Self-help from goodwill troops

Self-help from goodwill troopsIn recent years, the world community is increasingly confronted with problems that have a negative impact on the maintenance of peace and security on the planet. Increasingly, in various regions and individual countries, the resolution of these or other contradictions by force becomes a priority, which leads to the emergence of intrastate and international conflicts, and often - serious local wars. That is why international institutions such as the United Nations are becoming increasingly important in world politics, the 70 anniversary of the formation of which all progressive humanity will celebrate October 24 this year.


This event will be celebrated in our country, especially among Russian peacekeepers. In 1988, the UN peacekeeping forces were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. This is the merit of our peacekeepers.

EXCURS V HISTORY

The first UN peacekeeping mission was established on 29 on May 1948 of the year and was called the Armistice Monitoring Organization (UNTSO).

Russia has significantly lagged behind the world community in the field of peacemaking, both in theory and in practice. Only after 25 years, in 1973, by the decision of the USSR government, in accordance with a UN Security Council resolution, the first group of Soviet officers was sent to the Middle East to serve in UNTSO at UN military observers. Their tasks included monitoring the cease-fire in the Suez Canal zone and the Golan Heights after the end of hostilities.

So began the participation of the USSR, and then the Russian Federation in peacekeeping operations under the auspices of the UN. Peacekeeping operations are divided into peacekeeping operations (PKO), which are conducted in accordance with the sixth chapter of the UN Charter, and peace enforcement operations, which are conducted in accordance with the seventh chapter of the UN Charter.

Beginning in 1991, Russia's participation in peacekeeping operations has intensified. In April, a little more than a month after the end of the Persian Gulf War, a group of Russian UN military observers were sent to the Iraqi-Kuwaiti border area, and in September of the same year - to the Western Sahara. Since the beginning of 1992, the scope of our military observers has spread to Yugoslavia, Cambodia, Mozambique, and in January 1994, to Rwanda. In October, by UN decision, our observers were sent to Georgia, in February, 1994, to Angola, in March, 1995, to Guatemala, in May, 1997, to Sierra Leone, in July, 1998, to East Timor, to November - to the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In order not to list all the missions, I’ll say that all our officers took part in 1999 UN peacekeeping missions as military observers, who are called “blue berets”.

Blue berets are officers in the rank of captains and majors. They traveled from Russia with green diplomatic passports (now mainly began to give regular service) and, arriving in the mission area, received the so-called white cards - documents certifying that they are UN employees.

Blue berets are essentially military diplomats. They do not have weapons and are protected by diplomatic immunity and the UN flag.

The working language of military observers is English. Knowledge of other languages, especially the language of the host country is encouraged. Before being sent to a mission, they undergo a rigorous selection and special training courses. From 1973 to the present, about 2000 Soviet and Russian officers served as UN military observers. Currently, they have become officially called military experts of peacekeeping missions.

Our officers have proven themselves so well in all missions that, having gone to the reserve and becoming veterans, they are still in great demand. Our Interregional Public Organization of veterans of UN peacekeeping missions in cooperation with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation and the OSCE Secretariat sends candidates from its ranks to compete for the post of observer of the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission (SMM) in Ukraine. Seven people have already been officially credited to this position. Work with veterans - blue berets continues.

“BLUE HELMETS”

Sometimes blue berets are confused with blue helmets. By blue helmets is meant a military contingent that is part of the UN peacekeeping force. As is known, the UN has no permanent peacekeeping forces. They are formed on the basis of military units supplied to the UN from 122 countries of the world.

Since April, 1992, in the history of Russian peacekeeping, a new stage has begun, when Russia began to take part in peacekeeping operations as blue helmets. I want to stress right away that since the topic of this article only applies to UN peacekeeping operations, I will not dwell on other peacekeeping operations in which Russian blue helmets took part. I will only note that our peacekeepers acted in Abkhazia and Tajikistan under CIS mandates, and in Moldova and South Ossetia under bilateral agreements. As for the operations under the auspices of the UN, the events developed as follows. On the basis of UN Security Council Resolution No. 743, after completing the necessary domestic procedures, a Russian infantry battalion of 900 men was sent to former Yugoslavia, which was reinforced by personnel, armored personnel carriers BTR-8, anti-tank weapons, other weapons and military equipment in January 1994. Later on, our blue helmets took part in the UN mission in the former Yugoslavia in 80, where our paratroopers served with their colleagues from NATO.

We all remember and are proud of the march of our paratroopers, peacekeepers to Pristina. It can be said that it was a march of Russia in an attempt to enter the club of peacemaking on an equal footing, to demonstrate its national interests and potential capabilities, to increase its influence in the world community. It is a pity that instead of developing and building on success, the participation of our blue helmets in UN peacekeeping operations began to decline sharply and faded away. Despite the fact that the number of UN peacekeeping operations on the contrary increased. So, if in the first 40 years of the UN's existence, the entire 13 OPM was conducted, then, starting from the 1988 year, 58 new operations were initiated. The number of peacekeeping personnel also increased. While in the first UN missions from a few dozen to a few hundred military personnel, in 2015, the total number of contingents reached 106 245 people in 16 current UN missions. Russia, having withdrawn from the supply of military contingent for the UN peacekeeping forces, as of 1 in October 2015, remains on the sidelines.

The number of military observers involved in the PKO, from 50 people in 1948 to 1811 people in 2015, has also grown steadily. It is unfortunate that, against this background, Russian military observers in UN missions every year also become less and less. If earlier we were in the top three in blue berets, now we are only in the 8 place. The following figures show the general trend of reducing the number of Russian peacekeepers. If at the end of 1995, a Russian soldier and 1341 military observers were involved in 113 in various peacekeeping missions, in the 2015 year, only 64 military observers (including 4 people for air traffic control) and 15 police officers (including 3 women) were involved. Of the total number of UN military observers, the participation of Russians is 3,53%. Ethiopia has the largest number of observers - 113, which is 6,23%.

