Military Review

Compromise between opportunity and necessity

14
The development of the armed forces depends on the economic potential of the Russian Federation and the geopolitical situation.


When embarking on the construction of any capital construction, its intended purpose is determined in the project, and not at the end of the process. This thesis is very obvious in the construction industry, but in the military for some reason it is necessary to prove it. With the submission of the weekly "Military Industrial Complex", a broad discussion of new approaches to the construction of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation is conducted. I would like to make my contribution.

Before building, the goal is determined, what and by what time to do, how much force, material and financial resources are needed for this, geological and other surveys are carried out. All activities are displayed in the project facilities, the relevant material and financial documents. The construction of the object begins not from the roof, but from the foundation.

The same algorithm is valid for the military sphere. The armed forces are a multispecific, multi-level socio-technical combat system that cannot be built from the roof without defining their purpose, tasks that are assigned in peacetime and wartime. The assertions are wrong that it is not necessary to define these tasks on the basis of a long-term forecast of the military-political situation, the determination of probable opponents and the balance of forces of the parties. Accounting for these factors in the construction of the armed forces is not at all a utopia, and common sense in the construction of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation is not limited by taking into account the possibilities of the country's economic complex.

Formation of an armed defense plan

Apparently, it is impossible to cut from the shoulder, to destroy everything that was accumulated in the theory of the construction of armed forces in the past. This theory, as well as other branches of military sciences, now proposes classical approaches to the development of the armed forces of any peace-loving non-aggressive state. It should be noted that this process consists not only in the deployment of the required combat and numerical strength, but also in the construction of other equally important elements of their appearance.

Compromise between opportunity and necessity


Consequently, in order to build modern armed forces capable of ensuring the defense capability of the state, it is necessary to carry out a comprehensive military and economic substantiation and planning of their appearance for the foreseeable future. This rationale is understood as a study performed using scientific methods, in which, based on the criteria of military-strategic and resource-economic feasibility, the armed forces are projected to correspond to the concept of armed defense of the state and its economic capabilities.

Let's try to consider its content in a popular form. The military-economic substantiation of the Armed Forces is one of the most complicated problems of the theory and practice of their construction. This problem has always been in the field of view of military science, which, in relation to the specific military-strategic and economic conditions for the development of the state, found appropriate and justified possible solutions for it. Naturally, at the basis of this justification lay possible military threats to vital national interests, a plan for strategic deterrence of a potential enemy and armed defense of the Fatherland, as well as economic and mobilization capabilities of the state. In the past, the appearance of the Armed Forces was formed under the most complex version of the reflection of aggression. Of course, this approach corresponded to the doctrinal guidelines of the military-political leadership of the country and was supported by the powerful economic base of the state, which allocated as much material, financial, human, and other resources for defense as was required.

For the conditions of the modern period of the socio-economic development of Russia, such an approach is unacceptable from the economic and inexpedient from the military-strategic point of view. In conditions of limited allocations for national defense and limited number of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation must correspond to the economic and mobilization capabilities of the country in their costs of maintenance and development. This is on the one hand, and on the other - to be adequate to the needs of ensuring its defense and military security. It would seem that two contradictory requirements that are incompatible with the simultaneous implementation. This is the essence of the military-economic substantiation of the perspective appearance and the art of building the Armed Forces - to combine the strategic aspects of construction with the economic ones. That is, it is necessary to find a compromise between what kind of armed forces a country needs and which countries can afford.

In many countries, planning the construction of the armed forces is decided by methods of program-target planning, the main stages of which are shown in the figure.

Such stages can be:

-the formation of the idea of ​​armed defense of the state;
-the military and strategic rationale for the future appearance of the Armed Forces;
-resource-economic rationale for the construction and development of the perspective appearance of the Armed Forces;
-development of programs and plans for the construction and development of the Armed Forces.


Consider the content of these stages.

First of all, proceeding from the forecast of the development of the military-political situation for the prospective period, possible military dangers (threats) identified and as a result potential and real opponents, developed scenarios for the unleashing and predicted nature of military operations against the Russian Federation, a plan of armed defense of the state is developed.

In our opinion, it should be built on simple and understandable grounds: “We don’t need someone else’s land, but our own should be reliably protected by all available means and methods.” Proceeding from this, the intent of the armed defense of the Russian Federation should be understood as a set of ideas, approaches, ways of solving the tasks of strategic deterrence of potential adversaries from unleashing any scale of aggression against Russia, preventing it, and in case of a start - reflecting, localizing and terminating on the terms of the Russian Federation .

