The basis of the country's defense
It consists of patriotic, selfless and dedicated people.
We live in a troubled and unstable world. Illusions related to the fact that after the end of the Cold War world harmony will come, if they have remained, then only among infinitely naive people. They have not gone anywhere, but on the contrary, the geopolitical struggle and fierce competition for resources are intensifying. The processes of globalization reveal even more the many injustices of the current world order. The global financial and economic crisis has become a signal of alarm, indicating not only the exhaustion of development models based on liberal ideas, but also the entry of mankind into a period of change historical eras and global civilizational shifts. And such periods are always fraught with the emergence of new threats, including military conflicts and other shocks. The dramatic events in Ukraine provide quite fresh and concrete confirmation of this.
In such conditions, Russia with its gigantic spaces, huge length of borders, enormous volumes of natural resources would be very rash to remain in serenity, without showing special concern for the protection of borders, territory and sovereignty. I agree with those politicians and public figures who, on the basis of an understanding of the historical fate of our state, put the question squarely: Russia can be either great or none. It must be powerful, able to pursue an independent policy, or it will simply be torn apart by forces that consider it an extra country, in the words of the eternal hater Zbigniew Brzezinski.
The party "Fair Russia" supports the efforts being made by the country's leadership to give our Armed Forces a new look and modernize the defense-industrial complex (DIC). In the framework of the State Armaments Program (LG) for the period 2011 – 2020, more than 20 trillion rubles are planned for these purposes. Yes, these are big, one might say, unprecedentedly huge means. But such costs are justified by a deep analysis of the real risks and threats that Russia may face in the coming decades, and even years. Therefore, it is important that trillions not remain on paper. After all, the sad experience of the implementation of the previous GPO, in which high goals were also declared, was not remembered, but in fact was not achieved.
It is imperative that at this stage of reforming the Armed Forces and the military-industrial complex, true professionals, state-minded people, and not so-called effective managers, who learned a little something at all, were at the head of the process. Serious lessons should be learned from the period when Anatoly Serdyukov was at the head of the Defense Ministry. The CP fraction in the State Duma has always harshly criticized its activities. But not because we were against the vector of military reform aimed at the transition to a highly efficient mobile army consisting of units of constant readiness. This vector, by the way, is not at all the merit of Serdyukov, who knew little about defense issues. The direction of the reform was set by military science and life itself.
The basis of the country's defense
Andrei Sedykh collage
No wonder they say that even the best idea can be turned into its opposite, if you bring it to the point of absurdity. This absurdity, we swallowed in full. I mean the transformation of the army into a real estate selling agency, the destruction of military education and medicine systems, endless conflicts between the Defense Ministry and defense industry enterprises on pricing issues and much more. But, perhaps, the apotheosis of Serdyukovschina was the decision to purchase a number of samples of foreign military equipment, which were made, as it were, in peak of our defense industry. Doubtful epics with the purchase of amphibious ships "Mistral" from the French and Iveco armored vehicles from the Italians, who, as it turned out, in many ways are not suitable for use by our military, and some other similar transactions are the embodiment of glaring lack of professionalism.
Here, in our opinion, the way of thinking that is characteristic of the generation of ultra-market-rate liberals, which are now seated, unfortunately, has manifested itself in many state structures. In their heads, like one of the heroes of Saltykov-Shchedrin, are built in small organchiki playing a limited number of melodies. In our case, they sound like this: “The market will regulate everything” and “Everything can be bought”. In their opinion, it is possible to patch holes in the defense shield without developing “defense”, but buying everything you need in the West. But not everything is bought, even for very big money.
First successes
Today, the process of military reform and the relationship of the army with the defense industry are brought to common sense. We welcome the fact that with the advent of the new Minister Sergei Shoigu to the Defense Ministry, many gross managerial errors are corrected, that the commercialization of the army is stopped, and the military are focused on their main tasks. The regular moment of the last months became regular checks of the combat readiness of units and formations with real marches, firing, launches, testing the interaction of staffs. I am glad that qualitative changes are taking place with the supply of new equipment and weapons to the troops, that the Strategic Missile Forces are successfully mastering the strategic complexes Topol-M and Yars, that in the Navy underwater strategic missile carriers of the new Borey project, that the re-equipment of the Air Force, the Ground Forces, the Airborne Forces, and the Aerospace Defense Forces went at an accelerated pace.
It was necessary to establish a constructive dialogue between the military and the “defense industry”, as it immediately turned out that the state defense order could be formed without disruption, and a consensus could be found on pricing issues. Many defense companies have gained a good pace, combining their own modernization with the organization of large-scale production. weapons and technology. A worthy result was the fact that in 2013, a number of industries (in particular, aircraft manufacturing, shipbuilding, rocket production) showed an increase in production by 14 – 16 percent. Especially if we take into account that almost all the rest of the Russian industry is experiencing a period of stagnation.
The basis of the country's defense
At the same time, I would urge not to flatter yourself with the first successes of the defense industry. Admittedly, while positive developments are achieved mostly due to what is called manual control. It can not be said that we have created a reliable system that, on a long-term basis, will ensure the interrelation of the processes of military construction, industrial and scientific-technical development. In fact, this system has yet to be created. And it is necessary to begin with the fundamental prerequisites that go beyond the defense problems proper. After all, it is impossible to successfully strengthen the defense, not thinking about what is happening with the country's economy as a whole. The DIC cannot be an island of stability in the midst of an ocean of a wild unregulated market.
We, in the SR, are convinced that it is time, in the end, to determine and adopt a federal law on industrial policy, designed to clearly highlight the priority sectors and areas in which the state relies, and also the mechanisms of their state support. Of course, all key sectors of the defense industry should be among these priorities.
In our opinion, it’s time to stop dodging the word “plan” and start returning planned beginnings to the economy, because, as rightly noted in one well-known aphorism, “he who plans nothing, plans failures”. Of course, we are not talking about a return to the directives of the Soviet era, in which everything was centralized and detailed almost to the last gear. We are talking about the so-called indicative planning, which has long been successfully used in France, Japan, South Korea and many other countries. The meaning of this algorithm is to work out, through a system of agreements between economic subjects, verified decisions regarding various parameters - prices, volumes and terms of output, investments, export levels, production growth rates, etc. If we do this for, say, five years ahead, as the CP suggests, the economy will get dynamic and balanced, and manufacturers will be able to more accurately build a long-term economic strategy. This is useful for all economic entities, and for the enterprises of the military-industrial complex doubly, for many of them are focused on the output of products that require long production cycles.
