Military Review

Military strategic mythology in Russia and America

Military strategic mythology in Russia and AmericaNo matter how many times we are told that America is the only superpower, no matter how many times we ourselves repeat this, in our hearts we don’t believe that.

We persistently consider ourselves to be equal. We would like to be friends with America, but only on equal terms. But friendship is still not a matter of principle. We are ready to clash with America as much as necessary, and the prospect of outright hostility does not terrify us. But equality is psychologically absolutely necessary for us.

And the interesting question remains, what do we mean by equality. It must be expressed primarily in the military-strategic plan. The point is not that this is the only sphere available to us where we persistently maintain parity. It's not just that.

This is the way the national mentality works, that equality with another superpower is very important for it, and we are ready to expend super efforts on maintaining it. When the desired success flows away from the hands, myths are born.

The same is true for America. For her, military superiority over us is a kind of religion. And when they obviously cannot reach it, myths also arise.

Myths can arise at any mention of a subject of interest. When Russian peasants very much wanted to colonize the spaces acquired by the Russian empire, any decree where the word "colonization" sounded, even if it was extremely restrictive or even prohibitive, was perceived by the people as the king's call, calling "Russian people" to settle the new royal lands.

Something similar happened here after the talks between Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and the new US Secretary of State John Kerry. From them, even the most serious analysts were waiting for a breakthrough in the question of the American missile defense system.

On the reason that prompted these conversations, we will say separately. And there were several real reasons.

It was known that the issue of missile defense in the negotiations will be touched upon (along with a whole list of other topics, yes it doesn’t matter!), And it is also known that Kerry is well-tuned in relation to Russia (which, if the truth is, has yet to be checked), and Obama last March seems to have promised Dmitry Medvedev that, he says, he will become more flexible during his second term.

It all overlapped one another, and a myth arose. He was voiced by a very respectable newspaper “Kommersant”, and behind it other media. It is interesting that the material was submitted as supported by the most accurate evidence that a mass print publication is capable of, such as references to the most competent sources, and from both our and the American side. That in turn gave rise to the snowball: quite competent experts began to voice the new myth.

Secondly, the myth was presented as an absolutely new and joyful message, although, if you look at it, there was nothing fundamentally new, much less joyful, in it. In fact, the news was even sad, because, if it were true, it would turn out that our authorities handed over us with giblets. It is not by chance that Sergey Lavrov disowned this myth with indignation. “I read these messages and talked to the authors of these messages. I do not know where the author’s sources come from, but there is no reason for this kind of reporting, ”he said.

What was the myth, launched by Kommersant? In the article "PRO put on the presidential guarantee" (missile put on the presidential guarantee) from 26 February 2013, the publication issued the following information:

“Russia and the United States seem to have found a way out of the impasse on missile defense. As it became known to Kommersant, a breakthrough can provide exchange between the presidents of the two countries with political declarations, the meaning of which is to fix the desire of the Russian Federation and the United States to cooperate in the field of missile defense and not use their potentials against each other. Discussion of such documents by Kommersant was confirmed by diplomatic sources from both sides ... Today’s meeting in Berlin of Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov with the new US Secretary of State John Kerry, which will last about two hours, according to Kommersant’s information, could be a breakthrough for Russian deadlocked -American missile defense talks. The parties have not been able to compromise on this issue for more than two years, which is poisoning relations between Moscow and Washington in all spheres ... In the current situation, an exit from the impasse, according to Kommersant’s data, can be an exchange of political declarations at the highest level on the principles of cooperation Missile defense To sign such a document to President Barack Obama does not necessarily require the consent of the Congress. In the US, there is a form of international agreement that does not require ratification by lawmakers. These are the so-called presidential executive agreements: in 1937, the US Supreme Court ruled that they had the same force as international treaties approved by the Senate. In this case, Russian President Vladimir Putin will only need to sign a memorandum of understanding similar in content to the American text. It is assumed that in both documents we will discuss the desire of the parties to cooperate in the field of missile defense and not use their potentials against each other. They can also contain specific confidence-building measures: mechanisms for mutual notification and information exchange, joint exercises and threat assessments. The fact that the parties began to discuss the possibility of developing such documents, "Kommersant" confirmed diplomatic sources from both sides ".

The implementation of these plans will remove a key irritant in relations between Moscow and Washington - at least during the presidency of Barack Obama.

