Military Review

Russia. Power of powerlessness

99
Russia's military gain seems to compensate for relative weakness in other factors of strength.

Russia headed for military gain. At the same time, the military external threat is unprecedentedly low. But the course with variations will continue. It fits into the emerging new international realities and meets the internal logic of the current development of the country. The question is how to optimize it.
We - and, it seems, the leaders of the country - do not explain ourselves to ourselves and, perhaps, do not fully know why we need military force and how much we need it.
Does force lose value?

It is generally accepted that military power loses its meaning. This thesis is especially popular in Europe, bursting on its Samoyed stories wars
Indeed, most of the main problems of the modern world — climate change, the demand for greater well-being from the activating masses, the state of world finances, the growing relative shortage of raw materials and food — are not solved by military force. The changed political culture and economic structure make it economically meaningless to seize and retain territories and the population living there.

The use of military force is to a certain extent delegitimized. If before the war, paraphrasing Clausewitz’s formula that was imposed on his teeth, was a normal continuation of politics, now, after two world wars and the emergence of nuclear weaponsethical evaluations have shifted. The use of military force is considered a failure of politics.

The thesis of the uselessness and futility of military force in the modern and future world both as an instrument of policy and as an indicator of the power and influence of states also reinforces the experience of recent years. The most powerful military state - the United States - loses two consecutive wars that it initiated (Iraq, Afghanistan).

But the idea of ​​diminishing the role of military force in the world and its devaluation as the leading tool of public policy is contradicted by a different set of factors and arguments.

Renaissance power?

Wars are still won. The West won in Yugoslavia and - with a murky result - in Libya. Russia won, albeit at a terrible price, in Chechnya and, of course, in Georgia.

Nuclear deterrence works without major wars. And nobody seriously reduces nuclear weapons. And only modernizes - and increases. New world leaders such as China or India, who seem to be winning in peaceful competition, are rapidly arming themselves.
There are constant talks about future wars over resources, water.

Such conversations can be considered remnants of the old thinking. And it is. State and scientific spheres related to security policy are overflowing with good-looking gentlemen who have passed their peak of life, who are unable and unwilling to think otherwise than as categories of the times of their youth. And they pull back. Who - through inventing endless threats. Who - through calls for the return of the blessed times of the arms limitation process. Which was one of the engines (albeit decent) to continue the arms race.

If one of the readers of this article considers me one of these gentlemen, I will not be offended. Although with them for the most part and do not agree. But called gruzdem - get into the body.

Talk about threats apparently have objective grounds.

Dreams - liberal (about world government) or reactionary (about a new concert of powerful nations that would rule the world) - do not come true. The world is moving towards ordinary chaos, aggravated by interdependence.

Many ethical norms of the international community are undermined. Many people justified the attack on Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya with humanitarian considerations. But the main thing is the result. Countries have seen the weak beat. And at least some strong - do not beat. Non-nuclear Iraq was smashed under false pretenses. And even less pleasant from a humanitarian point of view, but the North Korea that has managed to acquire nuclear weapons is not touched.
The old principles of political morality also go away - “they don’t give up”. First, "their" passed the Soviet Union. Now the West began to take over its “own” Mubaraks.

In the new world, the seizure of direct control over the territory and the resources located on it does not work. But the closure or opening of access to them by military methods can be ensured. It is not by chance that the "new" is almost the main direction of the buildup of armaments - the naval forces. If countries develop a tendency to overlap the headwaters of the rivers, especially dangerous for Indochina and India, then this problem can also be solved with the help of military force.

The renaissance of the role of military force in international relations is also served by the long-established proliferation of nuclear weapons. New and potential nuclear powers put their neighbors in a vulnerable position. They are trying and will try to compensate for it.

Structural changes in the international system are also pushing towards greater reliance on military might. Faced with global challenges while weakening global governance institutions, societies rushed under the protection of their usual institution — the state. The re-nationalization of world politics and part of the economy began.

But states have weakened. They are less able to control informational, financial, economic, and hence political processes, even on their own territory. While they are increasingly dependent on the outside world. One more incentive is being created for greater reliance on the instrument that states still almost completely control, military force.

In the medium term, the global re-militarization of world politics can also be caused by the global economic crisis that is dragging on for a decade. He limits the appetites of military lobbies. But at the same time it strengthens the radicals within countries and creates powerful incentives to start wars in order to distract from internal despair. The war in Libya - with all due respect to the people whom Gaddafi had turned against - looked like a classic small victorious war.

Russia and military force

And Russia began to build up this force. While in terms of military security, it is in an unprecedented situation in its history. The country that has been forming the millennium around the main national idea - protection from external threats and ensuring its physical sovereignty - no one threatens and cannot threaten in the medium term.

The last possibility of military confrontation existed before 2008, while the expansion of NATO threatened to involve Ukraine in the union. What could create the vulnerability of Russia, intolerable from the point of view of military security, was fraught with the emergence in Ukraine of a split and conflict in which all of Europe could be drawn with a high degree of probability.

The expansion of the union was stopped, alas, by no appeals to reason and persuasion. A blow to the military fist in Georgia. Moscow must be "grateful" to the current Georgian leadership and those who pushed him for his attack on South Ossetia. It, by its war and defeat, prevented a much more dangerous scenario.

Russian foreign threat propagandists often point to NATO’s formal superiority in the field of general-purpose forces. But they cunningly fail to see that these armed forces and spending on them in Europe have been declining for two decades and there is no end in sight.
China, anticipating the deepening of its rivalry, including military-political, with the United States, is doing everything so as not to threaten Russia. There is, of course, the problem of China's gain, which could lead in the absence of a super-energetic policy on the new development of Transbaikalia to the “Finlandization” of Russia. But this is not a military threat.

The real threats of conflict are multiplying in the southern periphery of Russia. And these conflicts will have to be prevented or stopped, including by military force. But this threat is qualitatively different from the existential threat that determined the entire history of Russia.

Even in perspective, the obvious traditional large-scale military threats are not visible. Unless, of course, intimidating oneself with the threat of the United States creating the ability to deliver a massive strike at Russia with non-nuclear ultra-precise missiles. Even if the missiles are created, the threat of hitting the Russian territory looks ridiculous. The answer can only be nuclear. If, of course, do not let yourself be drawn into an arms race in this obviously unfavorable direction.

You can intimidate yourself and the European missile defense system following the example of the Soviet, frightened by the absolutely mythical Reagan star wars. I hope that those who are leading the current campaign against Euro-PRO, pursue more rational goals: to politically tie the hands of the Americans, to get a convenient and convincing excuse for refusing any further treaty steps to reduce any nuclear weapons.

But despite the absence of a military threat, the continuation of the course of military reinforcement is inevitable. Not only because of the need to have modern armed forces to contain potential challenges.

I think that in the eyes of the current Russian leadership, the need for military reinforcement is determined primarily by the factors of the international positioning of the country, taking into account the prospects for its development. Four years of sweet curls about modernization in the almost complete absence of any concrete actions, except for Skolkovo, clearly indicate that neither society nor the elite have matured for a modernization breakthrough.

With such a vector of internal development, a country may not hold the position of the third of the great powers. Despite all the luck and skill of diplomacy. And, apparently, the need for "greatness" lies not only in the ambitions of the leaders, but also in the majority of Russians.

Economic weakening threatens and weakens sovereignty. Not only Vladimir Putin, but also other Russians received in the 1990-ies. confirmation of his confidence that the weak are beaten. And society, it seems, is again almost at the gene level ready to defend its sovereignty at all costs. What it has done with a rare desperate courage throughout its history. Then to crawl into poverty, and even slavery. It is regrettable that, for the most part, we cannot and do not want to “live like everyone else”, to be a “normal” country. And I still do not see such changes on the horizon that could break this type of behavior.