To ensure the stable development of the Russian defense industry, the improvement of the legal framework is of great importance. There are a lot of gaps, even in terms of the usual legal techniques. It’s a paradox, but the law doesn’t even have a clear definition of what the military-industrial complex is. Many new realities were not reflected. The basis of the Russian defense industry today are more than 50 large vertically integrated structures. However, while there is no regulatory framework that would regulate their activities. Another pressing question is lost in the fog: what is a public-private partnership in the defense industry? There is a lot of talk about it, but a common understanding of the forms in which it is expedient and permissible has yet to be worked out.
I would like to clarify that, in its ideology, the party “Fair Russia” is social-democratic. Unlike orthodox communists, we recognize the market, private property and competition. At the same time, we are in favor of effective state regulation of market relations and, unlike liberals, we believe that commercialization should not be all-pervasive and inclusive, that the market, figuratively speaking, should know its place. This is especially true of everything that is connected with the defense interests of the state. We believe that a categorical taboo on the privatization of strategically important defense enterprises should be respected. We are opposed to giving control of the production of the most important systems and models of armaments and military equipment to private owners. All this state must hold in their hands. At certain levels of cooperation, the involvement of private companies as co-contractors, subcontractors, etc. is quite possible. This practice should be developed in every possible way, because it is capable of bringing additional investments in the defense industry and reducing the cost of production.
In short, we need the most reasonable and fair attitude to our "defense industry", a comprehensive account of the specifics of literally every enterprise. If we analyze all the legislation relating to the defense industry, we will see that it mainly consists of various kinds of regulations and restrictions. In our opinion, this is wrong. It is impossible to drive "defense industry" into the Procrustean bed of strict requirements on the state contract and at the same time harsh market realities in the form of inflation, tariffs, prices for raw materials, components, etc. There must be mechanisms that compensate the company for the costs that it incurs status. Recently, the State Duma amended the Law on State Defense Order, introducing a more flexible pricing system for defense products. This is a step in the right direction. But the state should take care of other support measures. For example, in order for the so-called long-term money to go to the military-industrial complex, the rates on loans taken by defense enterprises in banks were as low as possible. Apparently, for the sake of this, it is worth going for partial compensation of the size of bank rates at the expense of the budget. I am sure that the idea of a so-called innovative tax credit, which “Fair Russia” persistently promotes, would have come to the court. The meaning of the idea is that the expenses of enterprises for innovative purposes should be fully deducted from the amounts of the accrued income tax without any permits and approvals from officials.
Frames always in price
If we are talking about innovation, one can not help but mention our proposals for the development of Russian science. No reliable defense can be built if there is no powerful science in the country. That is why our party program clearly states that at least three percent of GDP should be allocated for the financing of science and scientific research. Among the priorities here are, of course, those scientific institutes and centers that work directly for the army and the defense industry complex. They need to be raised, and some simply to be revived after a long period of stagnation and lack of demand. It is not at all good that, by investing in defense R & D, Russia today is about ten times inferior to the United States. Such a lag should be sought to reduce, but not at the expense of civilian research sectors. World practice shows that, in the old days, the main stream of technological innovations went from military production to civilian production, now up to 50 percent of innovative ideas and technologies come into the defense sector from civilian industries. That is why we insist on preserving in Russia a wide range of scientific research, including fundamental research. And the reform of the RAS, which began, in our opinion, very spontaneously and ill-conceived, in no case should result in a primitive optimization and reduction of scientific institutions.
Another hot issue related to the fate of our defense-industrial complex is personnel. When I was the chairman of the Federation Council and in the current role of the leader of the parliamentary party, I often traveled and traveled around the regions. It has long been taken as a rule: during the trips you must visit at least one defense company. Wherever I was - in Chelyabinsk or Khabarovsk, Omsk or Arkhangelsk, Nizhny Tagil or near Moscow Korolev, among the most pressing, burning questions always sounded: "Who will work in our enterprises through 5, 10, 15 years?". At the beginning of 2000-ies, the aging of personnel in the defense industry reached critical proportions, in some places everything was kept only by retirees and people of pre-retirement age. Now the situation is getting better and the youth has gone into the defense industry. Up to a third of workers are already those who do not have 35, but the problem of the acute shortage of many important specialists has not been overcome. The shortage of process engineers in the defense industry is 17 percent, design engineers - 22 percent. With skilled workers in general, the crisis situation is a shortage of up to 40 percent. There is only one conclusion: we must urgently expand the system of incentives that would make work in defense enterprises as attractive as possible.
I remember that in one of the election articles in 2012, the current president of Russia, Vladimir Putin, suggested that the average wage at defense companies, in design and research centers be comparable to the money allowance in the Armed Forces. This is a very good idea, and it is time to take up its practical implementation. In addition, the “defense industry” should have a significant social package associated with guarantees of providing affordable housing, decent pension provision, etc. “Fair Russia” also proposes to amend the law on conscription so that the work of a young man in the public sector, the military-industrial complex was equal to military service.
Of course, moral incentives are important. Taking up the revival of the destroyed system of vocational education, it is necessary at the same time to give it a new image, eliminating from the label the refuge of losers. The same is required in engineering universities. Now often come here guys showing not the highest performance in school. The majority of young people are still very disoriented and continue to choose the profession of managers, economists, lawyers. I believe that we need to actively expand the information policy in the direction of the dissemination of technical knowledge in society, increasing the prestige of engineering work, the promotion of working specialties. Well, a lot here depends on whether we can make the army, defense industry enterprises and scientific institutes centers of attraction for talented young people, convincing them that it is here today that there are greater opportunities for self-realization, creativity, fruitful work, and success in life. When we achieve this, then it will be possible not to worry about the fate of Russia, its security and defense capability.
In conclusion, I want to emphasize once again: ensuring the country's defense and security is a complex, multifaceted work that requires a systematic solution to a huge complex of problems. Success in work largely depends on the understanding that defense is not only secured with money. Even trillions of rubles is just a prerequisite for change, like the most modern miracle weapon - missiles, planes, ships, Tanks. The decisive factor was and will be people who are responsible, patriotic, selfless, dedicated, dedicated to life in the Armed Forces and work in enterprises of the military-industrial complex.
