Military Review

The State Duma is again not ready to make "wild geese" home

146
Last Thursday, an event took place in the State Duma, about which no information appeared on the official website of the Russian parliament. Here, in the format of a round table, a discussion of the draft law “On Private Military Security Activities” was held. In December, Gennady Nosovko, a deputy from the Fair Russia party faction, introduced him to the State Duma. Now the deputies, experts interested in the law of the person are involved in the discussion of the norms contained in the specified project.


The State Duma is again not ready to make "wild geese" home


Lobbyists of private military companies went on the fifth attempt

Apparently, the State Duma apparatus considered the event unworthy of public attention, because the information on the discussion of the draft law appeared only on the official website of spravorossov. This attitude of the Duma members to the new initiative of the deputy Nosovko is explained by the fact that this is already the fifth attempt to legislate private military companies (PMCs) in Russia. The first four failed at the stage of the so-called zero reading.

According to experts, the failures of the bills are largely due to the fact that the topic of private military companies in the eyes of the public is directly associated with hired military activities. Many deservedly consider it unacceptable. There is even an 359 article “Mercenary” in the Russian Criminal Code. It provides for punishment (imprisonment for a term of four to eight years) for recruitment, training, financing or material support of a mercenary. For illegal military activities will be punished no less seriously.

There is nothing surprising here. In the Russian mentality, mercenaries have always been a threat to the world and humanity. At best, they were called "wild geese", and not at all "soldiers of fortune," as they formed the image of this public in Western countries.

It all began in the sixties of the last century, when British Colonel David Stirling created the first private military company Watchguard International (WI). She worked for the Allied British governments and international organizations, carried out "delicate operations", the participation in which the military personnel of the state itself could have undesirable political or economic consequences.

David Stirling created several private military companies. There was, for example, another Kilo Alpha Service. She fought poachers in South Africa on a contract with the International Wildlife Federation. Along the way, she trained armies of warring political forces (ANC and Inkata). As they say, nothing personal - only business.

This business has grown across countries and continents and has almost become legal. According to experts, already in the 90-e years PMCs trained troops in 42 countries and took part in more than 700 conflicts. In the new century, the expense of private military armies exceeded one hundred. They say that they already have more than a million (some authors call the figure of five million) employees, and the turnover of the business has exceeded 350 billion US dollars.

The Economist calls a more modest figure - over $ 100 billion. However, even the low-key assessment of British economists puts the PMCs above the gross domestic product of dozens of states - about a 60 place in the world economic rating. For example, it is higher than Azerbaijan, Belarus, and other countries of the post-Soviet space close to us (in this list, only Kazakhstan and Ukraine have better indicators than PMCs).

Hence the interest of Russian business in private military activities. According to observers, retired generals and oligarchs are lobbying for it. Their efforts have not yielded any meaningful results. Initially, having directly designated the purposes of the PMCs in the draft law “On Private Military Security Companies”, they faced legal casuistry — in the Russian Civil Code legal entities are classified as commercial and non-profit organizations, but not companies. I had to adapt. The options “On State Regulation of the Establishment and Activity of Private Military Companies”, “On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation” have appeared. But they also found a discrepancy with the norms of Russian legislation.

High government officials joined the topic. In 2012, at the retreat in Tula of the Military-Industrial Commission (MIC), Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Government, Dmitry Rogozin, said (I quote from RIA News): “Today we are considering the issue of the formation of an interdepartmental working group on the problem of creating private military companies in Russia. The group’s task will be to prepare (taking into account the monitoring of private security initiatives of the private sector, as well as the state of the main trends of the world private services market) for the feasibility of creating private military companies in Russia.

Dmitry Rogozin will return to this topic more than once. But lawmakers will support him only in 2014. The LDPR faction of the Pskov Regional Assembly of Deputies will do this. She will develop the project “On Private Military Companies”. Franz Klintsevich, who was the deputy chairman of the Duma’s defense committee at that time, actively protested that it was not the competence of the regional deputies, that the draft law should be drafted by the Ministry of Defense and the State Duma deputies.

In the autumn of 2014, the new version of the PMC bill was introduced by the already-mentioned spravoross deputy Gennady Nosovko. The idea was once again unpromising and did not even reach the first reading.

PMCs on the protection of national interests?

Now on the table are Duma members a new version of the law, which is intended to legally regulate the activities of private military companies in the Russian legal field. After all, now it is prohibited in our country. Few PMCs operate within the framework of the law “On private detective and security activities in the Russian Federation”. He, however, seriously limits the capabilities and appetites of companies.

