Military Review

Break is not yet visible

Break is not yet visible

It seems that the intractability of Western generals on the European missile defense system is increasingly driving the dialogue between Russia and NATO to a standstill. The situation is reminiscent of the work of two telecommunications operators, who seem to be tuned in to one frequency, but no matter how much one calls the other, he receives in response: "I can't hear you."

Another attempt to reach out to partners yesterday in Brussels was made by the head of our military department. After a more than two-year break, a meeting of the Russia-NATO Council was held at the headquarters of the North Atlantic Alliance, at which Sergei Shoigu first held talks as Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation. The agenda was traditional for such meetings - including, inter alia, problems of international security, European missile defense, the situation in Syria and Afghanistan.

It is no secret that the political barometer of NATO shows "clearly" or "cloudy" depending on the mood in Washington. Therefore, in the list of bilateral meetings Shoigu negotiations with his American counterpart Chuck Hagel stood immediately after the protocol vis-à-vis with the Secretary General of the Alliance Andres Fogh Rasmussen. A dialogue with British Defense Secretary Philip Hammond and Italian Mario Mauro was scheduled for a later time. Bilaterals, like the Russia-NATO Council meeting, were not broadcast to journalists, but media representatives quickly found out: a breakthrough in the main issue - Europe’s missile defense - did not happen. It was difficult to expect otherwise. Even on the eve of negotiations with Shoigu, the Alliance’s Gen. Alliance openly declared that NATO’s approach to this problem was unchanged. Moreover, according to Fogh Rasmussen, by 2018, the missile defense system "will fully protect the population of Europe and the NATO countries." Russians do not seem to be considered Europeans in Brussels. Hence the role that the Alliance assigns to our country in the construction of the continent’s missile defense. In the NATO variant, the alignment of forces is as follows: Russia and the alliance create two independent missile defense centers that exchange information, prepare joint exercises and analyze external threats.

In the alliance, they prefer not to recall the sectoral construction of a single antimissile umbrella proposed by Russia. As for the main demand of Moscow - to give legal guarantees that the US missile defense system is not directed against our state - in the West it is still ignored. That is why at a press conference following a meeting of the Russia-NATO Council, Sergei Shoigu was forced to state:

- Collaboration in this area does not work. Missile defense programs in Europe are developing, and our concerns are not taken into account.

At the same time, the Russian Defense Minister confirmed that Russia is still open for mutually beneficial cooperation in the field of anti-missile defense, which can strengthen the security of each state.

“However, before we start joint anti-missile projects, we need firm and reliable legal guarantees that the US missile defense system will not be used against the Russian nuclear deterrent forces,” Shoigu said.

Unfortunately, missile defense is not the only stumbling block in our relations with the North Atlantic bloc. Moscow, in particular, is worried about NATO’s attempts to revive the old Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe. That is, the desire of Western generals to limit the number of our military equipment on a large part of the country and control its movement even within the borders of a sovereign state. And, at the same time, to preserve in Europe the so-called gray zones, where the buildup and deployment of military arsenals can go without control from Russia. This, first of all, refers to the Baltic countries that joined NATO after the collapse of the USSR. Of course, this option is unacceptable for us.

Another long-standing problem is the advancement of the Alliance’s infrastructure to the Russian borders and the NATO policy to expand its membership. Although admission to the bloc of new countries has now slowed down, Moscow is well aware that this did not happen because of the desire of the alliance to take into account our interests, but for economic and political reasons within the organization. After all, the so-called youngonatovtsy must be pulled up militarily to the level of the leading countries of the bloc, and this requires hundreds of millions of dollars. During the economic crisis, they don’t want to look for such huge sums either in the USA or in Europe.

In a word, there are enough problems in Russia's relations with NATO. But this does not mean that the dialogue between them can be minimized. As they say, a thin world is better than a good quarrel, and any military contacts are better than their complete absence. Especially since Moscow and Brussels have something to write "plus". This includes the joint fight against international terrorism, including maritime piracy, and cooperation in the rescue of ships in distress, and joint training to neutralize the invaders of air liners. The latter are practiced annually at the Vigilant Eagle.

We talked about the exercises even twice, when Shoigu recalled the unprecedented openness to the Western generals of our strategic doctrine, "West-2013." Russia informed NATO about its tasks and even the size of the forces and assets involved, and it did so in advance, and not as a result of the maneuvers, as it was practiced before. In November, the Alliance conducts its exercise "Stadfast Jazz-13" on the territory of Poland and the Baltic States and, apparently, invited our representatives there as a response gesture. We expect NATO officials and generals at the Moscow International Security Conference-2014, and Western soldiers and officers - at international tank biathlon competitions.