Read more: http://vpk-news.ru/articles/19526
We live in a turbulent and unstable world. The illusions connected with the fact that after the end of the Cold War world harmony will come, if they have remained, then only among endlessly naive people. Do not go away anywhere, but on the contrary, the geopolitical struggle and fierce competition for resources are intensifying. The processes of globalization even more clearly reveal the many injustices of the current world order. The global financial and economic crisis became an alarm signal, signifying not only the exhaustion of development models based on liberal ideas, but also the entry of humanity in the period of changing historical eras and global civilizational shifts. And such periods are always fraught with the emergence of new threats, including military conflicts and other upheavals. Dramatic events in Ukraine give very fresh and concrete evidence of this.
In such conditions, Russia with its gigantic spaces, huge length of borders, enormous volumes of natural resources would be very rash to remain in serenity, without showing special concern for the protection of borders, territory and sovereignty. I agree with those politicians and public figures who, on the basis of an understanding of the historical fate of our state, put the question squarely: Russia can be either great or none. It must be powerful, able to pursue an independent policy, or it will simply be torn apart by forces that consider it an extra country, in the words of the eternal hater Zbigniew Brzezinski.
“It is impossible to drive“ defense industryists ”into the Procrustean bed of strict requirements under the state contract and at the same time harsh market realities in the form of inflation growth”
The party "Fair Russia" supports the efforts being made by the country's leadership to give our Armed Forces a new look and modernize the defense-industrial complex (DIC). In the framework of the State Armaments Program (LG) for the period 2011 – 2020, more than 20 trillion rubles are planned for these purposes. Yes, these are big, one might say, unprecedentedly huge means. But such costs are justified by a deep analysis of the real risks and threats that Russia may face in the coming decades, and even years. Therefore, it is important that trillions not remain on paper. After all, the sad experience of the implementation of the previous GPO, in which high goals were also declared, was not remembered, but in fact was not achieved.
It is imperative that at this stage of reforming the Armed Forces and the military-industrial complex, true professionals, state-minded people, and not so-called effective managers, who learned a little something at all, were at the head of the process. Serious lessons should be learned from the period when Anatoly Serdyukov was at the head of the Defense Ministry. The CP fraction in the State Duma has always harshly criticized its activities. But not because we were against the vector of military reform aimed at the transition to a highly efficient mobile army consisting of units of constant readiness. This vector, by the way, is not at all the merit of Serdyukov, who knew little about defense issues. The direction of the reform was set by military science and life itself.
No wonder they say that even the best idea can be turned into its opposite, if you bring it to the point of absurdity. This absurdity, we swallowed in full. I mean the transformation of the army into a real estate selling agency, the destruction of military education and medicine systems, endless conflicts between the Defense Ministry and defense industry enterprises on pricing issues and much more. But, perhaps, the apotheosis of Serdyukovschina was the decision to purchase a number of samples of foreign military equipment, which were made, as it were, in peak of our defense industry. Doubtful epics with the purchase of amphibious ships "Mistral" from the French and Iveco armored vehicles from the Italians, who, as it turned out, in many ways are not suitable for use by our military, and some other similar transactions are the embodiment of glaring lack of professionalism.
Here, in our opinion, the way of thinking that is characteristic of the generation of ultra-market-rate liberals, which are now seated, unfortunately, has manifested itself in many state structures. In their heads, like one of the heroes of Saltykov-Shchedrin, are built in small organchiki playing a limited number of melodies. In our case, they sound like this: “The market will regulate everything” and “Everything can be bought”. In their opinion, it is possible to patch holes in the defense shield without developing “defense”, but buying everything you need in the West. But not everything is bought, even for very big money.
First successes
Today, the process of military reform and the relationship of the army with the defense industry are brought to common sense. We welcome the fact that with the advent of the new Minister Sergei Shoigu to the Defense Ministry, many gross managerial errors are corrected, that the commercialization of the army is stopped, and the military are focused on their main tasks. The regular moment of the last months became regular checks of the combat readiness of units and formations with real marches, firing, launches, testing the interaction of staffs. I am glad that qualitative changes are taking place with the supply of new equipment and weapons to the troops, that the Strategic Missile Forces are successfully mastering the strategic complexes Topol-M and Yars, that in the Navy underwater strategic missile carriers of the new Borey project, that the re-equipment of the Air Force, the Ground Forces, the Airborne Forces, and the Aerospace Defense Forces went at an accelerated pace.
It was necessary to establish a constructive dialogue between the military and the “defense industry”, as it immediately turned out that the state defense order could be formed without disruption, and a consensus could be found on pricing issues. Many defense companies have gained a good pace, combining their own modernization with the organization of large-scale production of weapons and equipment. A worthy result was the fact that in 2013, a number of industries (in particular, aircraft manufacturing, shipbuilding, rocket production) showed an increase in production by 14 – 16 percent. Especially if we take into account that almost all the rest of the Russian industry is experiencing a period of stagnation.
At the same time, I would urge not to flatter yourself with the first successes of the defense industry. Admittedly, while positive developments are achieved mostly due to what is called manual control. It can not be said that we have created a reliable system that, on a long-term basis, will ensure the interrelation of the processes of military construction, industrial and scientific-technical development. In fact, this system has yet to be created. And it is necessary to begin with the fundamental prerequisites that go beyond the defense problems proper. After all, it is impossible to successfully strengthen the defense, not thinking about what is happening with the country's economy as a whole. The DIC cannot be an island of stability in the midst of an ocean of a wild unregulated market.
We, in the SR, are convinced that it is time, in the end, to determine and adopt a federal law on industrial policy, designed to clearly highlight the priority sectors and areas in which the state relies, and also the mechanisms of their state support. Of course, all key sectors of the defense industry should be among these priorities.
In our opinion, it’s time to stop dodging the word “plan” and start returning planned beginnings to the economy, because, as rightly noted in one well-known aphorism, “he who plans nothing, plans failures”. Of course, we are not talking about a return to the directives of the Soviet era, in which everything was centralized and detailed almost to the last gear. We are talking about the so-called indicative planning, which has long been successfully used in France, Japan, South Korea and many other countries. The meaning of this algorithm is to work out, through a system of agreements between economic subjects, verified decisions regarding various parameters - prices, volumes and terms of output, investments, export levels, production growth rates, etc. If we do this for, say, five years ahead, as the CP suggests, the economy will get dynamic and balanced, and manufacturers will be able to more accurately build a long-term economic strategy. This is useful for all economic entities, and for the enterprises of the military-industrial complex doubly, for many of them are focused on the output of products that require long production cycles.