Opening the discussion, MP Gennady Nosovko said: “The previous version of the bill did not find understanding and support, so my colleagues and I took it up. Now it turned out almost a new bill. ”

The discussion in the Duma showed that the Russian mentality has not changed over the year. Experts believe that the state will no longer transfer powers in the sphere of defense and security into the hands of private entities. This is how Igor Korotchenko, editor-in-chief of National Defense magazine, declared this to NSN: “If such organizations were needed, they would have already been created. From the point of view of performing functions related to defense, security, and training of military personnel, all these questions remain in the jurisdiction of the state. There will be no delegation of authority in this area to anyone. ”

Igor Korotchenko allowed the use of PMCs abroad, but for strictly limited tasks. “They would be appropriate to protect the areas of gas and oil production of those large Russian companies that work abroad. To ensure, for example, the protection of ships while passing in those areas where sea pirates are operating. ” A similar opinion was expressed by Vladimir Putin when he was prime minister.

Business representatives see their goals a little differently. Thus, Oleg Krinitsyn, general director of RSB-Group (positioning himself as a “Private Military Consulting Company”) who spoke at the discussion of the draft law, stated that the main purpose of the new law should be regulation of PMC activities as “a fine instrument of the state for use in those regions where it is not always advisable to use regular troops. ” (Hello to British Colonel Stirling!)

Oleg Krinitsyna was supported by State Duma deputy Maxim Shingarkin: “We all understand what lies at the heart of such a law, and we must honestly say that if we set the task of legitimizing the actions of citizens of the Russian Federation on the territory of third countries, including in the context of warfare then we must by this or another law provide for the right of citizens of the Russian Federation to carry out such actions in the interests of protecting themselves, their relatives, the interests of third parties including in the absence of any organized process in the form of security organizations.

The thought of the deputy Shingarkin, even if expressed not very wisely and elegantly, was developed by Valery Shestakov, one of the developers of the draft law, an expert of the Duma security committee. He sees the commercial activities of PMCs (the word “commercial” Shestakov emphasized), aimed at “implementing the plans of the Russian state to protect its national interests.” That's it - no more and no less.

All these throwings between commercial and national interests indicate that the developers of the law today are closer to the appetites of business than to public goals. Attempts, as one witty put it, to make “wild geese” homemade, say only that, as before, the legislators have no understanding, what is the public request for PMCs? And is there one? This is reflected even in the details of the bill. In particular, the licensing of PMCs is to be transferred in some cases to the Ministry of Industry and Trade, in others - to the Ministry of Defense, and in the third - to the FSB. The range is from routine trade in services to hotel and military planning. The customers of the alleged services of private military companies are equally uncertain in the text. Not surprisingly, the discussion of the draft law has given birth to more disputes than consent, and the prospects for its reading in the Duma have become very vague.

Meanwhile, the number of private military companies in the world is increasing. Experts attribute this to the growth of private capital independence. Others speak even more precisely, - about the power support of the goals of transnational corporations. Does Russian business need such support? It seems that without a clear answer to this question one can hardly count on serious commercial prospects for Russian PMCs and legislative support for their activities ...
Author:
146 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Zoldat_A
    Zoldat_A 1 February 2016 06: 38
    22
    Here we have only PMCs not enough ... In the 90s, they did not make war in a private way? negative

    Apart from the oligarchs' personal armies, recruited from the "torpedoes" not shot in the 90s, nothing good will come of it. There is the Armed Forces - and they would be engaged. And then PMCs, then the FRS (when private traders start printing money), and then an open tender for the post of President of the Russian Federation ...

    And, to be honest, I've met these "geese" a couple of times. Come to visit, sit, "sew" to wave - they are good, cleanup where there is nothing to clean - is also possible. And how seriously it smells of burnt skin - well, they are in FIG, this money, the skin is more expensive. They are not fighters. Thugs ...
    1. Glot
      Glot 1 February 2016 06: 44
      +5
      Here we have only PMCs not enough ... In the 90s, they did not make war in a private way?


      Yes, we already have them. request
      1. vladimirZ
        vladimirZ 1 February 2016 08: 53
        +5
        PMCs as a "thin state tool for use in those regions where it is not always advisable to use regular troops" is needed.