Separately, the Russia-NATO Council talked about the situation in Afghanistan after the coalition forces were removed from there in 2014 year. And also about Syria. Shoigu recalled that there was a junction of two threats - international terrorism and weapons mass destruction. According to our minister, it is possible to fight with them in the only way - jointly seeking the destruction of chemical weapons and its components not only in government arsenals, but also from the Syrian opposition.

There are still many areas of common effort. For example, next year Russia intends to promote the implementation of a joint project with NATO on the safe and environmentally "clean" destruction of old ammunition in the Kaliningrad region. And yet - to develop cooperation in ensuring security in transport.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. HAM
    HAM 24 October 2013 11: 09
    As practice shows, legal guarantees can be given, and when you need to take it back. With these jackals you need to keep an eye out.
    1. Airman
      Airman 24 October 2013 14: 15
      As long as there is no big club on our borders that can make an ABM with a funnel in the middle within 2-3 minutes, they will not calm down.
      1. INTER
        INTER 24 October 2013 15: 43
        Agreements can be signed (the paper endures everything), but it is not necessary to execute, wedge by wedge !!!
    2. Interface
      Interface 24 October 2013 20: 00
      It is necessary to annul the agreement on the prohibition of the BRDS. Thank God that Russia has the opportunity to restore this type of weapon.
      And then aim them at Poland, Romania, the Czech Republic and Turkey. They are unlikely to want a nuclear club hanging over their head, they themselves will refuse to deploy missile defense on their territory.
      If someone decides that rebuilding the BRS threatens with retaliatory measures, then you need to remember the times of the Cold War, when there was more tension in the world, but at the same time the chance of starting large-scale hostilities was less.
  2. Dmitry 2246
    Dmitry 2246 24 October 2013 11: 13
    Medium-range missiles will "help" find mutual understanding with the European NATO states. Before deploying them, you can show "interest and concern".
    1. Dmitry Zurn
      Dmitry Zurn 24 October 2013 12: 41
      Once it was like that, it didn’t help much. Problems added. However, just watching will not work either. Now they will push us for Syria in all directions and compensate for reputation losses. I think it is necessary to find common ground, but it is also unobtrusive to crush, but just to rattle with a weapon makes no sense, especially since we are not in that position, if we look soberly. We are unlikely to come out with our corruption soon, and they see it well. And they will finish it off, because their card is stronger.
      1. varov14
        varov14 24 October 2013 22: 20
        Conclude a full-scale military treaty with the Chinese and invite the Chinese brigade, or at least a regiment to the western border, for exercises, but long-term.
    2. Dmitry Zurn
      Dmitry Zurn 24 October 2013 12: 41
      Once it was like that, it didn’t help much. Problems added. However, just watching will not work either. Now they will push us for Syria in all directions and compensate for reputation losses. I think it is necessary to find common ground, but it is also unobtrusive to crush, but just to rattle with a weapon makes no sense, especially since we are not in that position, if we look soberly. We are unlikely to come out with our corruption soon, and they see it well. And they will finish it off, because their card is stronger.
      1. timer
        timer 24 October 2013 19: 46
        For us, NATO is an enemy bloc, and all this co-operation at the meetings does not give any breakthrough and rapprochement. NATO, as it planned to build its missile defense, is building it. And they do not give a damn about the sighs of Russia! And for some reason, because Russia so far weak and vulnerable. She does not have a little mask of a cohesive team of countries (bloc) that could be opposed to NATO. Maybe from BRICS this block will turn out in the future, but for now it’s bad.
  3. Alex66
    Alex66 24 October 2013 11: 27
    If only we did not play with NATO as with Hitler, and we had an agreement and there was cooperation, they would go to us to visit them for exercises, all in one, and when they poured us full on 22.06.41/XNUMX/XNUMX we did not believe for a long time what happened, we thought Hitler and I were friends.
    Our friends Army and Navy!
    1. Onyx
      Onyx 24 October 2013 12: 01
      Quote: Alex66
      If only we did not play with NATO as with Hitler, and we had an agreement and there was cooperation, they would go to us to visit them for exercises, all in one, and when they poured us full on 22.06.41/XNUMX/XNUMX we did not believe for a long time what happened, we thought Hitler and I were friends.
      Our friends Army and Navy!