“The president’s executive agreements, however, have one drawback,” Kommersant clarifies. - Not being ratified by the Senate, they, in fact, reflect only the will of the president who signed them. “If Republicans come to power after Obama, they can continue to fulfill the terms of such an agreement, and they can even terminate it,” Yevgeny Buzhinsky, Senior Vice President of the PIR Center, told Kommersant ... Meanwhile However, according to experts, at least as a temporary measure, the option of a presidential "executive agreement" can suit both parties. “The Russian Federation and the United States have come to understand that it’s unlikely to completely overcome fundamental differences now,” Viktor Kremenyuk told Kommersant. “But you can reach a temporary compromise for which the presidents’ political declarations are quite suitable. ”

Viktor Kremenyuk, Deputy Director of the Institute of the USA and Canada Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, is quite confident in the perspective described by the Kommersant, as if he knows well what he is talking about

“Such an agreement is necessary for both us and the Americans ... Americans understand that if they create their missile defense system without our approval, we will find ways to harm them, creating conditions under which their system can be largely depreciated. On our side, too, there is an understanding that a compromise is needed. ”

The expert of the German Science and Policy Foundation, Dr. Margarete Klein, in an interview with Golos Rossii to develop the statements made by Kommersant, stressed the importance of signing such a document: it will allow Obama to circumvent the need for the document to be approved by Congress. Another advantage of this approach, supposedly already achieved, is that “this confirms the desire of both parties to cooperate, and also reinforces the specific principles of such cooperation and transparency mechanisms”.

Golos Rossii, as well as a number of Internet publications retelling it, seem to be well known from diplomatic sources that negotiations on the possibility of developing such documents have already begun. And although there is a risk that with a possible future change in the administration of the White House, the current agreements may be canceled, the main thing, according to experts, is “to create an incentive and reach a mutual compromise.” Here, the publication quotes Dmitry Danilov, head of the European Security Department of the Institute of Europe, who is convinced that “any step in the direction of some agreements means trying to unblock a process that basically moves in a circle. And any political declaration in this regard will undoubtedly allow the process to get off the ground. In addition, such things are good because they do not just move things off dead center, but also activate practical policies. More active expert discussions, party discussions, and practical work around these initiatives begin. And it gives direction to further movement. ”

Sergei Lavrov responded to all these conjectures with great irritation: “We made enough declarations, both in the framework of the OSCE and in the framework of the Russia-NATO Council. At the highest level, it was declared that we will all ensure the indivisibility of security, then none of us will ensure our security at the expense of the security of others. ” In any case, the EuroMD system “will create a problem for our security, therefore declarations are not enough here.”

If we cannot agree on a joint missile defense system, “as Russia has repeatedly offered since 2007, then, of course, we need to talk not about regular declarations, but about guarantees that will be verifiable on objective military-technical criteria, guarantees of non-directionality of this system against the Russian nuclear potential, ”stressed the Foreign Minister.

Despite the convincing arguments of Lavrov, for many analysts the biggest disappointment from the meeting in Berlin of Lavrov and Kerry was that the dreams already accepted as reality did not come true. And many Russian experts, contrary to common sense and the position clearly expressed by the Americans, believe that they have every reason to expect "serious negotiations" with Washington on the issue of missile defense. So, at least, believes the publication POLITKOM.RU.

Yes, but where does the smoke come from, because there is no fire without it? It turns out that the reason for the expectations was a leak of information, organized by one of the Republican senators of the US Congress. On January 30, Senator Mike Rogers sent a message to Vice President Joe Biden with a request to confirm his promise about the need to coordinate all decisions relating to national security with the Senate.

The rest was thought by experts.

* * *

But we should not assume that we surpass the Americans with our baseless hopes. Yes, we are afraid of losing to America in a military-strategic competition and building illusions, which we take very seriously.

But aren't the Americans doing the same? The last years there is an arms race, albeit asymmetric. The Americans are improving their missile defense, and we are improving our missiles so that they can easily overcome the American missile defense.

The Russian command has acknowledged that in response to the creation of an American missile defense system, Russia is preparing to deploy new heavy-duty intercontinental ballistic missiles that will replace the PC-20 and PC-18 missiles, since modern solid-fuel missiles are less adapted to overcome missile defense.

Russia is creating new intercontinental missiles, focusing on the characteristics of the American missile defense system. The starting mass of the new rocket, according to the BBC, will be up to 100 tons. To overcome the missile defense missile weight must be more than 4 tons. The arms race is not going on quantitatively, but in a qualitative direction, said Viktor Esin, the former chief of the General Staff of the Strategic Missile Forces, in an interview with the BBC, adding that “if a space flight of the American missile defense system appears,” Russia will move to a quantitative increase. strategic nuclear forces.