ALL LIMITED

Summing up, we get a disappointing conclusion. On 31 August 2015, Russia ranks the overall 75 in terms of the number of contingents supplied, taking into account the military contingent for peacekeeping forces, military observers and police officers. For comparison, it would be appropriate to say that Bangladesh ranks first, which, in 2015, allocated a total of 9432 military personnel to participate in UN peacekeeping operations. At the same time, the United States singled out 82 military personnel, Great Britain 289, France 909, China 3079, and Ukraine 546 military.

The non-participation or limited participation of Russian peacekeepers in the PKO adversely affects not only the ability of the Russian military to obtain real peacekeeping experience, but also the ability of Russia to influence the solution of crisis situations in different parts of the globe, actively defend their point of view on current international problems, determine the future system of world order. However, Russia does not show due interest in the evolution of peacekeeping. Another confirmation of this is the fact that on September 28 of this year, a Summit on Peacekeeping was held at UN Headquarters, where 43 countries signed the Declaration of Peacekeeping, and Russia is not on this list. Interestingly, immediately after the summit, the US President issued a Memorandum on Peacekeeping, which gave instructions to the Department of Defense, the State Department and the US Mission to the United Nations.

A reduction in participation in peacekeeping operations occurs despite the fact that in February 2013 of the year the Russian Foreign Policy Concept was published, which states that the Russian Federation, “considering international peacemaking to be an effective tool for resolving armed conflicts and solving state-building tasks at the post-crisis stage, intends to participate in international peacekeeping activities under the auspices of the UN and in the framework of interaction with regional and international organizations; will make an active contribution to the improvement of the preventive anti-crisis potential of the UN ”(p. 32: m, n, o). Much the same is said about peacekeeping in the Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation.

CONSENT IN MINISTRIES NO

Of course, a few quoted words are not enough to raise peacekeeping in our country to the proper level. Back in 2001, the “Independent Military Review” published an article entitled “Doctrine and Possibility”, which substantiated the need to create a national concept of peacekeeping and a special body under the President of the Russian Federation supervising, controlling and directing the activities of all state and public organizations involved in peacekeeping. Here is a small example of what problems such a body could solve. Russia sends its peacekeepers on a compensation basis. This means that the UN for its participation in peacekeeping operations transfers money to the Russian budget, where they remain, and are not transferred to the accounts of the Defense Ministry of the Russian Federation. In this regard, the military department is not interested in preparing and sending peacekeepers at its own expense, and it has not been possible to resolve the issue of obtaining compensation for many years. Our ideas were approved by the relevant government agencies, but things are still there, and 14 years have passed. One can only hope that the Foreign Ministry and the Defense Ministry of the Russian Federation will move from words to deeds. And for this now there is a very good reason.

The fact is that in September of this year, the report of the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon “The Future of United Nations Peacekeeping Operations: Implementation of the Recommendations of the High-Level Independent Panel on Peace Operations” was published. In this report, he suggested the creation of the United Nations Rapid Reaction Force (SSR) on an ongoing basis to quickly resolve emerging issues. After all, in order to deploy a mission, it usually takes about six months. If the UN has its own special forces, this will dramatically improve the current state of affairs in UN peacekeeping. In this regard, Russia has a chance to reach the front lines of modern peacemaking. Russia has a special 15-I peacekeeping brigade, and it could take the initiative to create future Rapid Reaction Forces at its base, or at least suggest using the 15 Brigade and airborne units undergoing training in the UN peacekeeping system. The same applies to the CSTO peacekeeping forces.

AND A LITTLE ABOUT POLICE

Separately, I would like to say a few more words about our peacekeepers - the policemen. The systematic use of police in peacekeeping operations (PKO) began in 1989, and by the middle of 1990, virtually no POM was conducted without the participation of the UN Civilian Police, which is now called the UN Police or the International Police Force. By the beginning of the XXI century, the total number of international police forces under the auspices of the UN exceeded 7000 people, and in 2015 year reached 13 550 people. MPS play an important independent role in the PKO and are no longer subordinate to the military component of operations, since they are usually introduced after the end of hostilities and the elimination of military conflict to establish a peaceful life.

The international police contingent performs the following functions: monitoring and controlling local police activities, mentoring, advisory functions, local police training, law enforcement.

The Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation has been actively involved in UN peacekeeping since April 1992. The officers of the internal affairs agencies and the servicemen of the internal troops of the Ministry of the Interior of Russia are sent to peacekeeping missions in compliance with orders of the President of the Russian Federation.

Since 1992, representatives of the Ministry of the Interior have served in UN, OSCE and European Union missions in Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, East Timor, Kosovo, Macedonia, and Haiti. As already mentioned, 15 Russian police officers, including three women, are currently serving successfully in UN missions. I would like more. And women, too, given that only 13 550 police are in UN missions now.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

54 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. oleg-gr 17 October 2015 14: 05 New
    • 41
    • 0
    +41
    In my opinion S.V. Lavrov is the best foreign minister since A.A. Gromyko.
    1. Chicot 1 17 October 2015 14: 09 New
      • 11
      • 0
      +11
      Quote: oleg-gr
      In my opinion S.V. Lavrov is the best foreign minister since A.A. Gromyko.

      And I hope not the last best foreign minister, but ... What does it have to do with the UN peacekeeping contingent and its Russian component (to put it directly to the topic of the article)? ..
      1. MIKHAN 17 October 2015 14: 16 New
        • 28
        • 0
        +28
        Quote: Chicot 1
        Quote: oleg-gr
        In my opinion S.V. Lavrov is the best foreign minister since A.A. Gromyko.

        And I hope not the last best foreign minister, but ... What does it have to do with the UN peacekeeping contingent and its Russian component (to put it directly to the topic of the article)? ..

        Well, let's say ...
        Currently, 15 Russian police officers, including three women, are successfully serving in UN missions

        And earlier, one word of Gromyko "We are concerned about the state of affairs in this or that region of the planet .." Immediately upset many hotheads, even without the introduction of the UN Peacekeeping Force .. Was it like that? hi
        1. sabakina 17 October 2015 14: 55 New
          • 21
          • 0
          +21
          Bike or not, I don’t know ...
          Turks to the Soviet Narcotics Ministry of Foreign Affairs
          - Why is Mount Ararat depicted on the flag of the Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic?
          - Well, the crescent moon is depicted on the flag of Turkey ... And what? Prohibit the crescent moon to shine over the territory of the USSR?
          Quote from memory, do not blame me.
          1. moskowit 17 October 2015 15: 49 New
            • 14
            • 0
            +14
            Not much wrong.

