Military Review

A new recipe from RSDM: While the US is "sharpening the stylet", Russia is being offered to "bury a club"

121
A new recipe from RSDM: While the US is "sharpening the stylet", Russia is being offered to "bury a club"The Russian International Affairs Council (INF), chaired by former Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov, continues his expert work. October 21 The 2013 of the year on its information resource published an article by the head of the IMEMO department of the Russian Academy of Sciences and MGIMO professor Andrei Zagorsky (1959) entitled "Radical nuclear arms reduction will strengthen the security of Russia" (1). This work needs detailed comments.


Andrei Zagorskiy in his article proposes to Russia such a "radical reduction" of nuclear weapons, which clearly goes beyond the scope of practice, such as historical the SALT-1 (1972) and SALT-2 (1979) treaties, as well as the newest ones - START-1 (1991), START-2 (1993) and START-3 (2010). Note that a radical reduction of nuclear arsenals by a whole third quite recently, in June 2012, was proposed to the Russian Federation by US President Barack Obama in his speech at the Brandenburg Gate. However, prof. Zagorskiy speaks, after all, not of a "cardinal", but of a "radical" method, that is, of a completely different approach than a balanced reduction of nuclear armaments, taking into account all kinds of carriers and nuclear warheads. In his article, the MGIMO professor simply suggests that the United States and Russia eliminate one of the components of their nuclear triad, which, as you know, includes three components: strategic Aviation, intercontinental ballistic missiles and nuclear submarine missile carriers. Specifically, the article in Zagorsky’s article is about the complete elimination of ballistic missiles. Note the fact that only two countries possess the full-fledged nuclear triad in the world at the moment: the USA and Russia.

In support of their logic prof. Zagorsky refers to the rhetorical appeal of the presidents of the United States and the Russian Federation dated April 2008 to "step over the barriers of the strategic principles of the past." True, by "stepping over barriers" the INF writer clearly understands something other than the leaders of the two countries.

Why do you need it? It turns out that it became difficult to count. According to Professor MGIMO, "maintaining strategic stability, understood as the preservation of the ability of Russia and the US to mutually destroy each other, becomes an increasingly complex task as the development of military technology." The formula of the two-sided "strategic stability" equation begins to include not only strategic nuclear weapon two countries, but also promising missile defense systems, as well as new classes of precision weapons. Because of such multifactorial nature, the formula of strategic stability for new negotiations on strategic offensive arms, Andrei Zagorsky believes, becomes difficult to calculate. It is not clear how, in the case of bilateral disarmament, the United States and the Russian Federation should relate to it the existing potentials of "China, Britain, France, and sometimes even India and Pakistan." The achievement of agreements on the reduction of strategic offensive arms is beginning to impede new factors in the development of military technologies and the promotion of new strategies. But instead of taking control of the "new factors", Zagorsky proposes to eliminate the original "old factor".

In the emerging new situation, Zagorsky considers the position incorrect that a further reduction of nuclear weapons is incompatible with the interests of Russia's national security. To break the impasse of multifactorial nature, Zagorsky proposes to simplify the initial components of the formula itself by "phasing out all ground-based long-range ballistic missiles worldwide". “As a first step, Russia and the United States could set an example to other countries, agreeing on a substantial reduction in their intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs),” he writes. Such a measure, according to Zagorsky, "would allow Russia not only to make a breakthrough and significantly strengthen cooperation with the United States, at the same time strengthening its own national security, but also to make progress in a number of other equally important areas." Practical implementation of such an initiative would reinforce another possible proposal of Russia - to eliminate the general class of ballistic missiles by making the Russian-US Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Short-Range Missiles (1987 of the Year) universal, that is, to eliminate the global class of ballistic missiles altogether. True, we note, it is not clear whether North Korea will agree to such a step, for example. A radical reduction and liquidation of the ICBM, according to the INF expert, will provide an opportunity to remove the issue of the missile defense program in the mutual strategic balance between Russia and the United States, since the facilities for interception by the missile defense system will simply disappear. True, here the INF writer is in conflict, since he proposes to preserve the strategic sea-based systems "to maintain a reasonable potential for mutual nuclear deterrence at reduced levels."

Prof. Zagorsky also believes that the elimination of ICBMs "will also alleviate the issue of the possible appearance of non-nuclear high-precision long-range systems in the future, which could theoretically solve the problem of delivering a first strike on the ICBM mines - there will be no more such targets for them." Here the DIMO expert again makes an obvious mistake. The elimination of mine ICBMs does not negate the presence of many other potential targets for enemy precision weapons.

What benefits does prof. Zagorsky in the proposed version of the new START?

1. The elimination of the most destabilizing systems will remove the threat of mutual guaranteed destruction.

2. The Russian leadership will be able to save a significant part of the budget by eliminating the cost of maintaining the current quantitative level of ICBMs and abandoning the development and deployment of new ICBMs in exchange for old ones being removed from combat duty. In particular, there will be no need for the execution of a part of the Russian program for the modernization of strategic weapons - the creation of a new heavy ICBM with multiple warheads. Such a proposal seems to be a more than controversial decision even within the framework of the traditional definition of strategic stability in Russian-American relations.

So prof. MGIMO Zagorsky offers essentially the same as US President Barack Obama in Berlin - a significant mutual reduction of nuclear arsenals, albeit by eliminating one component of the triad. Specifically for Russia, the Zagorsky proposal means the elimination of a whole kind of troops - the Strategic Missile Forces (RVSN). As of 22 June 2013 of the year, the strategic nuclear forces of Russia include 448 combat-ready strategic carriers that can carry 2323 nuclear warheads. At the same time, as of 1 June 2013, the Strategic Missile Forces include 395 missile systems capable of carrying 1303 nuclear warheads. Of the total number of missile systems, 171 belongs to the category of "mobile missile systems", and 36 - to the "mobile". Thus, the mine component of the Russian Strategic Missile Forces is equal to slightly less than half of all deployed missile systems.

The naval component of the Russian nuclear triad includes 7 SSBNs whose ballistic missiles are capable of carrying 512 nuclear warheads.

The strategic aviation of the Russian Federation includes 45 strategic bombers, which are capable of carrying up to 508 long-range cruise missiles.

Let's compare the Russian potential with the American nuclear triad. At the end of the 2012, the US nuclear triad had 450 deployed silo-based ICBMs with about 560 warheads, which is two times smaller than Russia, 14 SSBNs with 336 missiles and 131 strategic bomber. (2)

According to the report of US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, submitted to the US Congress in May 2010, after meeting the conditions of the START-3 Treaty, by February 2018, the US strategic forces will have 420 "Minuteman-3", 14 SSBN type " Ohio's 240 Trident 2 SLBMs with 1000 Charges and 60 Strategic Bomber B-52H and B-2A. At the beginning of 2011, only the US Navy’s nuclear arsenals contained 320 Tomahawk sea-launched nuclear cruise missiles (SLCMs) that were beyond the scope of strategic agreements. In the past three years alone, more than 6 thousand rocket launchers for SLCMs have been deployed on US sea-based carriers. In quantitative terms, Russia lags far behind the US in this class of weapons.

Thus, the United States, as before, has some advantage in the sea and air component of its triad. At the same time, the potential of the maritime component of the American triad is approximately equal to the Russian component of land ICBMs. All the advantages of the secrets of the SSBN remain with the Americans. American submarines of the Ohio type are the most efficient component of the US nuclear triad. The presence, in turn, of the Russian Federation of mobile and mobile ICBM complexes, according to experts, reduces the possibility of a sudden disarming nuclear strike in peacetime. However, the sea and air units of the American triad are carriers of highly sophisticated cruise missiles that are not counted on to the potential of strategic nuclear forces. The new generation of ALCM being created in the US will have the ability to retarget in flight, which gives the potential possibility of defeating Russian mobile complexes. In addition, the system of non-nuclear weapons of rapid global strike (NBGU), which has been developed in the USA for over a decade, poses the threat of an almost sudden attack. At the same time, this system creates for Russia a dilemma of the possibility of a reciprocal use of nuclear weapons.