Therefore, such complex elements of the state structure as the Armed Forces, other troops and bodies of the Russian Federation, the defense industrial complex, which form the basis of its defense, cannot be built on the basis of current problems only. Military construction in Russia should also proceed from the prospective needs of ensuring the state’s military security, taking into account possible threats that it may face in the next five to ten years and beyond.

Otherwise, the intent of the armed defense of the Russian Federation can be developed by a narrow circle of people without proper forecasting and comprehensive justification, be determined only by the complexities of the current political and economic situation, which can exacerbate existing problems and in the future lead to major political, economic, military and social consequences. A striking confirmation of this is the defense construction in the Russian Federation in 2008 – 2013, when the dangers and possible military threats were assessed incorrectly and thus caused a huge damage to security.

Once again on the terminology

Thus, when developing the concept of armed defense of the Russian Federation, it is necessary to clearly understand the content of the concepts of “military danger” and “military threat”, from where they come from and from whom they originate. We will understand these concepts.

Under the danger refers to the state of relations between states in which there is a potential, and under the threat - the real possibility of a military conflict. The main factors responsible for this danger are that the parties have significant contradictions in ensuring (defending) their vital national interests and prepared military force, and the distinctive features of the state of threat are the presence of antagonistic contradictions, sufficient military force and declared political intentions and at least one will. of the parties to apply this force. In the first case, the opposing sides are potential, and in the second - real opponents.

At the same time, the presence of a military danger or military threat does not mean the presence of a threat to the security of the state. It is impossible to objectively assess the military danger (threat) only on the basis of the intentions and military power of the aggressor. He needs to have confidence in the successful implementation of his plan. That is, the fact of the unleashing of hostilities by the aggressor does not mean that these actions will be successful and he will reach the goal.

So, the degree of the state’s military security cannot be assessed without analyzing the state of the countering system of military threats or the system of ensuring the military security of a state subjected to aggression. At the same time, the term “military security” should be understood as the state of protection of the vital interests of the state from internal and external threats.

It is appropriate to give an example of today's relationship with Ukraine. Yes, this country represents a certain military danger for Russia. But it does not represent a threat to military security, because despite the presence of antagonistic contradictions and, apparently, a certain desire to use military force, the Ukrainian armed forces do not have sufficient military or other power to resist Russia. However, Kiev’s aspiration to join NATO should be considered not only as a serious factor in the increase of the military threat, but also as a factor in the exacerbation of the military-political situation in the center of Europe. Proof of this are the events of the year 2008 in Georgia and South Ossetia.

When developing the concept of armed defense of the Russian Federation, it is important to understand the essence of the concept “ensuring the military (defense) security of the state”, in which there are two components. On the one hand, these are military dangers (threats), on the other, the system of parrying these military dangers (threats) and ensuring the military security of the state. Hence, a quantitative assessment of the level or degree of danger can be determined by the ratio of the scale of the military danger (threats) to the capabilities of the existing (prospective) system of their countering. The return value to it is the level (degree) of the state’s military security. Obviously, in the first case, if the values ​​are equal to or greater than one, there is a military danger or threat, with smaller values ​​there is no military danger. In the second case, of course, the opposite is true.

Thus, when developing a plan for armed defense of the state, it is important to objectively assess the state of the state’s military security system and, above all, the state of combat readiness of the armed forces.

Based on the above, the content of the formation of the idea of ​​armed defense of the state is:

-in monitoring (forecasting) the nature and scale of military dangers (threats);
-in assessing the state of the existing or prospective system of ensuring the state’s military security;
- in assessing the level (degree) of the state’s military security;
- in determining the complex of measures for removing (resolving) contradictions, or easing (neutralizing) military dangers and threats, or enhancing the capabilities of the military security system of one’s own state, or all at once in a complex, or as a last resort - physical destruction of a carrier of military danger ( ), if these threats were realized in the form of aggression against the Russian Federation.

Based on the conclusions from the forecast of possible military threats and possible scenarios of their implementation, assessing the state of the system to ensure military security and state protection from forecasted military threats, the organization’s defense plan and a system of military and non-military measures to counter these threats in peacetime and wartime are determined.
Author:
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/articles/20120
14 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. fvandaku
    fvandaku 15 May 2014 21: 22
    +8
    SERIOUS ARTICLE. I FEEL THE ACADEMIC APPROACH AT THE AUTHOR. I will put a plus.
    1. SRC P-15
      SRC P-15 15 May 2014 21: 30
      +4
      Quote: fvandaku
      SERIOUS ARTICLE. I FEEL THE ACADEMIC APPROACH AT THE AUTHOR. I will put a plus.