Military reinforcement, it seems, is intended to compensate for the relative weakness in other factors of power - economic, technological, ideological and psychological.

It is easy to condemn such a bet as not corresponding to the modern world. This is in many ways. But the modern world is changing so quickly and unpredictably, which is very likely that this rate is adequate.

Military reinforcement is inevitable

The risk of errors is increased by the fact that there are practically no institutional arms race limiters.
The most interesting and illustrative in the beginning of the military reform - its success. All other proclaimed reforms stand still, crawling at a snail's pace, or simply fail. It is not only the claimed defense appropriation figures. Behind them clearly are not fully thought out rearmament plans.

There is a truly revolutionary reformation of the armed forces. From the huge, traditionally mobilized Russian, Soviet army, designed primarily for a large land war with the West, in favor of a compact, more professional army of constant combat readiness, which would be aimed at low and medium intensity conflicts. To prevent major conflicts, reliance on nuclear weapons is increasing, which is also being upgraded.

Powerful nuclear weapons, although difficult to apply, are still needed so that no one tries to achieve superiority in conventional forces. In addition, the nuclear sword of Damocles is necessary for the "civilization" of hotheads. Especially now, when unprecedented in depth and speed changes in the world lead to the loss of strategic landmarks, common sense.

It is already obvious that the army is rapidly professionalizing and a complete refusal of the conscription or its further sharp reduction and transfer to a voluntary basis is not far off. Began, albeit unevenly, slowly, the humanization of military service. But the main thing is that the armed forces, despite the wild resistance, are honed under the real challenges and problems of the present and the future.

Rearming comes with a creak. MIC is drained of blood. But the main thing - almost not reformed. And it remains the shadow of the Soviet Leviathan. As recently as the pale shadow of the Soviet was the Russian army.

I will not list achievements. A lot of them. The list of problems and errors will not be shorter. Moreover, the reforms were deliberately not discussed and not worked out. Apparently, the military-political leadership of the country concluded that any discussion would lead to such an opposition that the reform would be ruined once again. Even the fundamental documents - the national security strategy of 2009 and the military doctrine of 2010 practically did not reflect the processes going on in the armed forces. Just located in other, few intersecting planes.

How much and how much

Continuing the course of military reinforcement is not only generally desirable for the ruling elite, and perhaps for the country, but also inevitable. The question is how and how much. It is necessary not to overspend money, having ruined the budgets for development, but it seems that the course has already been taken for a suicidal for the country to reduce — instead of a sharp increase — expenditures on education. Destroying even trans-horizon opportunities for modernization spurt.
It is foolish, peretrativ and re-armed beyond reasonable measure, to create their own enemies, fearing Russia.

The risk of mistakes is increased by the fact that there are practically no institutional arms race limiters. While only two limiters. Finance ministers - past and present - are trying not to give as much as they require. And the Minister of Defense is trying to limit the appetites of the hungry and, apparently, corrupt, like almost all of us, the remnants of the military-industrial complex. The parliament in the current political system cannot play a serious role in determining military policy and budget formation.

No less alarming, there is still virtually no scientific and public debate around the definition of military policy priorities. And in a limited form, it existed even in the late USSR. The then created academic groups of specialists physically and morally aged. Now, to the right - from the liberal side - the current military policy is criticized, as far as I know, by literally two or three publicists. Honor and praise them for their courage. But they do not have sufficient knowledge and are politically engaged. In the center there is a group of specialists close to the Ministry of Defense, who, of necessity, praise all his actions and do not pay attention to mistakes. On the left - in the media, fortunately, not reaching the mass reader at all - dozens, if not hundreds, of specialists representing the remnants of the monetary and intellectually bloodless academic part of the Soviet military-industrial complex write. I will not surprise the reader with the phantasmagoric threats with which these experts scare themselves and our country. Very often, their descriptions have no conjugation with reality, are a caricature of Soviet inventions. It seems that they do not listen. But they are crushing by the masses and cannot fail to shape public opinion in the multimillion human environment associated with defense. Among some of these specialists, both Serdyukov and Putin behind him are considered to be almost traitors, limiting insane appetites, trying not to successfully impose competition, any modern methods of management.

The article is not a note to governing bodies. Therefore, I will not give detailed recommendations. Many of them, I think, are obvious. Some are not obvious to me. But in order to understand what needs to be done, it is necessary to artificially create an independent public, political, and scientific examination of the processes taking place in the military sphere. Or there will be too many extremely costly mistakes.
Author:
Originator:
http://hvylya.org
99 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. Vadivak
    Vadivak 5 October 2012 11: 30
    +25
    Power from impotence

    Wrong, somehow. From powerlessness they eat Viagra. And the strength is from pumping up muscles and will.
    1. Tirpitz
      Tirpitz 5 October 2012 11: 50
      +6
      I do not agree with you a little. Many go to the gym precisely from impotence. (at school they beat, at the institute they humiliate .......). The Klitschko brothers went to boxing precisely because they were offended at school.
      1. Vadivak
        Vadivak 5 October 2012 12: 23
        +17
        Quote: Tirpitz
        Many go to the gym precisely from impotence.


        People go to the gym not from impotence, but from a desire to take revenge, this requires will, that means a person is already strong, spiritually, and you can be powerless all your life being captive of your own lie
        1. Tirpitz
          Tirpitz 5 October 2012 12: 40
          +1
          Quote: Vadivak
          They don’t go to the gym from impotence, but from a desire to take revenge

          Not always. Many go so that there are no situations when you need to take revenge. God saves man, who save himself.
          1. aksakal
            aksakal 5 October 2012 13: 07
            0
            Quote: Tirpitz
            Not always. Many go so that there are no situations when you need to take revenge. God saves man, who save himself.
            - a case not from Germany? Notes familiar, so orderly-pedantic -))))
            1. Tirpitz
              Tirpitz 5 October 2012 17: 58
              +1
              Quote: aksakal
              a case not from Germany?

              Ukraine. Odessa region
        2. aksakal
          aksakal 5 October 2012 13: 06
          0
          Quote: Vadivak
          and because of the desire to take revenge, it needs a will, then a person is already strong, spiritually and powerless you can be all your life captive of your own lies

          Are you a case not from the Caucasus? The notes are familiar.
          I am from Kazakhstan - wounded vanity - the reason -)))). Lost, decided to prove (not revenge, different things).
      2. Borizzz
        Borizzz 22 October 2012 14: 16
        0
        What the hell! ????
        People have a lot of reasons to go to the gym!
        One of my reasons is self-discipline, well, just keeping yourself in order. My girlfriend likes my cubes)))))
    2. Ross
      Ross 5 October 2012 13: 35
      +5
      Vadivak,
      Strange article, Leads to the side.
    3. Yura
      Yura 5 October 2012 16: 33
      +3
      Quote: Vadivak
      And the strength is from pumping up muscles and will.