To ensure the stable development of the Russian defense industry, the improvement of the legal framework is of great importance. There are a lot of gaps, even in terms of the usual legal techniques. It’s a paradox, but the law doesn’t even have a clear definition of what the military-industrial complex is. Many new realities were not reflected. The basis of the Russian defense industry today are more than 50 large vertically integrated structures. However, while there is no regulatory framework that would regulate their activities. Another pressing question is lost in the fog: what is a public-private partnership in the defense industry? There is a lot of talk about it, but a common understanding of the forms in which it is expedient and permissible has yet to be worked out.
I would like to clarify that, in its ideology, the party “Fair Russia” is social-democratic. Unlike orthodox communists, we recognize the market, private property and competition. At the same time, we are in favor of effective state regulation of market relations and, unlike liberals, we believe that commercialization should not be all-pervasive and inclusive, that the market, figuratively speaking, should know its place. This is especially true of everything that is connected with the defense interests of the state. We believe that a categorical taboo on the privatization of strategically important defense enterprises should be respected. We are opposed to giving control of the production of the most important systems and models of armaments and military equipment to private owners. All this state must hold in their hands. At certain levels of cooperation, the involvement of private companies as co-contractors, subcontractors, etc. is quite possible. This practice should be developed in every possible way, because it is capable of bringing additional investments in the defense industry and reducing the cost of production.
In short, we need the most reasonable and fair attitude to our "defense industry", a comprehensive account of the specifics of literally every enterprise. If we analyze all the legislation relating to the defense industry, we will see that it mainly consists of various kinds of regulations and restrictions. In our opinion, this is wrong. It is impossible to drive "defense industry" into the Procrustean bed of strict requirements on the state contract and at the same time harsh market realities in the form of inflation, tariffs, prices for raw materials, components, etc. There must be mechanisms that compensate the company for the costs that it incurs status. Recently, the State Duma amended the Law on State Defense Order, introducing a more flexible pricing system for defense products. This is a step in the right direction. But the state should take care of other support measures. For example, in order for the so-called long-term money to go to the military-industrial complex, the rates on loans taken by defense enterprises in banks were as low as possible. Apparently, for the sake of this, it is worth going for partial compensation of the size of bank rates at the expense of the budget. I am sure that the idea of a so-called innovative tax credit, which “Fair Russia” persistently promotes, would have come to the court. The meaning of the idea is that the expenses of enterprises for innovative purposes should be fully deducted from the amounts of the accrued income tax without any permits and approvals from officials.
Frames always in price
If we are talking about innovation, one can not help but mention our proposals for the development of Russian science. No reliable defense can be built if there is no powerful science in the country. That is why our party program clearly states that at least three percent of GDP should be allocated for the financing of science and scientific research. Among the priorities here are, of course, those scientific institutes and centers that work directly for the army and the defense industry complex. They need to be raised, and some simply to be revived after a long period of stagnation and lack of demand. It is not at all good that, by investing in defense R & D, Russia today is about ten times inferior to the United States. Such a lag should be sought to reduce, but not at the expense of civilian research sectors. World practice shows that, in the old days, the main stream of technological innovations went from military production to civilian production, now up to 50 percent of innovative ideas and technologies come into the defense sector from civilian industries. That is why we insist on preserving in Russia a wide range of scientific research, including fundamental research. And the reform of the RAS, which began, in our opinion, very spontaneously and ill-conceived, in no case should result in a primitive optimization and reduction of scientific institutions.
Another hot issue related to the fate of our defense-industrial complex is personnel. When I was the chairman of the Federation Council and in the current role of the leader of the parliamentary party, I often traveled and traveled around the regions. It has long been taken as a rule: during the trips you must visit at least one defense company. Wherever I was - in Chelyabinsk or Khabarovsk, Omsk or Arkhangelsk, Nizhny Tagil or near Moscow Korolev, among the most pressing, burning questions always sounded: "Who will work in our enterprises through 5, 10, 15 years?". At the beginning of 2000-ies, the aging of personnel in the defense industry reached critical proportions, in some places everything was kept only by retirees and people of pre-retirement age. Now the situation is getting better and the youth has gone into the defense industry. Up to a third of workers are already those who do not have 35, but the problem of the acute shortage of many important specialists has not been overcome. The shortage of process engineers in the defense industry is 17 percent, design engineers - 22 percent. With skilled workers in general, the crisis situation is a shortage of up to 40 percent. There is only one conclusion: we must urgently expand the system of incentives that would make work in defense enterprises as attractive as possible.
I remember that in one of the election articles in 2012, the current president of Russia, Vladimir Putin, suggested that the average wage at defense companies, in design and research centers be comparable to the money allowance in the Armed Forces. This is a very good idea, and it is time to take up its practical implementation. In addition, the “defense industry” should have a significant social package associated with guarantees of providing affordable housing, decent pension provision, etc. “Fair Russia” also proposes to amend the law on conscription so that the work of a young man in the public sector, the military-industrial complex was equal to military service.
Of course, moral incentives are important. Taking up the revival of the destroyed system of vocational education, it is necessary at the same time to give it a new image, eliminating from the label the refuge of losers. The same is required in engineering universities. Now often come here guys showing not the highest performance in school. The majority of young people are still very disoriented and continue to choose the profession of managers, economists, lawyers. I believe that we need to actively expand the information policy in the direction of the dissemination of technical knowledge in society, increasing the prestige of engineering work, the promotion of working specialties. Well, a lot here depends on whether we can make the army, defense industry enterprises and scientific institutes centers of attraction for talented young people, convincing them that it is here today that there are greater opportunities for self-realization, creativity, fruitful work, and success in life. When we achieve this, then it will be possible not to worry about the fate of Russia, its security and defense capability.
In conclusion, I want to emphasize once again: ensuring the country's defense and security is the most complex, multifaceted work that requires a systemic solution of a huge complex of problems. Success in work largely depends on the understanding that defense is fastened not only with money. Even trillions of rubles are only a prerequisite for change, as is the most modern wonder weapon - rockets, airplanes, ships, tanks. The decisive factor was and will be people responsible, patriotic, dedicated, devoted to their work, dedicating their lives to service in the Armed Forces and working in enterprises of the military-industrial complex.
