwing out a pity, inconvenient to carry. A purely political alliance, but for the sake of this it was created.
  4. elenagromova
    elenagromova 6 September 2012 09: 13
    +1
    Required. First option.
  5. Apollo
    Apollo 6 September 2012 09: 13
    +4
    In my opinion, the core of the CSTO is undoubtedly Russia. The main military potential is concentrated in Russia and it also bears the main burden of expenses.
    In my opinion it would be appropriate along with the CSTO enter into a military-political alliance with more powerful statessuch as China and / or India ..
    1. Ataturk
      Ataturk 6 September 2012 10: 01
      +7
      Quote: Apollon
      In my opinion, it would be advisable, along with the CSTO, to conclude a military-political alliance with more powerful states, such as China and (or) India ..


      It is impossible to build relations with a country that has land claims. And China has it! Why should you sit at a table with a temporary neutral neighbor, knowing that the time will come and he will attack you, plus if they are in the CSTO, they will know certain military secrets of Russia. Does Russia need this? I don’t think so. India is not fish, not meat, it is not possible to understand with it what they want with whom they are friends, where they drive the landmark.

      Humpbacked, bastard, he ruined the country so much that I don’t know what to say, although if the CSTO had an atmosphere of trust and respect, then raising the level of Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, these countries have not a small population, training and strengthening these countries, believe me, Russia is not needed; not India; not China; we have our own eagles among the former union. But reality is more deplorable than you might imagine.

      No one supports Russia on the Georgian issue. All gave back! Including members of the CSTO, + Uzbekistan came out + I will even say more, others will not support Russia either, as Russia did not support them.

      Moscow’s policy is not clear. The Kremlin’s big mistake was when conflicts in the countries of the former union were created or weren’t extinguished, but the Kremlin created a lever for itself to solve it.

      Plus, why does GAZPROM allow itself to spoil relations between Russia and Belarus and Ukraine?

      Everything suggests that, the Kremlin’s authorities do not think far about relations between the CSTO countries and the former union, but are simply busy plundering Russia's resources.

      The transfer of the two islands to China, the territory near Murmansk, was given to the Norwegians, what kind of policy is this scattering of state lands when the Russian men earned blood?

      Draw conclusions.

      I think, before talking about the CSTO, it is necessary to chop off a rotten head to a fish. And it rots. I am convinced of this as never before.
      1. SASCHAmIXEEW
        SASCHAmIXEEW 6 September 2012 10: 18
        0
        At the expense of holoaa 100% with you to begin with this!
      2. nickname 1 and 2
        nickname 1 and 2 6 September 2012 11: 38
        +1
        Ataturk,
        Somehow it’s not exactly with you! We started for health and .........!

        Quote: Ataturk
        No one supports Russia in Georgian

        Well it happened! Yes, they did not support it, and rightly so that they did not support it! And do not need to be supported. Bad precedent!
        Quote: Ataturk
        Moscow’s policy is not clear.
        So MARKET ???? Or where you do not need a market? That's how the PU set itself! I do not fit! Maybe in vain. What is there!
        Quote: Ataturk
        allows himself to spoil relations
        This also applies!
        PU said - it’s time to get used to the fact that the market does not intersect with politics, with the economy! Otherwise, everything will slide into nepotism and matchmaking! (well, something like that) AND WILL NOT BE ANY MARKET!
        And isn't that right? smile

        Quote: Ataturk
        Transfer of the two islands to China,
        Well, why do you need to simplify everything? Well, Sukhoi designs the planes, we don’t tell him - it is necessary that the planes fly sideways! We understand that there are laws! And what is so simple here? Maybe there are good arguments for GIVING! request We do not know this? wink

        Ataturk,
        Extension
        There is such wisdom when drawing borders to cut them in your favor, and then, on occasion, give this piece for a certain benefit to yourself! So this piece of land he, when he did not belong to us, by and large! those. there is a background to this!

        Ataturk,


        Chop off, the time will come, in an evolutionary way! drinks
        And what do you mean? Revolution? Enough! Fools are more dumb! stop
        10 no 1000 times more lose! Don’t do this to us! bully
        1. Ataturk
          Ataturk 6 September 2012 12: 04
          +3
          Quote: nick 1 and 2
          Well it happened! Yes, they did not support it, and rightly so that they did not support it! And do not need to be supported. Bad precedent!

          In my understanding, a strategic ally should support its patron, and Russia is the patron of the CSTO, so the younger brothers should support the older brother, who dresses and feeds and arms them, sometimes even for free. And the result was, GANDURAS supported and the brothers in faith, the brothers in the CSTO refused.

          Quote: nick 1 and 2
          Extension
          There is such wisdom when drawing borders to cut them in your favor, and then, on occasion, give this piece for a certain benefit to yourself! So this piece of land he, when he did not belong to us, by and large! those. there is a background to this!


          good took note. what's true is true drinks




          Quote: nick 1 and 2
          10 no 1000 times more lose! Don’t do this to us!


          This is also true. You are a plus.
          1. Focuser
            Focuser 6 September 2012 15: 44
            -2
            Quote: Ataturk
            In my understanding, a strategic ally should support its patron, and Russia is the patron of the CSTO, so the younger brothers should support the older brother, who dresses and feeds and arms them, sometimes even for free. And the result was, GANDURAS supported and the brothers in faith, the brothers in the CSTO refused.

            I didn’t want to write my stupid thoughts of the average man, but since you’re talking about brothers, I’ll tell you. I think in the same terms.

            In that situation with Georgia, Russia, as an elder brother, could tell its younger ones that they would not intervene. The conflict is not so serious as to connect the younger ones. And it’s better to hold them for a real mess when you really need help .. Give them the opportunity to get stronger for this.