In general, it can be concluded that with the hypothetical implementation of the proposal by prof. Zagorsky on the elimination of ICBMs in the brackets of the strategic equation should be entered cruise missiles - weapons that have mobile capabilities that are incomparable to ICBMs - a class in which the United States, beyond any doubt, is superior to the Russian Federation. At the same time, speaking of budgetary benefits, prof. Zagorsky clearly decided to play with the United States in giveaway. It is the United States that will face major expenditures on upgrading its missile component of the triad, which only the outdated Minuteman-3 ICBMs are currently armed with. The retrofit of the missiles first tested in the 2012 for the year of the 1968 was canceled. For the time being, the modernization program envisages the problem extension of the “Minuteman” resource to 2030. To modernize the missile component of its triad, the United States has yet to create its own project. Prof. Zagorsky proposes Russia to abandon its new and modernized mobile ICBMs in exchange for the US decommissioning of the obsolete Minuteman-3 missiles.

And then the proposal of prof. Zagorsky has a downside. In recent years, the United States has achieved impressive successes in the creation of high-precision non-nuclear ammunition and their means of delivery, to which Russia cannot effectively oppose anything in this area of ​​military technology. The elimination of ICBMs will make it impossible for Russia to create a cheap asymmetric response to the threat of a pre-emptive strike with a high-precision non-nuclear weapon. A possible answer in this direction can be given only after the restoration of the industrial potential of the Russian Federation and the reconstruction of entire industries of its industry, in particular, domestic electronics. In the new situation, the high-precision weapons of the United States are a polished stiletto, and the Russian ICBMs are a striking club. It is the ICBM for Russia that is a kind of strategic insurance against risks and challenges in the field of security. Speaking for the elimination of the ICBM, prof. Zagorsky proposes to move military-technological competition from the United States into a deliberately costly sphere for Russia.

In words, the sentence of prof. Zagorsky aims to get away from the model of mutual guaranteed destruction. In practice, the abandonment of the ICBM makes it more problematic to defeat the territory of the United States, while for the Americans, with their real military presence on all extremities of the Eurasian continent, such difficulties in relation to Russia should not arise. Therefore, the abandonment of the model of mutual guaranteed destruction after the elimination of ICBMs will mean the elimination of the basic principles of the Yalta-Potsdam security order.

Back in 1948, the administration of US President Harry Truman set the main goal in relations with the Soviet Union — to reduce the Soviet military potential to a level safe for the United States. After the end of the Cold War, Washington once again confirmed this thesis.

Initially, the creation of nuclear missiles in the USSR was regarded as an effective means of compensating American superiority in strategic aviation. Then the appearance of nuclear missiles allowed the development of a political concept of "nuclear deterrence." The concept of "deterrence" is a policy of preventive threats to use nuclear weapons in order to induce the adversary to abandon any actions or, on the contrary, to carry out them. Thus, in the practical execution of the proposal of prof. Zagorsky traditional deterrence policy is transformed into a military-strategic situation, characteristic of the era preceding the nuclear-missile era. At the same time, it is impossible to imagine a situation that technological development in the foreseeable future will reduce the importance of ICBMs.

In 1977, a prominent American expert in arms control, Paul Nitze, in his concept of strategic stability, determined that, from the US point of view, the Soviet ICMMs with MIRVs undermine stability in the strategic sphere. He suggested at negotiations with the USSR to seek a reduction of Soviet heavy ICBMs with a MAP, subject to moving beyond the framework of negotiations on the reduction of strategic armaments of cruise missiles. In 1989, a similar basis was adopted by the leaders of the USSR - Mikhail Gorbachev and Eduard Shevardnadze.

An important concession by the Kremlin, both in Russia and in the United States, was the signing of the START-2 Treaty (1993), which envisaged the elimination of heavy intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM), especially dangerous for the US Р-36М (SS-18 Satan) and Р-36Х2 " Voevoda "and promising P-36М3" Icarus ". In the second half of the 90s, the Americans at the talks suggested that Russia should transfer the ICBMs to a mode that would take several hours to prepare for their launch. Washington’s actions to deploy a missile defense system in Europe prompted Russia to begin upgrading its nuclear forces, which began with the development of new ICBMs. The 2007 year was developed by the MBR RS-24. Representatives of the Russian Strategic Missile Forces announced the possibility of restoring production of ICBM railroad-based RS-24 and partially RS-36orb orbital missiles. In 2010, under the reboot talk, the administration of US President Barack Obama adopted a "minimum deterrence" strategy, which included redirecting part of the US strategic nuclear forces to key economic infrastructure sites of potential adversaries. The new strategy envisaged a radical reduction in Russian and American strategic nuclear forces to 75% and the extensive development of missile defense systems. As a result of START-3, Russia and the United States approached the ceiling of deployed warheads - 1550 units. Further reduction of this limit below the 1000 warheads leads to a possible disarming strike on the strategic forces of one of the parties. Further reductions in the US and Russian ICBMs are also hardly possible due to the continuing uncertainty regarding the existing strategic forces of China and plans for their further deployment. At the same time, not one of the nuclear powers of the world, including China, possesses a volume of funds that allows destroying the strategic potential of Russia and the United States. Because of the presence of mobile ICBMs in Russia, the Americans now also have no way to quickly and guaranteedly destroy the entire nuclear potential of Russia.

Summing up, it should be noted that due to the continental specifics of Russia, the United States has always been particularly interested in reducing or eliminating certain categories of Russian ballistic missiles. The hypothetical elimination of Russian ICBMs will be followed by the diffusion of the doctrine of deterrence. The consequences for the Russian military industrial complex, which in this case will lose another segment of its relatively technological enterprises, are also significant. Let's not forget that in modern conditions it is the ICBM that, in the first place, become an attainable strategic weapon for the countries of the Third World.

In general, the article by Andrei Zagorsky, head of the IMEMO department of the Russian Academy of Sciences and MGIMO professor, “Radical reduction of nuclear weapons will strengthen the security of Russia” and its author can be assessed differently. We can say that Zagorsky, with its more than “original” proposal, wants to “please” the Western expert community. Professor Zagorsky can be likened to another well-known professor at the Higher School of Economics, who suggested transferring the Russian Arctic under international control. However, from our point of view, the other is true - the INF Treaty has voiced a recipe for depriving a future "Russia without Putin" sovereignty in one of the key areas. Under the talk of a radical reduction in nuclear weapons, which supposedly strengthens Russia's security, it is quite legal through negotiations on the next START to deprive the country of the tool that for more than half a century has ensured the security and independence of our Motherland.

(1) Zagorsky Andrey. A radical reduction of nuclear weapons will strengthen the security of Russia // http://russiancouncil.ru/inner/?id_4=2538#top

(2) Esin V.I. US nuclear forces // http://www.rusus.ru/?act=read&id=311
Author:
Originator:
http://www.regnum.ru/
121 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. The comment was deleted.
    1. Asgard
      Asgard 2 November 2013 08: 37
      42
      Thanks to Nuclear weapons, balance reigns in the world ...
      But in Russia, fermentation began in the minds of People, and "foam" and "" which were previously thrown abroad or disposed of here, became a professor and got the right to write articles ...
      Probably graduating from the "school of economics" where slogans are taught, but not knowledge ...
      unfortunate ((((
      1. SPACE
        SPACE 2 November 2013 09: 29
        31
        Quote: Asgard
        Thanks to Nuclear weapons, balance reigns in the world ...