      Such articles need to be published in the morning to study it freshly. But still, the author plus, for the zeal. smile
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Vitaly Anisimov
        Vitaly Anisimov 15 May 2014 21: 39
        +2
        Thus, when developing a plan for armed defense of the state, it is important to objectively assess the state of the state’s military security system and, above all, the state of combat readiness of the armed forces.

        There are those who want to be clever ...? bully (today is the second such article is laid out)))) In the evening just ..))) Do not be shy ...
        1. I do not care
          I do not care 15 May 2014 21: 49
          +8
          +100 500
          From the point of view of banal erudition, every local individual seeks to mystify abstraction, but we must not neglect the tendencies of paradoxical illusions, and also motivate the criteria of abstract subjectivism. Since your potential level is equal to zero and tends to minus-infinity, I consider further conversation unprofitable ...
    2. typhoon7
      typhoon7 15 May 2014 21: 41
      +1
      I agree the article is very serious, the topic for reflection is not for one day. Respect to the author.
    3. I do not care
      I do not care 15 May 2014 21: 42
      +3
      Quote: fvandaku
      SERIOUS ARTICLE. I FEEL THE ACADEMIC APPROACH AT THE AUTHOR. I will put a plus.

      What exactly she brought to you, share.

      I’ll write the same blah blah if desired without straining
      the system of parrying these military dangers (threats), ensuring the military security of the state. Hence, a quantitative assessment of the level or degree of danger can be determined by the ratio of the scale of the military danger
      I am in shock.
      academician for sure.
      1. mamont5
        mamont5 16 May 2014 04: 01
        0
        Quote: me by
        What exactly she brought to you, share.

        I’ll write the same blah blah if desired without straining


        I agree. A lot of abstruse words, a lot of "water", stretched out. In short, "unreadable".
  2. Morgan
    Morgan 15 May 2014 21: 32
    +1
    The epistemology of military science is a serious science. Neither reduce nor add.
    1. hrapon
      hrapon 15 May 2014 22: 09
      +1
      It is appropriate to give an example of today's relationship with Ukraine. Yes, this country poses a certain military danger to Russia. But it does not pose a threat to military security, because despite the presence of antagonistic contradictions and, apparently, a certain desire to use military force, the armed forces of Ukraine do not have sufficient military and other power to withstand Russia.


      Yes. Thought cannot be killed. Although it can be hidden strongly ...
  3. lis-ik
    lis-ik 15 May 2014 21: 34
    +1
    I really feel a serious approach, I’ll re-read it tomorrow, now I don’t understand much, but I put a plus for fundamentality.
  4. Giant thought
    Giant thought 15 May 2014 21: 41
    +1
    By and large, nothing new, something like this was all brought up at lectures at the military department in the middle of the 70's. In general, military construction (not the construction industry is meant) is a very specific section of military science. Without a bottle, you can’t make it right away.
  5. Sterlya
    Sterlya 15 May 2014 21: 44
    0
    I read and understood that I should sit thinking about this article. Thank you for giving the topic. although there is never free time to pore over it, although everything is correct.
    Therefore, I think that such issues should be resolved at the professional level (although where is the guarantee that there will be "the right people". To the place ((like a creep wassat )))
    So it goes. total. Cadres decide everything. (not money, as the mattresses think)
  6. skifd
    skifd 15 May 2014 21: 47
    +4
    Previously, it fit into the phrase "military doctrine." Now verbosity is a trend.
  7. typhoon7
    typhoon7 15 May 2014 21: 57
    +4
    Good material, in the Soviet Union whole institutions worked on this subject. At the moment, the GDP team of the security forces, politicians, analysts is powerful, but the economy is at least as long as the Achilles heel, it is necessary to correct the situation.
  8. Vitaly Anisimov
    Vitaly Anisimov 15 May 2014 22: 13
    0
    The main thing is to remember the old poster "DO NOT SPEAK.!" (and sometimes remember Snowden ...) bully I do not impose .. just think so ...
  9. santepa
    santepa 15 May 2014 22: 48
    +1
    Ochchch is a good article, and everything is correctly laid out, on all the correct shelves, you can’t say anything, science is science. These issues are dealt with by the respected Research Institute for Defense Planning Problems. But I don’t quite imagine what recommendations the president and the government of the Russian Federation (on the further development of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation) give in connection with the 20-year hiatus in any development of the armed forces and the almost complete collapse of the military-industrial complex. In other words, WHAT TO DO NOW, and which percent of GDP, or in absolute numbers, to invest in development (and development of which is of higher priority) so that you do not tear the economy up and get the maximum, and do something for the future. Empirizing and flying in the clouds is a very smart way to get into Warm place. AND RESPONSIBILITY - NO, AND PAYMENT DECENT !!!!!
  10. DerSamowar
    DerSamowar 15 May 2014 23: 02
    +2
    I took a five-minute break to take a break from writing a thesis. Let me think I’ll go to VO and read a couple of articles. But no, the smoke break failed. I had to read an article stylistically reminiscent of scientific research.