            How would you benefit if it were different? Western countries would find out who is on whose side and would intensify their actions in these areas on the principle of "divide and rule". In the meantime, they get the impression that everything is only in words. And Russia was supported only by Honduras, which is not at all in the subject.
            We are all still at the stage of recovery after the collapse of the USSR. And we are currently no match for the US allies in NATO. And quarrel us between each other is relatively easy. Especially if the West will really need it .. Why give them a reason for this at such an inopportune moment? When there will be a real mess and everyone will clearly understand what is at stake, then the actions will be appropriate.
            1. Ataturk
              Ataturk 6 September 2012 16: 00
              +2
              Quote: Focker
              In that situation with Georgia, Russia, as an elder brother, could tell its younger ones that they would not intervene. The conflict is not so serious as to connect the younger ones. And it’s better to hold them for a real mess when you really need help .. Give them the opportunity to get stronger for this.


              Tell me please. do you believe in what you wrote? So that someone, or rather the Kremlin, would worry about the soldiers of Belarus, Kyrgyzstan and keep them on a rainy day. Sorry, but I can hardly believe it.

              Since, okay, they did not fight Georgia, but it was possible to support the recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. So? Just a word. BUT the TRUTH is that not a word or a deed did not help.

              The question arises, why? What is the price of this strategic alliance? Or do they not support what the older brother is doing? Or maybe because of the burka, an order was given not to support Russia? Where the truth is, only God knows. BUT FACT alone, they did not even support it in words. This is the reality of the "great power" of the CSTO.

              After that, would you fight shoulder to shoulder with those who did not support you? I would send! I don’t want to offend anyone, I just write what I see. This is not a reliable organization. And it doesn’t have much power, and there are no guarantees that if they attack someone tomorrow, that one of them will come to the rescue.

              The creation of the CSTO was a good idea, but the CSTO members did not get out correctly. More precisely, with this composition of the CSTO, Russia's policy should have been different.

              Think for yourself, Armenia is a member of the CSTO, an outpost of Russia, but Russia with great pleasure is selling offensive weapons to Azerbaijan. Do you think that after this they will be flaming with love for the Kremlin authorities in Armenia? Not. Hence the whole srach what is happening on their forums with anti-Russian slogans.

              GAZPROM, put Belarus on a brush, so it asks where did this brotherhood go? After that, will Dad come to the aid of Russia? I doubt it !!!!

              So where is the flaw? in the choice of policy in relation to the CSTO countries or in the selection of the CSTO members themselves, the question is interesting.

              The CSTO’s policy was the issue of CAUCASUS 2012 fees or something like that, that is, 2 TURKISH COUNTRIES Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, even Kyrgyzstan, should fight against their brothers in faith and culture and identity. It turns out that either the policy is wrong, or the wrong members of the CST are chosen. According to this, the Uzbeks came out, and the Kazakhs with the Kirghiz will not participate, and even more so, given their economic relations with Turkey. I am silent about Tajikistan.

              So either the potential enemy must be changed or the CSTO members.


              1. Focuser
                Focuser 6 September 2012 16: 28
                0
                Quote: Ataturk
                Tell me please. do you believe in what you wrote? So that someone, or rather the Kremlin, would worry about the soldiers of Belarus, Kyrgyzstan and keep them on a rainy day. Sorry, but I can hardly believe it.

                No no. You did not understand me. Nobody holds anyone for a rainy day, like selective troops, for example. Relations between countries are not strong yet. Easy to tear if you push hard. If you demonstrate them now, then tomorrow they will be gone. It is necessary to give some more time for the countries to strengthen and establish stronger relations among themselves. And then it will be a real military-political alliance. Not all at once, and even more so after the devastation (USSR)
                And in what I wrote, I believe.
                1. Ataturk
                  Ataturk 6 September 2012 16: 31
                  +1
                  Quote: Focker
                  And in what I wrote, I believe.

                  Well, God forbid that it was as you say. It’s just not real for me.
              2. kNow
                kNow 6 September 2012 16: 41
                +1
                Quote: Ataturk
                Russia with great pleasure is selling offensive weapons to Azerbaijan. Do you think that after this they will be flaming with love for the Kremlin authorities in Armenia?

                By the way, as far as I know, this is a direct violation of the CSTO treaty
                1. Ataturk
                  Ataturk 6 September 2012 17: 41
                  +1
                  Quote: kNow
                  By the way, as far as I know, this is a direct violation of the CSTO treaty


                  As far as I know, having a base in GYUMRI is also a direct violation of the OSCE on neutrality. Like Russia's membership in the OSCE, being a decisive Karabakh problem.
                2. nickname 1 and 2
                  nickname 1 and 2 6 September 2012 22: 22
                  -1
                  Quote: kNow
                  Quote: Ataturk
                  Russia with great pleasure is selling offensive weapons to Azerbaijan. Do you think that after this they will be flaming with love for the Kremlin authorities in Armenia?

                  = Pu and Aliyev met. Aliyev says - in the south it’s not very calm! We need to strengthen our defenses! We need to buy weapons from you!
                  And Pu Aliyev answers: Yeah! And then you will use this weapon against Armenia!
                  Question: This answer can give PUTIN ???? angry No! Nor how can it! But what will he say to Armenia? Yes! Will tell! But what he will say: if Aliyev is not with us, then he will buy from the USA! Will it make it easier for you?