      Exactly so, and only after that i.e. having real power, have the ability to conduct successful diplomacy. If this article was signed by Gorbachev I would not be surprised, but in general I see a picture of an ostrich with its head in the sand.
    4. starshina78
      starshina78 5 October 2012 19: 45
      +2
      Solid pacifism. Even, suppose, if there is no military threat, then the army and navy must be modernized, new weapons developed, new dual-use equipment. Always developing new weapons, helped to produce normal equipment for the population. And the author is too clever with threats. They are, they simply cannot be, they cannot be.
    5. galeo88
      galeo88 6 October 2012 05: 27
      +1
      I agree that it is never harmful to increase military power. Example 1941, Iraq, Libya, without "pumped up fists" anyone will hit us on the nose.
  2. mongoose
    mongoose 5 October 2012 11: 37
    0
    gee! or maybe the afftor will say what the Armed Forces are?
  3. strannik595
    strannik595 5 October 2012 11: 41
    +16
    increasing relative scarcity of raw materials and food - can not be solved with the help of military force................ tell it to Iraqis and Libyans
  4. Wedmak
    Wedmak 5 October 2012 11: 42
    +16
    Some kind of muddy article. Either the force is needed, or the force is not needed .... Either it acts, or not ... the author pours from empty to empty.
    My opinion: Strengthening and modernizing the army is needed. Never a state that does not have an army and navy behind will not be a significant player. It will either be ignored or simply crushed. It is not yet time to disarm. And will not come in the next 100 years.
  5. andrei332809
    andrei332809 5 October 2012 11: 48
    +6
    they suggest that we don’t arm ourselves? afraid, scum.
  6. Andrey_K
    Andrey_K 5 October 2012 11: 48
    +18
    Firstly, the threat of war is stronger than ever
    Secondly, Russia has always been a magnet for various "Napoleons" (maybe somewhere on the territory the "magnetic stone" was buried) - for her, war is a "professional risk".
    Thirdly, the Russian people (in the light of paragraph 2 and sad history) can be happy only if there is a powerful army that can break anyone, and happiness is not only increased productivity, but simply the main goal that the government must ensure.
    In Brazil, for the happiness of the people, it is necessary to hold a carnival parade, and in Russia to make new military equipment.
    1. leon-iv
      leon-iv 5 October 2012 12: 33
      -11
      Firstly, the threat of war is stronger than ever
      With whom? Real List?
      Secondly, Russia has always been a magnet for various "Napoleons"
      While I do not see such leaders? Give an example.
      1. volcano
        volcano 5 October 2012 12: 46
        +3
        Quote: leon-iv

        Firstly, the threat of war is stronger than ever
        With whom? Real List?


        Colleague ... the question is incorrect ....
        Any arguments "on the possibility of war" can be broken by arguments "on its impossibility" ..... this opinion versus opinion ....

        But often wars happen "not because of" but "in spite of".
        Take the example of the Soviet-Finnish ....... who would have thought that Finland could resist, but it did .....
        who would have thought that in the 80s there might be an armed conflict between two not weak states, but remember the Falklands ..... and by the way England didn’t shout that she would use nuclear weapons .... and didn’t ...

        In our world, everything is possible.
        And for the worst case scenario, you need to be prepared ........ because in words .... this was not expected .... and this could not happen in principle ...... nothing can be fixed.
        1. leon-iv
          leon-iv 5 October 2012 14: 37
          -3
          Take the example of the Soviet-Finnish ....... who would have thought that Finland could resist, but it did .....
          Umm, what about Vyborg from within the Russian Federation? How this is achieved is a separate issue.
          and by the way, England didn’t shout that it would use nuclear weapons .... and didn’t ...
          that conflict lasted for decades. The only similar is the smokers, but there they adequately assess the threat and strengthen the 18-PulAD. And who would let England use nuclear weapons?
      2. Andrey_K
        Andrey_K 5 October 2012 15: 10
        +9
        1) The USA - their plans to destroy the USSR have not disappeared anywhere - only the word of the USSR has been replaced by another - for this they are stubbornly developing ways to neutralize Russian nuclear weapons - as soon as they provide sufficient protection, they will strike immediately.
        2) China - the Chinese have not fought with anyone for a long time, but they are hunting, it’s up to someone they are pushing at Japan — they have already attacked India, Vietnam, even the USSR.
        Just as long as their economic expansion is more productive than the military, they prefer the economy, as soon as difficulties begin in the economy - wait for provocations.
        3) Japan - if there weren’t Russian military power, it would immediately occupy the islands - the peace treaty has not yet been signed, therefore Japan still cherishes the hope of taking the islands by force.
        4) Arab world. Aggressive religions (Salafists and Wahhabis) gained determination and began the struggle to gain their version of Islam around the world.
        So far they are conquering other Muslim countries, but as soon as things are completed there, a turn of other directions will come: Central Asia, the Caucasus, Russia, Europe, the USA.
        Something tells me that Europe and the United States in their plans will be at the end of the list (for some reason, all novice conquerors of the world put Russia at the top of their list after they gain strength)
        5) Afghanistan. Small and bad, after the Americans are kicked out, the Taliban may experience euphoria in their brains and be tempted to start conquering Central Asia, where they will find many supporters among the local population, and Europe, the USA, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan will gladly support them with money and weapons.
        6) So far enough, but the global crisis may still give rise to several hotbeds of tension, starting with the war in the Arctic and ending with the inappropriate behavior of Turkey or Iran.
        1. leon-iv
          leon-iv 5 October 2012 17: 11
          -4
          The United States - their plans for the destruction of the USSR have not disappeared anywhere - only the word of the USSR has been replaced by another - it is for this that they are stubbornly developing ways to neutralize Russian nuclear weapons - as soon as they provide sufficient protection, they will strike immediately.
          You would be interested in the state of strategic nuclear forces in the United States. But pro PRO is fantastic. But even our new missiles are made taking into account all their dreams in the field of pro.
          As well as the state of nuclear weapons production in the USA. Here's an example for you Americans are already processing nuclear fuel for nuclear power plants in Russia.
          And look at their Air Force. Do you see really new planes there? Now think about how much they need to update the air force fleet to ensure the necessary intensity of departures.
          China - the Chinese have not fought with anyone for a long time, but they want to fight, it’s up to someone who is bullied in Japan — they have already attacked India, Vietnam, even the USSR.
          Just as long as their economic expansion is more productive than the military, they prefer the economy, as soon as difficulties begin in the economy - wait for provocations.

          I agree with you. But Russia is not stupid at all in matters of foreign policy and is actively pumping arms and technologies both China and India. And not so much products as projects. I highly recommend looking at PLA Navy submarines and India. A degree is tense
          Japan - if there weren’t Russian military power, it would immediately occupy the islands - the peace treaty has not yet been signed, therefore Japan still cherishes the hope of taking the islands by force.
          And immediately get hits from YES on infrastructure facilities? Yapi are not fools and even Americans will not give them.
          Arab world
          As military adversaries they are 0, but as terrorists it is a danger. But for this there is the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the FSB

          I’m talking about something. Really serious opponents of Russia are 2 US and China. But neither one nor the other wants to fight, because someone else will benefit from this, and if there is a victory, then Pyrrhic.
          1. Andrey_K
            Andrey_K 5 October 2012 18: 55
            +1
            The United States is now actively relying on drones.
            A million aircrafts will destroy any country without the use of nuclear weapons - and no air defense will help.
            Old destruction methods are no longer needed.
            The fact that they abandoned the development of nuclear weapons means that a more promising replacement has appeared.

            So far, Arabs and Taliban are only terrorists, but this does not mean that they will not be able to switch to classical methods of warfare if they control a territory and population the size of China.
            1. leon-iv
              leon-iv 6 October 2012 09: 53
              +1
              The United States is now actively relying on drones.
              It is not from a good life.
              A million aircrafts will destroy any country without the use of nuclear weapons - and no air defense will help.
              eot like 100500 cruise missiles. Proofs even I do not judge yet strike UAVs capable of delivering strategic strikes. Here we will talk. Especially in air defense, we will soon also have a new line.
              The fact that they abandoned the development of nuclear weapons means that a more promising replacement has appeared.
              Since the age of 91, they have been working on ogo garbage. And even in the aerospace industry, migrants, including from the former USSR, can now work. What do you think is a good life?
              So far, Arabs and Taliban are only terrorists, but this does not mean that they will not be able to switch to the classical methods of warfare
              So far, I only see that the Arabs have not created a single modern model of military hardware. And the infantry masses are not even the 20th, it is the 18-19th century. Yes, and there will not be a single Muslim world too different Islam, they will enthusiastically slaughter each other.