    In fact, the author is well done. Seriously approached the problem, laid out everything on the shelves. And, as someone already noted earlier, such articles need to be read with a fresh mind :)
  11. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 15 May 2014 23: 25
    0
    Excellent article, for more of these.
  12. not main
    not main 15 May 2014 23: 49
    0
    The article is good. But actually these are the tasks of the General Staff and the Defense Ministry. And I think that they do not eat their bread for nothing!
  13. EsTaF
    EsTaF 16 May 2014 00: 44
    +1
    [img] http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=7853648monument_jukov_3.jpg [/ img]
    Here it is a compromise between opportunity and necessity)))

    http://www.moscow.org/moscow_encyclopedia/photoview.php?id_photo=168

    Around the urn monument. next to them you can sit down)) smoke)) throw out the trash. Directly covered with ballot boxes on all sides (4 ballot boxes in the corners).
    And the joke is also that there are no more ballot boxes anywhere. And there are no shops - aka the direct road to sit down a current with a monument. Pieces of paper, ice cream))) dining room PPC.
    was there today - people sit, eat cakes, ice cream, spit and smoke. Right around the monument.

    This is an insult to memory. who could think of such a thing. if only intentionally.

    what kind of disease is there for the Slavs .... media and window dressing and thirst for dough and all.
  14. Demon0n
    Demon0n 16 May 2014 03: 05
    0
    "This theory, as well as other branches of military science, still offer classical approaches to the development of the armed forces of any peace-loving non-aggressive state." - it needs to be deciphered, first of all for the author's development process. Guiding questions ... What theory? What is a peace-loving non-aggressive state? How do the goals and objectives of the Armed Forces relate to the level of aggression and peacefulness (and vice versa)?
    Moment number 2. Design begins with questions that follow in a specific order. Or, if problems are identified and formulated, goals, objectives, methods, etc. can be formulated.
    ... "a comprehensive military-economic substantiation and planning of their appearance" is far from the beginning of the process (and in the presented formulation it is rather a consequence or independent work based on the results of the primary one), separate work with its own problems and goals (the results of which can be used as the basis for something).
    Read further did not find it rational.
    However, for me the source of problems in the army and the military-industrial complex was not a big secret ...
  15. uzer 13
    uzer 13 16 May 2014 05: 40
    0
    [A vivid confirmation of this is the defense construction in the Russian Federation in 2008-2013, when the dangers and possible military threats were incorrectly assessed and thereby caused great damage to security.]
    You must have a good position to write it. (Or not have any)
    The article correctly analyzes the direction of reforming and building the armed forces, albeit in a slightly official language. The audience should also be appropriate. It can be added that in addition to the military, there are others that are no less dangerous for the state. For example, this is cyber threats, uncontrolled immigration, organized misinformation, attacks on stock markets and others. Therefore, it is advisable to create a military doctrine in contact with civilian analysts. Recall Kosovo, where immigration of peaceful Albanians led there. The same thing happens in our territories adjacent to China. And it may happen that for now the military creates superweapons, they will come at night and slaughter them with simple kitchen knives. Well, tactics to counter external threats should be based on the technical capabilities of the industrial-defense complex. We live in the real world.
  16. Eragon
    Eragon 16 May 2014 08: 27
    0
    Author, we are not in the academy, we are mostly ordinary people. If you decide to publish a lecture or repost an article, then you would take the trouble to adapt it for "average" brains. And so ... For the idea +, for the implementation -. Total - no assessment.