      First, we and they went on a visit before Hitler came to power. After that, all joint activities were curtailed. And secondly, no one ever considered Hitler a friend. We just tried to set him on the one who brought him up to set on us. In general, the prewar situation was very complex and ambiguous. The British and the French were going to bomb us. Only Anglophilia of Hitler made him attack us, not Britain. In addition, the head of his intelligence, Canaris was, if not an agent of Britain, then he was definitely closely connected with its intelligence. He informed Hitler that we have weak weapons and a defense system, etc.
  4. Migari
    Migari 24 October 2013 11: 34
    The enemy is the enemy, do not step on the same rake, we also had a non-aggression pact with Hitler, so there’s only an adequate answer, we simply don’t have another choice.
  5. Nitarius
    Nitarius 24 October 2013 11: 44
    There is an old and kind proverb "HOPE ON GOD and Bind the Donkey!" Or "QUIET UKRAINIAN NIGHT - BUT BUT THE FAT IS BETTER BINDING!"
    DEVELOP YOUR OWN PRO ABOUT the same way! and missiles set!

    but in general it is necessary to defend the missile defense along the borders of the USA and Europe --- and protect these poor things from terrorism and potential enemies! cares about the neighbors! God forbid war, but they are not protected!
    We need to give all possible help and put our missiles at the BOUNDARIES OF EUROPE!
    1. Gennady1973
      Gennady1973 24 October 2013 22: 37
      Nitarius. Better in Cuba. It’s faster if it doesn’t seem enough. They can be at our borders. What is stopping us?
  6. poccinin
    poccinin 24 October 2013 11: 49
    yes "ISKANDERS" simply put along the entire border. NATO is not a brother to us. You cannot trust them RUSSIA was. is and will be enemy number 1 for them
  7. tank64rus
    tank64rus 24 October 2013 11: 52
    The West has always understood, understands and will understand one argument - a good club. Let's not indulge ourselves with illusions in the world they respect and "make friends" with the powerful and despise and spit on the weak.
  8. DPN
    DPN 24 October 2013 12: 00
    It has long been known that RUSSIA, or rather its territory is a GOOD PIECE for the West, it was Soviet and Soviet history, and now that we have changed from socialist to kapstroy, nothing has changed and until Russia shrinks to the Moscow region it will not have good relations with the West and the states all the more.
    We need the territory of CUBA from where you can wipe the United States off the ground, only under these conditions there can be mutual understanding between Russia and the West at low material costs. As a result, no missile defense systems from the West will be needed.
  9. DPN
    DPN 24 October 2013 12: 04
    Until RUSSIA surrenders its territory, there will be no breaks.
  10. stalker
    stalker 24 October 2013 12: 19
    All this once again shows that NATO is moving towards our borders, smiling sweetly and nodding to us, in general, we also smile sweetly and build up military potential, allies in different regions, strengthen the borders. Sooner or later NATO will come to "democratize" us.
    1. sasska
      sasska 15 December 2013 14: 42
      as far as I remember, in 1990 the alliance promised Gorbachev not one iota to advance to the East.
      (sarcasm)"the boy gave his word - the boy took the word. Is he not the master of the word?"
  11. MIKHAN
    MIKHAN 24 October 2013 12: 48
    NATO is a potential enemy, but a friend needs to be kept close, and the enemy is even closer.
    Here's something to do like that ...
  12. Alex toll
    Alex toll 24 October 2013 13: 17
    We are surrounded !!! Wake up !!! These bastards have tried several times already, but we still don’t give up, and in the end we decided to isolate us around and PPC - we need to quickly develop industry and work on independence - autonomy .........
  13. I think so
    I think so 24 October 2013 13: 24
    You have to be a very narrow-minded person to dream that the West will abandon its attempts to destroy Russia. There has been so much in history, but here for some reason it won't be around ... Instead of developing its defense and offensive weapons, the Russian government asks for "guarantees of non-directionality" well, just some kind of childish babble ... would get down to business. And the case really smacks of disaster for Russia. The nuclear shield of Russia is fairly thinned out by the efforts of the same authorities, they CANNOT make new strategic missiles, the old ones will soon be unable to fly ... Considering this, who would refuse such a tempting opportunity as to finally wipe out this rebellious state from the face of the earth. And the government is in illusion about the West. Well, what did this power not do to please the West, and destroyed strategic missiles, and sawed submarines, strategic planes and then rotted, gave its warheads to the enemy for free to generate electricity, oil and gas drives unmeasured quantities to the West, and half of its people have never even seen gas, they keep all their money in the west, people are spreading rot, the country has been dying out for more than a dozen years, it abandoned its Slavic idea, gave all human property to foreigners or collaborators ... And it didn’t please the west. And there is no other way to expect. With such a territory at your disposal, it is naive to dream that you will be left alone someday ... and these are dreaming ...
    1. Patriot_1
      Patriot_1 24 October 2013 22: 15
      I absolutely agree ..... the West will not back down, it must be destroyed
  14. DmitriRazumov
    DmitriRazumov 24 October 2013 15: 00
    We are strangers to the West. Here the genes "friend or foe" - the most ancient means in the structure of DNA that determine the survival of the flock, operate. From this "friend or foe" the West has never renounced and did not refuse throughout the history of its existence. Their goal is the degradation and disintegration of the enemy and competitor in the East - the Russian state. Either we or they, there is no third way. This must be well understood. Our corrupt leadership would be happy to crawl in front of our comrades from the EU, but they are not at all interested in maintaining the status quo of our bureaucrats with their ambitions and interests, they themselves have interests. This is what keeps the ruling elite in the Russian Federation from completely degrading.
    On the other hand, the West itself is degrading quite quickly: the dictates of the LGBT community, the collapse of national institutions, the inability to resist immigration from Africa, etc. Ie. his (the West's) ability to realistically resist and fight the Russian Federation is sharply decreasing every year. PRO is, by and large, a PRO-fanation, helping the military-industrial complex to knock money out of national budgets and keep new "allies" in obedience from the east. Europe. No one will ever be able to really test and verify the effectiveness of this super-complex, distributed and confusing system, so it is difficult to talk about its use against our strategic nuclear forces. Yes, they themselves understand by and large ...
  15. silver_roman
    silver_roman 24 October 2013 16: 53
    Moreover, Moscow and Brussels have something to write "plus". This is a joint fight against international terrorism, including sea piracy, and cooperation to rescue ships in distress, and joint training to neutralize airplane hijackers. The latter are trained annually in the "Vigilant Eagle" exercise.