            The Turks were outraged by the fact that Mount Ararat, which is now located in the territory of modern Turkey, is depicted on the arms of Armenia. Some of the officials representing Turkey asked Stalin this question. The leader replied: "The flag of Turkey shows half a month (moon), this does not mean that Turkey owns it ..."
            1. sabakina 17 October 2015 20: 23 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Thank you for correcting, but Comrade Stalin was definitely not there.
        2. olegglin 17 October 2015 15: 29 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          successfully serve 15 Russian police, including three women


          Russian woman is also a weapon:

          1. vovanpain 17 October 2015 15: 57 New
            • 25
            • 0
            +25
            [quote = olegglin] [quote] 15 Russian policemen successfully serve, including three women[/ Quote]

            Russian woman is also a weapon:

            And perhaps better than nuclear;
            1. andj61 17 October 2015 17: 42 New
              • 5
              • 0
              +5
              Quote: vovanpain
              Russian woman is also a weapon:

              This is a weapon of mass destruction! good hi
              1. Lelek 17 October 2015 18: 40 New
                • 5
                • 0
                +5
                Quote: andj61
                This is a weapon of mass destruction!


                Who, how, when and where.
      2. Major Yurik 17 October 2015 14: 21 New
        • 26
        • 0
        +26
        The best answer is Transnistria! Ask any resident there, and he will tell you how the Khokhlomoldan Nazis convulsively swallow poisonous saliva at the sight of our “blue helmets”. And at the reflex level they understood: Do not touch, they will kill! Good luck, patience and fortitude to them! soldier
      3. wk
        wk 17 October 2015 14: 36 New
        • 10
        • 0
        +10
        Quote: Chicot 1
        What does it have to do with the UN peacekeeping contingent and its Russian component (in other words, the immediate subject of the article)? ..

        ... Lavrov, Putin, Shoigu and Rogozin (the last two are completely undeserved) relate to the pluses on the marshal's epaulettes in this resource ..... you can also get the pluses by remembering “by mother” Serdyukov and Vasilyev, this is in the first category. ... Yeltsin and Gorbachev in the second .... higher category will be toilet humor about the Kiev junta and its leaders. such a resource has become .... less and less meets its name "military review"
      4. USSR 1971 17 October 2015 15: 29 New
        • 6
        • 0
        +6
        Despite the fact that participation in peacekeeping missions and other operations of the RF Armed Forces are carried out only after diplomatic work.
        20 years we were not in foreign policy, poverty flourished in the army, a bunch of cropped units with summer cottages, then Serdyukovsky theft and the incompetence of his bl.dyushnika. This is not the fault of soldiers and officers. From the 2008 of the year, from putting in place the u..kov who shot Tskhinval, the return to big politics began, and then it dawned on some that without a strong army this is impossible.
        Now there is no turning back.
        1. samarin1969 17 October 2015 15: 32 New
          • -5
          • 0
          -5
          "Now there is no turning back."
          Donetsk showed that there is ...
          1. German Titov 17 October 2015 16: 50 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            Go on an erotic journey along the route you know. Or am I "a little misunderstood" or do you think that we are sleeping and see "hug" Nenko?
          2. USSR 1971 17 October 2015 17: 46 New
            • 7
            • 0
            +7
            Donetsk showed no. Ilovaisk, Debaltseve and the fact that in Lugansk and Donetsk do not go with Bandera flags, shows that no. Nobody leaked anything, they’ve already explained a hundred times. And diplomatic work is in full swing. There is no complete victory in a couple of weeks and was not expected. Against us are "poleurops." So for a long time messing around.
          3. armata37 17 October 2015 19: 22 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Honestly, I do not understand those who write, in plain text or hinting that Russia merged the Donbass. Look at what's happening in the world, look at things a bit including strategic thinking or looking at a few moves ahead.
            1. samarin1969 17 October 2015 19: 45 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              I envy your "strategic thinking", I think primitively: the state of Ukraine is killing brutally speaking Russian militias, civilians. No economic benefits can be a reason not to sever diplomatic relations with Ukraine, to trade with it. I believe that ten civilians from Kramatorsk who died in the spring of 2014 are enough to defiantly not shake hands with Kuchma and Poroshenko.
            2. 34 region 18 October 2015 01: 08 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Armata37! If you think strategically, there should be no situations involving the use of UN forces. And so it turns out with one hand, kindle the flame, and extinguish with the other. The main firefighter first inflates the flame, and then with a generous hand finances the fire brigade. After all, US financial revenues to the UN seem to be the largest.
        2. mihasik
          mihasik 17 October 2015 17: 04 New
          • 5
          • 0
          +5
          Quote: USSR 1971
          Tskhinval, the return to big politics began, and then it dawned on some that without a strong army this is impossible.
          Now there is no turning back.