        Russia's nuclear weapons are the last obstacle holding back the Dark Forces ...
        Let’s say such an agreement was concluded, the Strategic Missile Forces were reduced, and years later, through 10, the West will unilaterally withdraw from this agreement as it left the ABM Treaty. But having more financial and technical capabilities, it will not be difficult for MI to make up this group, just like missile defense today, they have come out and are developing with us, there is no money for it. In addition, strategic nuclear submarines, even in their waters, they can in any case track down and destroy, having a quantitative superiority in multipurpose boats and navy, and the rest of the launched SLBMs will easily intercept their missile defense.
        Such conversations are worst of all, because when implementing article ideas, in general, all free reasoning loses all meaning, as well as freedom itself in this world.
        The author is either a fool or a traitor.
        1. Onyx
          Onyx 2 November 2013 10: 34
          +9
          Quote: SPACE
          Let’s say such an agreement was concluded, the Strategic Missile Forces were reduced, and after 10 years the West unilaterally withdraws from this agreement, as it left the ABM Treaty

          Perhaps, but they won’t even need it, given their superiority in high-precision long-range weapons.
          As soon as I read that he was proposing to abandon one of the three components of the triad, I immediately thought about land-based ICBMs. Of course, this is either an agent, or a grantee, or wants to become one. I do not believe that he is simply mistaken.
          Here is what Putin recently responded to such proposals:
          True, I still did not understand what kind of non-nuclear charges comparable in strength to nuclear ones, he says
          1. SPACE
            SPACE 2 November 2013 11: 38
            +1
            Quote: Onyx
            Perhaps, but they won’t even need it, given their superiority in high-precision long-range weapons.

            It is a myth!
            Quote: Onyx
            I do not believe that he is simply mistaken.

            It is obvious!
            Quote: Onyx
            True, I still did not understand what kind of non-nuclear charges comparable in strength to nuclear ones, he says

            No wonder!
            1. Onyx
              Onyx 2 November 2013 11: 58
              +3
              Quote: SPACE
              It is a myth!

              What is the myth? Do Americans have no heap of tomahawks on which to install nuclear warheads?
              It is obvious!

              For me, yes. But you wrote that he might be a fool
              1. SPACE
                SPACE 2 November 2013 12: 36
                +2
                Quote: Onyx
                What is the myth? Do Americans have no heap of tomahawks on which to install nuclear warheads?

                While Tomahawk will fly, whether ?, America will be sown three times and once the Strategic Missile Forces will be plowed.
                Quote: Onyx
                For me, yes. But you wrote that he might be a fool

                Well, not smart. In any case, he is a fool, but in one of the cases he is not aware of it.
                1. Onyx
                  Onyx 2 November 2013 13: 00
                  +2
                  Quote: SPACE
                  While Tomahawk will fly, whether ?, America will be sown three times and once the Strategic Missile Forces will be plowed.

                  Well, we are talking about a scenario when we follow the advice of Zabugorsky. There will be no Strategic Missile Forces
                  1. SPACE
                    SPACE 2 November 2013 13: 34
                    0
                    Quote: Onyx
                    Well, we are talking about a scenario when we follow the advice of Zabugorsky. There will be no Strategic Missile Forces

                    If there is no Strategic Missile Forces, then they will not need tomahawks. Well then, the SSBN Zabugorny is allowed to us.
                    1. Onyx
                      Onyx 2 November 2013 13: 51
                      +3
                      Quote: SPACE
                      Well then, the SSBN Zabugorny is allowed to us.

                      We do not have so many and KOH (coefficient of operational voltage) is small. This will create the conditions for blackmail by the States
                2. Ascetic
                  Ascetic 2 November 2013 16: 59
                  +7
                  Quote: SPACE
                  While Tomahawk will fly, whether ?, America will be sown three times and once the Strategic Missile Forces will be plowed.

                  And before he reaches it, he needs to come closer and with the whole armada, and this is an occasion for a preemptive strike, even if not against the states, but against one of his allies in the coalition, which is clearly stated in the military doctrine. And the question is whether the states will go for a massive strike if surprise is lost? In general, I’ll explain more simply. What does it mean to lose the ground component of strategic nuclear forces, that is, Strategic Missile Forces? This means lose potential retaliation for which these troops are actually intended mainly. For the naval component of the SSBNs are designed as the least vulnerable in retaliatory and subsequent strikes. I say nothing about YES because the strategic bomber still needs to reach the launch area of ​​the Kyrgyz Republic capable of hitting the state.
                  1. Onyx
                    Onyx 2 November 2013 17: 09
                    +1
                    Quote: Ascetic
                    This means losing the potential for a retaliatory strike for which these troops are actually designed primarily.

                    Well, it seems, a promising group of strategic missile forces will include more PGRK than mine complexes, which means that the main destination will be a retaliatory strike.
                    Quote: Ascetic
                    the marine component of the SSBNs are intended as the least vulnerable in retaliation and subsequent strikes

                    But aren't PGRK the least vulnerable component of strategic nuclear forces?
                    1. Ascetic
                      Ascetic 2 November 2013 18: 43
                      +9
                      Quote: Onyx
                      But aren't PGRK the least vulnerable component of strategic nuclear forces?


                      If they are at the checkpoint, and this is only a quarter of the staff in peacetime. In the threatened period, for the hidden conclusion of the rest, one will have to face many problems. Now it is not the USSR when everything was under control and there was no such threat as terrorism, for example. I remember once during the heyday of democracy in the press and among the population they tried to organize protests of the dissatisfied (they frightened two-headed calves and other horrors), through the criminal structures they recruited gopniks to beat officers. Then I remember the Priene March, the democratic public in several cars breaking through the curfew, the cordon of two soldiers blocked our path. The rally was staged by a bloke. I had to drive away the people's deputies of the local councils with an armored car. The view of Utes only sobered up ... Not everything is smooth and with the anti-sabotage struggle, although recently there have been serious concerns about this and there are certain shifts. In my time in peacetime, this struggle was only a fiction. In any case, the regiments did not have full-time units, they were formed from the mobile reserve in wartime. Only weapons were stored in warehouses of the NZ. Now the Typhoon Combat Anti-sabotage Vehicle (BDM) has been developed and is being tested in Balabanovo. In addition to various electronic stuffing, it is also equipped with a UAV reconnaissance aircraft.
                      BPDM "Typhoon-M", autumn 2013 (photo - Konstantin Semenov, http://tvzvezda.ru).





                      1. Ascetic
                        Ascetic 2 November 2013 19: 14
                        +7
                        They also shoved seismic sensors near the BSP that were tuned and reacted to the movement of equipment weighing more than 100 tons and transmitted a signal about the passage to the satellite. A stump like in the photo or a hitch. In the stump you could also install a radar and track the operation of the Strategic Missile Forces radio channels.
                      2. Onyx
                        Onyx 2 November 2013 19: 46
                        +2
                        Well, yes, but keep in mind that SSBNs also do not spend all their time at sea. For mattresses, KOH is very high (50-60%). Each SSBN has two crews replacing each other.
                        Quote: Ascetic
                        I remember once during the heyday of democracy in the press and among the population tried to organize protests of dissatisfied

                        Yes, our "partners" really wanted us not to have a PGRK. Even if I am not mistaken, there was a period when, according to the START treaty, there were serious restrictions on the patrol area of ​​the PGRK (no more than 5 km2, in my opinion).
                      3. Ascetic
                        Ascetic 2 November 2013 20: 05
                        +6
                        Quote: Onyx
                        there were serious restrictions on the patrol area of ​​the PGRK (no more than 5 km2, in my opinion).

                        Yes, I found this. I don’t remember in what years either under Gorbachev or under Yeltsin. Yeltsin introduced another 0PZ. It’s scary when the media drummed about this nonsense that now the missiles are not going anywhere. The nachoper of the division found out how many combat documents needed to be redone.
                      4. s1н7т
                        s1н7т 3 November 2013 18: 14
                        0
                        Quote: Onyx
                        Each SSBN has two successive crews

                        Moreover, one of them was necessarily "blue"! laughing In any case, this was at the border of the 70-80s.
              2. Pilat2009
                Pilat2009 2 November 2013 21: 15
                +1
                Quote: Ascetic
                The bomber strategist still needs to fly to the launch area of ​​the Kyrgyz Republic, capable of hitting the state.