We live in a troubled and unstable world. Illusions related to the fact that after the end of the Cold War world harmony will come, if they have remained, then only among infinitely naive people. They have not gone anywhere, but on the contrary, the geopolitical struggle and fierce competition for resources are intensifying. The processes of globalization reveal even more the many injustices of the current world order. The global financial and economic crisis has become a signal of alarm, indicating not only the exhaustion of development models based on liberal ideas, but also the entry of mankind into a period of change historical eras and global civilizational shifts. And such periods are always fraught with the emergence of new threats, including military conflicts and other shocks. The dramatic events in Ukraine provide quite fresh and concrete confirmation of this.
In such conditions, Russia with its gigantic spaces, huge length of borders, enormous volumes of natural resources would be very rash to remain in serenity, without showing special concern for the protection of borders, territory and sovereignty. I agree with those politicians and public figures who, on the basis of an understanding of the historical fate of our state, put the question squarely: Russia can be either great or none. It must be powerful, able to pursue an independent policy, or it will simply be torn apart by forces that consider it an extra country, in the words of the eternal hater Zbigniew Brzezinski.
The party "Fair Russia" supports the efforts being made by the country's leadership to give our Armed Forces a new look and modernize the defense-industrial complex (DIC). In the framework of the State Armaments Program (LG) for the period 2011 – 2020, more than 20 trillion rubles are planned for these purposes. Yes, these are big, one might say, unprecedentedly huge means. But such costs are justified by a deep analysis of the real risks and threats that Russia may face in the coming decades, and even years. Therefore, it is important that trillions not remain on paper. After all, the sad experience of the implementation of the previous GPO, in which high goals were also declared, was not remembered, but in fact was not achieved.
It is imperative that at this stage of reforming the Armed Forces and the military-industrial complex, true professionals, state-minded people, and not so-called effective managers, who learned a little something at all, were at the head of the process. Serious lessons should be learned from the period when Anatoly Serdyukov was at the head of the Defense Ministry. The CP fraction in the State Duma has always harshly criticized its activities. But not because we were against the vector of military reform aimed at the transition to a highly efficient mobile army consisting of units of constant readiness. This vector, by the way, is not at all the merit of Serdyukov, who knew little about defense issues. The direction of the reform was set by military science and life itself.
The basis of the country's defense
Andrei Sedykh collage
No wonder they say that even the best idea can be turned into its opposite, if you bring it to the point of absurdity. This absurdity, we swallowed in full. I mean the transformation of the army into a real estate selling agency, the destruction of military education and medicine systems, endless conflicts between the Defense Ministry and defense industry enterprises on pricing issues and much more. But, perhaps, the apotheosis of Serdyukovschina was the decision to purchase a number of samples of foreign military equipment, which were made, as it were, in peak of our defense industry. Doubtful epics with the purchase of amphibious ships "Mistral" from the French and Iveco armored vehicles from the Italians, who, as it turned out, in many ways are not suitable for use by our military, and some other similar transactions are the embodiment of glaring lack of professionalism.
Here, in our opinion, the way of thinking that is characteristic of the generation of ultra-market-rate liberals, which are now seated, unfortunately, has manifested itself in many state structures. In their heads, like one of the heroes of Saltykov-Shchedrin, are built in small organchiki playing a limited number of melodies. In our case, they sound like this: “The market will regulate everything” and “Everything can be bought”. In their opinion, it is possible to patch holes in the defense shield without developing “defense”, but buying everything you need in the West. But not everything is bought, even for very big money.
First successes
Today, the process of military reform and the relationship of the army with the defense industry are brought to common sense. We welcome the fact that with the advent of the new Minister Sergei Shoigu to the Defense Ministry, many gross managerial errors are corrected, that the commercialization of the army is stopped, and the military are focused on their main tasks. The regular moment of the last months became regular checks of the combat readiness of units and formations with real marches, firing, launches, testing the interaction of staffs. I am glad that qualitative changes are taking place with the supply of new equipment and weapons to the troops, that the Strategic Missile Forces are successfully mastering the strategic complexes Topol-M and Yars, that in the Navy underwater strategic missile carriers of the new Borey project, that the re-equipment of the Air Force, the Ground Forces, the Airborne Forces, and the Aerospace Defense Forces went at an accelerated pace.
It was necessary to establish a constructive dialogue between the military and the “defense industry”, as it immediately turned out that the state defense order could be formed without disruption, and a consensus could be found on pricing issues. Many defense companies have gained a good pace, combining their own modernization with the organization of large-scale production. weapons and technology. A worthy result was the fact that in 2013, a number of industries (in particular, aircraft manufacturing, shipbuilding, rocket production) showed an increase in production by 14 – 16 percent. Especially if we take into account that almost all the rest of the Russian industry is experiencing a period of stagnation.
The basis of the country's defense
At the same time, I would urge not to flatter yourself with the first successes of the defense industry. Admittedly, while positive developments are achieved mostly due to what is called manual control. It can not be said that we have created a reliable system that, on a long-term basis, will ensure the interrelation of the processes of military construction, industrial and scientific-technical development. In fact, this system has yet to be created. And it is necessary to begin with the fundamental prerequisites that go beyond the defense problems proper. After all, it is impossible to successfully strengthen the defense, not thinking about what is happening with the country's economy as a whole. The DIC cannot be an island of stability in the midst of an ocean of a wild unregulated market.
We, in the SR, are convinced that it is time, in the end, to determine and adopt a federal law on industrial policy, designed to clearly highlight the priority sectors and areas in which the state relies, and also the mechanisms of their state support. Of course, all key sectors of the defense industry should be among these priorities.
In our opinion, it’s time to stop dodging the word “plan” and start returning planned beginnings to the economy, because, as rightly noted in one well-known aphorism, “he who plans nothing, plans failures”. Of course, we are not talking about a return to the directives of the Soviet era, in which everything was centralized and detailed almost to the last gear. We are talking about the so-called indicative planning, which has long been successfully used in France, Japan, South Korea and many other countries. The meaning of this algorithm is to work out, through a system of agreements between economic subjects, verified decisions regarding various parameters - prices, volumes and terms of output, investments, export levels, production growth rates, etc. If we do this for, say, five years ahead, as the CP suggests, the economy will get dynamic and balanced, and manufacturers will be able to more accurately build a long-term economic strategy. This is useful for all economic entities, and for the enterprises of the military-industrial complex doubly, for many of them are focused on the output of products that require long production cycles.
