On the current state of Russian military and foreign policy
In March, 2013, the board of the Ministry of Defense reviewed the results of a four-year military reform. The President of Russia V.V. took part in its work. Putin In his speech, he noted that the defense policy and the definition of military needs should be consistent with the country's existing resources and military-technical capacities.Historically, the military policy of Russia has always been in the spotlight of the world community. After all, it influenced not only the security of Russia itself and its closest neighbors, but also the situation of the entire European-Asian region. At present, according to experts, this interest is due to the following circumstances:
- The confrontation with Georgia in 2008 showed that Russia can decide on the defense of its interests;
- military policy is directly related to all spheres of the life of the Russian state, and there are no changes for the better either in the army or in society, despite significant expenditures from the country's budget;
- Announced the completion of the first stage of the reform of the armed forces, but evidence of the increase in the level of security of the country is not very much observed;
- a critical situation has now been created - the old army does not exist, and a new one was not created (and there were no fewer military threats);
- Russia during the brutal financial and economic crisis retained its status as a subject implementing its policy at the global level. And although Russia is among the top ten leaders in military spending, it still lags behind other countries in developing new weapons and equipment;
- in the west and east of Russia there are subjects with a strong military potential (NATO and China), in the south the explosive regions are Asia and the Caucasus. In any military conflict, Russia can rely only on its own forces, so it is interested in ensuring peace and order along its border.
The military and political leadership of the country is charged with conducting sound, balanced military policies, making decisions on the implementation of measures in the field of military cooperation, developing the structure of the military organization of the entire state, and forming the country's armed forces in accordance with modern realities.
Thus, according to analysts, the presidency of D. Medvedev has introduced quite serious contradictions between military doctrine and the foreign policy of the Russian state. Dmitry Medvedev believed that Russia could cope with such difficult problems for the country as the modernization of democracy, building a new economy only together with the leading European countries - Germany, France, Italy, and the United States of America. Dmitry Medvedev believed that Russia did not have sufficient financial and technological resources to independently achieve a real recovery in the main directions of the country's life. Experts say that D. Medvedev considered the creation of modernization alliances with international partners as priorities of foreign policy. It’s not at all realistic, his words were voiced at the Rostov summit of Russian and foreign investors, where large-scale projects were offered to foreign businessmen for joint implementation, including those that were essentially re-equipment and modernization of the Russian industry.
On this basis, in order to gain the confidence of international partners, Russia made large enough concessions: a new START treaty was concluded, the supply of anti-aircraft missile technology to Iran was canceled, and agreement was reached to create, jointly with NATO, a new European missile defense system, the transit of military cargo through Russian territory in Afghanistan, Russian military units participated in joint exercises with Western European armies, etc.
But the Russian military doctrine existed at that time regardless of the country's foreign policy. The military doctrine was based on a policy of opposing the expansion of foreign alliances near the borders of Russia. The military recognized as dangerous for the country the steps of the leading countries of the world to militarize outer space, deploy European high-precision non-nuclear weapons near the Russian territory. weapons. And these far unfriendly steps towards Russia were made not by anyone, but by countries that were invited to participate in projects for the economic recovery of Russia.
The contradiction between the military tasks and the foreign policy of the country, according to experts, testified that the country's leadership did not control the formation of defense policy, and also pointed to the mismatch of various departments in developing effective and optimal solutions in the field of foreign and military policy.
The negative result of this imbalance affected almost immediately after the signing of the START Treaty, further negotiations between Russia and the United States of America were stalled. The parties have not been able to reach a mutually acceptable agreement on the issue of missile defense. Both sides continued independent development and deployment of missile defense systems. This led to the fact that D. Medvedev announced a number of measures to increase the level of offensive weapons of the Russian army.
The change of presidential team led to a new stage in the development of relations between Russia and the West.
Note that during his first presidency, V. Putin sought to establish good relations with the countries of Western Europe, Japan and the United States, based on equality and mutual respect. The increase in oil prices allowed the country's leadership to pay off foreign debt and raise the standard of living of the people. In 2000, the Duma, controlled by the country's leadership, ratified the START-2 treaty, and in 2004, the conventional arms treaty. These documents were a step towards the West.
After the September 11 attack on the US, 2001, Russia unconditionally supported NATO in the Afghan conflict, providing NATO transport with transit of military cargo through Russian territory. It must be said that these steps were not supported by the Russian political elite, but Vladimir Putin made a strong-willed decision. Despite the fact that neither the Europeans nor the United States were in no hurry to take reciprocal steps to discuss the expansion of the North Atlantic bloc to the east with the participation of Moscow, V. Putin proclaimed "the European choice of Russia."