                Combat duty and implies flights in the range of the United States, and the closer, the less flight time
                The same applies to the nuclear submarines with the KR on board. In my opinion, it is realistic to equip the submarines with one hundred KR, as in the USA, it is better to hypersonic
                1. Ascetic
                  Ascetic 2 November 2013 22: 14
                  +3
                  Quote: Pilat2009
                  The same applies to the nuclear submarines with the KR on board. In my opinion, it is realistic to equip the submarines with one hundred KR, as in the USA, it is better to hypersonic

                  We will not attack them first. They equip their Ohio primarily to hit strategic targets and objects in a disarming strike as accurately as possible. We don’t need this. In the retaliatory strike, the region is launched in densely populated areas and we do not need to reinvent the wheel. Multipurpose nuclear submarines are a hunter just behind their submarines on duty. Sivulf has a similar task of combating low-noise submarines and other forces of the Russian Navy in its near operational zones (near bases), as well as in the Arctic regions.

                  MOSCOW, November 1 - RIA Novosti. The Borey-class strategic nuclear submarines (NPS) Alexander Nevsky and Vladimir Monomakh (Project 955) can be adopted by the Russian Navy not for service, but for trial operation and perform tasks as multipurpose attack submarines.

                  While there are no Maces will carry out the task of the hunter. The need for inventions is cunning. And you say to equip with a hundred KR. Here the Mace would be brought to mind as soon as possible.
                  1. Onyx
                    Onyx 2 November 2013 22: 47
                    +2
                    Quote: Ascetic
                    While no Maces will perform the hunter's task

                    According to Interfax, the Defense Ministry denied reports that it is allegedly planned to use Borei-class strategic nuclear missile submarines as multipurpose submarines.
                    "The information that Borei-class strategic nuclear submarines will be adopted by the Navy to perform tasks" as multipurpose submarines "does not correspond to reality," the General Staff of the Navy told Interfax-AVN.
                  2. Ascetic
                    Ascetic 3 November 2013 01: 17
                    +2
                    Quote: Onyx
                    "as multipurpose submarines",

                    And I almost told myself that maple leaves are falling from Ash, etc. led without thinking and only then began to think how is this even possible ... the Americans would probably fall into a stupor
                2. Realist58
                  Realist58 3 November 2013 13: 18
                  -3
                  Quote: Ascetic
                  We will not attack them first.

                  And why not attack?
                  The amerosionist oligarchy poses a real threat to both us and the whole world, so why not actually have plans for a first disarming strike.
                  Moreover, after receiving a hypersonic weapon, she will not use it, since its sudden use guarantees the absence of a retaliatory strike (especially considering the speed of decision-making among our leaders with a turtle).
                  So the goal is more than obvious - the acceleration of work on the creation of a hypersonic strategic carrier, strategic tracking systems for strategic nuclear submarines and its own missile defense.
                3. s1н7т
                  s1н7т 3 November 2013 18: 21
                  +1
                  Quote: Realist58
                  And why not attack?

                  But because this is the fundamental difference between us. Or are you from corpse eaters?
                4. Realist58
                  Realist58 3 November 2013 20: 51
                  +5
                  Darakhoy, I am not interested in radiation-fried meat.
                  Moreover, I am a peaceful, kind person, BUT ...
                  I am interested in ensuring the safety of Russian citizens, and if for this it would be necessary to turn the United States into radioactive ruins, then my hand would not have trembled.
            2. varov14
              varov14 3 November 2013 21: 20
              +1
              Guys, you seem to be military people, obsessed. There is no need to reinvent the wheel, it was invented a long time ago, during the war one must walk with a horse. But "feed" in advance.
  2. Alex63636363
    Alex63636363 3 November 2013 16: 36
    0
    Well done! Brevity is the brother of talent
  • s1н7т
    s1н7т 3 November 2013 18: 04
    -7
    Quote: Onyx
    This is what Putin recently answered such proposals.

    I am sick of everything your pukin says. Army reform is his brainchild. No matter what he says. But, to put it mildly, I also disagree with the "professor" - he is horrible, like your Pukin - each one works out his own, probably.
    1. Onyx
      Onyx 3 November 2013 19: 30
      +2
      I am sick of everything your pukin says. Army reform is his brainchild. No matter what he says. But, to put it mildly, I also disagree with the "professor" - he is horrible, like your Pukin - each one works out his own, probably.

      Nausea is your problem. I'm sick of people like you, but I'm not talking about it
  • velikoros-xnumx
    velikoros-xnumx 2 November 2013 11: 46
    +9
    Quote: SPACE
    The author is either a fool or a traitor.

    To the count of the demon negative
    1. AVV
      AVV 2 November 2013 12: 42
      +2
      And this professor receives grants at the American embassy, ​​or during business trips to the states ???
      1. Onyx
        Onyx 2 November 2013 12: 59
        +2
        Quote: AVV
        And this professor receives grants at the American embassy, ​​or during business trips to the states ???

        At the American Embassy
        1. Ascetic
          Ascetic 2 November 2013 17: 08
          12
          Quote: Onyx
          At the American Embassy


          Zagorsky, Andrei Vladimirovich - Member of the Editorial Board of the OSCE Yearbook (Hamburg) and Executive Editor of the Russian edition of the Yearbook. Member of the Editorial Board of Helsinki Monitor, The Hague. Member of the editorial board of the European Security Newsletter, Moscow. Vice President of the Russian Association of Euro-Atlantic Cooperation. Member of the international council of the Geneva Center for Democratic Control of the Armed Forces. Member of the PIR Center Council and Editorial Board (Political Studies in Russia).
          Specialist in European security issues, relations between Russia and NATO and European organizations: OSCE, EU, Council of Europe. He stood at the origins of the formation of independent, non-governmental research in the field of non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and arms control in the Russian Federation, and provided assistance to novice specialists in this field.
          Taken from Pedevikia. When talking about INDEPENDENT and NON-GOVERNMENTAL specialists, they mean that they are independent from everyone except the Pentagon and the State Department, as well as independent media and non-governmental organizations
          1. Onyx
            Onyx 2 November 2013 17: 12
            +1
            Well, yes, Dvorkin is working on his team, in my opinion
            1. pahom54
              pahom54 3 November 2013 11: 37
              +1
              Strange ... Is this the exact information about Dvorkin Vladimir Zinovievich?
              He spent his conscious life working in the opposite direction ... And now what, how did Academician Sakharov begin - first - the creation of a hydrogen bomb, then - the struggle for world peace?
              It's a shame if this is true. In general, at one time he knew him as a normal, sane and respected person ...
          2. Sobol
            Sobol 2 November 2013 18: 35
            0
            Well. It follows that the Cossack is mishandled!
          3. bif
            bif 3 November 2013 10: 45
            +5
            Quote: Ascetic
            Taken from Pedevikia.

            At 2004 — 2005 - Deputy Head of the Moscow Branch Fund them. C. Adenauer. He stood at the origins of the formation of independent, non-governmental research in the field of non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and arms control in the Russian Federation.
            The name "Fund named after some Western figure" should be understood as follows - "Money from the CIA by transfer, and instructions - by consular mail"
            1. bif
              bif 3 November 2013 11: 08
              +8
              Quote: bif
              Fund them. C. Adenauer

              The Adenauer Foundation and the Hanns Seidel Foundation are close to the Christian Democrats, whose leader is Frau Chancellor.
              Historical humor.
              The most epic phrases of Khrushchev N.S.
              “We will never accept Adenauer as the representative of Germany. If you take off his pants and look at his ass, you can make sure that Germany is divided. And if you look at it from the front, you can see that Germany will never rise. ”
          4. AlNikolaich
            AlNikolaich 3 November 2013 19: 23
            +1
            Quote: Ascetic
            Zagorsky, Andrei Vladimirovich - Member of the Editorial Board of the OSCE Yearbook (Hamburg) and Executive Editor of the Russian edition of the Yearbook. Member of the Editorial Board of Helsinki Monitor, The Hague. Member of the editorial board of the European Security Newsletter, Moscow. Vice President of the Russian Association of Euro-Atlantic Cooperation. Member of the international council of the Geneva Center for Democratic Control of the Armed Forces. Member of the PIR Center Council and Editorial Board (Political Studies in Russia).
            Specialist in European security issues, relations between Russia and NATO and European organizations: OSCE, EU, Council of Europe. He stood at the origins of the formation of independent, non-governmental research in the field of non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and arms control in the Russian Federation, and provided assistance to novice specialists in this field.