              PS You see, if a war was planned within the next 5-8 years, for example, the USA wouldn’t saw the F-35 superwaffle and cut the ticonderogs and Perry, but on the contrary would put the F-15 and F-16 on the conveyor. Abrash would be allowed to re-enter, and up to the level of SEPV2 they would not have tuned not 1000 tanks in 5 years, but all in 3 years. And there are many such examples. Ours would likewise not wait for new models but would release old ones with modernization. I do not urge you to sit peacefully with your paws raised; I want threats to be assessed adequately. And adequately addressed. Where do you need PMCs, where do you need light brigades, where do you need strategic nuclear forces and heavy brigades.
        2. Sandov
          Sandov 5 October 2012 22: 42
          +1
          Andrey_K,
          + Amer now works against us more delicately and subtly. Swamp, white ribbons - this is their job. I think the guns are different. Loosen from the inside. And military force will be used when we raise our paws in front of the general people. Arming? Slow.
  7. volcano
    volcano 5 October 2012 11: 49
    +13
    What is the author of a pacifist?
    It hints that we are trying in vain to build up our military power and bluntly says that no one will attack us ...
    Well, NATO also tells us so ......... to believe such speeches and promises is the height of shortsightedness and stupidity ....
    1. DYMITRY
      DYMITRY 5 October 2012 12: 19
      +12
      Good afternoon, colleague.
      I was more pleased with the calls for public discussion about military reform and rearmament. It’s hard to imagine more dibilism. The whole country is a pancake, military geniuses, solid Suvorovs and Zhukovs.
      IMHO The author is a professional talker from the series - I do not know how to, but you still do everything wrong.
      1. volcano
        volcano 5 October 2012 12: 40
        +5
        Quote: DYMITRY
        IMHO The author is a professional talker from the series - I do not know how to, but you still do everything wrong.

        I agree.

        But he also hints that we are all like fools .... we are not focusing our efforts ..... our brains are ossified .... and we all suffer from persecution mania ....

        And the fact that the world is rapidly arming itself and increasing its military budgets ..... even Australia, which nobody seems to need for nothing ....... he so carefully avoids it ....

        Or believes that everything around n ... one he is Dartanyan.
  8. ultraC
    ultraC 5 October 2012 11: 49
    +13
    Even the ancients said, if you want peace, get ready for war. There is no army, there is no power! The article is essentially harmful!
  9. silver_roman
    silver_roman 5 October 2012 11: 51
    +10
    "The most powerful militarily state - the United States - is losing two wars in a row that it initiated (Iraq, Afghanistan)." is an extremely stupid statement. The author, in order to judge the results of the conduct of hostilities on the territory of Afghanistan and Iraq by the United States, you need to know their goals. And the goals, I believe, were not at all the fight against terrorists and the establishment of a democratic order in such barbaric countries with dictatorial regimes. It seems to me that you have achieved most of your goals, and therefore the war can be considered victorious. the developing countries have bases close by, control over puppet countries such as Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and other husks has been established, the interests of "great and all-powerful democracy" are defended, so, comrades, the states know what they are doing and there is nothing to blame
    1. Purgen
      Purgen 5 October 2012 12: 23
      0
      Interesting "husk" Uzbekistan with a population of 30 million. There are 45 million people in Ukraine. Not far from the "husk" of Uzbekistan left.
      1. leon-iv
        leon-iv 5 October 2012 12: 34
        0
        e went far from the "husk" of Uzbekistan.
        Looking from which side to look.
      2. silver_roman
        silver_roman 5 October 2012 12: 48
        +3
        and where does the population size ??? take Germany as an example: the population is about 80 million people, of which 10 million are emigrants from Turkey, etc., but if we compare the armies of the same Ukraine and Germany in proportion to the ability of the armed forces to population, then Ukraine is clearly a loser. the same is with Uzbekistan: despite 30 million people, their armed forces are in decline. in addition, a lot of military infrastructure remained on the territory of Ukraine: the same Kharkov tank plant, etc. Scientific base, not to mention all the equipment left over from the times of the USSR. It is a pity, of course, that under the onslaught of the states, many wonderful types of equipment had to be cut. I personally was at the Tu-22 "aircraft graveyard", there were also Tu-160s there.
      3. Purgen
        Purgen 5 October 2012 15: 33
        0
        For Central Asia, this "husk" "to the eyebrows" is enough to set everything on fire. There is enough military infrastructure and equipment in Uzbekistan. It is not for nothing that the main "launch pad" for Afgan was in Uzbekistan. No questions asked, everything is in a rather poor state. But that will be enough.
        1. Brother Sarych
          Brother Sarych 5 October 2012 16: 38
          +1
          How do you know how and in what condition in Uzbekistan? Is it really that bad?
          1. Purgen
            Purgen 5 October 2012 16: 58
            0
            Sarych. Everything is written in the text. In "deplorable enough". This does not mean "ruins" or "absence." Read and understand literally. And not the way you want (or your Imagination). You consider the Tuzel military airfield a model for modernizing and equipping an Air Force base. Don't be ridiculous. He has some actions taking place on it. Military transporters are standing. Yes, the decommissioned Tu and that's all. As for the rest of the troops, I will be very surprised that it will be much better. Good luck.
    2. rexby63
      rexby63 5 October 2012 12: 34
      +2
      Exactly. Amer achieved the most important thing - destabilization.
  10. Andrey64
    Andrey64 5 October 2012 12: 04
    +7
    The author clearly smokes something laughing Or mishandled Cossack.
  11. saruman
    saruman 5 October 2012 12: 05
    +1
    The author is right in one thing - the strength of Russia, now rests mainly on military power, which all world players have to reckon with. In the foreseeable future, Russia really has nothing to rely on except military force. I also agree with Karaganov that reducing spending on education will lead to sad results.
  12. Rezun
    Rezun 5 October 2012 12: 15
    +9
    The first one. Russia is not arming, but is modernizing its armed forces — twenty years have not passed without a trace — the defense potential has been lost by a third (IMHO).
    Second. The concentration of resources in the defense industry will inevitably give an impetus for the development of "civilian" industries (technology, personnel, finance).
    The third. Threats are always present - even breathing is harmful.

    I put the article "-".
  13. dmb
    dmb 5 October 2012 12: 18
    +7
    From Wikipedia So too6 sometimes they write the truth) "The program of" de-Stalinization of society "proposed by Karaganov in April 2011 at the Council for the Development of Civil Society and Human Rights under the President of the Russian Federation was subjected to harsh criticism of some political forces. ):

    1. It must be admitted that “after the last 100 years, the people of Russia have almost no respect for themselves”.

    2. It is necessary to recognize the Soviet period of our history as one big crime, and the Soviet Union as a criminal state.

    3. It must be recognized that "all of Russia is the great Katyn." At the same time, I mean the point of view that the mass graves in Katyn are the work of the NKVD.

    4. It is necessary to recognize that in the USSR a “genocide” was carried out, that is, the Soviet state deliberately exterminated the Soviet people.

    5. It is necessary to recognize the USSR as a "totalitarian state" and on this basis consider it the same as Hitler's Germany.

    6. It is necessary to recognize that the USSR is responsible for the outbreak of the Second World War, along with Nazi Germany.

    7. It is necessary to rewrite history textbooks in order to reflect in them everything that concerns the genocide in Soviet times and the USSR as a criminal state.

    8. It is necessary to prohibit being civil servants to people who doubt that the Soviet Union was a criminal state.

    9. It is necessary to conduct an audit of memorable dates and holidays in order to exclude or rename all dates related to the history of the Soviet Union.
    And this gentleman discusses the absence of threats to Russia from the United States.
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 5 October 2012 12: 24
      +10
      Uhhh ... seriously?
      Can I add it then?
      10 It is necessary to recognize the need for the author of 1-9 points to insert an unprocessed aspen trunk into the ass and turn 9 times.