To ensure the stable development of the Russian defense industry, the improvement of the legal framework is of great importance. There are a lot of gaps, even in terms of the usual legal techniques. It’s a paradox, but the law doesn’t even have a clear definition of what the military-industrial complex is. Many new realities were not reflected. The basis of the Russian defense industry today are more than 50 large vertically integrated structures. However, while there is no regulatory framework that would regulate their activities. Another pressing question is lost in the fog: what is a public-private partnership in the defense industry? There is a lot of talk about it, but a common understanding of the forms in which it is expedient and permissible has yet to be worked out.
I would like to clarify that, in its ideology, the party “Fair Russia” is social-democratic. Unlike orthodox communists, we recognize the market, private property and competition. At the same time, we are in favor of effective state regulation of market relations and, unlike liberals, we believe that commercialization should not be all-pervasive and inclusive, that the market, figuratively speaking, should know its place. This is especially true of everything that is connected with the defense interests of the state. We believe that a categorical taboo on the privatization of strategically important defense enterprises should be respected. We are opposed to giving control of the production of the most important systems and models of armaments and military equipment to private owners. All this state must hold in their hands. At certain levels of cooperation, the involvement of private companies as co-contractors, subcontractors, etc. is quite possible. This practice should be developed in every possible way, because it is capable of bringing additional investments in the defense industry and reducing the cost of production.
In short, we need the most reasonable and fair attitude to our "defense industry", a comprehensive account of the specifics of literally every enterprise. If we analyze all the legislation relating to the defense industry, we will see that it mainly consists of various kinds of regulations and restrictions. In our opinion, this is wrong. It is impossible to drive "defense industry" into the Procrustean bed of strict requirements on the state contract and at the same time harsh market realities in the form of inflation, tariffs, prices for raw materials, components, etc. There must be mechanisms that compensate the company for the costs that it incurs status. Recently, the State Duma amended the Law on State Defense Order, introducing a more flexible pricing system for defense products. This is a step in the right direction. But the state should take care of other support measures. For example, in order for the so-called long-term money to go to the military-industrial complex, the rates on loans taken by defense enterprises in banks were as low as possible. Apparently, for the sake of this, it is worth going for partial compensation of the size of bank rates at the expense of the budget. I am sure that the idea of a so-called innovative tax credit, which “Fair Russia” persistently promotes, would have come to the court. The meaning of the idea is that the expenses of enterprises for innovative purposes should be fully deducted from the amounts of the accrued income tax without any permits and approvals from officials.
Frames always in price
If we are talking about innovation, one can not help but mention our proposals for the development of Russian science. No reliable defense can be built if there is no powerful science in the country. That is why our party program clearly states that at least three percent of GDP should be allocated for the financing of science and scientific research. Among the priorities here are, of course, those scientific institutes and centers that work directly for the army and the defense industry complex. They need to be raised, and some simply to be revived after a long period of stagnation and lack of demand. It is not at all good that, by investing in defense R & D, Russia today is about ten times inferior to the United States. Such a lag should be sought to reduce, but not at the expense of civilian research sectors. World practice shows that, in the old days, the main stream of technological innovations went from military production to civilian production, now up to 50 percent of innovative ideas and technologies come into the defense sector from civilian industries. That is why we insist on preserving in Russia a wide range of scientific research, including fundamental research. And the reform of the RAS, which began, in our opinion, very spontaneously and ill-conceived, in no case should result in a primitive optimization and reduction of scientific institutions.
Another hot issue related to the fate of our defense-industrial complex is personnel. When I was the chairman of the Federation Council and in the current role of the leader of the parliamentary party, I often traveled and traveled around the regions. It has long been taken as a rule: during the trips you must visit at least one defense company. Wherever I was - in Chelyabinsk or Khabarovsk, Omsk or Arkhangelsk, Nizhny Tagil or near Moscow Korolev, among the most pressing, burning questions always sounded: "Who will work in our enterprises through 5, 10, 15 years?". At the beginning of 2000-ies, the aging of personnel in the defense industry reached critical proportions, in some places everything was kept only by retirees and people of pre-retirement age. Now the situation is getting better and the youth has gone into the defense industry. Up to a third of workers are already those who do not have 35, but the problem of the acute shortage of many important specialists has not been overcome. The shortage of process engineers in the defense industry is 17 percent, design engineers - 22 percent. With skilled workers in general, the crisis situation is a shortage of up to 40 percent. There is only one conclusion: we must urgently expand the system of incentives that would make work in defense enterprises as attractive as possible.
I remember that in one of the election articles in 2012, the current president of Russia, Vladimir Putin, suggested that the average wage at defense companies, in design and research centers be comparable to the money allowance in the Armed Forces. This is a very good idea, and it is time to take up its practical implementation. In addition, the “defense industry” should have a significant social package associated with guarantees of providing affordable housing, decent pension provision, etc. “Fair Russia” also proposes to amend the law on conscription so that the work of a young man in the public sector, the military-industrial complex was equal to military service.
Of course, moral incentives are important. Taking up the revival of the destroyed system of vocational education, it is necessary at the same time to give it a new image, eliminating from the label the refuge of losers. The same is required in engineering universities. Now often come here guys showing not the highest performance in school. The majority of young people are still very disoriented and continue to choose the profession of managers, economists, lawyers. I believe that we need to actively expand the information policy in the direction of the dissemination of technical knowledge in society, increasing the prestige of engineering work, the promotion of working specialties. Well, a lot here depends on whether we can make the army, defense industry enterprises and scientific institutes centers of attraction for talented young people, convincing them that it is here today that there are greater opportunities for self-realization, creativity, fruitful work, and success in life. When we achieve this, then it will be possible not to worry about the fate of Russia, its security and defense capability.
In conclusion, I want to emphasize once again: ensuring the country's defense and security is a complex, multifaceted work that requires a systematic solution to a huge complex of problems. Success in work largely depends on the understanding that defense is not only secured with money. Even trillions of rubles is just a prerequisite for change, like the most modern miracle weapon - missiles, planes, ships, Tanks. The decisive factor was and will be people who are responsible, patriotic, selfless, dedicated, dedicated to life in the Armed Forces and work in enterprises of the military-industrial complex.