          I'm afraid to disappoint, there is easy. Serdyukov and Co. already forgotten? Was it a long time ago?
          Open your eyes, we have no monolithic power, everything rests on Putin’s manual control. Unfortunately, Putin will not become what will happen to the country, unfortunately.
          If again there will be a swan, cancer and pike, not only the Army, but also the country will be destroyed at a time.
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. Ural resident 17 October 2015 20: 29 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            therefore, all sorts of NGOs are trying to dump Putin
        3. Vladimir 70 17 October 2015 19: 46 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          ... For 20 years we have not been in foreign policy, poverty thrived in the army, a bunch of cropped units with summer cottages, then Serdyukovsky theft and the incompetence of his bl.dyushnika ....
          Serdyukov (I in no way praise him) was needed. He did his job. Well, Shoigu could not, with all his desire, build the Army that Russia now has in a year.
          1. USSR 1971 17 October 2015 22: 55 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            Yes, Serdyukov was not needed, but a person competent in the economic component of the RF Ministry of Defense. And they got Vasiliev, Slavyanka, dispersal of military universities, etc. Under Serdyukov, I still served, I remember how my soldiers stopped feeding normally and linen was transported to the neighboring region, because outsourcing. As a medical unit was reduced. As a barracks on paper repaired. How Slavyanka barracks housing fund literally killed, no worse than artillery. Thieves are filthy. Maybe everyone in the newspapers and TV thinks of an “effective manager”, I have a different opinion, I did not serve in the headquarters, but in the troops. Of course not Shoigu alone built, and build and build more. But we will remember the furniture minister for a long time. Until now, money has been spent from the budget on restoring what he has reduced. So what the hell was he for? Not understood.
            1. 34 region 18 October 2015 01: 19 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              USSR 1971! What the hell are Serdyukov for? The question is of course interesting. But maybe this is our Holocaust? Such an example, to which liberalism leads. As we do not need to do in Russia. What will happen next I do not know. But business and the army seem to be incompatible. Or am I already falling into insanity? But discussions about the benefits or harms of Serdyukov are not yet visible. Either the topic is uninteresting or Serdyukov has no defenders.
              1. USSR 1971 18 October 2015 01: 58 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Yes, for God's sake, I just wrote my opinion, I do not care if this topic is popular or not. God willing - the army will no longer have such a minister. I will not change my opinion about him. Sorry not to sit.
    2. MIKHAN 17 October 2015 14: 09 New
      • 7
      • 0
      +7
      Quote: oleg-gr
      In my opinion S.V. Lavrov is the best foreign minister since A.A. Gromyko.

      Gromyko, as he was called (in the West), Mr. NO! And the West understood this clearly ...
      1. venaya 17 October 2015 14: 16 New
        • 7
        • 0
        +7
        Quote: MIKHAN
        Gromyko, as Mr. NO called him!

        And Lavrov is no worse, Gromyko (Stalin’s school) had a tough dialogue, Lavrov is more flexible and diverse, you can compare, but the differences are great.
        1. Boa kaa 17 October 2015 17: 45 New
          • 8
          • 0
          +8
          Quote: venaya
          Lavrov is more flexible and diverse, you can compare, but the differences are great.
          Lavrov is a great diplomat, a recognized authority on the international stage. BUT! I do not agree with his statement:
          Russia is significantly behind the world community in the field of peacemaking both in theory and in practice.
          First, then it was not Russia, but the USSR.
          Secondly, it is the USSR on practice showed the whole world what "peacekeeping operation" means forcing Hitler Germany to peace!
          Then there were North Korea, Vietnam. Or recall 1956, when, according to the statement of the Soviet government, aggression against Egypt stopped in one day.
          So, we never scattered our people, remembering that where they shoot, there will always be victims. Apparently, therefore, they did not sign the peace convention so desired by the West now. And the thing is not that we can’t, the fact is that we don’t want to! under the mandate of a de facto US controlled United Nations, send their guys to the CHAD or Eritrea under the bullets of separatist extremists. We are better under the mandate of the CIS (SCO, CSTO) will deal with our corner of the planet and put it in order at our discretion, and not at the direction of Uncle Sam, who comfortably settled behind the UN screen!
          Something like that, in general. hi
          1. 34 region 18 October 2015 01: 24 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Boa KAA! And what? Sound in general thought. Hitler was forced to peace. The US forced peace in Korea, Vietnam and Cuba. The comment is definitely a plus!
        2. mihasik
          mihasik 17 October 2015 18: 35 New
          • 7
          • 0
          +7
          Quote: venaya
          Yes, and Lavrov is no worse, Gromyko (Stalin's school) had a tough dialogue, Lavrov is more flexible and diverse, you can compare, but the differences are great

          I would say that Lavrov is even better than Gromyko. Lavrov does not have behind him the strength and power that the USSR had. Gromyko skillfully used this power of the USSR. Lavrov has to work in more unfavorable conditions for our country, however, the successes of our Foreign Ministry on the face of Obama).
      2. wk
        wk 17 October 2015 14: 53 New
        • -10
        • 0
        -10
        Quote: MIKHAN
        Gromyko, as he was called (in the West), Mr. NO! And the West understood this clearly ...

        Mr. NET Gromyko was called because he always had a 38-gauge Colt conditionally in his pocket, while Lavrov, unfortunately, was a freak and self-gunner .... remember the good word and Colt?
        1. 34 region 18 October 2015 01: 26 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          VC! Understand. A good hit on the liver replaces four hours of intimate conversation. Oh! We should get to this liver! bully
    3. moskowit 17 October 2015 15: 42 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      In my opinion too. So what?
    4. varov14 17 October 2015 16: 37 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      I don’t know, I still understand - blue berets, create the world on an intellectual basis, but blue helmets. It’s like, some people are preparing terrorists all over the world, and then they are urging us to wipe the crap.
    5. SibSlavRus 17 October 2015 16: 48 New
      • 10
      • 0
      +10
      "... It is a pity that instead of developing and increasing success, the participation of our blue helmets in UN peacekeeping operations began to decline sharply and came to naught."

      The author, however, expresses herself very diplomatically with regard to the treacherous "Yeltsin-Kozyrev diplomacy" (who are interested can find out where this (many swear words) hangs around (again, a lot of swear words)).
      As a direct participant in peacekeeping operations in Former Yugoslavia, Bosnia (not only within the UN (UN PROFOR), but also under the auspices of NATO (IFOR, SFOR, KFOR), this is probably why the author does not mention this moment of the peacekeeping mission, which replaced the legally incompetent and asking the UN (supposedly), which paved the way for the Balkans and gave a new "life" format to NATO), although that is why we were part of the NATO group "North", to maintain and control the Anglo-Saxon ghouls), I can confirm that we had success, but how did the units withdraw (which the Serbs really didn’t want, but on the contrary were ready to provide us with entire military bases for deployment), then the Yankees took off (there were several large bases in Bosnia alone, and the largest in Europe - in Kosovo).
      If you are particularly interested, I recommend that you see the footage of the Russian peacekeepers entering both in 1992 in Bosnia and in 1999 in Kosovo. Read the works of volunteers (O. Valetsky), mission participants (historian-balkanologist E. Guskova), and contemporaries. Very interesting. After all, it was precisely from those moments that the current problems of a global nature began!When Russia, with its comprador and cosmopolitan leadership, began to lose Central and Eastern Europe. But the vacuum of power is quickly replaced. As a result, we will conquer what we have incompetently lost. Fortunately, the Balkans are waiting for Russia, whatever and how it would not be presented to us through the media.