According to many analysts, the US missile defense system in the form in which it is now conceived cannot become an effective “shield” against Russian missiles, but Moscow is striving to stop the improvement of relevant technologies for the future. There is a desperate competition of intelligence. And the Americans also desperately believe that they will succeed in deceiving Russia and seducing it with attractive peace initiatives. And they believe in this holy and show enviable perseverance.

* * *

It began when US Vice President Joe Biden discussed with Sergey Lavrov during a meeting on the margins of the February 2 Security Conference in Munich, the topic of further reducing nuclear warheads to 1000 units from each side. (Recall that START-3 provides for reducing the number of nuclear warheads to 1550 units, and carriers - to 700 units from each side.) But I received a “very cool” answer - in fact, a firm “no”.

Then the Deputy Secretary of State for Arms Control Rose Goethemuller is going to Moscow as a matter of urgency, with a four-day visit. It carries new proposals for the mutual reduction of nuclear weapons, the implementation of which would allow the parties to save about $ 8 billion each year. But “the Kremlin has clearly demonstrated a negative opinion on this issue,” writes Austrian Der Standard. “The Kremlin is cold with disarmament.”

Before talking about further reductions, the START Treaty must be fully implemented, said Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich. And he continued by listing a number of "factors affecting strategic stability," which cause serious discontent of Russia precisely because of the position of the Americans. These are plans to deploy a global missile defense system, and the US refusal to ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, and the reluctance to refuse to deploy weapons in space. Der Standard, referring to Moscow’s diplomatic and military circles, notes that Russia could imagine another round of nuclear disarmament talks if the United States refused to deploy a missile defense system in Eastern Europe.

Rose Goethemuller leaves with nothing.

But in fact, everything was even more interesting.

* * *

After the annual Obama message to Congress, the White House website posted a transcript of the speech and questions with answers on the main points. It stated that the president welcomed the 50-percent reduction in nuclear weapons. Further curious notes in the transcript follow. February 12 Rose Rose Goethemuller arrives in Moscow, and the very next day the information about the 50-percent reduction in arsenals disappears from the site.

Obviously, the reduction talks were unsuccessful. And it is quite natural.

START-3 was beneficial for Russia, because most of the missiles that fell under reduction would still have to be disposed of. Disarmament below the level of 800 warheads (and Obama proposes to reduce their number to 750) is unacceptable because it is fraught with the preventive destruction of the entire nuclear potential of Russia.

And then Obama makes a new move.

If Moscow refuses to negotiate new cuts in nuclear arsenals, Washington may consider unilateral disarmament, Kommersant reports, citing an anonymous source close to the administration of Barack Obama. "If Moscow refuses to consider this proposal, the White House may try to enlist the support of two-thirds of senators and begin arms reductions unilaterally," the source said. According to the New York Times, Barack Obama was ready to announce a reduction of nuclear weapons by a third already on February 12, but Russia never received any official information about this. Meanwhile (myths spread), on the Internet portal a third of the nuclear warheads somehow imperceptibly turned into half.

* * *

Many experts say that the dialogue on the reduction of nuclear weapons has reached an impasse, but there are many optimists among the supporters of the Global Zero project. President-elect Barack Obama, and the new head of the Pentagon, Chuck Hagel, elected for a second term, are members of the Global Zero project.

By the way, 8 in November 2012 was held in Moscow at the conference “Nuclear Weapons and International Security in the XXI Century”. The participants of the Global Zero project, which aims to completely abandon nuclear weapons in the world, took an active part in it.

As Vladimir Dvorkin, an expert at the International Security Center of the IMEMO RAN, who spoke at a conference in Moscow, said that in the new conditions “the nuclear deterrence system no longer meets the security interests of either Russia or the United States.” To ensure stability, Dvorkin believes, “it is only possible by establishing full-fledged cooperation between Moscow and Washington, as well as by reducing the level of combat readiness of missiles with nuclear warheads and reducing them even more.” It obviously helps the Americans to promote proposals that “sound a bit strange for Russia because it’s about unilateral reductions in nuclear weapons, that Moscow’s at this level of trust, which, frankly speaking, is small, is more suspicious than enthusiastic” Director of the Institute of Strategic Assessments, Professor of MGIMO of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, Deputy Chairman of the Russia-USA Association, Sergey Oznobishchev According to him, it is counterproductive to engage in unilateral reductions and optimization of its nuclear weapons structures at the current level of trust between countries.