      Sorry, no decent offers were found.
      1. lelikas
        lelikas 5 October 2012 12: 32
        +10
        If one of the readers of this article considers me to be one of such gentlemen, I will not be offended ... But called a cargo - climb into the back..- the author of the article is disingenuous - it sounds much more correct here -Called an enema-crawl in the ass. With a stake, the idea is not bad, but it is better to use a hot end with a cold end.
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 5 October 2012 12: 36
          +3
          Why a cold end?
          1. lelikas
            lelikas 5 October 2012 18: 43
            +1
            It was something not to pull it out.
      2. leon-iv
        leon-iv 5 October 2012 12: 36
        0
        What a shaking slag.
        The full transcript must be posted or a link to it.
      3. mongoose
        mongoose 5 October 2012 12: 50
        +4
        the witcher, what did you expect from the Jews? they stuck with us the same thing in the 20s and 30s about previous centuries
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 5 October 2012 13: 43
          +4
          I do not expect anything from them at all. Okromya some kind of veiled scam. Like from the whole western world in general.
      4. silver_roman
        silver_roman 5 October 2012 13: 02
        +2
        fully support!
    2. silver_roman
      silver_roman 5 October 2012 13: 02
      +3
      1,2,3,4,5 - partially, 6,7,8,9 ----- shorter stupidly all items are complete heresy. I have not heard about this program, but on the basis of the post above (if it relates to the truth), we can say that this is a pure information war against the people of the Russian Federation and the state as a whole. even if we share the different opinions of different strata of the population with respect to these 9 points, all the same they clearly harm the community and solidarity of the peoples that make up modern Russia.
      1. vorobey
        vorobey 5 October 2012 13: 04
        +2
        http://www.karaganov.ru/publications/page/1 достаточно почитать публикации сего господина.
    3. wax
      wax 5 October 2012 16: 23
      +3
      Thanks for the link. Somehow I did not pay attention to Karaganov. Yes, he is just a soul mate of Kokhu - both enemies of Russia. And all this for so?
    4. Sandov
      Sandov 5 October 2012 22: 53
      0
      dmb,
      What did he now change his mind? Hidden or what? Ugly, not masculine.
  14. Victor
    Victor 5 October 2012 12: 27
    +8
    Satya smells of pseudo-intelligentsia of the late nineteenth, early twentieth centuries, which, together with Nicholas II and so on ... the great Russian Empire. Such people are more enemies of the country than Navalny, Udaltsov and other Nemtsovs and Ryzhkovs. They are quiet and seemingly harmless, broadcast about the eternal and rub people thoughts about the uselessness of force to protect their own, blood. They say there are no bandits and rapists anywhere, they say, don't believe your eyes, but believe my stories and my conscience. There was no bombing of Yugoslavia and Iraq, there was no Libya, and the Georgians did not kill peaceful Ossetians in their homes. "Sleep the inhabitants of Bogdad, everything is calm in Bogdad ...": said the old man in the tale about Aladdin. So this, expert, broadcasts.
    No, my friends, don’t sleep, it’s not calm neither in our house nor in our neighbors, oil dealers roam the world and see who has a weaker house, where they won’t fight back.
    Definitely, an article hostile to Russia and this expert is not a friend of Russia.
  15. nas leonid
    nas leonid 5 October 2012 12: 29
    +10
    Karaganov is a famous scoundrel, dressing himself in the toga of a patriot.
    1. Brother Sarych
      Brother Sarych 5 October 2012 16: 40
      +1
      Yes, it’s kind of patriotic and not really dressed up - a complete t ... radish ...
  16. Jeen
    Jeen 5 October 2012 12: 30
    -19
    A good article, an unusually calmly detached analysis of the status quo and a healthy logic of withdrawal. It is understandable why she picked up so many minuses here :) Bionnovtsi cannot stand the harsh truth of life that does not fit into the Procrustean bed of agitprop blanks.
    On the subject: China has sounded in passing. So in vain that casual. After all, this is the answer to the question
    We - and, it seems, the leaders of the country - do not explain ourselves to ourselves and, perhaps, do not fully know why we need military force and how much we need it.
    Uncle Sam needs you
    1. Lech e-mine
      Lech e-mine 5 October 2012 13: 24
      +2
      AHA UNCLE SAM loves firing at a foreign country.
      1. Jeen
        Jeen 8 October 2012 14: 18
        -1
        Uncle Sam needs you to grind Chinese meat when it comes down to business. So do not worry, if you lag behind the Chinese by that time, the Americans will open Lendlis-2 to you
    2. Robin_3ON
      Robin_3ON 5 October 2012 13: 25
      +4
      Let the author write such an article in the USA, maybe they will believe there and will not arm themselves .....
  17. rexby63
    rexby63 5 October 2012 12: 32
    +6
    No one is threatening Russia, and in the medium term, it will not be able to threaten.


    What toothlessness. From a series of statements by a small bazaar trader: Who needs us ... Why am I going to send my baby to the army! "
    And about science - the best impetus for scientific achievement has always been war. No matter how sad it sounds. And now all scientists live satisfyingly. And, as Kamenoyedov used to say: Satur Ventur, non-libentur. What have these scientists discovered over the past half century, apart from the suction of the long-discovered. The article, despite the seeming sound thoughts, is a minus. Such opuses, in addition to empty debate, give and do not allow anything
  18. bask
    bask 5 October 2012 12: 34
    +1
    How not to blow advice, They are, servants of the people, And it is a pity that it is popular opinion that rarely reaches the ruling, elite., Advice is one. DISPLAY ALL THIS YELTSENOV ELITE. It’s up to the presenter. We need patriots in practice in the elite and business. And who lives behind the hill. Let them stay there. But to analyze the business .. (oil).
    1. andrei332809
      andrei332809 5 October 2012 16: 20
      +3
      Quote: bask
      They are, servants of the people