      And I want to repeat again that the Serbs were beaten by the NATO crowd after the bloody dismemberment of the Former Yugoslavia, S. Milosevic and his team were removed through the color revolution, and accordingly, what conclusions about the current government should be made there?
      It’s not worth it once again (as is sometimes the case here on the forum) to blame the Serbs for betrayal, because when it was especially difficult for them (especially the Krainsky and Bosnian Serbs, then Greater Serbia), then Russia, in the person of Yeltsin-Kozyrev’s diplomacy, was the first to surrender the Serbs to NATO , although finally after the withdrawal of our peacekeeping units. But the Serbs continued to believe and wait for Russia afterwards.
      Serbs have never been in the camp of traitors and will not, except for Russia they have nothing to associate with themselves. Serbs - Slavs - Orthodox! This is a complete analogue of Russian civilization - the enemy of the Anglo-Saxon civilization. And the whole Slavic world awaits only the beginning of the offensive of the Russian leader of the Slavs. They have no one else to hope for. Landmark Russia - Symbol of Strength and Faith.
      Russia must return to Central and Eastern Europe as the liberator of the Slavic world. This is one of the historical destinations of Russia - to be the Patron of the Slavic world and Serbia.
      1. 34 region 18 October 2015 01: 35 New
        • -1
        • 0
        -1
        Be the patron of the Slavic world !? But our outskirts? Something she does not very well run under the wing of the DNI, LC. And at the beginning of the events, their leadership did not really try to create a counterweight to Kiev in the form of Kharkov. Although ours did not double-hinted. Yes, there were isolated resistances. But after all, there were no masses. The outskirts do not run into the Slavic world. Alas.
        1. SibSlavRus 18 October 2015 05: 15 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          And it depends on what angle to look at a problematic issue, dear.
          The cradle of Russian civilization - Kievan Rus (remember: "where did the Russian land come from"?) - this is a single territorial, mental, ethno-confessional community. Russia knows that these are its integral territories!
          An unfortunate misunderstanding in the form of a pseudo-state entity Ukraine will be unambiguously eliminated. Remediation of the collective unconscious and conscious is already underway. And for this, it is not necessary to complicate everything with new blood and destruction.
          In the remaining territories of the future Novorossia, they know and understand that Russia will solve the problem.
          Russia has such an option - a global problem solver.
          Russia was very angry when they started hosting in its Ukraine.
          It does not reach the Western world through the head - it will come through the ass.
          Yes, in any country in the world, especially those obliged to Russia by their freedom and STATE, Russia, by default, is a symbol of Strength and Faith. In the subcortex of the brain.
          And the comprador and cosmopolitan governments of the countries and the cult of worshiping the dollar will be destroyed by the population itself, only Russia will indicate its presence.
          As an example, the organization of the people's fronts during World War II, which demolished the pro-German regimes.
          But the Slavic ethnos (gene pool), but to the delight of the Anglo-Saxons, and when the Slavs cut themselves again, is no longer needed.
          We will defeat everyone! But without the extra and valuable Slavic blood.
          It's time to bring the blood of the Anglo-Saxons and their Jewish helmsmen to the Slavic Gods.
    6. Zoldat_A 17 October 2015 18: 05 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: oleg-gr
      In my opinion S.V. Lavrov is the best foreign minister since A.A. Gromyko.

      I would say that he First Minister of Foreign Affairs since Gromyko. And with whom to compare - with A. Kozyrev? So it’s not the Minister of Foreign Affairs, it’s just the State Department’s six set for a deflection under the United States. Or with Primakov, who, with all due respect, was slightly involved in his own business? And Ivanov - in general, so, went to sit in an armchair ...

      But of course, in general, you are right - that, probably, should be the Minister of Foreign Affairs. The main skill and merit of a good foreign minister should be the same as Gromyko’s - the ability to say no. Lavrov knows how.
    7. akmalinin 17 October 2015 23: 56 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Better not to find
  2. MIKHAN 17 October 2015 14: 07 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Russia (USSR) created the UN and it remains for them!
    1. Eragon 17 October 2015 14: 15 New
      • 10
      • 0
      +10
      Quote: MIKHAN
      Russia (USSR) created the UN and it remains for them!

      Read the history of the UN when and by whom it was conceived and how the preparations for signing the Charter went. And do not write nonsense.
      1. Eragon 17 October 2015 14: 20 New
        • 11
        • 0
        +11
        In the Atlantic Charter US and UK from 14 of August to 1941 of the year to which a little later the Soviet Union also joined, a number of democratic principles of the future post-war system were defined: non-recognition of territorial changes that are not in harmony with the freely expressed desire of the peoples concerned; respect for the rights of all peoples to choose a form of government; restoration of the sovereignty of countries deprived of this by force; the destruction of "Nazi tyranny", the disarmament of states that threaten or may threaten aggression; equal access of all countries to trade and sources of raw materials; freedom of navigation. At the same time, military-political issues were circumvented in the charter.

        The term "United Nations" was first recorded in the United Nations Declaration, signed on 1 on January 1942 of the year by representatives of 26 fighting states along the axis. It contained the principles of the “Atlantic Charter” and the obligation not to conclude a separate peace with the aggressors.
        1. SibSlavRus 17 October 2015 17: 13 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          Eragon! Be generous and be tolerant, I ask you.
          MIKHAN meant that the USSR participated in the creation of the UN (which is why we are now in the Security Council, as the assignee of the Union).
          But the base and transformation of the proto-organization (albeit not viable) takes, nevertheless, a start from the League of Nations.
          The Atlantic Charter is not the UN Charter (1945). The goals and creation time are different, albeit the basis for writing texta The charter of the UN could be a charter.