“It is necessary to restore this trust, to establish normal relations. And make it verifiable, realistic steps, “- said Oznobishchev.

Meanwhile, it is the nuclear arsenals, many times greater than the potentials of all the others taken together, and the ability of complete mutual destruction make the relations between Russia and the United States "special." Therefore, the principle of “strategic stability”, inherited from the days of the Cold War, will not go anywhere, just like the topic of missile defense, political scientist Fyodor Lukyanov writes in Ogonyok magazine. With this sober approach, one can only agree.

* * *

However, under the surrealism of the military-strategic relations of Russia and America in recent weeks, it is not so easy to agree with that. Let us return to what we started with, namely, from the article in the Kommersant newspaper, “PRO is put on the presidential guarantee”. She came out early February 26 in the morning, a few hours before the start of the talks between Lavrov and Kerry in Berlin. The newspaper is serious, just because the "duck" will not throw. The article was written in a confident tone, obviously the author - Elena Chernenko - relied on seemingly reliable data.

Let the logical analysis of these data lead to the fact that there is nothing to rejoice at the American proposal, that behind this joy are the features of our subconscious mind, which wants to feel the Russian-American parity. We know that in the negotiations on missile defense the heads of the foreign affairs agencies of the two countries did not move a single step, at best - the topic was postponed. But this does not mean that the Americans did not make such a proposal. Judging from their behavior - from striving to impose us a disastrous reduction in armaments to a desire to reduce our nuclear arsenal unilaterally - one can expect that the proposal to exchange political declarations at the highest level on the principles of cooperation in the field of missile defense was made by Berlin Kerry, and Sergey Lavrov - rejected.

The fault of the journalist is not in distorting the facts, but in interpreting them through the prism of modern Russian political mythology. This mythology encourages a desire to be deceived, to take another base for the recognition of our greatness. This is a typical foreign policy provocation, on the basis of which foreign policy interaction is often built.

And we can create our own greatness only by our own intellect, purposefulness and readiness for a dialogue of provocations, the ability through foreign policy provocation to express our true values, even if they are embedded in our consciousness in a mythologized form.

It seems that psychologically, we are out of the game winners. America is clearly unsure of its missile defense capabilities and frankly afraid that we will reduce its efforts to achieve military-strategic dominance to nothing. Here are some things that make you wonder историяassociated with the Berlin meeting of Sergey Lavrov and John Kerry. But a new round of foreign policy games is still ahead.

Perhaps now, America will turn to another kind of foreign policy provocations. Susan Rice, the democratic hawk, is once again in the arena. According to the Washington Post, she will be offered the post of national security adviser. In the second half of this year, she will replace the "inconspicuous" Thomas Donilon and will be in this post not less bright public figure than Condoleezza Rice. Surely she will speak about the political aspects of the US missile defense. To speak out sharply, smoothly, impartially. So politicians with weak nerves may also regret that they did not accept John Kerry’s proposals at the time.

That's what the game is designed for. Rice will provoke Russia into a sharp reaction in response, drawing into the dialogue not subtle foreign policy provocations, like Badeon, Kerry, or Gethemuller, but rude, frank ones. But it seems that this will only be to our advantage, it will serve as a cold shower, it will give sports anger. This will be the case: Susan Rice will play the drum part, and the main theme will be John Kerry. And here our dialogue of foreign policy provocations will have to line up on the thinnest halftones.

The situation is not trivial, and Russia faces deep internal work.