    And these are the pros ??? No.
    All this is a waste of time. The struggle of the coalition with the most developed countries of the planet and Russia - one of the most powerful states, against piracy ... it sounds so stupid and funny. Soon they will probably build nuclear mines in Georgia to fight pirates!
    This is how they say about the decisions that a woman and a man make: "a woman deals with nonsense and everyday issues - how to feed a family? Where to get money for vacation? What university to place a child? And a man is engaged in truly global and much more important issues - who will become president? when is the end of the world? "
    and here it seems that our cooperation with NATO looks about the same as the decisions made by a man in this famous joke!
    Just in order not to sit idly by, they came up with some kind of stupid problems. which are solved at the expense of much smaller means than the cooperation of half the planet!
  16. alone
    alone 24 October 2013 18: 55
    no one will attack Russia directly. this will be the end of all. but the flywheel of the processes that destroyed the USSR starts quietly quietly. so do not lose vigilance. The 5th convoy does not doze off.
  17. Cherdak
    Cherdak 24 October 2013 19: 18
    Either Star Wars, or missile defense. Kindergarten, however ...
  18. Cherdak
    Cherdak 24 October 2013 19: 35
    Well, how did the Poles break off?
    And how much was the gloating from the lords who are ready to almost conquer the world with American 10 interceptor missiles.
  19. Patriot_1
    Patriot_1 24 October 2013 22: 06
    Gorbach thank you for such prospects
  20. starhina01
    starhina01 24 October 2013 23: 59
    the desire of Western generals to limit the amount of our military equipment in a large part of the country and to control its movement even within the borders of a sovereign state. And, at the same time, to preserve the so-called gray zones in Europe, where the buildup and deployment of military arsenals can go without control .... well, well done .. and on. angry they need some dirty tricks to arrange and squabble again, maybe calm down hi
  21. konvalval
    konvalval 25 October 2013 01: 09
    NATO members are "masters" of their words. According to the principle: "I gave it myself, I took it back myself."
  22. viktor_ui
    viktor_ui 25 October 2013 09: 02
    And the photo crowning the article, well, right WONDERFUL !!! I almost burst into tears of nostalgia, of the entichs of the very devices that are on the operator’s table ... and the portrait muzzle of the perdyuk was no less scared. In one of the famous fairy tales there is a saying: squalor and no art — chop off their heads. So here, the bells and whistles of the 80s and the background are a bunch of LCD monics combined into one panel ... well, the table wants to sing separate praises, but there is no more strength left. I know that it’s not patriotic, but this photo and the article of proud patriotism did not cause me. negative
    1. ZU-23
      ZU-23 25 October 2013 11: 51
      the loot for furniture was clearly squeezed out by corrupt officials))), but the devices are stable, it’s not your android, where you can catch a glitch at the wrong time)))
    2. DmitriRazumov
      DmitriRazumov 25 October 2013 17: 49
      In fact, this photo looks like a bullshit, not a control center. Monitor EC 7922 from the 80s It’s not connected to anything and stands with a black screen. On the wall is a Potemkin village made of a plasma panel and a static picture. I myself drew such very quickly for the next general show, when I was still a lieutenant in the 80s. Now TsU and TsUPy look more fine-tuned and the equipment there is different, although naturally no army lives without window dressing ...