            But a question in the subject-Whose serf is this Zagorsk? That is, what country is a citizen?
            According to statements, it’s definitely not a citizen of the Russian Federation! MGIMO dropped something, they write down every shushera in a professor ...
          5. varov14
            varov14 4 November 2013 12: 31
            0
            Yes, wherever you dig, everywhere a member. Thanks to the State Department that they only sponsor money, they don’t give Viagra.
    2. Su24
      Su24 2 November 2013 15: 17
      +4
      Quote: velikoros-xnumx
      Quote: SPACE
      The author is either a fool or a traitor.

      To the count of the demon negative


      Verily !! am soldier
  • tungus
    tungus 2 November 2013 12: 11
    15
    Quote: SPACE
    The author is either a fool or a traitor.

    Why either? He is both a fool and a traitor. A traitor, because being a professor at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations, he cannot but know that our main strategic nuclear forces are ICBMs, and American missiles are on strategic submarines. And while proposing to reduce precisely ICBMs, he openly calls for Russia to disarm. What will happen after such disarmament, I think, is clear to everyone, including him. Russia will no longer be. And this is betrayal.
    A fool, because he naively thinks that his Western friends will appreciate his activities and will not forget about him even after the destruction of Russia, if God forbid it happens. All this liberal thinks so, that they will be appreciated. They do not understand that the West needs them only as long as there is Russia. As soon as she is gone, they will no longer be needed by anyone. Because traitors were never appreciated anywhere. The betrayer will betray again, including his new masters.
  • Grbear
    Grbear 2 November 2013 15: 43
    +3
    The second one. For even just serving time at MGIMO requires intelligence, not to mention the profession.

    Conclusion: the enemy is deportation.
    1. Realist58
      Realist58 3 November 2013 19: 50
      +1
      Quote: GrBear
      Conclusion: the enemy is deportation.

      How is deportation ?! And to work 15 years on national economic construction sites?
    2. user
      user 4 November 2013 17: 52
      0
      The boy is studying at MGIMO, and talked with his curator, it seems that she lives in a different country and a different era, in terms of money, living standards, and naturally in relation to the current situation of us personally and the country as a whole (it appeared the feeling that Soros specifically selects them all). We are trying to communicate with her about our life, neither she of us, nor we understand her. Those. we just live in different realities, it reminds me of a conversation between a blind person and a deaf person.
      So now I read the article by Andrei Zagorsky and the sensation also returned.
  • varov14
    varov14 3 November 2013 21: 01
    +1
    "The author is either a fool or a traitor." --- Yes, apparently he just bought a hut in the states, his family, the kids there, and here he is preparing new managers from diplomacy. For the states, one can see neither knowledge nor intelligence is not enough, you have to earn money at home, and houses and "walls" help.
  • timer
    timer 4 November 2013 12: 00
    +1
    Author and traitor in fact. I’m watching lately in different newspapers and on the radio (like an echo) information appears like why did we need the Urals, the Caucasus, why do we need nuclear weapons, let's save on this and are similar in meaning. All this resembles the planned information campaign - throw rotten ideas into the masses, which ultimately lead to the collapse of the country and the transformation of the people into consumer slaves. There can be no question of any nuclear disarmament !! The world situation is steadily heating up by our Anglo-Saxon enemies. The economy of Russia is so far weak and ineffective (it’s true). And only nuclear weapons help us deter the unholy hawks from Capitol Hill from unleashing a world war! what I want to add, I am a supporter of mobile systems, and I think that financing the work on creating a new heavy mine-based missile is myopia and squandering and so scarce means!
  • Blackgrifon
    Blackgrifon 4 November 2013 12: 56
    0
    Quote: SPACE
    The author is either a fool or a traitor.


    Something a lot of such clever authors have recently been divorced - one proposes to reduce nuclear weapons, the other to give up the Arctic, the third - Siberia, the fourth - the Kuriles. The prison cries over these "bad lags" - only the ENEMY can rush with such ideas. And you have to fight the ENEMIES (at least with cold water and electricity :)).
  • SHILO
    SHILO 2 November 2013 11: 48
    +9
    In the regiment of glorious realtors of the Russian land increased. The name of Professor Zagorsky can be safely entered in gold letters next to such luminaries of this matter as Passage - traders in Siberia, Seryoga Medvedev - seller of the Arctic and Lemon - the donor of the Kuril Islands. Congratulations to the professor! For good reason.
    But seriously, it would cut you all down.
  • Renat
    Renat 2 November 2013 11: 54
    +6
    I would add thanks to Vissarionovich balance reigns in the world.
    1. s1н7т
      s1н7т 3 November 2013 18: 26
      0
      This is truly!
  • Su24
    Su24 2 November 2013 14: 26
    +4
    The Russian International Affairs Council (RIAC), headed by ex-Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov, continues its expert work. On October 21, 2013, his information resource published an article by Andrey Zagorsky (1959), Head of the Department of IMEMO RAS and Professor of MGIMO, entitled "Radical reduction of nuclear weapons will strengthen Russia's security."


    I did not read further))

    P.S. The author already for the title can immediately be sent to a sanatorium in the Magadan Territory. 10 years, let it be cured.
    1. Ivan_Ivanov
      Ivan_Ivanov 2 November 2013 17: 13
      +6
      "Radical reduction of nuclear weapons will strengthen Russia's security"

      A bullet in the back of the head will strengthen health.
  • Bober
    Bober 2 November 2013 19: 42
    +4
    Something lately the professor has gone funny. But the format of the report is not the same. It is necessary to impose laughter, as in those "comedies" where they laugh offscreen when necessary. Offer, short pause. Rzhaka. It will be much more fun.
  • terkin.vasi
    terkin.vasi 2 November 2013 20: 45
    +3
    For the sake of a new formula, this professor wants to hang a sword of Damocles over Russia. Once again entrusted to solve military affairs to someone, but not a professional military.
  • timer
    timer 4 November 2013 12: 21
    0
    You need to understand one thing - an enemy is actively acting in Russia, which is even stronger than the external enemy (the United States) - this is the "fifth column"! It is quite diverse, but its goal is the same - the collapse of Russia, the destruction of the army and navy, the Russian people, national culture and faith ! The country is at the mercy of the comprador oligarchy, which is linked to our external enemy, the United States. And this process is ruled by our so-called "leader". He will not fight the "fifth column", it is beneficial to him! The best way to cure us of this infection is to destroy it. If this is not done, no investment in the economy will have a strong effect Only a new leader, close in spirit to Stalin, can solve this serious problem. Who is interested in my point of view, let's continue communication through correspondence, my mailbox [email protected]
  • rrrd
    rrrd 2 November 2013 08: 29
    +5
    Zagorsky-go to the bathhouse !!!
    1. Migari
      Migari 2 November 2013 10: 29
      +1
      And then as in spirit: Whose mill are you pouring water on? Who benefits from this?
    2. 11111mail.ru
      11111mail.ru 2 November 2013 11: 43
      +1
      No, he goes to the synagogue.
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 2 November 2013 11: 51
        +2
        Rather, the US Embassy. What side is the synagogue here?
  • predator.3
    predator.3 2 November 2013 08: 30
    11
    Well, here's another "stranger among his own", and even a professor at MGIMO for whom weeping felling! and this type trains future Russian diplomats.
    1. wasjasibirjac
      wasjasibirjac 2 November 2013 20: 38
      +1
      I wonder what kind of diplomats would be obtained from the students of this "professor", probably such as demanded guarantees that the missile defense would not be targeted, cover the sector with a guarantee, and everyone is happy. And ... that's it, the "professor" proposes to reduce ICBMs and missile defense will simply disappear. and no guarantees are needed am
  • andr327
    andr327 2 November 2013 08: 34
    14
    Another Judas, dreaming of an overseas hot dog. In the furnace!
  • makarov
    makarov 2 November 2013 08: 35
    +6
    While the US is "sharpening the stiletto," Russia is being offered to "bury the club."
    This has already happened in History. Kaiser Germany declaring war on Russia, immediately afterwards sent a telegram from the Kaiser to cousin Nikolai2, saying that war was war, but for the time being your cousin didn’t bring your troops across the border .......
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Alikovo
    Alikovo 2 November 2013 08: 37
    0
    he is clearly a stupid person, albeit a professor.
  • major071
    major071 2 November 2013 09: 04
    +7
    Another pro-Western railway policy. Who thought of that? In which bank are thirty silver coins?
  • andruha70
    andruha70 2 November 2013 09: 12
    +1
    A radical reduction in nuclear weapons will strengthen Russia's security
    fool this "professor" may first "cut down" the walls and roof in his house, to strengthen the security of his property lol
  • Aleksandr
    Aleksandr 2 November 2013 09: 15
    0
    "Author Andrei Zagorsky" ---- you.
  • andrei332809
    andrei332809 2 November 2013 09: 18
    +2
    ex-Minister of Foreign Affairs Igor Ivanov,