Read more: http://vpk-news.ru/articles/19526
We live in a turbulent and unstable world. The illusions connected with the fact that after the end of the Cold War world harmony will come, if they have remained, then only among endlessly naive people. Do not go away anywhere, but on the contrary, the geopolitical struggle and fierce competition for resources are intensifying. The processes of globalization even more clearly reveal the many injustices of the current world order. The global financial and economic crisis became an alarm signal, signifying not only the exhaustion of development models based on liberal ideas, but also the entry of humanity in the period of changing historical eras and global civilizational shifts. And such periods are always fraught with the emergence of new threats, including military conflicts and other upheavals. Dramatic events in Ukraine give very fresh and concrete evidence of this.
In such conditions, Russia with its gigantic spaces, huge length of borders, enormous volumes of natural resources would be very rash to remain in serenity, without showing special concern for the protection of borders, territory and sovereignty. I agree with those politicians and public figures who, on the basis of an understanding of the historical fate of our state, put the question squarely: Russia can be either great or none. It must be powerful, able to pursue an independent policy, or it will simply be torn apart by forces that consider it an extra country, in the words of the eternal hater Zbigniew Brzezinski.
“It is impossible to drive“ defense industryists ”into the Procrustean bed of strict requirements under the state contract and at the same time harsh market realities in the form of inflation growth”
The party "Fair Russia" supports the efforts being made by the country's leadership to give our Armed Forces a new look and modernize the defense-industrial complex (DIC). In the framework of the State Armaments Program (LG) for the period 2011 – 2020, more than 20 trillion rubles are planned for these purposes. Yes, these are big, one might say, unprecedentedly huge means. But such costs are justified by a deep analysis of the real risks and threats that Russia may face in the coming decades, and even years. Therefore, it is important that trillions not remain on paper. After all, the sad experience of the implementation of the previous GPO, in which high goals were also declared, was not remembered, but in fact was not achieved.
It is imperative that at this stage of reforming the Armed Forces and the military-industrial complex, true professionals, state-minded people, and not so-called effective managers, who learned a little something at all, were at the head of the process. Serious lessons should be learned from the period when Anatoly Serdyukov was at the head of the Defense Ministry. The CP fraction in the State Duma has always harshly criticized its activities. But not because we were against the vector of military reform aimed at the transition to a highly efficient mobile army consisting of units of constant readiness. This vector, by the way, is not at all the merit of Serdyukov, who knew little about defense issues. The direction of the reform was set by military science and life itself.
No wonder they say that even the best idea can be turned into its opposite, if you bring it to the point of absurdity. This absurdity, we swallowed in full. I mean the transformation of the army into a real estate selling agency, the destruction of military education and medicine systems, endless conflicts between the Defense Ministry and defense industry enterprises on pricing issues and much more. But, perhaps, the apotheosis of Serdyukovschina was the decision to purchase a number of samples of foreign military equipment, which were made, as it were, in peak of our defense industry. Doubtful epics with the purchase of amphibious ships "Mistral" from the French and Iveco armored vehicles from the Italians, who, as it turned out, in many ways are not suitable for use by our military, and some other similar transactions are the embodiment of glaring lack of professionalism.
Here, in our opinion, the way of thinking that is characteristic of the generation of ultra-market-rate liberals, which are now seated, unfortunately, has manifested itself in many state structures. In their heads, like one of the heroes of Saltykov-Shchedrin, are built in small organchiki playing a limited number of melodies. In our case, they sound like this: “The market will regulate everything” and “Everything can be bought”. In their opinion, it is possible to patch holes in the defense shield without developing “defense”, but buying everything you need in the West. But not everything is bought, even for very big money.
First successes
Today, the process of military reform and the relationship of the army with the defense industry are brought to common sense. We welcome the fact that with the advent of the new Minister Sergei Shoigu to the Defense Ministry, many gross managerial errors are corrected, that the commercialization of the army is stopped, and the military are focused on their main tasks. The regular moment of the last months became regular checks of the combat readiness of units and formations with real marches, firing, launches, testing the interaction of staffs. I am glad that qualitative changes are taking place with the supply of new equipment and weapons to the troops, that the Strategic Missile Forces are successfully mastering the strategic complexes Topol-M and Yars, that in the Navy underwater strategic missile carriers of the new Borey project, that the re-equipment of the Air Force, the Ground Forces, the Airborne Forces, and the Aerospace Defense Forces went at an accelerated pace.
It was necessary to establish a constructive dialogue between the military and the “defense industry”, as it immediately turned out that the state defense order could be formed without disruption, and a consensus could be found on pricing issues. Many defense companies have gained a good pace, combining their own modernization with the organization of large-scale production of weapons and equipment. A worthy result was the fact that in 2013, a number of industries (in particular, aircraft manufacturing, shipbuilding, rocket production) showed an increase in production by 14 – 16 percent. Especially if we take into account that almost all the rest of the Russian industry is experiencing a period of stagnation.
At the same time, I would urge not to flatter yourself with the first successes of the defense industry. Admittedly, while positive developments are achieved mostly due to what is called manual control. It can not be said that we have created a reliable system that, on a long-term basis, will ensure the interrelation of the processes of military construction, industrial and scientific-technical development. In fact, this system has yet to be created. And it is necessary to begin with the fundamental prerequisites that go beyond the defense problems proper. After all, it is impossible to successfully strengthen the defense, not thinking about what is happening with the country's economy as a whole. The DIC cannot be an island of stability in the midst of an ocean of a wild unregulated market.We, in the SR, are convinced that it is time, in the end, to determine and adopt a federal law on industrial policy, designed to clearly highlight the priority sectors and areas in which the state relies, and also the mechanisms of their state support. Of course, all key sectors of the defense industry should be among these priorities.
In our opinion, it’s time to stop dodging the word “plan” and start returning planned beginnings to the economy, because, as rightly noted in one well-known aphorism, “he who plans nothing, plans failures”. Of course, we are not talking about a return to the directives of the Soviet era, in which everything was centralized and detailed almost to the last gear. We are talking about the so-called indicative planning, which has long been successfully used in France, Japan, South Korea and many other countries. The meaning of this algorithm is to work out, through a system of agreements between economic subjects, verified decisions regarding various parameters - prices, volumes and terms of output, investments, export levels, production growth rates, etc. If we do this for, say, five years ahead, as the CP suggests, the economy will get dynamic and balanced, and manufacturers will be able to more accurately build a long-term economic strategy. This is useful for all economic entities, and for the enterprises of the military-industrial complex doubly, for many of them are focused on the output of products that require long production cycles.