                  So will Armenia understand Russia? And will she be normal with the Kremlin? The answer is yes! They will understand! After all, they are not fools!
                  So maybe we do not discuss such issues? laughing
              3. Piligrim
                Piligrim 7 September 2012 15: 04
                0
                From the fact that we are selling weapons to Azerbaijanis, there is nothing bad - the same is not bad for Armenians! Well, it’s clear that there won’t be any war between them! So why not sell it?
                And at the expense of Gazprom (that you are not indifferent to it? You will also drag "Zenith"), then you have to pay for gas! as well as for everything in this world. And dad is still a fox, if not more bluntly - the first female profession. He already gets this gas with a good discount !!!
                You have forgotten about Ukraine, it is "poor" the same "suffered" from a bad Gazprom!
            2. theodorh
              theodorh 29 May 2013 21: 51
              0
              not Ganduras and Honduras, but Nicaragua actually.
        2. White
          White 6 September 2012 13: 52
          +2
          PU said - it’s time to get used to the fact that the market does not intersect with politics, with the economy! Otherwise, everything will slide into nepotism and matchmaking! (well, something like that) AND WILL NOT BE ANY MARKET!
          .

          Of course, they are kicking me right now, but in gas relations between Russia and Ukraine it doesn’t smell like any market (we are closest than everyone, only Germany buys us more, and the price is?) So that somehow does not fit with your statement.
          1. Ataturk
            Ataturk 6 September 2012 14: 58
            -3
            Quote: White
            Of course, they are kicking me right now, but in gas relations between Russia and Ukraine it doesn’t smell like any market (we are closest than everyone, only Germany buys us more, and the price is?) So that somehow does not fit with your statement.


            For this I have repeatedly said how it turns out, fraternal Ukraine, a Slavic country, buys gas more expensive than anyone else. And then they wonder why pen-dos are in Ukraine.

            What came to the conclusion that Dad, says, thanks to Azerbaijan for saving our independence from our older brother, named Russia at the head of GAZPROM.

            I didn’t just say that this GAZPROM would cause everyone to quarrel.
            1. Piligrim
              Piligrim 7 September 2012 15: 18
              +1
              Do you need a gazelle for free? Can we still throw oil?
              What else do our former republics do?
              And when they gave thousands of Russians a kick in the ass in the 90s, they say, bring it to our Russia, we will heal uuuu without you!
              And what do I see on the streets of my cities !? Thousands of Uzbeks, Tajiks, Kyrgyz! And if only Moscow and St. Petersburg, and even provincial Bryansk, had experienced such an invasion over the past 2 years .... that has already reached the national showdown !!!
              I am so eager to go up to some Uzbek or Tajik and ask, "Well, have they healed? And now who is stopping you from developing your state? Who has taken your jobs from you now? WHAT HAVE YOU LOST HERE?"
          2. nickname 1 and 2
            nickname 1 and 2 6 September 2012 16: 06
            0
            White,


            Quote: White
            but in gas relations between Russia and Ukraine


            Here is another scenario: there is a contract, Tymoshka signed it, if Pu corrects him, then he should sit? wink
            There is a contract and it MUST be implemented! This is the international practice! Ukraine - claims to be a full-fledged state? And if - with Russia = then no: we are like our own! There is no such thing in international practice! Signed - answer! And Timoshka - A LESSON for all "BAB" who have gone crazy - And who is there to manage? Not ma what!
            (I remember the contented face of PU, after signing. With amazement in my eyes - these are the ones on!)
            1. White
              White 6 September 2012 16: 11
              -1
              That is, everyone agrees that there is no smell of market relations here.
            2. Kaa
              Kaa 6 September 2012 20: 09
              0
              Quote: nick 1 and 2
              And Timoshka - A LESSON for all "BAB" who have gone crazy - And what is there to manage? Not ma what!

              A THIEF SHOULD SIT IN JAIL,
          3. Piligrim
            Piligrim 7 September 2012 15: 11
            0
            I am a bastard with the Ukrainians! How do you propose that you calculate the price of gas? From the middle and from the purchase volumes?
            Have you heard about the market price? And energy exchanges? Or the prices for oil and energy are set by the parties in such a way, from the bulldozer ... they say we are nearby ... and we take a lot ... lol it's a deal then! Figs to you, you want to live in Europe and climb over their heads ... so please pay as Europeans!
            And stop already tyrit this gas!
      3. Van
        Van 6 September 2012 19: 12
        -2
        Quote: Ataturk
        I think, before talking about the CSTO, it is necessary to chop off a rotten head to a fish. And it rots. I am convinced of this as never before.

        There is nothing to argue, it is a fact. recourse
      4. Piligrim
        Piligrim 7 September 2012 14: 54
        0
        / others also will not support Russia as Russia did not support them. /
        This is what Russia did not support Tajikistan? or kazakstan? and Kyrgyzstan?
        Well, clarify?
    2. Evil Tatar
      Evil Tatar 6 September 2012 10: 05
      0
      Yes, there is such an organization - BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa), and as an observer, Iran read somewhere that Pakistan is considering its capabilities ...
  6. Brother Sarych
    Brother Sarych 6 September 2012 09: 31
    0
    In this form, it’s an absolutely useless organization, in my opinion, but whether it will be possible to create something more effective is a big question!
    "Friends" do not sleep, and are always ready to make an offer that is difficult to refuse ...
    1. nickname 1 and 2
      nickname 1 and 2 6 September 2012 09: 49
      0
      Brother Sarych,

      Yes! the right organization! good

      There are more good people, but they are worse organized! fool

      And therefore: the more the good are organized, the worse the bad is! am
  7. Sasha 19871987
    Sasha 19871987 6 September 2012 09: 36
    -1
    the Warsaw Pact fell apart, but NATO has come to terms, it’s worth considering .... it’s imperative to create military alliances, the main thing is not to make a mistake with partners
  8. Kolyan 2
    Kolyan 2 6 September 2012 09: 43
    0
    Brother Sarych (2) Today, 09:31 ↓ new 0
    In this form, it’s an absolutely useless organization, in my opinion, but whether it will be possible to create something more effective is a big question!
    "Friends" do not sleep, and are always ready to make an offer that is difficult to refuse ...