    I should have asked Kozyrev for advice (who remembers, there was such an activist) already distorted everything, as I remembered)
  • awg75
    awg75 2 November 2013 09: 21
    +6
    special services need to be very, very interested in Mr. Zagorsky. it’s clear that this little man sucks money from Western intelligence for his nasty little pussy
  • Dimy4
    Dimy4 2 November 2013 09: 22
    +3
    Cho you are fed up with uncle, he just fulfills his denyuzhku. The main thing here is that those who listen to it have brains.
    1. varov14
      varov14 4 November 2013 12: 55
      0
      The trouble is that both among the authorities and among the military there may also be "members" of the association of "pacifists."
  • vlad.svargin
    vlad.svargin 2 November 2013 09: 35
    0
    In general, we can conclude that with a hypothetical implementation of the proposal of prof. Zagorsky, to eliminate ICBMs, cruise missiles should be introduced into the brackets of the strategic equation - a weapon that has mobile capabilities incomparable with ICBMs - a class in which the United States undoubtedly surpasses the Russian Federation. At the same time, speaking about budgetary benefits, prof. Zagorsky clearly decided to play giveaway with the United States. It is the United States that faces large expenditures to modernize its missile component of the triad, which is currently armed only with the obsolete Minuteman-3 ICBMs. The 2012 modernization of these missiles, first tested in 1968, has been canceled. So far, the modernization program provides for the problematic extension of the "minuteman" resource until 2030. To modernize the missile component of its triad, the United States has yet to create its own project. Prof. Zagorsky proposes that Russia abandon its new and modernized mobile ICBMs in exchange for removing obsolete Minuteman missiles from US armaments

    Another "agent of influence" has emerged. You can compare Professor Zagorskiy to another well-known professor at the Higher School of Economics, who proposed transferring the Russian Arctic under international control. However, from our point of view, something else is true - the RIAC voiced a recipe for depriving the future "Russia without Putin" of sovereignty in one of the key areas.
    Maybe it's time to remember the pre-war years of getting rid of the "fifth column"
  • HollyGremlin
    HollyGremlin 2 November 2013 09: 51
    +3
    I am amazed how often the names correspond to the essence: Zagorsky - Zabugorsky. ICBMs are the basis of the nuclear triad; to reduce them is simply to reduce the nuclear shield.
    1. lelik613
      lelik613 2 November 2013 14: 20
      0
      From behind the forest, from behind the mountains, the "professor" showed an ax. But not only showed, but also tied ...
  • kotvov
    kotvov 2 November 2013 09: 53
    0
    well, one more ,, zalanets, “decided to prove himself. apparently the landlords pushed for a ,, peaceful” initiative.
  • pahom54
    pahom54 2 November 2013 10: 01
    +3
    Here's how such "h" udaks earn high scientific titles and positions ??? And how do they successfully live in our time ??? An unrespectable figure from pseudoscience forgets that we, Russia, need not only to maintain nuclear parity with the United States, BUT not forget about the amount of nuclear weapons in NATO countries (England, France), but also China, without naming other owners of nuclear weapons.
    Well, it’s necessary to invent such a thing — Russia's security lies in its disarmament !!! Uncle got stoned-chopped-got drunk ??? What kind of expert ??? Why is he in the public service ??? Or will he be given the highest award for such an analysis as Gorbach - the Order of St. Andrew the First-Called?
    There is no need to serve in counterintelligence in order to say about this person - an agent of influence, an enemy of Russia. Aw, Putin, do you hear ???
    1. Ingvar 72
      Ingvar 72 2 November 2013 10: 16
      +3
      Quote: pahom54
      Here is how such "h" udaks earn high scientific titles and positions ???

      That's SO and earn.
    2. wasjasibirjac
      wasjasibirjac 2 November 2013 20: 41
      0
      Quote: pahom54
      Well, it’s necessary to invent such a thing - the security of Russia lies in its disarmament !!

      and in his opinion, the safest thing is to take off your pants and take the "ostrich" position.
  • ed65b
    ed65b 2 November 2013 10: 05
    +2
    Similar sentences will sound more often. With the growth of power in Russia. And they will be thrown through the grand-bearers such as this professor, take it easy. Another as Putin says about such.
  • Onyx
    Onyx 2 November 2013 10: 39
    +1
    In general, Americans along with Zagorsky and others like him should be sent to hell, and the structure of the Strategic Missile Forces should be changed: reduce the number of mine complexes, while increasing the number of mobile
    1. Realist58
      Realist58 3 November 2013 20: 54
      0
      Mobile complexes are not a panacea.
      IMHO, RBD and the ICBM mines on the Central Siberian plateau will be more reliable.
      1. Onyx
        Onyx 3 November 2013 21: 08
        0
        Quote: Realist58
        Mobile complexes are not a panacea.
        IMHO, RBD and the ICBM mines on the Central Siberian plateau will be more reliable.

        Maybe so. Naturally, all this should be calculated by specialists, and not taken by voluntaristic decisions of politicians or officials. It is necessary to calculate, simulate all possible options and understand whether it is advisable to create a BRZD. And so, according to the principle "to be" and "does not interfere" BRZD is not needed. Moreover, these are huge costs associated not even with the BRZD themselves, but with the infrastructure that needs to be recreated.
    2. kartalovkolya
      kartalovkolya 4 November 2013 09: 41
      0
      I agree with you, but let me add: urgently to revive the BZHRK, to increase the aviation component to at least 80-90 aircraft, and of course, sea-based ICBMs should not be forgotten! After all, all these START-1,2, etc., have been concluded traitors and their main goal is to deprive Russia of reliable protection from the aggression of the so-called "partners" who sleep and see how they can share the wealth of Russia!
    3. yur
      yur 5 November 2013 00: 39
      0
      And in my opinion it is necessary to increase the number of those and others, so that such professors Zagoruisky together with their masters completely lost count.
  • Peaceful military
    Peaceful military 2 November 2013 10: 48
    +3