          It was the UN Charter that was approved at the San Francisco Conference and signed on 26 on June 1945. According to any law, the beginning of the Charter is the beginning of the organization.
          Technically and legally MIKHAN is right!
          1. Eragon 17 October 2015 18: 00 New
            • 6
            • 0
            +6
            Quote: SibSlavRus
            It was the UN Charter that was approved at the San Francisco Conference and signed on 26 on June 1945. According to any law, the beginning of the Charter is the beginning of the organization.
            Technically and legally MIKHAN is right!

            What does tolerance have to do with it - ordinary historical accuracy. If we put them on the shelves, then briefly it looks like this:
            1. The initiative to create a new international organization to replace the League of Nations belongs to the USA and Great Britain (not the USSR).
            2. The United Nations Declaration (in other words, the protocol on the intention to create the UN) was signed by the USSR on equal terms with the other 25 participants during the Washington Conference.
            3. Each year, several countries joined the Declaration, most of all in 45.
            4. The final decision to create the UN was made at the Yalta Conference by Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchill 11.02.1945.
            5. In San Francisco, the USSR, along with 49 other countries, signed the UN Charter.
            6. 24 of October 1945 of the year is the Day of the UN: its Charter, ratified by the five permanent members of the Security Council and most of the other signatory states, has entered into force.

            To say at the same time that the USSR created the UN is at least incorrect. With equal success, this can be said at least about 26 countries. Moreover, the USA and Great Britain have more right to say so (see paragraph 1)

            Interesting Facts:
            - 3 participants were invited - USSR, BSSR and, oddly enough, Argentina, which supported the Nazis.
            - Poland did not want to be accepted among the founders of the UN and was not even allowed to attend a conference in San Francisco, but the USSR insisted and Poland signed the UN Charter separately from other countries.
            1. SibSlavRus 17 October 2015 19: 07 New
              • 5
              • 0
              +5
              Great educational program, Eragon! good
              It is just right that TopWar is more fully recognized as an educational resource, and not just as news. laughing If you don’t exactly comment, then forum users will add to the level of a fully-detailed answer.
              Clear, concise, informative and concise, with links to the source.
            2. 34 region 18 October 2015 01: 51 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              And how does Poland feel about its signature today? Soviet dictatorship? Doesn’t want to leave the UN?
        2. 34 region 18 October 2015 01: 47 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Eragon! Pancake! Respect for the rights of all peoples to choose a form of government. Equal access of all countries to trade and sources of raw materials. In the light of recent events, such principles are directly scary.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. MIKHAN 17 October 2015 14: 24 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Eragon
        Quote: MIKHAN
        Russia (USSR) created the UN and it remains for them!

        Read the history of the UN when and by whom it was conceived and how the preparations for signing the Charter went. And do not write nonsense.

        I don’t know how the preparations for signing went .. And the essence of the organization after the Second World War gave the idea to end the world wars! We had huge losses and we did not need new wars ..! This is the function of the UN was created and it acted! Now it’s gone .. but Russia is trying to restore all this ... How can we!
        1. Bayonet 17 October 2015 16: 14 New
          • 8
          • 0
          +8
          Quote: MIKHAN
          .A essence of the organization after the Second World War gave the idea

          Meehan! Stop talking about the USSR in the third person - “IT”! USSR - OH !!! And it is shit! request
    2. 34 region 18 October 2015 01: 41 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Before the UN was the League of Nations. And they didn’t wait for us with pies. The League and the UN are a prototype of world government. Where is Karabas Barabas is the main one, and all the other dolls. Therefore, the USSR (Russia) is there like a bone in the throat.
  3. samarin1969 17 October 2015 14: 18 New
    • 14
    • 0
    +14
    "Since 1991, Russia's participation in peacekeeping operations has intensified." ...--- in translation into Russian from obscene "why?" Listen to the covenants of the Great Russian Tsar!
    1. marlin1203 17 October 2015 15: 34 New
      • 9
      • 0
      +9
      And why then were thousands of our soldiers killed there? Under Plevna, but on Shipka? And these "brothers" in both world wars were against us, and now they don’t pass humanitarian supplies and threw them along the South Stream. Bad guys one word. am
      1. samarin1969 17 October 2015 15: 38 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        "why then were thousands of our soldiers killed?"

        It was under Alexander the Liberator II ...
    2. veksha50 17 October 2015 15: 36 New
      • 14
      • 0
      +14
      Quote: samarin1969
      "Since 1991, Russia's participation in peacekeeping operations has intensified." ...--- in translation into Russian from obscene "why?" Listen to the covenants of the Great Russian Tsar!



      I was thinking ... Sergey Lavrov I really respect, but he argues - why Russia is not in the list of peacekeepers, and Bangladesh is among the first ... And he does not find understanding in the Defense Ministry, or, obviously, Putin. ..

      It seems to me that Putin does not want our units and people to carry out delusional orders-orders at the direction of the UN ...

      As an example, I’ll cite last year’s case ... Ukraine is an enemy to us (at least, its leadership announces daily) ... However, due to the fact that Russia is a member of different WTOs and the IMF, it was a mockery last year that part tranche provided by IMF Urkaine paid by Russia !!! From your pocket !!! Because such rules !!! And he can’t get his three lard, and even Yaytsenyuh is going to sue three trillion wrappers!

      Therefore ... maybe indeed - well, they are in figs ... When it will be necessary, when it is pressed - our troops without any UN resolutions will find themselves where necessary ...
      1. Vladimirets 17 October 2015 17: 10 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        Quote: veksha50
        Therefore ... maybe indeed - well them in figs ...

        I also think so, the existing international institutions are highly discredited, and our soldiers are shoved under their banners. no
    3. Sergey S. 17 October 2015 17: 04 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: samarin1969
      "Since 1991, Russia's participation in peacekeeping operations has intensified." ...--- in translation into Russian from obscene "why?" Listen to the covenants of the Great Russian Tsar!


      For whom is great ...
      But ...
      Great similar quotes do not multiply.
      In terms of meaning, it turns out, and Gorbachev correctly passed everything everywhere?

      The policy of Alexander III, with complete peacefulness, allowed a sharp weakening of Russia's position at the international level.
      The result of this policy went to his son - the revolution and the collapse of the country.