    I totally agree with you that in this form it’s full of cocoa and there’s no use whatsoever,
  9. antiaircrafter
    antiaircrafter 6 September 2012 10: 06
    -1
    Organization is undoubtedly necessary, but all prostitutes need to be kicked out, or at least taxed.
  10. Ataturk
    Ataturk 6 September 2012 10: 14
    0
    Before you build a relationship, you need to solve your problems. But the problems are as follows. I am more than sure that talking about the CSTO as an extraterrestrial force is a joke.
    The CSTO has, STRONG AND POWERFUL Russia, with a western landmark. At least these are the facts. (Syria and Iran are evidence of this + I am silent about the robberies of Russia's wealth from a person close to the Kremlin + how Gazprom is quarreling Russia with everyone)

    The CSTO has Turkic Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, there is Persian Tajikistan, there is also Batya Lukashenko, who tells everyone in a row how his elder brother in the person of GAZPROM as a racket puts the whole country on a brush and after that everyone is waiting for some kind of shifts from Belarus towards Russia? Believe me, there are no idiots sitting there. And the authorities of the Kremlin and its environment, sick of money, save up and save up forgetting about human and fraternal norms.

    there is Armenia in the CSTO, a weak link that is completely dependent on Russia, which has already begun to scandal why we should pay more money than the regions of Russia, plus this is the country where the money is and its influence and lobby, where is it located? It is in the United States and in Europe that both these and other enemies of Russia. And you do not forget who pays the one and orders the music, now imagine what will happen if Russia stands in the direction of Azerbaijan? That Saakashvili will seem to you an Angel. But she sided with Armenia and what has she achieved? Relations with Azerbaijan are deteriorating, radar stations are already losing, projects are contrary to Russia's interests, plus, billions of weapons are bought not only from Russia but also from other countries, and in Armenia, to keep it as a friend, Russia spends billions, sending free weapons and much more.

    there is Kyrgyzstan in the CSTO. Not only do they want to create the Turkic Union, they are still under the influence of the United States, so they don’t think that you are real allies. Since they remember that Russia did not save them in some issues. Conflicts at the border.

    in the CSTO there are Tajiks who are clearly pushing Russia out of the REGION.
    Uzbekistan was in the CSTO.
    so the article is a plus. There is a CSTO TITLE, but the reality is deplorable.

    The question is different, aren't all the countries so bad, or is the policy of the Russian Federation to these countries still wrong?
    The question is certainly interesting.

    If someone is offended by my post, I apologize.

    Regards Omar
    1. Neutral
      Neutral 6 September 2012 10: 24
      -1
      While in Azerbaijan "heroes" are sharpening axes,

      From September 15 to 19, mechanisms of the use of collective security forces and means in the Caucasus region will be worked out on the territory of the Republic of Armenia. The training will be attended by military contingents and formations of special forces and operational groups of Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan, as well as representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross, international observers of the UN, OSCE, CIS. The total number of attracted contingents is about 2000 people.

      The exercise itself will be held at the Baghramyan training ground.
      1. Ataturk
        Ataturk 6 September 2012 10: 46
        +1
        Quote: Neutral
        While in Azerbaijan "heroes" are sharpening axes,


        That's right and they do. Until the insults stop and they will not touch our flag with dirty paws.

        Quote: Neutral
        From September 15-19, mechanisms of the use of force will be worked out on the territory of the Republic of Armenia. The exercise itself will be held at the Baghramyan training ground.

        the flag in your hands!
        1. Piligrim
          Piligrim 7 September 2012 15: 30
          -1
          Who needs you?
          Clever here about changing our heads!
          Ours then changed Yeltsin forgot. And you have so much a model of the monarchy !!! From father to son! And still there is enough arrogance to teach us what and how to do !!!
    2. Evil Tatar
      Evil Tatar 6 September 2012 10: 27
      +5
      Offends, does not offend, that's not the point ...
      Your post simply says in simple words between the lines that if Russia had shared a significant part of its budget between the former republics of the USSR, as before, then everything would have been in chocolate - Russia and its people are brothers forever!
      And so ... Let’s take away Gabala, we have clouded your friends of Armenians, remembering all the grave ones, we’ll go to the camp of the former enemy (USA), we will rest against common sense, and then, as Allah gives ...
      All is one, if Russia will win with her, let’s go, and if it’s not her, then excuse me, Allah would have liked ...

      If anyone is hurt by my post, please forgive me ... Not on purpose, so on stupidity ...
      1. esaul
        esaul 6 September 2012 10: 40
        0
        Quote: Angry Tatar
        If anyone is hurt by my post, please forgive


        By no means, the post absolutely suits me with its unguiled truth. I myself hold the same opinion and expressed myself in a similar vein, colleague.
      2. Ataturk
        Ataturk 6 September 2012 10: 50
        -1
        Quote: Angry Tatar
        Russia would share a significant part of its budget between the former republics of the USSR

        I didn’t say that. The former have enough of their budget!

        Quote: Angry Tatar
        as before, everything would have been in chocolate - Russia and its people are brothers forever!

        Please tell me which republics from the treasury of the USSR as a parasite did you send money to? To Azerbaijan? Ukraine? Belarus? Or maybe rich Kazakhstan? To whom?

        Quote: Angry Tatar
        let's go to the camp of the former enemy (USA)

        I thought communicating with an adult and a reasonable person.
        1. Evil Tatar
          Evil Tatar 6 September 2012 11: 30
          +2
          Quote: Ataturk
          I didn’t say that. The former have enough of their budget!

          It seems so personally to you, but the ruling - a different opinion ...
          Quote: Ataturk
          Please tell me which republics from the treasury of the USSR as a parasite did you send money to? To Azerbaijan? Ukraine? Belarus? Or maybe rich Kazakhstan? To whom?