    Liberasts are strangling, and Judas Kudrin entered another council. I don’t understand why ... Maybe they are being grouped so that they can slam them at once?
  • jagdpanzer
    jagdpanzer 2 November 2013 10: 50
    +1
    it’s necessary not to reduce, but to increase, and the emphasis should be on high-precision means, all these agreements are worth nothing, it’s clear even to me without MGIMO
  • kartalovkolya
    kartalovkolya 2 November 2013 11: 11
    +3
    Zagorskiy not only assent and wants to please Western experts, he is an ordinary traitor and it is surprising that he has not yet been introduced to Matrosskaya Tishina. Apparently he has very high patrons in the Russian government and on whose behalf he threw the "trial balloon" .Dear Guarantor of the Constitution, and when you take measures and protect us from similar Zagorsk people trying to deprive us of our constitutional right to defend the country from aggression. For more than half a century ICBMs and nuclear weapons have guaranteed our security, and this one wants to disarm us in front of the armed forces. teeth international bandits. What a scoundrel want to arrange a Yugoslav scenario for Russia, and fuck you and your patrons!
    1. s1н7т
      s1н7т 3 November 2013 18: 39
      0
      Quote: kartalovkolya
      Dear Guarantor of the Constitution, well, when you take action and protect us

      Good question! probably when we change the guarantor.
    2. Realist58
      Realist58 3 November 2013 20: 40
      +1
      Read the constitution, according to it our security is NOT OBLIGATED BY ANYONE.
  • Clueless
    Clueless 2 November 2013 11: 12
    0
    to hang this professor on the first bitch, so that the rest would not be bad
    1. 11111mail.ru
      11111mail.ru 2 November 2013 11: 46
      +2
      Quote: Bad
      on the first bitch

      This sc ... ku. Twenty times. I AM FOR!
  • egor 1712
    egor 1712 2 November 2013 11: 25
    +4
    The provocateur is Zagorsky. Let's be honest, because of such "professors", we lost the USSR and almost destroyed Russia. Traitor - Zagorsky is his name.
    1. s1н7т
      s1н7т 3 November 2013 18: 49
      -1
      Quote: egor 1712
      because of such "professors", lost the USSR

      The USSR was pissed off not by professors, but by lumpen who wanted jeans, chewing gum and hot dogs (so that they choked on them, who still hadn't died!). Professors in the USSR were engaged in science. Working at NIEFL, I saw it myself. And this professor, probably already in the late Yeltsin period, i.e. bottling laughing Well, the price of his statements is zero.
  • washi
    washi 2 November 2013 11: 28
    +4
    prof. Zagorsky is a bad person.
    If the "Russian" Council on International Affairs (RIAC), headed by ex-Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov, has nothing to do, then let it be better to explain that in the case of nuclear weapons, nuclear weapons will primarily be targeted at large cities. And, in order to preserve the population, it is necessary to resettle the Big cities, and not the small ones (whose inhabitants will definitely survive). And industry and other structures need to be pulled across the entire territory of the country, in contrast to the DAM policy, which (as if on purpose) calls for relocation to several large metropolitan areas (just two words - the enemy of the people).
  • yurypetrunin
    yurypetrunin 2 November 2013 11: 47
    +4
    Power must be exercised in relation to such figures! Where is our President of the Russian Federation, why "in the order established by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, he DOES NOT take measures to protect the sovereignty of the Russian Federation, its independence and state integrity ..." (Clause 2, Article 80 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation).
    Let's finish playing "democracy", giving such figures the opportunity to promote their anti-RF ideas. Where is the Duma, why is there no law prohibiting such activities and the sanctions envisaged by it in the form of deprivation of citizenship, prison or felling?
    Yuri Petrunin. Veteran of the USSR Armed Forces, Polar, Gatchina.
    1. Onyx
      Onyx 2 November 2013 12: 03
      0
      Quote: yurypetrunin
      the sanctions provided for by him in the form of deprivation of citizenship

      and where such a sanction is registered do not say?
      1. yurypetrunin
        yurypetrunin 2 November 2013 12: 20
        0
        It is not registered anywhere. It's a pity. Yu. Petrunin
  • Ivanovich47
    Ivanovich47 2 November 2013 12: 09
    +4
    What can this professor teach his students at MGIMO? Maybe this is the reason that our diplomacy sometimes makes irreparable mistakes. WITHThe most recent example is the gangster bombing of Libya by NATO aircraft. After all, Russian diplomats agreed on a fatal UN decision, which allowed European bandits to attack Gaddafi.
  • chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 2 November 2013 12: 15
    +2
    "And the Cossack is sent."
    Then they will write - "The best people of the country, the intelligentsia, gays, the MGIMO professors, leading house-2 were deported from the country on this ship. The color of the nation."
  • Onyx
    Onyx 2 November 2013 12: 19
    +4
    Quote: Ivanovich47
    The most recent example is the gangster bombing of Libya by NATO aircraft. After all, Russian diplomats agreed destructively

    In fairness, it must be said that diplomats only follow the line of watered. guides. In addition, as you probably know, the Russian ambassador to Libya was removed from his post for disagreeing with Medvedev’s policy.
    1. My address
      My address 2 November 2013 17: 15
      0
      But Dimon-iPhone was not expelled by the results but at least only this stupidity. Or not stupidity ?!
      Gross violation of the principle of responsibility. Rude. From Putin’s side.
      And the hunt is to call Putin an effective manager, supervisor or even worse.
      1. Onyx
        Onyx 2 November 2013 17: 30
        +2
        Quote: My address
        But Dimon-iPhone was not expelled by the results but at least only this stupidity. Or not stupidity ?!
        Gross violation of the principle of responsibility. Rude. From Putin’s side.
        And the hunt is to call Putin an effective manager, supervisor or even worse.

        You're oversimplifying everything. One should not think that Russia is in a vacuum. So far, the reality is that Putin still has to reckon with foreign pressure. It is obvious that Medvedev is pursuing the interests of "powerful participants in international activity" (an expression once said by Putin on another occasion). To replace the elites in the country with nationally oriented ones, the President needs at least:
        1. rearm the armed forces
        2. Get the right to CHANGE the system from the people.
        Without achieving these two things, the country will either become mired in wars and total sabotage and destabilization of the internal situation will begin (for example, import of food to Russia by foreign exporters, etc. will be blocked), and people from the same elite who can physically eliminate it their foreign patrons will crush.
  • vadson
    vadson 2 November 2013 13: 23
    +1
    this zagorsk paid-up whore of the west. How can you undermine the country's defense?
  • kaktus
    kaktus 2 November 2013 13: 34
    +1
    And why do I not believe such "pacifists"? what
  • APASUS
    APASUS 2 November 2013 14: 07
    +4
    Alternative weapons are developing in the world that are superior in their power to or equivalent to nuclear weapons. And in this area the Americans are ahead of us, while we are being made an attractive proposal to reduce nuclear weapons. I think we always want to cheat. Although ours are also diligent in this direction
  • Yuri Y.
    Yuri Y. 2 November 2013 14: 08
    +2
    On October 21, 2013, his information resource published an article by Andrey Zagorsky (1959), Head of the Department of IMEMO RAS and Professor of MGIMO, entitled "Radical reduction of nuclear weapons will strengthen Russia's security."

    As we see the article is completely Russian policy in the field of its security in favor of the United States. Apparently, MGIMO began to issue specialists for the United States, but for some reason they work with us. The country's leading university for international relations, however.
    Quote: Spade
    Rather, the US Embassy. What side is the synagogue here?

    It’s also true, in our time there are more atheists in Russia.
  • 1c-inform-city
    1c-inform-city 2 November 2013 15: 24
    +1
    There are no drooling words alone !!! These gay men offer to disarm and take a comfortable position with respect to the USA. I wonder how many grants they have mastered. We heard such speeches in the 90s. Let's cut all weapons and then everyone will have bread and sausage. Results as it is known in the toilet. They disarmed by nowhere, now any petty pug begins to raise its voice. (Sorry, so emotional.)
  • Arkan
    Arkan 2 November 2013 15: 25
    +1
    The "professor" wants to eat, but this does not mean that the Fatherland should be sold. The most regrettable thing is that this "specialist" teaches at MGIMO, that is, the graduates of this institute, being in the service, are so "sensitive" to the citizens of this country.
  • My address
    My address 2 November 2013 15: 29
    +1
    Well, Duc Minister Ivanov, whose friend this Zabugorsky, a follower of the Minister "DA" Kozyrev.