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

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. alexng
    alexng 18 March 2013 10: 34
    Many in life play several roles.
    Psychologists are on the balcony. In the kitchen - politics. There are philosophers on the net. And only in life as they were m ... and so they remained.
    1. ughhh
      ughhh 19 March 2013 17: 11
      I set the minus article for the next batch of shit analytics. Like, such Russians, these Americans, these think so, those are different. Personally, I disagree with Ms. Lurie on a number of points.
      This missile defense is exaggerated poor. For a long time I do not believe in these tales. What can she protect from if several submarines float in a okiana, each of which can turn several American cities into ruins. Well, I would hope that they swim. And, hopefully, capable.
      And in general, the article gives the impression of being mixed up in some newspaper clippings with journalistic speculation, greasyly greased with rubbish from a zombie box.
  2. Region65
    Region65 18 March 2013 11: 57
    we need equality with the United States blah blah blah and so on ... I personally just do the violet state on the other half of the globe, for me they are there, they are not, how can we compare a civilized, yet still still a cultural country Russia with some kind of USA there? with a herd of broiler boars, each 200 kg in weight and with a walnut in his head instead of a brain (not for nothing that obesity is enshrined in the laws of the USA as a threat to national security_), there is no culture (except blood, brains, dismemberment and superheroes in shorts over workouts), education no, just do not have people there, some kind of mutants ... QUESTION FOR AUTHOR _ Why do I need equality with such a parasitic? Am I supposed to build up another hundred kilograms of weight, stupid at the end and spend my whole life devouring GMO chips from a box and drinking all this with some artificial feces flavored with dyes and chemicals, raising dumb children and going to shoot neighbors ???? be equal to such a country and dream of being equal with it.
      SASCHAmIXEEW 18 March 2013 12: 10
      Cool about amers, but probably not so simple !!! They’re drumming to me, too, but they got the drug trade out of Afghanistan, and our ushlepoks share with them, and the authorities don’t want to do anything about it !!! We need a sane government, and not a herd in the mouth watching puppeteers !!! Long live Russia !!!
    2. Army1
      Army1 18 March 2013 16: 50
      I agree, but there is one big but. Not everything is true that we are shown on TV. Many films, series and other American rubbish goes specifically to Russia, and is rarely shown in the states. Teenagers who drink and copulate in those same shit films are nothing but propaganda, the decomposition of youth, which they do by the way. Do not forget your culture.
      And the one who says that the Americans are stupid, maybe this is so, because many of them do not really know about ordinary things, but they are only the slaves of the Rokshilds and the Rockefellers, in general, the labor force. And their elite is not stupid, the Russian state is far beyond a thousand years, and the states do not even have 300, and now look at our world, what they eat, listen to what they drive, who control the world and people's consciousness, draw conclusions, the country was formed on empty land.
      States I do not like, and do not protect them.
      1. Sinbad
        Sinbad 18 March 2013 17: 10
        To your PS, dear Army 1, I allow myself to add: in order to successfully defeat the enemy, he must be well studied.
      2. Region65
        Region65 21 March 2013 15: 36
        Quote: Army1
        Many films, series and other American rubbish goes specifically to Russia, and is rarely shown in the states.

        do not agree! all the cattle, cattle horrors and cattle released in the world distribution have box office receipts in the United States much more than in Russia and even in Europe. I mean that the government (the true US government together with the Queen of Great Britain) not only cleans our brains, but also its citizens in the first place, because ordinary Americans are naive people, they sincerely believe in good :)))) so if they don’t to brainwash and not brainwash them, then they can arrange an armed coup, fortunately that the population has enough military weapons ... that's why they wash their brains to keep them on a leash, it's not for nothing that in the USA even lamps for the house are sold with built-in systems tracking. Global all-encompassing control in the most "free" country :)))
    3. starshina78
      starshina78 18 March 2013 19: 39
      I would not be so categorical in assessing the Americans. Not loving them, treating them with hostility is one thing, but another is to face the truth. What the Americans cannot do on their own due to lack of knowledge, they simply buy. They buy the most important thing at the moment - this is the mind located in the heads of people of different nationalities, including Russians (among the employees of "Facebooc" there are a huge number of Russians, a huge number of our young compatriots who have not found offers from us in Russia; the atomic bomb in the USA was created by a conglomerate of scientists from all over the world, including A. Einstein; Nazi criminal Wolf Brown taught them how to make rockets, and many other examples). On what, and on science, unlike us, they do not skimp. They spend a lot of money on science, and therefore from here they are ahead of the whole planet in some types of weapons. There are many examples: a rail gun, hypersonic missiles, and so on. In theory, we are still working on projects created in the USSR (nuclear submarines - Borey, etc. 855, Iskander, S 300 - 4000), but we do not support our science, young scientists go abroad, because they are given practically no money. It is no secret that practically all new scientific discoveries are primarily used for war, and then for peace. we need to invest in science, then we will catch up and overtake (once again) the Americans.
      1. Region65
        Region65 19 March 2013 05: 45
        Quote: starshina78
        The fact that the Americans cannot do themselves due to lack of knowledge, they simply buy. They buy the most important thing at the moment - it's the mind

        oh, we would like that! invent and produce thousands of tons of toilet paper, which is worthless and then buy the whole world for this toilet paper ...
    4. wax
      wax 18 March 2013 22: 54
      I personally just do violet state in the other half of the globe