          Personally, I did not send my money to the republics of the USSR to raise their economies - it wasn’t accepted then ... But I worked in the USSR in cold weather, in harsh conditions, but I believed that I live worthily, in the most beautiful region of the Motherland ...
          And when I learned after perestroika from Gdlyan and Ivanov and other sources, some of the fraternal peoples lived almost like in paradise — they sprouted bamboo in an open field ... Therefore, it is not necessary ...
          Quote: Ataturk
          I thought communicating with an adult and a reasonable person.

          Do you want to start again?
          Understand, I have no desire to start a long and senseless argument ... You have your own sources, and I have your own ... You believe in your truth, and I in your ...
          Whose- Whose is more truthful - the mind will show and judge ...
          (Damn ... Anegdot on the topic: The cop stops the driver ... Takes documents, reads, asks ... Surname !, drove-Whose? ... name, that - Whose? Cent thoughtfully: - Whose-Whose - Chinese that or?)
          Therefore:
          1. Personally, I have no complaints about you, just like where you can come from me ...
          2. You do not owe me anything, I hope the same ...
          3. Well, Russia ... Let's leave Russia alone - let him rest from the turmoil of the 90s, even at least a dozen years ...

          Frets? Do you mind
          1. Evil Tatar
            Evil Tatar 6 September 2012 11: 48
            0
            Ataturk, a colleague in the shop that did not like the joke?
          2. Ataturk
            Ataturk 6 September 2012 11: 52
            0
            Quote: Angry Tatar
            Therefore:
            1. Personally, I have no complaints about you, just like where you can come from me ...
            2. You do not owe me anything, I hope the same ...
            3. Well, Russia ... Let's leave Russia alone - let him rest from the turmoil of the 90s, even at least a dozen years ...

            Frets? Do you mind


            I was pleased to read such a post. The topic is closed.
        2. volcano
          volcano 6 September 2012 11: 58
          -2
          Quote: Ataturk
          Please tell me which republics from the treasury of the USSR as a parasite did you send money to? To Azerbaijan? Ukraine? Belarus? Or maybe rich Kazakhstan? To whom?


          Hello Ataturk.

          If you do not mind getting in with my 5 cents.

          I already wrote about this, but I repeat here. According to Gerashchenko (chairman of the State Bank of the USSR), based on the budget of the USSR (at least for 89 years, but he says that it was like that before), the two republics, namely the RSFSR and the BSSR, contained the remaining 13.
          So they sent money to everyone.

          Sincerely
          1. Ataturk
            Ataturk 6 September 2012 12: 40
            0
            Quote: volkan
            Hello Ataturk.

            If you do not mind getting in with my 5 cents.


            Not against, but rather need to communicate. Suddenly I’ll discover something new for myself. I am for freedom of speech. Somewhere I can be mistaken and I will be pleased if they correct me with facts, I will be grateful.


            Quote: volkan
            So they sent money to everyone.

            If you allow me, I will write what I know. I hope no offense. Since this will be a direct accusation to the Kremlin. The USSR was good in that, the bulk of the inhabitants lived the same way, but the money was withdrawn in different ways, I think Azerbaijan got the least. If interested, I can give an example and discuss this topic.
            1. volcano
              volcano 6 September 2012 14: 10
              +2
              Quote: Ataturk
              I think Azerbaijan got the least.


              Ataturk

              Can you imagine ..... we also think that we got the least laughing

              No offense
              1. Ataturk
                Ataturk 6 September 2012 15: 10
                0
                Quote: volkan
                Can you imagine ..... we also think that we got the least

                No offense


                Dear Andrei, of course, no offense, but listen to my penny.
                Azerbaijan has been a part of Russia since 18. From 18 to 90, oil was pumped through a pipe exclusively to Russia. 70 years old.
                From the same year, from 18 towards Russia, besides black gold and white gold, cotton wool goes. Billions were made on this in due time, I will write about this later.

                by 90, Azerbaijan looked worse than the Baltic states, worse than Ukraine, and worse than other cities. The only thing that they had from the USSR was a radar station that didn’t belong to us, and almost even now they are threatening us at the forum, and weapons.

                Considering that Ilham Aliyev for 5 years, made the country FAIRY beautiful, given the fact that quite a few officials are robbing, in spite of all this, Azerbaijan for 5 years has become one of the most beautiful cities, in economic terms, as well as in the purchase of weapons clear too.

                For 70 years, my country was supposed to be the strongest in all plans, among the former republics of the 90s, but were in a deplorable form.

                Now imagine the scale of the theft of our resources.

                if I am mistaken, I will be glad to read the opposite facts.
                1. nickname 1 and 2
                  nickname 1 and 2 6 September 2012 19: 49
                  -1
                  Ataturk,
                  We need to see if Azerbaijan is self-sufficient!
                  Here's an analogy: China produces and sells rare metals (I don’t remember the name), but only in China do they exist! Without this metal, alloys are junk!
                  So, arguing in your opinion, China is robbed? Is all progress due to the wealth of China?
                  Here is the second analogy: Russia sells gas to the EU! So they rob Russia? Without Russian gas, would progress in the EU go far?

                  Something like that!

                  A huge number of metal structures, etc., etc. - without this, where would Azerbaijan be? Not joining Russia would go to Turkey, Iran, or everywhere successful USA! And what would be left of Azerbaijan by this time?
                  But history (as you know) does not accept the subjunctive mood!
                  If there weren’t Baku as part of the USSR, we would all be part of GREAT GERMANY! What are you talking about?
              2. Piligrim
                Piligrim 7 September 2012 15: 37
                0
                So I talked with the Kyrgyz, in KZ., I also lived with Uzbeks nearby! And do not believe it, they all believe that they gave a LOT in the USSR, but they received less than all the republics!
                like that. So more!
                Now this opinion is enshrined in school textbooks and is already hammered into youth.
        3. Kaa
          Kaa 6 September 2012 20: 17
          +1
          Quote: Ataturk
          Please tell me which republics from the treasury of the USSR as a parasite did you send money to? To Azerbaijan? Ukraine? Belarus? Or maybe rich Kazakhstan? To whom?