To ensure the stable development of the Russian defense industry, the improvement of the legal framework is of great importance. There are a lot of gaps, even in terms of the usual legal techniques. It’s a paradox, but the law doesn’t even have a clear definition of what the military-industrial complex is. Many new realities were not reflected. The basis of the Russian defense industry today are more than 50 large vertically integrated structures. However, while there is no regulatory framework that would regulate their activities. Another pressing question is lost in the fog: what is a public-private partnership in the defense industry? There is a lot of talk about it, but a common understanding of the forms in which it is expedient and permissible has yet to be worked out.
I would like to clarify that, in its ideology, the party “Fair Russia” is social-democratic. Unlike orthodox communists, we recognize the market, private property and competition. At the same time, we are in favor of effective state regulation of market relations and, unlike liberals, we believe that commercialization should not be all-pervasive and inclusive, that the market, figuratively speaking, should know its place. This is especially true of everything that is connected with the defense interests of the state. We believe that a categorical taboo on the privatization of strategically important defense enterprises should be respected. We are opposed to giving control of the production of the most important systems and models of armaments and military equipment to private owners. All this state must hold in their hands. At certain levels of cooperation, the involvement of private companies as co-contractors, subcontractors, etc. is quite possible. This practice should be developed in every possible way, because it is capable of bringing additional investments in the defense industry and reducing the cost of production.
In short, we need the most reasonable and fair attitude to our "defense industry", a comprehensive account of the specifics of literally every enterprise. If we analyze all the legislation relating to the defense industry, we will see that it mainly consists of various kinds of regulations and restrictions. In our opinion, this is wrong. It is impossible to drive "defense industry" into the Procrustean bed of strict requirements on the state contract and at the same time harsh market realities in the form of inflation, tariffs, prices for raw materials, components, etc. There must be mechanisms that compensate the company for the costs that it incurs status. Recently, the State Duma amended the Law on State Defense Order, introducing a more flexible pricing system for defense products. This is a step in the right direction. But the state should take care of other support measures. For example, in order for the so-called long-term money to go to the military-industrial complex, the rates on loans taken by defense enterprises in banks were as low as possible. Apparently, for the sake of this, it is worth going for partial compensation of the size of bank rates at the expense of the budget. I am sure that the idea of a so-called innovative tax credit, which “Fair Russia” persistently promotes, would have come to the court. The meaning of the idea is that the expenses of enterprises for innovative purposes should be fully deducted from the amounts of the accrued income tax without any permits and approvals from officials.
Frames always in price
If we are talking about innovation, one can not help but mention our proposals for the development of Russian science. No reliable defense can be built if there is no powerful science in the country. That is why our party program clearly states that at least three percent of GDP should be allocated for the financing of science and scientific research. Among the priorities here are, of course, those scientific institutes and centers that work directly for the army and the defense industry complex. They need to be raised, and some simply to be revived after a long period of stagnation and lack of demand. It is not at all good that, by investing in defense R & D, Russia today is about ten times inferior to the United States. Such a lag should be sought to reduce, but not at the expense of civilian research sectors. World practice shows that, in the old days, the main stream of technological innovations went from military production to civilian production, now up to 50 percent of innovative ideas and technologies come into the defense sector from civilian industries. That is why we insist on preserving in Russia a wide range of scientific research, including fundamental research. And the reform of the RAS, which began, in our opinion, very spontaneously and ill-conceived, in no case should result in a primitive optimization and reduction of scientific institutions.
Another hot issue related to the fate of our defense-industrial complex is personnel. When I was the chairman of the Federation Council and in the current role of the leader of the parliamentary party, I often traveled and traveled around the regions. It has long been taken as a rule: during the trips you must visit at least one defense company. Wherever I was - in Chelyabinsk or Khabarovsk, Omsk or Arkhangelsk, Nizhny Tagil or near Moscow Korolev, among the most pressing, burning questions always sounded: "Who will work in our enterprises through 5, 10, 15 years?". At the beginning of 2000-ies, the aging of personnel in the defense industry reached critical proportions, in some places everything was kept only by retirees and people of pre-retirement age. Now the situation is getting better and the youth has gone into the defense industry. Up to a third of workers are already those who do not have 35, but the problem of the acute shortage of many important specialists has not been overcome. The shortage of process engineers in the defense industry is 17 percent, design engineers - 22 percent. With skilled workers in general, the crisis situation is a shortage of up to 40 percent. There is only one conclusion: we must urgently expand the system of incentives that would make work in defense enterprises as attractive as possible.
I remember that in one of the election articles in 2012, the current president of Russia, Vladimir Putin, suggested that the average wage at defense companies, in design and research centers be comparable to the money allowance in the Armed Forces. This is a very good idea, and it is time to take up its practical implementation. In addition, the “defense industry” should have a significant social package associated with guarantees of providing affordable housing, decent pension provision, etc. “Fair Russia” also proposes to amend the law on conscription so that the work of a young man in the public sector, the military-industrial complex was equal to military service.
Of course, moral incentives are important. Taking up the revival of the destroyed system of vocational education, it is necessary at the same time to give it a new image, eliminating from the label the refuge of losers. The same is required in engineering universities. Now often come here guys showing not the highest performance in school. The majority of young people are still very disoriented and continue to choose the profession of managers, economists, lawyers. I believe that we need to actively expand the information policy in the direction of the dissemination of technical knowledge in society, increasing the prestige of engineering work, the promotion of working specialties. Well, a lot here depends on whether we can make the army, defense industry enterprises and scientific institutes centers of attraction for talented young people, convincing them that it is here today that there are greater opportunities for self-realization, creativity, fruitful work, and success in life. When we achieve this, then it will be possible not to worry about the fate of Russia, its security and defense capability.
In conclusion, I want to emphasize once again: ensuring the country's defense and security is the most complex, multifaceted work that requires a systemic solution of a huge complex of problems. Success in work largely depends on the understanding that defense is fastened not only with money. Even trillions of rubles are only a prerequisite for change, as is the most modern wonder weapon - rockets, airplanes, ships, tanks. The decisive factor was and will be people responsible, patriotic, dedicated, devoted to their work, dedicating their lives to service in the Armed Forces and working in enterprises of the military-industrial complex.
Information