      Is it not from under one tail that the author with kudrin fell out? their thoughts are painfully similar, no need to spend money on defense, around friends
  19. AAA
    AAA 5 October 2012 12: 40
    +13
    The article is clearly wrong. Our "partners" have already surrounded Russia from all sides. The Western media are constantly throwing mud at the country and the entire Russian people. The image of the main enemy, Russia, has long been formed in the minds of the Western citizen. Russia is discriminated against everywhere and at all levels.
    These are clear signs of far from friendly relations that form in the brains of people for further actions against this state, which we saw before the outbreak of war in Yugoslavia. Iraq, Afghanistan. And I do not understand, the author does not follow the news. If one of the candidates for president of America declares that Russia is America’s number one enemy, that it’s not a threat. Or it will be a threat specifically when nuclear toys fly towards us. Mr. Karaganov has a very strange opinion.
  20. NAV-STAR
    NAV-STAR 5 October 2012 12: 46
    +2
    I don’t understand how a Russian political scientist can not understand the significance of a strong army for a large country. Perhaps, all the same, he is a Russian political scientist, not a Russian one, he forgot the 90s.
    1. plotnikov561956
      plotnikov561956 5 October 2012 15: 56
      0
      Being genetically Russian does not mean at all being a patriot of Russia.
      In this case, this line is traced ...
      1. NAV-STAR
        NAV-STAR 5 October 2012 16: 56
        0
        Russian is not a genetic concept, but a civilizational one. And what country’s patriots should be called people who consider themselves Russian, living in the same country, and after different major twentieth-century geopolitical disasters find themselves in different states?
        And the political scientist most likely works for the propaganda of overseas "partners".
  21. Nickname
    Nickname 5 October 2012 12: 50
    +4
    To go nuts and this nonsense wrote political scientist, chairman of the presidium of the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy
    Serdyukov probably adheres to this ideology.
    Then it’s clear why we have such a state of the sun
    1. rexby63
      rexby63 5 October 2012 16: 15
      +5
      The program of “de-Stalinization of society”, proposed by Karaganov in April 2011 at the Council under the President of the Russian Federation for the Development of Civil Society and Human Rights, was subjected to harsh criticism of some political forces. Some abstracts of the program (in quotation marks are exact quotes):
      1. It must be admitted that “after the last 100 years, the people of Russia have almost no respect for themselves”.
      2. It is necessary to recognize the Soviet period of our history as one big crime, and the Soviet Union as a criminal state.
      3. It must be recognized that "all of Russia is the great Katyn." At the same time, I mean the point of view that the mass graves in Katyn are the work of the NKVD.
      4. It is necessary to recognize that in the USSR a “genocide” was carried out, that is, the Soviet state deliberately exterminated the Soviet people.
      5. It is necessary to recognize the USSR as a "totalitarian state" and on this basis consider it the same as Hitler's Germany.
      6. It is necessary to recognize that the USSR is responsible for the outbreak of the Second World War, along with Nazi Germany.
      7. It is necessary to rewrite history textbooks in order to reflect in them everything that concerns the genocide in Soviet times and the USSR as a criminal state.
      8. It is necessary to prohibit being civil servants to people who doubt that the Soviet Union was a criminal state.
      9. It is necessary to conduct an audit of memorable dates and holidays in order to exclude or rename all dates related to the history of the Soviet Union.
      - http://axio.eot.su/program.html
      Virtual club “The essence of time” conducted an all-Russian survey among residents of Russia in order to find out the attitude of society to the proposed program. More than 36 thousand people were interviewed from 77 regions (the number of respondents is an order of magnitude greater than the number of respondents usually involved in surveys of leading Russian research centers). Against the program of “de-Stalinization” 89,7% of all respondents spoke out (http://axio.eot.su/). The anti-communists in the person of the Russian All-Military Union, who disseminated their comments on S. Karaganov’s speech under the heading: “How the“ de-Stalinists “try to pretend to condemn communism,” categorically condemned the proposed concept of “de-Stalinization”.
      Karaganov's article “Not De-Stalinization, but Modernization of Consciousness”, which was an explanation of the project “Perpetuating the memory of the victims of the totalitarian regime and national reconciliation” (called “de-Stalinization” in the press), was also criticized severely.

      This is what he is, "reindeer", this Mr. Karaganov. And the Defense Policy Council is also a public organization. Those. "a pair of each creature." So don't listen too much.
  22. Lech e-mine
    Lech e-mine 5 October 2012 13: 03
    +6
    The author of the article, KARAGANOV, probably decided that it was necessary to be in a flock of wolves TOLERANT, but such a fool would quickly be eaten and not choke. Therefore, his thesis that nobody threatens RUSSIA is a great stupidity and idiocy. THREATS OF RUSSIA have already formed-the division of the Arctic is coming to the NORTH, IN THE SOUTH, after the US flees from Afghanistan, they will trample the Taliban, in the West NATO with a democracy in the form of bombing, in the east, CHINA AND JAPAN with
    poorly concealed desires to chop off our territories. So KARAGANOV LAUNCH YOUR ARTICLE WILL BE TURNED INTO A PIPE and thrust it into a known place.
  23. tan0472
    tan0472 5 October 2012 13: 13
    +4
    I would like to answer the author in his " And so it is."style.
    Article certainly with a liberal stifle.
    Undoubtedly the author is trying to inspire the idea of ​​the uselessness of spending on weapons. They say the country is not equipped, and here - unnecessary expenses.
    Of course the author would like Russia to become strange with rivers of milk and jelly banks, but without a modern army. (then it will be easier to "democratize")
    In a word, the author is trying to suck in shit margarine under the guise of a state oil.
  24. 8 company
    8 company 5 October 2012 13: 13
    +10
    What is this article about? Yes, nothing - a set of general phrases, lack of specificity, analysis, conclusions. But how many author have high-profile titles and posts! Soother.
    1. tan0472
      tan0472 5 October 2012 13: 22
      +2
      Quote: Company 8
      Dummy.

      This dummy led the Ministry of Foreign Affairs under Yeltsin.
      1. 8 company
        8 company 5 October 2012 13: 29
        +5
        Quote: tan0472
        This dummy led the Ministry of Foreign Affairs under Yeltsin.


        There was no such thing. Even if he was offered, he would refuse. He is in life a pure adviser-consultant-without-any-responsibility. There is a more interesting question: why did they drag him here? No article, after all.
        1. tan0472
          tan0472 5 October 2012 13: 55
          0
          Quote: Company 8
          There was no such thing.

          There really wasn’t. Blundered. hi He is " Member of the Council on Foreign Policy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation. "then"Advisor to the Deputy Head of the Presidential Administration on Foreign Policy."
      2. Robin_3ON
        Robin_3ON 5 October 2012 13: 45
        +7
        The article sucks, reminds how an animal is calmed before slaughter, they whisper in your ear, and then chick with a knife .... and a barbecue.
  25. Kite
    Kite 5 October 2012 14: 13
    +1
    If Mr. Karaganov has not repaired the walls and door of his house for twenty years, but plans to bring in new furniture and equipment, then the opinion of such a "owner" is very useful to support the neighboring punks. I put it figuratively, but I hope it's clear.
  26. aksakal
    aksakal 5 October 2012 14: 17
    +3
    I did not like either the article or the author. Minus.
    I can agree on one thing - there are no military threats at the moment. But it is still!
    Secondly, and this is the most important! Russia has only a defense industry - a reservoir of high technology and having potential! According to Rogozin’s figures, 1,3 million people work in the defense industry, of which only 10% are developers and engineers, this is at best. Those. only 130 thousand people are people who are able to develop something on a world or higher level than the world level - sorry for the tautology. Further, only such I will call scientific and technical personnel. Add here fifteen thousand academic scientists, we get only 0,1% of the total population of the competent scientific and technical composition of Russia. In ordinary industry, there are no scientific and engineering personnel. Developers do not dare to turn a thread of Lada-viburnum or Grants so to speak - compare with analogs from German or Japanese manufacturers and you will understand that there is not a scientific-engineering, but a craft-special level. Moreover, for the Tollyatins, the authorities didn’t do anything, even the Far Eastern residents were weaned from the Japs - everything is not a horse feed. There is no potential in the citizen, no reserve, nothing. Hence the conclusion - since only 0,1% of the total population remains - and this is very very small, it is dangerous and critically small! and all this 0,1% in the defense industry, then we are forced to raise the defense industry, no matter how much money it costs. There will be a lot of money at the defense industry, it will start to draw in young people, and each of those 0,1%, if at least five students are educated, Russia's position will already improve. Moreover, some part of the students will get tired of making weapons, they will flow to the civilian - then the situation will improve here.
    It seems to me that this is the main reason, and not the crap that the author writes
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 5 October 2012 14: 27
      +9
      You say there are no military threats? Come on, they are looking at our territories and bowels from all sides. In some places, even to this day, calls are still heard about Siberia, as a "world" heritage, which for some reason we got. Eliminate the army, and in a week, or maybe a month, you will get a dozen states instead of integral Russia. And do not think that the division of such territories will be done by political means. Just other people's guys with machine guns will come and say: "Bris otsedova!" And no UN and others like them will not help - they will simply remain silent at best.
      1. aksakal
        aksakal 5 October 2012 15: 56
        +2
        Quote: Wedmak
        You say there are no military threats? Come on, they are looking at our territories and bowels from all sides. In some places, even now, calls are heard about Siberia, as about a "world" property, which for some reason we got

        - Inaccurately expressed. Military threats always exist! And your example
        Quote: Wedmak
        Eliminate the army