          According to 1990 data, per capita GDP consumed in the RSFSR amounted to 67% of the output, in Belarus - 77%. Part of the income of these republics was withdrawn for subsidies to other republics. As a result, the GDP consumed exceeded that produced in Ukraine by 1,07 times, Moldova - 1,34, Kyrgyzstan - 1,58, Latvia - 1,63, Kazakhstan - 1,75, Lithuania - 1,79, Turkmenistan - 1,88, Azerbaijan - at 2,01. The largest gaps were in Estonia - 2,27 times, Uzbekistan - 2,64, Tajikistan - 2,84, Armenia - 3,10 and Georgia - 3,95. According to specialists, at the end of the Soviet period, when regional self-financing was already introduced, subsidies to national republics from the state budget amounted to about $ 50 billion a year. Http://www.hrono.ru/statii/2010/vdovin201003.php
          1. Ataturk
            Ataturk 6 September 2012 21: 08
            0
            Quote: Kaa
            According to 1990, GDP consumed

            You are man. Thank you for the site that you recommended to me. Where I will see you, I will immediately plyusovat!

            GOD GRANT YOU HEALTH.
            1. Kaa
              Kaa 6 September 2012 21: 12
              +1
              Quote: Ataturk
              GOD GRANT YOU HEALTH.

              THANKS AND YOU DON'T LIKE.
        4. KaPToC
          KaPToC 15 November 2016 20: 05
          0
          Quote: Ataturk
          I didn’t say that. The former have enough of their budget!

          In the USSR, ALL the Republics except the RSFSR, Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan were subsidized, and there was only one donor - the RSFSR.
    3. nickname 1 and 2
      nickname 1 and 2 6 September 2012 12: 08
      +1
      Ataturk,

      I wonder if Azerbaijan has such a site on which a certain Russian sits and says:
      Oh dear. yes not so necessary! Went wrong! You don’t do it! Well, what are you wrong with Russia? What is wrong with Armenia? wink
      SHUUUTTTKKKAAA !!!! soldier
      But in fact - lived next to me in a rented apartment (about 5 years ago) = Armenian with his family! He cried for life! He said that he had many wells in Baku! And here is the beggar! And then one day suddenly says ALL = leaving! Aliyev, well done, called us! All WILL LIVE !!!! And left! yes
      I think: everything is not at all as we imagine here! No.

      No where, no one "axes" do not sharpen!
      And those naivets that in Libya yelled at the camera: we’ll break everything! Now they are sitting with a broken trough and will regret their stupidity for a long time! fool

      Nothing personal!
      1. Ataturk
        Ataturk 6 September 2012 12: 49
        +1
        Quote: nick 1 and 2
        I wonder if Azerbaijan has such a site on which a certain Russian sits and says:


        You don’t have to go far, here a Russian peasant from Azerbaijan wrote. And in Azerbaijan you start talking, then believe the Russians will answer you the same way.

        I guarantee 100% !!!

        Again, I am for a healthy dialogue, and most importantly, I respect people when they say 2 + 2, there will be four and you’ll show them on your fingers and make a screen calculator, but alas, many say there will be no 4 and it will be 4000 BC.

        and another question, where did the Armenian go where the well is in Baku?
        1. nickname 1 and 2
          nickname 1 and 2 6 September 2012 15: 51
          +1
          Ataturk,

          Quote: Ataturk
          the question is, where did the Armenian whose well was left in Baku go?


          In Baku! On your wells! He was not here in Moscow "6". (from his words)
          We were neighbors for a couple of months! I really did not have time to get to know each other.
          1. Ataturk
            Ataturk 6 September 2012 16: 25
            -1
            Quote: nick 1 and 2
            In Baku! On your wells! He was not here in Moscow "6". (from his words)


            Believe me, he is lying to you brazenly.
            That's who owns all the wells in Baku

      2. kNow
        kNow 6 September 2012 16: 50
        +3
        Quote: nick 1 and 2
        I wonder if Azerbaijan has such a site on which a certain Russian sits and says:
        Oh dear. yes not so necessary! Went wrong! You don’t do it! Well, what are you wrong with Russia? What is wrong with Armenia

        Oddly enough - there is. smile Former paratrooper, albeit a terrible swindler, but we love him. Sometimes it grabs us by the tail and lets us go to the ground when we break away from reality laughing
    4. Argentum
      Argentum 6 September 2012 14: 45
      -2
      My friend is not tired of crowing in every post? laughing
  11. sergo0000
    sergo0000 6 September 2012 10: 15
    +1
    Organization is indispensable. BUT ... It's time to revise the contract itself. And it’s not even about money. More specific rules are needed. Someone disagrees, good riddance!
  12. Ash
    Ash 6 September 2012 10: 24
    0
    It would be enough to comply with one unconditionally agreement on military cooperation between Russia and China. NATO will nervously smoke aside.
  13. Vasily79
    Vasily79 6 September 2012 10: 25
    0
    Question Volodin Alexey Explain why or for whom and how the survey is used (just interesting) thank you.
    1. Volodin
      6 September 2012 14: 02
      0
      Vasiliy. Surveys are used to display real public opinion on a particular situation. Often they are used as a basis for preparing articles on the subject discussed in the future in order to rely on objective facts, and not on data from sociological services, which, frankly speaking, it is not always possible to trust.
  14. Patriot
    Patriot 6 September 2012 11: 01
    -4
    That is the question.