        And in this area of ​​interaction between states, Russia is late, and accordingly loses.
        From this point of application of PMCs, the law should be adopted, where it is necessary to provide for the social and legal protection of its participants. And URGENTLY!
        Why use your military forces, substituting the state, where you can use a more "subtle instrument" - PMCs.
        The areas of application of such PMCs are now needed to protect the interests of Russia and the Russians in Novorossia, Transnistria, Central Asia, the airborne forces in Syria, and other places where regular troops cannot or are inexpedient.
        1. nerd.su
          nerd.su 1 February 2016 11: 20
          11
          Quote: vladimirZ
          Already needed to protect the interests of Russia and the Russians in Novorossiya, Transnistria, Central Asia, the airborne forces in Syria, and other places where it is impossible or inexpedient to use regular troops.

          In Transnistria and Central Asia can not use regular troops? Or impractical?

          How will the use of Russian PMCs (registered with us and obliged to obey Russian laws) in Novorossia differ from the use of regular troops there? Can it be read as the question "private military companies have the right to interfere in the internal affairs of another state, in contrast to the regular army"?

          And what. Is the regular army unable to protect our air forces in Syria? So maybe she already can’t defend Russia?
          1. Nehist
            Nehist 1 February 2016 13: 03
            +5
            The use of regular troops is often associated with international acts! A PMC in this regard is easier! And not one PMC is not independent! They are all controlled by the state.
            1. nerd.su
              nerd.su 1 February 2016 14: 15
              +9
              Quote: Nehist
              And not one PMC is not independent! They are all controlled by the state.

              And only we Russians know about it. Of course, no one will demand from Russia to stop interfering in the affairs of another state and will not impose sanctions on us if our PMCs controlled by the state operate in New Russia.
              What are some teenage arguments.
            2. fennekRUS
              fennekRUS 2 February 2016 00: 47
              +1
              Quote: Nehist
              And not one PMC is not independent! They are all controlled by the state.

              Tell me frankly, officials are trying to "regulate" a dangerous area for themselves. Here are just the very concept of PMCs means, "whoever eats a girl, he dances her"
              The essence is the power protection of the next financial flow, which you don't want to expose publicly. And how many "funny" things in the hands of "free contractors" Others even had to change the "flag" several times, it turned out to be painfully difficult to "wash"
        2. Nehist
          Nehist 1 February 2016 13: 00
          +1
          I completely agree with your comment! Competently and carefully
        3. self-propelled
          self-propelled 1 February 2016 22: 38
          +2
          Quote: vladimirZ
          PMCs as a "thin state tool for use in those regions where it is not always advisable to use regular troops" is needed.

          In this regard, I agree to all 100%.
          There are situations when the use of regular troops is inappropriate. yes and presence official forces are undesirable, but it is necessary to carry out the "party policy". in such cases, PMCs can be an effective tool for "removal of some tumors"... as I see it, there is an official policy (issues of which are resolved in the offices) and there is, so to speak, unofficial (issues of which are resolved in the battlefield). but they are united by one thing - the achievement of the assigned tasks. and to achieve the set tasks - any means are good. and PMCs are like this "scalpel"to remove problems that it is almost impossible to find a hand for their managers
          1. fennekRUS
            fennekRUS 2 February 2016 00: 49
            +2
            Quote: self-propelled
            There are situations when the use of regular troops is inappropriate

            And where did you hide the MTR? We have them
            1. self-propelled
              self-propelled 3 February 2016 12: 35
              0
              Quote: fennekRUS
              And where did you hide the MTR? We have them

              such a provocative question - in the Donbass forces of the MTR of the Russian Federation are used?
              and if there were PMCs there - such questions would not have arisen in principle (we don’t know. And who is fighting under the tricolor - such PMCs are the sea. Look (if you find)). what don't you say, but PMCs are a convenient tool for resolving "controversial issues"
        4. Old old
          Old old 2 February 2016 19: 58
          +3
          Why use your military forces, substituting the state, where you can use a more "subtle instrument" - PMCs.

          The "subtle instrument" of the state is the MTR, GRU General Staff and special services with motivation to implement and protect STATE interests.
          PMCs are a commercial structure, initially aimed and sharpened to receive PROFIT and do not care about the rest. "The one who pays orders the music."
      2. Aleksandr72
        Aleksandr72 1 February 2016 10: 23
        13
        Hence the interest of Russian business in private military activity. According to observers, retired generals and oligarchs are lobbying it. Their efforts did not give any meaningful result.