      Unfortunately, "this state" is not on the other half of the globe, but at our doorstep with metastases in our gut.
      1. Region65
        Region65 19 March 2013 05: 50
        that’s the point, but if it had become violet to everyone in our country (although since the beginning of the 90s it has firmly stuck in our brains first through video salons with watching a movie for one ruble then via the Internet, beautiful candy wrappers, chewing gum and coca -col) for this and the influence of the foreign on our minds has become great. By the way, it should be said that they correctly noted here - in their own country, the true US government does exactly the same and from its citizens it is stupid precisely for this reason that the entertainment industry is so developed there. Because they are stupid and such, they simply are not allowed to think, they have no time to think, they are all head over heels in their television shows, corn and so on. They have no time to look around and realize the reality. They tried to push us the same thing, but it seems like (this is my personal feeling) this wave is weakening and the tide is beginning ..... well, our people have seen enough in 20 years for democracy, freedom of speech, freedom of show, and it seems to me that it’s all our citizens, all the same, on our Russian and Russian roads, we quietly turn off the western path)))
        1. rodevaan
          rodevaan 19 March 2013 19: 01
          Tired - not the right word! All this West-like nonsense, imposed on us by a zombie man, stupid individualism and stupidity, - all this is alien and disgusting to Russian people.
          Personally, I am disgusted. and many others too. Many people are sober (And thank God, finally !!) and there is no longer that nasty and disgusting puppy's delight, pig squeal and other shit-hysteria in the early 90's with our average man about America and the West in general.

          Finally, people see all this and begin to think - do we need this Mr., who stuffed us every day?
          We are going the right way. And I hope we don’t turn it off.

          It’s time to recall those human and not animal values ​​that were instilled in us in the USSR, and not now with shit democracy and pro-Western fooling.
    5. rodevaan
      rodevaan 19 March 2013 18: 55
      Good for you!
      Well truthfully said, in the case and with the ringing. I fully support and also think so!

      Oh, if every current Russian thought so, and if every our Russophobe politician thought so - uh, we would be far ahead of the rest.
  3. Bekzat
    Bekzat 18 March 2013 12: 02
    Americans want to save, it’s as clear as God's day. But if there hadn't been an economic crisis, they would never have abandoned their plans to build up offensive weapons. Do not believe them !!!
    1. plotnikov561956
      plotnikov561956 18 March 2013 14: 30
      Take peace initiatives as truth ... do not respect yourself.
  4. old rocket man
    old rocket man 18 March 2013 12: 02
    The article put a plus sign, out of respect for the loud surname of the famous historian, but I really wanted to put a minus. Correct words, but the content does not reveal the topic promised by the loud headline, a kind of chaotic vinaigrette, from "news" sucked from all sides hi
    Myths have not been shown to us.
    1. Botanologist
      Botanologist 18 March 2013 14: 50
      old rocket man
      Myths have not been shown to us

      Bear in mind that for alleged myths, the author of the article tries to betray exclusively liberalistic expectations of general disarmament. From the very beginning it was clear that the American proposal was half hopelessness, half provocation.
      1. xtur
        xtur 18 March 2013 22: 04
        S. Lurie is an ethnology specialist, and from the point of view of its theory, one nation differs from another in its thinking

        a myth is what is between the parties to the dialogue when they belong to different civilizations, because they understand all the important concepts in different ways.
        1. Botanologist
          Botanologist 18 March 2013 22: 25
          a myth is what is between the parties to the dialogue,

          myth is a stable judgment, very far from reality. And the difference in thinking of different peoples is cultural archetypes. Something like this. hi
          1. xtur
            xtur 18 March 2013 22: 33
            emphasis should be placed on the difference in thinking between the parties to the dialogue - S. Lurie’s articles are based on this
            and the myth, by the way, is not far from reality - it is an image of reality that is imposed on us :-)
    2. xtur
      xtur 18 March 2013 21: 58
      Svetlana Lurie is an ethnologist of high class. But she has a series of articles on foreign policy, on how foreign relations are related to the psychological characteristics of the peoples of these countries
      1. Botanologist
        Botanologist 18 March 2013 22: 30
        Svetlana Lurie is an ethnologist of high class.

        I am happy for Lurie and her class, but the myths of ethnology and the myths of modern politics lie on different planes. This is in the first case - culture and historical dogmas, and in the second - PR and the promotion of their interests in the mass consciousness. I think she understands this.
        1. xtur
          xtur 18 March 2013 23: 03
          The process is based on a misunderstanding / different understanding arising from the difference in thinking of the parties. And one of the parties often deliberately tries to use this situation to their advantage.