    I read this news recently

    http://www.vz.ru/news/2012/9/4/596543.html

    By the way, zombie Putin’s adherents, but please tell me why your favorite pres. Putin disbanded this regiment? Or is Russia going to withdraw its fleet from the Black Sea?
    1. Vasily79
      Vasily79 6 September 2012 11: 29
      0
      Quote: Patriot
      By the way, zombie Putin’s adherents, but please tell me why your favorite pres. Putin disbanded this regiment? Or is Russia going to withdraw its fleet from the Black Sea?

      Read more closely and you will understand that you didn’t disband and re-form, but rather read the forum about two days ago about this news.
    2. antiaircrafter
      antiaircrafter 6 September 2012 14: 41
      0
      All the same, we will not fight from this base, which means that excess air defense is not needed there.
      If we fight in alliance with Ukraine, then Ukraine will also find a base than to cover up.
    3. Kaa
      Kaa 6 September 2012 21: 15
      0
      Quote: Patriot
      Or is Russia going to withdraw its fleet from the Black Sea?

      Withdraw fleet from the Russian sea? This is where such a rocky plan?
  15. Ruswolf
    Ruswolf 6 September 2012 12: 19
    0
    In this form, as now, this union is -Not needed!
    Why such an alliance in which everyone can go out whenever he wants. And what if it happens during an armed conflict ?!

    I want to remember Krylov

    When there is no agreement in the comrades,
    In the mood their business will not go,
    And it will not work out of him, only flour.
    1. Ataturk
      Ataturk 6 September 2012 12: 52
      0
      Quote: Ruswolf
      Why such an alliance in which everyone can go out whenever he wants.


      Aim not at getting out or getting in when you want, but about the benefits of what will be at the entrance. And why do you need someone who does not want to be with you? It’s the same as a husband wiring his wife in chains, who has a lover.

      Do you need this?
  16. sichevik
    sichevik 6 September 2012 12: 27
    +1
    You can't trust anyone !!! There was the USSR, there was the Warsaw Treaty ... Where are now all those "loyal allies" who swore eternal friendship? Almost everyone is in NATO. So it is with the current partners, while they are our partners. But if, God forbid, some kind of turmoil begins against us, I am more than sure that we will not see a single partner and ally. We will get out, we are no stranger to it. But some will wash with bloody snot. For our real adversaries will use the territories of all our neighbors as a springboard for a war with us.
    1. Kaa
      Kaa 6 September 2012 21: 19
      +3
      Quote: sichevik
      Where are all those "faithful allies" who swore eternal friendship now?

      Thank God, the matter did not come to a direct conflict between the NATO and the Warsaw Pact, they would get an ax in the back. With such friends and enemies is not necessary. Russia has always had two faithful allies - its Army and Navy, and that’s the whole story.
  17. anfreezer
    anfreezer 6 September 2012 12: 37
    0
    It is necessary to build up your strength, and there are those who want to grab hold of powerful biceps. And we will see there ....
  18. mark021105
    mark021105 6 September 2012 18: 43
    0
    It would not have been necessary in the future to join all of Central Asia, the Baltic states, Ukraine, Moldova ... 150 years ago, all this was already ... Geopolitics, interests ... The Empire needs to be revived !!!
  19. bask
    bask 6 September 2012 18: 53
    +1
    Those who want to be friends with Russia need to be brought into blocs in economic alliances. Two strategic allies are agreed: Belarus and Armenia. Without Russia, NATO would have started a peacekeeping operation long ago, to establish peace and democracy in Russia. It’s vital to remove NATO bases from Central Asia. It is a springboard for expansion and a platform for deploying modern weapons to attack Russia. This must be put to an end !!!.
  20. Dmitry.V
    Dmitry.V 6 September 2012 19: 42
    +1
    Of course, strong allies are needed. If we refuse, our "friends" will immediately be found there, and then it will be even worse. But why not nurture these strong allies? ... Although we are invaders ...
    "An army of rams, led by a lion, will always triumph over an army of lions, led by a ram."
  21. MI-AS-72
    MI-AS-72 6 September 2012 20: 07
    +1
    Quote: Ataturk
    Please tell me which republics from the treasury of the USSR as a parasite did you send money to? To Azerbaijan? Ukraine? Belarus? Or maybe rich Kazakhstan? To whom?