      To be clear:
      Literally on the eve of World War I, our newspapers wrote: "... we won’t give our sons to cannon fodder ..."

      Junior officers sometimes received less salary than a skilled worker ...

      This army did not fight for a long time, did not want to fight, and in the end did not fight.

      Incredible upheavals were required to shake off indifference to military service and to duty to the motherland.

      And do not remember Kolchak.
      Exceptions only confirm the rules. But his fate is a great example of hatred of the people, soldiers and sailors for officers of that time, especially when they called for fighting to the end.

      Unfortunately, now all the kings are praised indiscriminately.
      This unscrupulousness will not bring to good.
      You need to know the real story and understand that ignorance of history leads to the defeat of the nation.

      And then there was a nuclear submarine named Alexander III ...
      Unlucky ship.
  4. iliitchitch 17 October 2015 14: 19 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: oleg-gr
    .


    Yes, this is the student of Andrei Andreevich! The rattle of honor from the Internet community is Bulldog. Kerry clings to the throat and kirdyk that Kerry. If this is not a victory, then which one?
  5. Vladimir 1964 17 October 2015 14: 25 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Dear colleagues, what is common between the Minister of Foreign Affairs and this article? Or did someone seriously decide that it was written by the minister? fellow hi
  6. MIKHAN 17 October 2015 14: 26 New
    • 27
    • 0
    +27
    Yes, they all went ... hi
    I am not a fan of Stalin, but he is right nevertheless!
  7. boroda64 17 October 2015 15: 06 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    ......
    when for a diplomat
    - the army is worth .....
    1. MIKHAN 17 October 2015 15: 22 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: boroda64
      ......
      when for a diplomat
      - the army is worth .....

      Gauges in the Caspian! This is only a minimum .... hi Immediately everyone begins to understand everything .. paddle!
      1. samarin1969 17 October 2015 15: 36 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        "Gauges in the Caspian! This is only a minimum .... hi Immediately everyone begins to understand everything .. paddle!

        PARTIES !!!
      2. Frigate 17 October 2015 16: 00 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: MIKHAN

        Gauges in the Caspian! This is only a minimum .... hi Immediately everyone begins to understand everything .. paddle!

        They don’t understand yet. Another chipyzha "navel of land with pais." Now, if they had cleared Syria’s sky of their planes, then yes, and so in the faces they personally, until they got it, then they would continue on.
    2. Boa kaa 17 October 2015 18: 14 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: boroda64
      when for a diplomat
      - the army is worth .....
      Then the forces of evil are powerless!
  8. Mountain shooter 17 October 2015 15: 28 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    To act in all directions. It will be advantageous to wear blue helmets - to wear, by observers - bystanders. This is called an initiative. And she in any fight is the key to success. Or someone else doubts that the fight did not stop. As in the old popular series - there will be only one. Everyone plays against everyone, sometimes uniting against someone. It is good that the GDP and his team are playing for ours now. Looking back at the time of EBN, you then become cold covered. In front of the amazed people, they were tearing the country, in a drunken stupor merging everything that you can imagine. How rich and abundant our country is that after so many years of natural robbery everyone has returned, and something has been added.
    1. Bayonet 17 October 2015 16: 17 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      In front of the amazed people, they tanned the country,

      But didn’t the people take to the streets?
      1. Boa kaa 17 October 2015 18: 37 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: Bayonet
        But didn’t the people take to the streets?

        Real violent few
        here and there are no leaders ... (c)

        The CPSU defamed everyone and sundry ... But nobody wanted to repeat the fate of General Rokhlin ... The top lived for herself, wanting to enrich herself by any means ...
        * Komsomol members * liquidly managed, having muddied the GKChP ... they got drunk with horror ... and merged the few who went after them ...
        * Tagged * was an agent of influence of the United States, at the post of Secretary General and the first "pizydent" doomed to slaughter the country ...
        So where did * the poor peasant * go?
        And you, brother, like any Russian, are strong in the back mind! Previously, why didn’t you ask such questions? Why didn’t he take to the streets himself?
        This is it!
        1. Bayonet 17 October 2015 18: 58 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: BoA KAA
          And you, brother, like any Russian, are strong in the back mind! Previously, why didn’t you ask such questions?

          That's how much I hear nagging about how they ruined, so many naggers and ask this question. Nobody came out because the “amazed people” (as it was written in the commentary) did not just look at how “they pulled the country,” he generally had it all because hell. Many themselves actively joined in this business - who sold and who robbed sellers. But now they begin to cry! You should not talk about the "back mind".
          Quote: BoA KAA
          The CPSU defamed everyone and sundry ..

          It was for what! Here our party organizer at the meetings pushed slogans, and after the same thumped and told jokes about the "leaders". Everything was rotten, complete ostentatiousness and duplicity ...
      2. velikoros-xnumx 18 October 2015 06: 12 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Bayonet
        Quote: Mountain Shooter
        In front of the amazed people, they tanned the country,

        But didn’t the people take to the streets?

        He also told his father when he recalled the Union at the next feast, about how good it was and how bad it is now. Where were you, where were you when you were cherishing the Motherland? In the kitchen under a glass, he discussed what would happen next. And this despite the fact that from about 89-90, a portrait of E.B.N. hung in his father’s office When reminded of this, his father was always very nervous, justifying himself with words like - "you know what words he spoke correctly ...".
        I always reminded him that my conscience and the conscience of my generation are clear before the story on this subject due to minority at the time of the collapse.
    2. Boa kaa 17 October 2015 18: 24 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      In front of the amazed people, they were tearing the country, in a drunken stupor merging everything that you can imagine.

      On the national composition of the parasites-robbers / aliens with dual citizenship did not bother to look? What, there was no leisure?
      And EFN ... he chose a "glass" more so that he could last for a long time and was pleased with that.
      1. Bayonet 17 October 2015 19: 02 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: BoA KAA
        On the national composition of the parasites-robbers / aliens with dual citizenship did not bother to look?