          And it is precisely in the case of complex games of this kind that an attempt may be made to impose a myth as a desirable image of reality for someone.

          there is a huge literature available online on myth theory - R. Barth, M. Eliade, E. Cassirer, and all of it intersects with ethnology / anthropology.
  5. Atlon
    Atlon 18 March 2013 12: 07
    There will be no sense from missile defense, just as there was no sense from SDI, they just drank the loot ... I think (more and more recently) that missile defense, as a "scarecrow" for Russia, did not work. the game has gone thinner. The US is scaring us with missile defense, we pretend to be afraid. However, since over the past 10 years Russia, represented by Putin, has outright outplayed the United States in all areas, I dare to suggest that missile defense is more beneficial to us than terrible. For this, we can (and have the moral right) to build up weapons, re-equip the Army, spend more on modernization and the development of new weapons. It seems to me that America, with its missile defense scarecrow, has driven itself into a dead end. It is impossible now to take and refuse, although the idea was initially dubious. In fact, Russia is imposing an asymmetric arms race on the United States. Putin seems to have learned his lessons from history.
    1. alexng
      alexng 18 March 2013 13: 09
      Quote: Atlon
      since the last 10 years, Russia in the person of Putin has outright replayed the United States in all directions

      A very dubious conclusion. What is and is stored in the warehouses of NZ is enough for a worthy answer, despite the lack of bells and whistles in old equipment. But the fact that the army has stopped rolling into the abyss is stopped, this is a very big plus. Putin just put the West to sleep, and when they realized it was too late. Now for Putin, the main task is to change the elite in power without blood, and to bring all traitors, such as smerdyukov and the like, to justice. But even here it is necessary to gather a peremptory evidence base so that lawyers do not pamper and find loopholes to justify or mitigate the punishment. And the US bet on white-idiot idiots is generally a disastrous thing. And now, so that the State Department does not take it, everything works against them and to the advantage of the current Russian government.
    2. Logs
      Logs 18 March 2013 15: 45
      Yes, Putin, the real leader of the country, pulled us all out of such a hole, God grant him health even more successes and most importantly, so as not to relax!
  6. Ragnarek
    Ragnarek 18 March 2013 12: 42
    we do not need equality with amers, we need to destroy them for the sake of all mankind
    1. Sirocco
      Sirocco 18 March 2013 15: 06
      I have already said the other day about the relations of our countries, and I will repeat myself. We have a discrepancy with the Americans in only one issue ... agrarian. Who will bury whom. And everything else is a political game.
  7. Rus2012
    Rus2012 18 March 2013 12: 47
    ... An article in brief on how to try to wag a dog with its tail! Those. our liberal columns are trying for us to decide how to disarm us ...laughing

    We remember perfectly well everything that all these restriction treaties began with ... And now, trying to give a different interpretation to all events - only the Yankees and their minions are capable of this.

    We remember very well who was the initiator of the missile defense limitation, who became the soberman of this whole thing, so to speak. They, i.e. and the Yankees came running when they saw that they had zilch in this direction ... At the same time, they asked us to link strategic offensive weapons with missile defense. Thank God, we then did breakthrough things both in ICBMs and missile defense.
    And then the Yankees from the beginning of 90xx decided to overtake us at the turn ...
    Dilute missile defense with START.
    Moreover, under the latest START Treaty, they did not agree and set the minimum number of carriers - 800. Our wanted -700.
    Result - Our 2 missile divisions were preserved under re-equipment at the PGRK.

    Now, seeing that they would not be able to re-equip the aged "Minutemans", they decided to ask to cut everything in sync!
    Having in mind, having gotten together on missile defense, in the future try to level out our remaining missiles.
    But figs to you!
    We have an impenetrable argument for this - China and the arsenals of other nuclear powers, plus your missile defense system, are close at hand. Cut the missile defense system to "zero" and with parity counts and reductions in strategic offensive arms of other countries, mb. we will go for additional reductions ...
  8. pechv
    pechv 18 March 2013 13: 08
    They waited, waited for all Russian missiles to rust and fall apart. Did not wait. It seems that they have serious problems with the programs for maintaining strategic nuclear forces. It is painfully persistent that they call us to cut our own.