According to analysts, rather all these steps of the Russian leadership were taken by NATO strategists as a manifestation of weakness. As a result: the United States defiantly withdrew from the ABM Treaty, the war unleashed by NATO members in Iraq, deprived Russia of the largest oil concessions, three former Soviet republics of the Baltic states were accepted into NATO, which allowed the bloc's military forces to approach significantly the borders of Russia. The US openly announced its plans to create military missile defense bases in the Czech Republic and Poland.
To top it all, far unfriendly actions, the West sided with the leaders of the Ukrainian and Georgian “color revolutions” who actively declared anti-Russian policies.
The open Georgian-Russian military confrontation in 2008 made it clear to foreign investors of "color democracies" that Russia intends to defend its interests even with arms.
During the third term of V. Putin’s presidency, there were changes in foreign policy relations — a course was set toward distancing and, in some areas, open confrontation with the West and the United States. Russian politicians have made it clear to their Western partners that the promotion of a “Eurasian policy” than a European one is more relevant for Russia. Russia has stepped up integration processes with Belarus and Kazakhstan. Finally, the realization came that neither the West nor the United States will participate in the modernization of the Russian economy. The Russian leadership proclaimed a new innovation doctrine of the country: the Russian military-industrial complex was designated as the driving force of positive changes in the creation of a high-tech society, and reference was made to the positive experience of the 30-s when the country made a breakthrough and entered the world industrial countries. The country's leadership proclaimed a strategic turn to the East. And an explanation was found: Europe was “stuck” in the financial and economic crisis, while the countries of the Asia-Pacific region were able to keep their economies at the proper level and conducted a thoughtful foreign policy with the states of other regions.
Between Russia and the West the time for uneasy relations has come. Nobody ever mentioned the “European choice” of Moscow. The process of partnership and cooperation in the European security system between the European Union and Russia was practically paralyzed. Work on the implementation of previously reached agreements on the reduction and limitation of conventional and nuclear weapons was halted. The contradictions between the US and Russia "buried" the process of limiting strategic weapons and nuclear weapons. This led to the intensification of the arms race and the high costs of upgrading and creating new types of weapons on both sides.
It must be said that while the great nuclear powers cannot find a common language, other countries bypass the nuclear non-proliferation regime - for example, Iran.
Another one of the biggest miscalculations of the United States and its European allies is the failure of their joint operation, called the Arab Spring. Power intervention in the affairs of sovereign states, split the great powers, the UN Security Council could not influence this situation. Washington has stumped the negotiation process with Russia on nuclear and missile non-proliferation, which put the world on the brink of disaster.
Analysts and experts say that the current leadership of Russia has removed the contradiction between military doctrine and foreign policy of the state. At present, the Russian foreign policy concept can be summarized briefly in the following theses: Russia is surrounded by enemies in the face of the United States and its allies, there is a real threat of Russia's loss of territorial integrity and natural resources, opponents of the country are organizing internal protest movements and numerous human rights organizations are involved. The Russian leadership believes that nuclear weapons possessed by the country are the key to its sovereignty and the preservation of its global status. Neutralize this main element of the Russian defense and the United States and its allies are trying. Deceiving the world community with calls for disarmament, NATO strategists, in fact, are doing everything to cover the territory of Russia with military bases and objects.
It is no secret to anyone that the military balance so far is changing not in Russia's favor. And this is at a time when potential opponents are cutting military spending, are working on a moderate modernization of weapons. In addition, the United States is focused on increasing its presence in the Pacific in anticipation of increased competition with China. Although the Soviet military minds constantly kept repeating about the upcoming global military confrontations, in reality, the Soviet and Russian military had to participate only in local conflicts: the suppression of the opposition in Czechoslovakia, Hungary, the GDR, helped partners from developing countries, took part in peacekeeping missions in Tajikistan, Moldova and Georgia, fought against militant rebels in Afghanistan, Chechnya. And today, despite historical the lessons, some military prophets did not change their point of view, although they did not provide any reasonable justification for their opinion. One can only agree with them - the danger really exists.
Thus, the withdrawal of the NATO military contingent from Afghanistan in 2014 will most likely lead to the strengthening of the Taliban movement. Islamists can seize power not only in Afghanistan, but also in Central Asia and Pakistan. It is not known whether Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan will be able to withstand the onslaught of the Islamists. This zone of violence and terror could spread to the Middle and Near East, as well as the North Caucasus.