    In the days of my youth, in a hooligan area, they usually said to this: "Hoo-hoo not ho-ho?" It was also easy to slap in the face between the legs.

    And, as usual, the sort of rogue MGIMO has payment from his country, which he sells.

    LORD!
    Yes, how these intellectuals PLAYED! These workers are toilet paper! And what a pity that now is not 37 for them!
  • QWERTY
    QWERTY 2 November 2013 16: 04
    +1
    Zagorsky firebox!
  • Indifferent
    Indifferent 2 November 2013 16: 06
    +2
    I think that if you look closely at this Zagosky, it will turn out, Zagorovich, and if even more carefully, then Zagerman! Why, then, finally, they won’t leave all the promised land! Or the money is spent by their colleagues and fellow tribesmen, who hate our country like hell.
  • T-130
    T-130 2 November 2013 16: 54
    +1
    Of course, it’s possible that they work out the money, but how much money they didn’t give to a sober mind should one blurt out either as an idiot or to be sure that they will only hear you, well, or take a smoke, is it interesting that he smoked?
  • Ivan_Ivanov
    Ivan_Ivanov 2 November 2013 17: 10
    +1
    "Radical reduction of nuclear weapons will strengthen Russia's security"

    A bullet in the back of his head is health ...
  • angarchanin
    angarchanin 2 November 2013 17: 18
    +1
    From Wikipedia: "In 1992-1999 - Vice-Rector of MGIMO for Research. In 1999-2001 - Senior Vice President, Project Director of the East-West Institute, Prague. In 2002 - Professor at the Geneva Center for Security Policy. In 2002-2003 - Deputy Director Institute of Applied International Research, Moscow In 2004-2005 - Deputy Head of the Moscow Branch of the K. Adenauer Foundation.
    Member of the editorial board of the OSCE Yearbook (Hamburg) and executive editor of the Russian edition of the Yearbook. Member of the Editorial Board of Helsinki Monitor, The Hague. Member of the editorial board of the European Security Newsletter, Moscow. Vice President of the Russian Association of Euro-Atlantic Cooperation. Member of the international council of the Geneva Center for Democratic Control of the Armed Forces. Member of the PIR Center Council and Editorial Board (Political Studies in Russia).
    Specialist on European security issues, relations between Russia and NATO and European organizations: OSCE, EU, Council of Europe. He was at the origins of the formation of independent, non-governmental research in the field of nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction and arms control in the Russian Federation, assisted novice specialists in this field. "It's sad that" ... a shoemaker bakes pies ... "And if you pay attention on the last sentence, it becomes clear (to me at least) that our students at MGIMO are taught by a "bad boy".
    1. Jarserge
      Jarserge 4 November 2013 12: 00
      0
      The boy is a bad guy, to put it mildly ... a man who never answered for any business, who always lived at the expense of others and only spoke his tongue. Such a general man who knows no boundaries .... Now he imagines himself to be the arbiter of fate and other other
  • Sergey21
    Sergey21 2 November 2013 17: 24
    +1
    So where do they come from? And why dare they open their mouths? And most importantly, nothing will happen to him! And in the USSR (under Stalin) they could unscrew their heads, only for such an idea!
  • lotar
    lotar 2 November 2013 17: 28
    +1
    I wonder how much it was bought? Or what was promised to him? The most acceptable option in his case is to go far away, in my opinion it would be worth publicly shaming him for all his "peacekeeping goals and positions."
  • family tree
    family tree 2 November 2013 19: 03
    +2
    It is necessary to possess remarkable conceit in order to give out such things and to think that it will give a ride fool No, well, otherwise why this opus? Though what , you can make a grant, and then report back, look like they say how much nonsense I got, and that no one believes me, it’s not my problems that I ordered, then it was pile up, the rest is the customer’s concern.
    So think now, whether the proxy decided that he was broadcasting the truth in the last resort, or simply, stupidly spread the suckers (the State Department) into grandmas repeat In this case, in the first case he is a dupe, in the second he is a con man, but he doesn’t roll at a scientist either request
  • Thirsty for wind
    Thirsty for wind 2 November 2013 19: 07
    +3
    I command you!
    To kick Sabak Zagorsky with his boots before dinner, for this stinking bark.
    Prayers do not listen, do not show pity. Then, before sunset, dunk this scum in the face with impurities. Aposlya should be sent to the panamas, whose handouts this stinker had collected with his bark, not hesitating to give him a kick and a dent.
    I am the master of the overseas. Amen.
    1. mountain
      mountain 2 November 2013 19: 50
      0
      It’s simpler to be, send him there whose order was fulfilled and the hut, that they would give him in the African quarter.))))
  • 222222
    222222 2 November 2013 19: 56
    +1
    Quote: Ascetic
    BPDM "Typhoon-M",

    http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-758.html
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEveobdgBT0
  • 222222
    222222 2 November 2013 21: 43
    +1
    A new recipe from the RSDM: While the United States is "sharpening the stiletto", Russia is offered to "bury the club."
    In the meantime .. "" Russian strategic missile forces by 2021 will almost completely, by 98 percent, switch to fifth-generation universal missile systems. "
    More details: http://globalconflict.ru/analytics/39272-yadernyj-shhit-smena-prioritetov
  • rubin6286
    rubin6286 2 November 2013 21: 50
    +3
    I have always been suspicious of people with glasses and surnames ending in "sky", "an", "dze", "shvili",
    "erg", "ich", "yants", "er", "yan", "iyev", "aev". My parents suggested to me that people with glasses, especially young ones, and with such endings of surnames not only see poorly, but most often see poorly in the business they are doing. A visually impaired doctor can remove the wrong organ from a patient, a telemaster, when repairing a TV, can burn the board and damage serviceable parts, a bus driver cannot see a road sign in time, etc. etc. After reading the article and looking at the photo of its author. I realized that this person does not see the obvious, he has long been out of place and it is high time for his leadership to think about the rotation of personnel and replace him in this position with a more worthy candidate.
    1. Onyx
      Onyx 2 November 2013 22: 13
      -1
      also there are often bad people with surnames ending in "-ev", "-ёv", "-in" with glasses and without
      1. rubin6286
        rubin6286 3 November 2013 11: 25
        -1
        If you often come across bad people with the endings of surnames in "ev,", "in", then I dare to suggest:
        1. Your surname ends in "o", "uk", "yuk".
        2. You must be in trouble with the law.
        1. Onyx
          Onyx 3 November 2013 11: 38
          +2
          Quote: rubin6286
          If you often come across bad people with the endings of surnames in "ev,", "in", then I dare to suggest:
          1. Your surname ends in "o", "uk", "yuk".
          2. You must be in trouble with the law.

          I dare to suggest that you write nonsense, identifying people by the end of surnames
          1. rubin6286
            rubin6286 4 November 2013 20: 08
            0
            I clearly wrote that I do not define people. but I am distrustful of people with glasses and the end of surnames.
  • bistrov.
    bistrov. 3 November 2013 10: 13
    +1
    And this "Zabugorsk" is still the "sent Cossack", considers the Russians to be fools. Let the United States, Great Britain and France reduce their naval component of the triad, and Russia will reduce its own in response. This is how the question should be posed. And do not agree, generally go to hell, start putting medium-range missiles into service.
  • Altona
    Altona 3 November 2013 15: 56
    +1
    To "sell something unnecessary, you must first buy something unnecessary, but we have no money" ... If there is something significant, similar in terms of the impact on the United States than atomic weapons, then the conversation can be conducted ... But no, then there is nothing to do nonsense, especially the professors of MGIMO ... Now anyone can make such calculations, in terms of power, speed, by some other parameters, you can find all the data on the Internet ... But there is no need to write with a pitchfork on the water. ..