    Their ballistic missiles are rapidly degrading. Even when checking the Minuteman systems in service, the missiles "do not fly." Therefore, in order to save face, you need to do your best to look for fellow travelers in the reduction - Russia. The fellow traveler is intractable, the programs for the construction of strategic nuclear forces are developing, they have a perspective and a good start.

    Judging by the cost and duration of the F-35 development and adoption project, the Americans simply won’t pull out rearmament under the ballistic missile program. They no longer need them - many tasks are solved by cruise missiles. And they will try to get rid of Russian projects by signing new agreements.

    It is very convenient in such a situation to become a peacemaker - and let's reduce our old junk and your new projects.

    An exciting spectacle awaits us. Moreover, all the players, as always, are bluffing with might and main and trying to promote their "partner" to useless and expensive programs.
  9. lechatormosis
    lechatormosis 18 March 2013 13: 36
    we don’t need to react so sharply to every American, for THEY ARE GOOD PROVOCATORS.
    WE, following the example of the Chinese, need to quietly and calmly bend their line - RE-ARME THE ARMENIA AND REVIVAL THE ECONOMY OF THE COUNTRY.
    1. alexng
      alexng 18 March 2013 13: 57
      Quote: lehatormoz

      What is happening now, but only without noise and applause. The former power of Russia is quietly but surely reborn.
      1. xan
        xan 18 March 2013 16: 09
        Quote: alexneg
        The former power of Russia is quietly but surely reborn.

        when quiet, but sure, then it’s especially scary for the enemy
    2. opkozak
      opkozak 18 March 2013 14: 09
      Not by streams of noisy phrases, but by quiet, tireless labor, love the Homeland.
      1. rereture
        rereture 18 March 2013 14: 18
        A good photo immediately recalls a small homeland smile
      2. Gari
        Gari 18 March 2013 15: 55
        Quote: opkozak
        Not by streams of noisy phrases, but by quiet, tireless labor, love the Homeland.
        everything is correct in the photo the future of the country
    3. 755962
      755962 18 March 2013 14: 59
      Quote: lehatormoz
      we don’t need to react so sharply to every American

      Pleased with the work of S. Lavrov and Co.It is necessary to speak with opponents harshly, and sometimes very harshly. You can even use obscenities if they do not understand differently and begin to become impudent.
  10. Rrrrr
    Rrrrr 18 March 2013 13: 40
    I demand to return the nationality to registered users of the site !!! Where are the country flags? Is someone afraid of something, or is it easier for some foreigners to fool us and make trouble? Return the flags !!!
    1. Alex45
      Alex45 18 March 2013 13: 59
      Return the flags - well, do not return - not scary. To communicate, argue and draw conclusions, you need to look at the essence of what is written and your attitude to this, and not on the flag sign.
      1. xan
        xan 18 March 2013 16: 07
        flags need to be returned, it is interesting to know the opinion of citizens of other countries
  11. xan
    xan 18 March 2013 16: 05
    No, there is something in the Americans, especially a thorough approach to business and the ability to achieve results. But in my opinion the cons are already outweighed. And the most important unkillable and reinforced concrete minus that they cannot get rid of is their women. And this is not only my opinion.
    I had a friend about 7 years ago, my sister with a 7-year-old son left St. Petersburg for permanent residence. Last year, for the first time, the whole fan came and the granddaughter brought her grandmother for the holidays. So she couldn’t take her son out, refused to leave, and the main reason was that the boy was fucked by the beauty of our maids, why the hell is this scary America telling me.
    1. rodevaan
      rodevaan 19 March 2013 19: 04
      Hehe, dude - You haven’t seen a German yet! :)))
  12. Tambov Wolf
    Tambov Wolf 18 March 2013 16: 08
    The more missiles, the calmer it is when fishing. And if you place something in space, then generally lyuli.
  13. washi
    washi 18 March 2013 16: 10
    What is the abbreviation? We have England, France, China, Pakistan, Israel at hand. And all with nuclear weapons.
  14. amp
    amp 18 March 2013 16: 58
    This asymmetric arms race - (ballistic missiles against missile defense) is actually a very good thing. This is developing our space industry. If you would take and abandon missile defense, no one would develop a new generation of missiles.
  15. OlegYugan
    OlegYugan 18 March 2013 22: 02
    I remember with START we sawed our missiles, and our amers dismantled. We are in color, and they are in the warehouse. then they outwitted us, now let them disarm themselves now.
    We do not remember evil; they are writing it down. laughing
    1. rodevaan
      rodevaan 19 March 2013 19: 05
      We all remember! And write ..... so as not to be forgotten!