Another real threat is that radical regimes are acquiring their own nuclear missiles. This enemy is very dangerous for its extremist fanaticism and the provision of resources: financial, technical and human. This will allow them to fight with the leading armies of the world, causing them great damage.
At the present stage, Russia also faces the problem of preserving the integrity of the country: in the foreign policy sphere, territorial claims fell upon it, integration processes among the CIS countries cease, Russia's ties with traditional partners are weakened, armed conflicts in neighboring countries are increasing, great difficulties have arisen before the Russian side to control for migration processes, etc.
In addition, according to analysts, there is a gradual weakening of the Russian economy, its industrial and technical potential is decreasing, Russia is gradually becoming a world fuel and raw material source, Russia’s withdrawal from many foreign markets has become apparent, Russia has blocked access to advanced technologies, and the country has been drained of uncontrolled capital outflow and resources outside the state, etc.
The threats in the military sphere are no less than foreign policy and economic ones: constantly emerging new hotbeds of wars and local conflicts, unresolved issue of managing strategic forces of the RF Armed Forces, uncontrollability of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, lack of integrity of the control system, unresolved issues of state border with the Baltic countries, unresolved the legal status of the presence of the Russian contingent in the neighboring countries, the constant threat from they are terrorists.
One of the most important tasks of any state is to identify the likely adversary and identify those states from which we can expect “non-partner relations”. Without this, it is impossible to establish the exact purpose of the war and its character. The peculiarity of the modern military confrontation is that the armed struggle will go on simultaneously at the tactical, strategic and operational levels in several areas of war: outer space, land, water and air. Is Russia ready for such a war? If an error is made in determining a potential enemy, then all the work on planning and implementing the construction of the Russian Armed Forces will be nullified. Our country will not have time to correct the error.
Currently, the Russian defense policy is aimed primarily at preparing for a war with NATO and the United States. The goal of these opponents is quite clear: to prevent the economic, political and military revival of the Russia that will be able to independently ensure security and protect its interests at all levels. And to the threat from militant Islam, Russia is not ready either militarily or politically.
Already, Russia at any time may be involved in violent and bloody conflicts around the perimeter of its borders. It is possible that in the near future, Russia will face a progressive stagnation of the country's political, socio-economic and military course. In order to stay in the league of the world's strongest powers and ensure their own security, Russia must urgently lead the transformation of its industry and increase its contribution to the world economy through the introduction of innovative technologies. However, the hope that this will happen at the expense of the Russian military-industrial complex or with the help of state-owned corporations of the Skolkovo type, as experts say, is still unlikely.
In addition, the struggle for access to the natural resources of the former Soviet Union is intensifying in the world from day to day. And the forces involved in this fight plan to use them not for the good of Russia itself.
The reorientation of Russian energy exports to Asia may upset the West, but for Russia it also does not bode well. To become a raw materials appendage of China, India and other Asian countries will not raise Russia's economic and political status. It is noteworthy that the economies of Asian countries serve the innovative economies of the European Union, Japan and the United States.
So, none of the listed countries that actually use the resources of Russia are interested in investing their money in reforming the Russian economy. Russia needs to rely only on its own strength in order to make the transition from a raw materials economy to a high technology economy. As V.Putin said, economic freedom, a developed institution of private property and competition, a strong market economy should be at the head of this process. But to realize this concept will be very difficult. Only by becoming a truly strong technical and economic power, will Russia be an influential subject in the Asia-Pacific region. And then Russia will be able to interact with world powers on equal terms: Japan, the European Union, the United States, China, etc. Only close economic cooperation with the leading countries of the world will allow Russia to influence the process of nuclear disarmament, the reduction of modern offensive weapons, the limitation of conventional armed forces, as in Europe and other regions of the world. And to ensure the security and effective development of Russia, a thorough review of foreign and military policy is required, as well as a profound modernization of the entire Russian socio-economic and political system.
Materials used:
http://nvo.ng.ru/concepts/2013-04-19/1_politics.html
http://www.perspektivy.info/rus/konturi/vojennaja_politika_i_vojennaja_bezopasnost_rossii_2010-09-24.htm
http://rgrtu-640.ru/istoria/istoria107.html
http://nvo.ng.ru/scenario/2013-04-23/9_defend.html
http://schelkovo.tv/besop-st1-14.html
Information