        - not accepted, I did not mean it. I meant that at the moment, and with this army (with the MANDATORY presence of this Army, do not distort) there is no military threat. I have justified it more than once and affirm it again. And I affirm that the modernization of the Army is more conceived for the modernization of Russia, and not for stopping the mythical military threats that Russia, with its Armed Forces, Navy, NW and TNW, does not currently exist. Because Medvedev’s modernization through Skolkovo is hardly viable.
        And yet - the non-modernization of Russia is much more dangerous than the current weakness of the Armed Forces. Without modernization, Russia will not have to be conquered in twenty years. There will be no need to send soldiers to the territory of the Russian Federation and fight. What for? Itself will fall. How I fell before because of the banal lack of gum and jeans !!!!! What's wrong? Doesn't it hurt your eyes? They knew how to make the best weapons in the world, but they even kept this a secret from their own population, I thought so until almost 9 of what year, the MiG-23 is the latest development of the Soviet aircraft industry, and they did not know how to make chewing gum and jeans - the contemptuous nickname "Scoop" (I myself did not use another expression for a country that does not know how to do even such elementary things!) - further, and then you know the chain.
        Want to repeat it? Let's. Do it this way: upgrade your army, but keep it all a secret, so that no one would have a clue about the characteristics of the Russians and don't let the experts into the civilian world. Yes, by the way, cover the MS-21 and Superjet, this is for the purity of the experiment. The purpose of the experiment is a powerful army and completely slop industry. Well, let's see what you are there and how you will be able to defend your strongest army -))))
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 6 October 2012 08: 43
          +1
          Well, yes, with "Eliminate the Army" I certainly showed an extreme result. And we do not hear about a military threat simply because we have an Army capable of nagging anyone. And globally and strangle the whole world. In the camp of our worst friends, they are not stupid either; they understand that if they attack us with a force that cannot be dealt with with conventional weapons, we will use nuclear weapons. And then everyone will get it, both right and wrong.
          However, I do not agree with your statement "The purpose of the experiment is a powerful army and a completely lame industry." Well, that won't work. To have a powerful army, you need to have a powerful industry that can make these most powerful weapons for the army. Your option can be on one condition - global arms purchases.
          I hope more social, economic and other experiments in the vastness of our homeland are not expected, enough.
          PS
          They knew how to make the best weapon in the world, but they even kept it secret from their own population, I thought so almost until 9 of what year, the MiG-23 is the latest development of the Soviet aircraft industry

          If my memory serves me right, I learned about the MiG-90 in 29 a year, if not earlier. Then it was painful and insulting to look at the collapse of the country ...
          1. aksakal
            aksakal 6 October 2012 21: 19
            0
            Quote: Wedmak
            If my memory serves me right, I learned about the MiG-90 in 29 a year, if not earlier. Then it was painful and insulting to look at the collapse of the country ...
            - I don’t remember, at Farnborough, when the MiG-29 was there tossing things there, I was in shock. And then I came across a magazine almost 83 years old, instrumental, I translated it, read about the MiG-29. And I actually felt insulted - the inos knew about this plane, they knew about its characteristics, and our authorities hid it from us until the last. What, if I read about him in my favorite journal Technique of Youth, I would immediately run to the foreigners to tell? Or would he be proud of his country and rush to enroll in the MAI? The habit of classifying everything and everything, whether it is necessary or not, also played a role.
            Quote: Wedmak
            "The goal of the experiment is a powerful army and a completely lame industry." Well, that won't work. To have a powerful army, you need to have a powerful industry that can make these most powerful weapons for the army.
            - Imagine, it turned out in the Union! -))))). Izhevsky produced good small arms and immediately completely sloppy pie ship. Why? Yes, for them the weapon was the main thing, and the pie ship was the product imposed by the State Planning Commission and a headache.
            Now there is hope that it will not be so. That military companies will diversify along the lines of Boeing - both good military aircraft and civilian ones. And they will not have "stepdaughters" and "stepchildren", everyone will be loved ones -))))
      2. wax
        wax 5 October 2012 16: 35
        0
        Apparently Karaganov is for the "world heritage" of our resources with a minimized population for their extraction and processing in the bargain.
  27. Rossmk
    Rossmk 5 October 2012 14: 19
    +4
    People who do not want to feed their army will feed someone else's. So this reform makes sense.
  28. afire
    afire 5 October 2012 14: 48
    +1
    aFtor interestingly arguing about, well, just murderous corruption, does he write articles just like that? al by order?
  29. dirty trick
    dirty trick 5 October 2012 15: 27
    +2
    Equally disturbing, there is still practically no scientific and public discussion around the definition of military policy priorities.

    Dear author, do not worry!
    let me quote Starikova N.V .:
    My point is this:
    Today’s internal problems of Russia, however, like yesterday’s, are a direct consequence of the loss of our state’s full sovereignty.
    What is Full State Sovereignty?
    It consists of five sovereignties:
    1. Recognition by the international community of the country's territory, flag, coat of arms and anthem.
    2. Diplomatic sovereignty - the ability to pursue an independent international policy. To be friends with whom you consider necessary, to quarrel with whom you consider necessary to quarrel. You are friends with Iran and do not give a damn that Ayatollahs are in power there. You give in your face the presumptuous aggressor and it does not matter that this is a democratically elected president of Georgia.
    In the presence of diplomatic sovereignty, objective processes are included that dictate the need to obtain the following two sovereignty. After all, diplomats in their activities always reckon only with real facts, namely with military force and a strong economy.
    Therefore, the third and fourth will be:
    3. Military sovereignty.
    4. Economic sovereignty
    Fifth sovereignty, as our history has shown, is the most important. With his absence, the road to nowhere begins.
    5. Cultural sovereignty.
    Only in the presence of all five sovereignty can we talk about the existence of Full State Sovereignty.

    just our leadership in the person of V.V. Putin finally decided to provide for its claim 3. Military sovereignty.
  30. arutun
    arutun 5 October 2012 15: 28
    +2
    USA - loses in a row two wars that it initiated (Iraq, Afghanistan).

    After these words I did not even read further.
    If the many thousands of murders of civilians, and the terror that is now entrenched in these countries for many years, means the loss of the UWB, then I do not want the UWB to initiate a vine with us and just like in Iraq lost. Because in these countries there is now neither political nor military power, until another revolution takes place again and some "dictator" comes to power who will unite the people.

    ZY Today I noticed how in my pots the UWB was replaced by the USA, it's strange. but after you press change, everything is in order .. some tricks .. since when did UWB begin to be written with the letter "A"? )))
  31. baltika-18
    baltika-18 5 October 2012 16: 07
    0
    I read the article, there are a lot of words, I didn’t catch the point so much that he wanted to say it at all. The world is changing, and so it was clear, it could have been shorter. It states facts that are known, but the language of the narrative is somehow ornate.
  32. Brother Sarych
    Brother Sarych 5 October 2012 16: 34
    -1
    What is the gain? What does it consist of? Yes, I point blank do not see anything like it - rather a further weakening, which is also accelerating ...
  33. wax
    wax 5 October 2012 16: 46
    0
    Yeah, a clinical case or full board.
  34. 77bor1973
    77bor1973 5 October 2012 16: 57
    0
    The author writes the same thing and here he refutes himself, concerning the "successful" military reform. The military reinforcement should not look like this, but what is happening here is a sluggish modernization. I consider such a view of the defense capability of my country to be an addictively harmful article "-".
  35. Per se.
    Per se. 5 October 2012 16: 59
    0
    The author of the article is hardly a naive boy, but, honestly, it feels like this material was sculpted by an idealist dreamer, or, on the contrary, a provocateur sophisticated in demagogy and sophistry. I did not like the article.
    1. v53993
      v53993 5 October 2012 19: 36
      0
      Rather, the second. You will not find idealistic dreamers this afternoon with fire.
  36. Patriot
    Patriot 5 October 2012 17: 36
    0
    Wow. Hmm. This is bad news. Amers in every possible way draw the maximum number of countries into this war. And it seems that this will not benefit the world.
    Ksati, why does the corrupt UN not want to introduce a peacekeeping contingent into Syria?
    Or do the American masters not allow Ban Ki-moon to do everything to pacify the country?
    1. v53993
      v53993 5 October 2012 20: 32
      0
      Because from the words "peacekeeping contingent", in the American way, many peoples immediately have a desire to take up the machine gun.
  37. aleksey
    aleksey 5 October 2012 18: 18
    +3
    enemies (well, or enemies, as you like) in any country have been, are and will be. You will be weak - you will get kicks and slaps. Does the author suggest first to wait for a real threat, and then think about modernizing the army? The article is amorphous in structure, the presentation style is tedious, and generally uninteresting, especially since the author is dean and chairman, a famous person ...
    1. v53993
      v53993 5 October 2012 19: 12
      0
      So he’s the dean of the Higher School of Economics. Does this really mean anything to you?
  38. v53993
    v53993 5 October 2012 19: 06
    +1
    Let me remind the author of the words are not the most stupid in human history.
    "I am not interested in their intentions; I am interested in their capabilities." Otto von Bismarck, First Chancellor of Germany
  39. ivachum
    ivachum 5 October 2012 19: 36
    +3
    "It is foolish, having over-spent and rearmed in excess of a reasonable measure, to create unnecessary enemies for yourself who are afraid of Russia."