    Annually, for one resident, including local alcoholics, subsidies from the federal budget amounted to:
    Latvia - 997 rubles.
    Estonia - 812 rubles.
    Georgia - 354 rubles
    Latvia - 485 rubles.
    Tajikistan - 220 r
    Moldova - 612 rubles. '
    "And the industrialized republics - Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan?"
    Ukraine - 11 rubles, Belarus - 201 rubles, Kazakhstan 399 rubles a year ... '
    Only 2 republics of the RSFSR and Azerbaijan did not receive, they were donors.
    1. Yeraz
      Yeraz 7 September 2012 16: 10
      +1
      the list is not complete. Can you give information how much Armenia, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan received?
  22. sania275
    sania275 6 September 2012 20: 24
    0
    During the military conflict with Georgia, Russia received neither moral, political nor military support from ,, allies, Hence the answer to the question in this article.
    1. MI-AS-72
      MI-AS-72 6 September 2012 21: 01
      +1
      And why, we needed their support, the price of this support, ZERO from a donut, everyone understands (including in the Kremlin) that in the world the union can be between equal or strong, Russia is not strong today, the countries included in the CSTO, also not very, therefore, only talk about allied relations, and no more than the Collective Security Treaty Organization, Russia needs only one thing, to win time and to prevent everything from penetrating NATO and the United States to its borders. Now, if we rise then we can talk about creating a serious military structure within the framework of the CSTO. And now I hope there are no fools to repeat the mistakes of the Warsaw Pact.
    2. Yeraz
      Yeraz 7 September 2012 16: 24
      +2
      That's right. The Collective Security Treaty Organization is an artificial temporary formation. Inactive organization both in the military sense and in the political.
      Well, I can’t imagine a Kazakh or an Uzbek, not only fighting for Karabakh on the side of the Armenians, but even acting as their leader with condemnation or threats towards Baku. And the Russian government also understands this very well, therefore, separate bilateral agreements are concluded with the CSTO participants. that during an emergency, many participants stupidly ignore the CSTO provisions.
  23. 16
    16 6 September 2012 23: 03
    -2
    eh .. !!!!! would be the USSR !!!! and as a matter of fact - the CST is not a union -------- Russia's attempt to create something, as opposed to NATO and America !!! !!!!!!! Why the USSR collapsed?
  24. Husseyn
    Husseyn 7 September 2012 05: 21
    +2
    CSTO.
    Belarus and Lukashenko, money has already been bought by my mother. Do not worry. Lukashenko is a dictator, the question, even for decades, will fly away, i.e. money in the air.
    Kazakhstan and Nazarbayev, the same song, with the departure of this Kazakh, is not a fact that loyal to Russia will come.
    Nudibranch Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, the same song, but even more simple ...
    Armenia, there are signs of weak democracy, but the whole history traveled on the backs of Russian soldiers, and owes its very education in the Caucasus to Russia. One BUT - a powerful lobby not only in Russia, from here they can change their course.
    With the exception of Kazakhstan, there may be all FREEZERS and sit on the neck of Russia. According to the experience of recent years, wherever Russia relied on dictators, it flew by, and with huge losses. All the parasites whom they fed and watered turned into enemies.

    It is simpler from the funds that are allocated to parasites, they are spent on maintaining and feeding the kings, to re-equip and strengthen their armed forces, the economy and not repeat the mistakes of the USSR. Also an ear with a commodity economy, but bent as we remember.
    1. motors
      motors 7 September 2012 10: 45
      0
      Talking about Kazakhstan. I doubt their sincerity to be an ally of the Russian Federation (since their army is rearmed in the Western manner). Having no alternatives, Kazakhstan will cooperate with Russia, and even despite the constant pressure from the Russian Federation, it purchases Western weapons. But not always successfully - in 2004, the Russian Federation managed to "disagree" Kazakhstan from purchasing air defense radars.

      I'm sorry for my Russian. he is not a wound tongue
  25. motors
    motors 7 September 2012 10: 33
    0
    Honestly, I don’t see Bolshev’s sense of military cooperation between Russia and the Asian states from the former USSR. At least comparing the devices and problems of society there and in Russia, where the latter is much nicer than Kyrgyzstan or Turkmenistan. Corruption, the inferior productivity of the economy is only some problem. To a large extent, exceptions are Kazakhstan. Cooperation between Russia and these countries can be more effective if only to use the infrastructure of the latter for the bases of the Russian Armed Forces.

    Smysl has more cooperation with countries such as Ukraine, Kazakhstan or Belarus with which the armed forces are much more efficient.

    And here is a very important question - against whom do you unite? Proto NATO or China?
    According to the new military doctrine of the Russian Federation, NATO countries are not enemies but not friends (!) As the wikileaks scandal shows, NATO does not even have defense plans against eventual threats from Russia or any other CIS member. It was only after the debt stubbornness of the Baltic states and Polsha that an assistance plan was developed. Well, this can be explained exclusively by historical opats about relationships.
    And so, in principle, there is no threat from the story of Russia and there will not be anything that can be explained to deep economic cooperation that is the basis of everything. For example, in the same Latvia, many enterprises are assigned to Russian capital, and the latter do not have any benefit to bear huge losses, glad of some kind of war. I already do not say that the very wealthy people of the Russian Federation often live more in "hostile" NATO and EU countries than at home.

    Sorry for the mistakes. Russian is not my happy language
  26. kush62
    kush62 7 September 2012 11: 13
    0
    As a child, I watched the film "Winds blow in Baku" in my opinion. There a German spy in our uniform knocked out his tank and cried. Very much like the father of the Turks. There are a lot of words supposedly for Russia, but as soon as you are interested, you can immediately see xy from xy.
    In order for there to be friendship, there must be equality. And the elder brother, the middle brother, the cousin is garbage. See how many words like nudibranchs, holodars, narrow-eyed, etc. That Ukrainians crawl, etc. etc. Equality should be first. No one wants to be addicted.
  27. Husseyn
    Husseyn 7 September 2012 12: 04
    +1
    kush62, there will never be equality, firstly simply because it does not exist in human civilization in general, and secondly because it does not exist in Russia itself. A country that does not have a clear, established structure of political power, led by a dictator, does not have a built and strong civil society, and with a host of corrupt regional dictators, is unstable. Another year and all processes in Russia will be frozen, just happen an emergency with Putin or an assassination attempt and it will be a stool knocked out from under the hangman's feet. Who needs a partner where everything is tied to a couple of people in her leadership and echoing ONE? ...
    1. kush62
      kush62 7 September 2012 12: 09
      +1
      Equality must be in respect for peoples and peoples to each other. And if in the words mo - skali, Uruses, chocks, crests, khachiki, then clearly, nothing good will come of it.
  28. Igoriok222
    Igoriok222 7 September 2012 18: 41
    0
    Membership of Ukraine, China and other countries would not hurt the CSTO.
  29. Stone
    Stone 12 September 2012 23: 00
    0
    Russia just needs to replace the political elite in some Central Asian countries (I think the peoples of these countries with both hands for this) with more loyal ones. If you do not pursue a more aggressive foreign policy with regard to the near abroad, the United States will undoubtedly implement or already pursue this policy. can not be!