        Yeah, but only on the legal field. De facto, such private armies in Russia have existed for quite some time in the form of security services of the largest companies, which are often supplied with no worse (or even better) armies. Of course, the protection of the oil industry is not a solution to purely military tasks. However, what did American PMCs do in Iraq - exactly the same thing, and even acting absolutely outside the legal framework.
        Do we need PMCs? On the one hand, these are mercenaries, "wild geese", which for us has an unambiguously negative meaning. (at one time I had occasion to communicate with former Soviet officers from the Air Force, who, having remained no longer in their own country, were forced to fly in all sorts of African and Asian states, they bitterly called themselves mercenaries and did not feel either pride or pleasure from this). On the other hand, PMCs can be entrusted with something that you cannot entrust your own army, tk. it threatens to lose face and prestige (unacceptable for political or other reasons). Those. the same "delicate operations".
        But do not forget that PMCs are primarily a business, a private business (albeit a militarized one), and what modern Russian businessmen are capable of and ready for (especially "top flight" that is oligarchs) do not even want to think ...
        I have the honor.
        1. strannik1985
          strannik1985 1 February 2016 10: 51
          +9
          Alexander, with all due respect, but you confuse the concepts. The contractor is not a mercenary, the customer delegates certain powers to him under the contract, no more. This does not mean that a person must fulfill any whims of the customer and, especially, to commit a crime.
          You are absolutely right, this is a business, and for the vast majority of companies, the business is legal and you need to know a lot to get a profit.
          For example, the ship security team requires knowledge of the UN Convention on International Law, the International Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation and its Protocols, the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, including the International Code for the Protection of Ships and Port Facilities. Skills of behavior on a ship in the high seas, in emergency situations (considering different types of ships) are needed.
          Since the attitude to armed people on a civilian vessel is different, certain tactics are needed related to loading and unloading security personnel and their weapons when entering territorial waters. Need legal support and many more questions.
          Therefore, most often, they use the services of PMCs, and do not create their own.
          1. Nehist
            Nehist 1 February 2016 13: 07
            0
            And you have a sound comment! But your opinion is not clearly needed PMCs or not? In my opinion they are needed.
          2. Old old
            Old old 2 February 2016 21: 15
            +3
            The contractor is not a mercenary, the customer delegates certain powers to him under the contract, no more. This does not mean that a person must fulfill any whims of the customer and, especially, to commit a crime.

            Playing with terms (contractor, guard, mercenary, etc.) does not change the essence (such as "homosexual" and "homosexual"), which is quite accurately stated in Art. 359 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
            Under what law should the "contractor" operate: the law of his citizenship, the law of the country of registration of the PMC or the country of residence? A contract that is legal in one country may not be legal in another.
            About "not fulfilling any whims of the customer" see the actions of PMCs in South America, Africa, the Middle East. The villages that have been cut out, shot or, in extreme cases, driven from their land are the result of the actions of PMCs.
            And the "Academy" in Iraq "did not commit crimes" so much that even the Western media sang praises for it and had to urgently rebrand it to "Black Water". The whole history of PMCs is a way of legalizing mercenarism (as at one time England legalized piracy in the form of a corsair). There are plenty of examples of oligarchs taking control of entire regions with the help of PMCs in Ukraine.
            Our PMCs (owned by Russians) are already quite successfully coping with their tasks abroad - ensuring the safety of shipping, guarding the oil and gas infrastructure, and escorting goods.
            Without the multiplication of entities, it is enough to expand the powers of FSUE Okhrana and expand the range of weapons for operations outside the Russian Federation. And state control will remain and the interests of Russian enterprises can be protected more effectively.
            1. strannik1985
              strannik1985 3 February 2016 07: 19
              0
              Wrong. Russia is the same participant in international law as all other countries, especially since PMCs are not working on the territory of the Russian Federation, so take into account the provisions of the 1949 UN Convention on Mercenaries and the 1977 amendments to it.
              Wrong. "Akademi" was created and operates under the roof of the Pentagon, that is, the same instrument of the state as the rest of the special services. That before that, the American special services did not work on the territory of other states, especially those controlled by the United States to one degree or another?
              Will FSUE "Okhrana" handle this type of activity? It's not in Russia to press the administrative resource of private security companies, everything is more difficult.
        2. Nehist
          Nehist 1 February 2016 13: 05
          +1
          I agree with you in almost everything! Yes, business and, above all, business, but all PMCs are state-controlled in all countries where they exist
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. Aleksandr72
            Aleksandr72 1 February 2016 13: 46
            +9
            Let me explain my attitude towards PMCs: If in Russia private military companies will be controlled not just by the state, but by specific officials who are trustworthy (for example, Defense Minister General of the Army S.K. Shoigu) and will carry out activities in the interests of the state, then I am only for the creation and operation of such PMCs, which can be entrusted with something that the army should not be involved in, in order to avoid immediately emerging problems of a political or even ethical nature. For example, what prevents PMCs (which, of course, will include well-trained fighters, and not just security guards) "guard" "Objects of Russia's economic interests" in the same Syria. And it doesn't matter that PMC fighters will in fact hunt for Daesh terrorists - you can protect objects in different ways!
            But I'm afraid that in the current Russian realities, if PMCs are really "private", then these companies will in fact work only in the interests of their owners (employers - call it what you want), and the interests of the latter do not always coincide with the interests of the state and society ... Especially when it comes to oligarchs, i.e. those individuals who "can afford" the creation and financing of PMCs. This is the kind of PMC I had in mind when I spoke about "mercenaries."
            Of course, one can argue about legally clearly defining the scope of PMCs, so to speak, in order to avoid. But, as is well known in our country, "the severity of laws is more than compensated by their (laws) being not obligatory for execution."
            I have the honor.
            1. strannik1985
              strannik1985 1 February 2016 14: 01
              -4
              And the laws, law enforcement agencies we have what? Why should the interests of law-abiding citizens and companies suffer because of a desire to ban something?
        3. pv1005
          pv1005 1 February 2016 18: 14
          +1
          On the other hand, PMCs can be entrusted with something that you cannot entrust your own army, tk. it threatens to lose face and prestige (unacceptable for political or other reasons). Those. the same "delicate operations".