    Better to be strong and have enemies than to be weak and have "friends" with a sweet smile on your face and a knife in your hand behind your back.

    "no one is threatening and will not be able to threaten in the medium term."

    Well, well .... And the weak will not have a "long-term perspective" at all.

    "I am not interested in the PLANS of our enemies. I am interested in their POSSIBILITIES." - it seems O. von Bismarck.
    1. ivachum
      ivachum 5 October 2012 20: 20
      +2
      v53993 sorry did not notice ... laughing

      I will add ..... The pacifism of the nation is the shortest way to the cemetery of history crying
      1. v53993
        v53993 5 October 2012 20: 26
        0
        No big deal, Stas. The main thing is that we understand the situation the same way.
  40. lerych
    lerych 5 October 2012 22: 16
    0
    Moreover, the military external threat is unprecedentedly low.

    rather the opposite
  41. Botanologist
    Botanologist 5 October 2012 22: 18
    0
    Among some of these specialists, Serdyukov and Putin, who is behind him, are considered almost traitors, limiting insane appetites, trying to not very successfully impose competition

    Yes, the aftor is not catching up with something. Crazy appetites - what is he talking about? About the attempt (I note - ATTEMPT) to rearm the army and make it combat ready?
    Apparently in childhood, the aphthor was not beaten very much in his intelligent goat face.
  42. Goldmitro
    Goldmitro 5 October 2012 22: 27
    0
    "" No one (Russia) is threatening and will not be able to threaten in the medium term. "" But what about what is happening in the world now? Is not what is happening now in the Middle East and, in general, all these color revolutions a threat to Russia? Is not what the likely future US president says, calling Russia enemy # 1, a threat to Russia? Yes, the countries of Europe seem to be cutting their military budgets, but the US military budget for so many years has many times overlapped all these budgets and, moreover, the Russian budget. Isn't this a clear threat to Russia? And all these "swamp marches" inspired by the West in Russia (the use of the so-called "soft power") with calls for a revolution, isn't this a threat to Russia? And it CAN'T BE ANOTHER, childish super-naivety to believe that the States, claiming the role of hegemon in the world, were calm about the existence of a country in the world, which is Russia, the only one capable of destroying the Zapany world !!! And this is not counting the West's frank claims to Russia for its huge "ownerless" natural resources, given the sharp aggravation of the struggle for resources in the world due to their depletion. So the article can be regarded as nothing more than a PROVOCATION!
  43. Dema239
    Dema239 5 October 2012 22: 49
    0
    Something ... paid. In recent years, every day gives an unambiguous understanding of the truth: weak - you'll be a bit.. And they are trying to convince us that Russia "overestimates" external threats .. Let the author try to sell such bullshit to the people of Iraq, or to the citizens of other countries that "overestimate" the external threat .. get sick .. laughing
  44. Dema239
    Dema239 5 October 2012 23: 06
    0
    Quote from the author of the article: "...But in order to understand what needs to be done, it is necessary to artificially create an independent public, political, scientific examination of the processes taking place in the military sphere..."
    I wonder what year the author was recruited by the CIA or MI-6 ?? Can we still, according to the author’s recipes, discuss the development strategy of the armed forces in referenda ?? Or even worse - to confirm the military doctrine of the development of the armed forces of the Russian Federation in the US Senate ?? smile
  45. 11Goor11
    11Goor11 5 October 2012 23: 23
    0
    You can frighten yourself and EuroPro against the example of the Soviet, frightened absolutely mythical Reagan star wars.

    nice to feel smarter than these "Soviet"?
    but I declare with responsibility, there was no "fear": we carefully considered the possibilities of their program, realized that for the most part it was a bluff, and took simple steps to neutralize the possibilities of their missile defense.

    It is foolish, peretrativ and re-armed beyond reasonable measure, to create their own enemies, fearing Russia.

    those who are afraid of Russia, as a rule, are not standing by the leadership, ordinary people can be intimidated, but leaders are driven by other feelings, rather ambition, a thirst for even more power, those who are afraid do not seek power.
    A strong army is needed to cool such hot heads
    Anyone who is weak and owns something valuable to his misfortune turns out to be the goal of humanitarian, peacekeeping missions, the purpose of which, of course, is to protect these values ​​and, of course, friendly help, and yes! - almost without casualties (only a few thousand, those who were unlucky) - friendly help.
  46. Magadan
    Magadan 5 October 2012 23: 48
    +2
    I really liked the reaction of the entire forum, really some kind of custom brainwashing. Someone does not like the strengthening of the Russian Army. I’ll answer this clever philosopher-intellectual: The global war is not only possible, but inevitable. Due to our 40% of world resources to 2% of the world population. And this war will be from the West, for the West has earned its entire history only by robbing other nations and its colonies.
    Here is the script:
    1) A bridgehead is one or several neighboring states where the next Orange Revolution has occurred / will occur.
    2) Armament: some private person buys crazy debts of the United States, and the United States pays with this person with weapons. For whom in general does the United States produce so many weapons?
    3) Composition of troops: led by Private Military Companies, who hired millions of thugs from the current Middle East for their comic strips.
    Conclusion - from this bridgehead near our borders there should be a lightning strike, the enemy will deepen by 1000 km, will we use nuclear weapons on our own territory? Further, what is the US risking? They will not fight!
    Still - if the strike comes from Japan or from the North. Korea (after the coup there), then this small piece is quite possible to cover the missile defense. Well, if a rocket or two flies by, then to hell with them, for these couple of millions of eaters, to-ryh and so many.
    In the current brainwashing, anyone can be poisoned by anyone, regardless of losses. Too much a piece we are tidbit.
  47. dmitrich
    dmitrich 6 October 2012 05: 05
    +1
    the author sees the swamp, then we are going the right way.
  48. smel
    smel 6 October 2012 07: 04
    +1
    Yeah. The brave scribbler decided to post his delusional understanding of military threats to Russia here. Complete neglect. Yes, and it’s impossible to allow retake
  49. Magadan
    Magadan 6 October 2012 07: 09
    0
    Quote: smel
    Yeah. The brave scribbler decided to post his delusional understanding of military threats to Russia here. Complete neglect. Yes, and it’s impossible to allow retake

    Damn, iksperdov spawned with political scientists! They also found a "boyar thought" for me. Are there really so few intelligent patriots in our fucking "elite"?
  50. razved
    razved 6 October 2012 13: 09
    0
    Some bad crap was written by Mr. Bad. Again, the brain wants to endure.