        I don’t evaluate people by nationality, there is enough shit everywhere. Moreover, there is no such nationality - the "burglar parasite" hi
  9. neznakomez 17 October 2015 16: 08 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    If you want peace, get ready for war! An interesting article about the army of Switzerland: http://warfiles.ru/show-97777-dazhe-gitler-ne-osmelilsya-napast-na-eto-gosudarst
    vo.html
    1. strannik1985 17 October 2015 22: 06 New
      • -1
      • 0
      -1
      A good PR article, nothing more.
  10. Const 17 October 2015 16: 44 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Thanks to the author for the article. In fact, the article is about nothing. Russia pays for its participation in UN CJSC, and also expels peacekeepers at its own expense somewhere. Maybe her, this UN? There is zero sense from him, only for the media a source of material.
  11. Olezhek 17 October 2015 16: 44 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    On 31 August 2015, Russia ranks the overall 75 in terms of the number of contingents supplied, taking into account the military contingent for peacekeeping forces, military observers and police officers. For comparison, it would be appropriate to say that Bangladesh ranks first, which, in 2015, allocated a total of 9432 military personnel to participate in UN peacekeeping operations. At the same time, the United States singled out 82 military personnel, Great Britain 289, France 909, China 3079, and Ukraine 546 military.


    In whose interests are these same "contingents" operating today? What is their "international"?
    Should we chase the megaderage Bangladesh? Maybe they have nothing to feed the soldiers at home (as the Ukrainians).
    And yes - we in Syria did more to fight terrorism than the whole West.
  12. bashkort 17 October 2015 17: 16 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The UN in its present form has become obsolete, therefore, the contingents acting under its auspices, on its behalf, are becoming ineffective. But this does not have to mean that Russia will not continue to contain any number of troops in this structure, it’s another matter that international practice shows that there are mechanisms other than the UN to intervene in regional conflicts. A vivid confirmation of this is the action of our VKS in Syria with a mandate from the legitimate Syrian government. And the United States and its hangers-on for the past 20 years have not even bothered, in fact, even with the appearance of the legitimacy of their actions in one or another sovereign country. As for the “blue helmets,” if there had been a contingent in Transnistria from some European country, not Russia, then there would have been massacre and destruction worse than Donbass and Kosovo. That is, scumbags of various stripes are afraid not of the ephemeral condemnation of the UN, but of a specific force, for example, our country.
  13. AIR-ZNAK 17 October 2015 17: 22 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Budget expenditures go to the CSTO Not a few. We still have a mission in Transdniestria and the Caucasus. Sorry, but I do not like it when UTair drops the helicopter crews irretrievably !!! in Africa, while fulfilling the tasks of UN peacekeeping operations, Ura-patriots may be enough to earn epaulettes of marshals on the blood of our victims, who were conceived and carried out in these operations with the knowledge and instigation of Vashigt UNA? Are there national interests and they imply a prudent attitude towards their people and budget
  14. iliitchitch 17 October 2015 17: 49 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: Chicot 1
    Quote: oleg-gr
    In my opinion S.V. Lavrov is the best foreign minister since A.A. Gromyko.

    And I hope not the last best foreign minister, but ... What does it have to do with the UN peacekeeping contingent and its Russian component (to put it directly to the topic of the article)? ..


    Peacekeeping in Russia is a cross ... Under Alexander Nevsky, it began. Since then we continue - villains climb and climb. UN to Moscow, Ban Ki-moon on the ruble register. Third Rome will not be, you say? To be, still to be.
  15. iliitchitch 17 October 2015 18: 19 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: oleg-gr
    In my opinion S.V. Lavrov is the best foreign minister since A.A. Gromyko.

    90s experience. Simply speaking, you come to all the groomsmen with a smooth-bore 12 gauge, and questions are quickly resolved. No rifled, we are not animals ...
  16. ssn18 17 October 2015 21: 42 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    To put it mildly, an odd little article. One gets the impression that in the UN peacekeepers only the Ministry of Internal Affairs. But the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation and, in particular, the Airborne Forces, as it were, and not at work? Honestly, the policy of laundering the appearance of the Ministry of Internal Affairs has already gotten. These series: Cops, Streets of broken lanterns, Cop wars, etc. Already climbed here. IMHO: You can’t wash a black dog to white. The reform of the Ministry of Internal Affairs is a dummy. Who was a man in the system of the Ministry of Internal Affairs remained one of them, but unfortunately such a minority.
    I consider the presence of three women among peacekeepers a slap in the face for men. War has no female face!
  17. Michael easily 17 October 2015 22: 03 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    There are no alternatives to the UN !!! The basis for providing a legitimate, sensible reaction in the current situation must be recognized as a sincere offer to the understanding of INTERACTION ...
    1. iliitchitch 18 October 2015 02: 41 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Your words would ...
  18. v.yegorov 17 October 2015 22: 52 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The best participation of Russian peacekeepers in peacekeeping operations is to have a couple of aircraft carriers
    near the zone of conflict and the opportunity to give p ... lei to the opposing parties. All
    the rest is just a concussion. The separation of the opposing blue helmets has never led to a normal result, at best to a smoldering confrontation, and only under the threat of the use of force. Examples are Kosovo,
    Ossetia, etc., where all the advantages were received by the slander, having behind the back of a large uncle with a big club.
  19. Zomanus 18 October 2015 01: 53 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Yes, Russia already has enough threats on its borders without this.
    We also have a dofig of peacekeepers in the former republics of the Union, the same CSTO. Abkhazia, Transnistria there too.
    And there are simply no people left on monkeys.
    And then, to fulfill someone’s whims, covering up with everyone ...
    I do not want this.
  20. bashmak 18 October 2015 05: 19 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: mihasik
    Quote: venaya
    Yes, and Lavrov is no worse, Gromyko (Stalin's school) had a tough dialogue, Lavrov is more flexible and diverse, you can compare, but the differences are great

    I would say that Lavrov is even better than Gromyko. Lavrov does not have behind him the strength and power that the USSR had. Gromyko skillfully used this power of the USSR. Lavrov has to work in more unfavorable conditions for our country, however, the successes of our Foreign Ministry on the face of Obama).

    I do not agree! Lavrov has the same people behind him! power is not in weapons, in people! And fortunately, there are still Russian people! But Lavrov well done!