          Or maybe you should not do what threatens with loss of face and prestige?
        4. self-propelled
          self-propelled 1 February 2016 23: 17
          +1
          Quote: Aleksandr72
          Yeah, but only on the legal field. De facto, such private armies in Russia have existed for quite some time in the form of security services of the largest companies, which are often supplied with no worse (or even better) armies. Of course, the protection of the oil industry is not a solution to purely military tasks. However, what did American PMCs do in Iraq - exactly the same thing, and even acting absolutely outside the legal framework.
          Do we need PMCs? On the one hand, these are mercenaries, "wild geese", which for us has an unambiguously negative meaning. (at one time I had occasion to communicate with former Soviet officers from the Air Force, who, having remained no longer in their own country, were forced to fly in all sorts of African and Asian states, they bitterly called themselves mercenaries and did not feel either pride or pleasure from this). On the other hand, PMCs can be entrusted with something that you cannot entrust your own army, tk. it threatens to lose face and prestige (unacceptable for political or other reasons). Those. the same "delicate operations".
          But do not forget that PMCs are primarily a business, a private business (albeit a militarized one), and what modern Russian businessmen are capable of and ready for (especially "top flight" that is oligarchs) do not even want to think ...
          I have the honor.

          if you wish and with some will, you can prescribe the powers of PMCs in the law (as an example, a ban on activities on the territory of the Russian Federation (if it’s absolutely scary), + a ban on activities to the detriment (or against interests) of the Russian Federation.)
      3. Mikhail Fedorov
        Mikhail Fedorov 1 February 2016 16: 14
        0
        Donbass and took
    2. igorka357
      igorka357 1 February 2016 09: 17
      +7
      In fact, 80% of the composition of such organizations are people who have gone through hot spots and sniffed gunpowder, so your arguments are unfounded, about personal meetings with guys from, say, RSB-GROUP, and I will write to you in a personal message if possible! Oh yes, I forgot to ask , probably there are no thugs in the army, or maybe they sometimes don't meet on the street, remember there are enough of them everywhere!
    3. Nehist
      Nehist 1 February 2016 12: 59
      +1
      You write nonsense dear !!! Especially about 90 years! There, such specialists went to crime ...
    4. stopkran
      stopkran 2 February 2016 00: 53
      -1
      PMC is an immersion in Western shit. In addition, this is the creation of a legal military structure that can easily carry out a coup d'etat in its own country. We should take a closer look at the initiators of such ideas as PMCs in Russia. If someone wants to secretly glance over the hillock, then this is usually done as "operation under the wrong flag."
  2. Glot
    Glot 1 February 2016 06: 43
    +1
    Well, some people want their specific knowledge, skills and, in the end, substituting their own heads to earn in such a way, what’s wrong. This is their personal affair, and I consider every right.
    All one who needs it - he earns this, albeit informally. So why not pass the law then? Yes, and we have PMCs already.
    1. Zoldat_A
      Zoldat_A 1 February 2016 06: 50
      10
      Quote: Glot
      Yes, and we have PMCs already.

      "Security companies", opened by former cops and former bandits, do not count. They are attracted to business showdowns, raiding, and guarding. Armament is, of course, VERY good, but light rifle. And to involve them in tactical operations is to fail the operation. The motivation is not the same, the skills are not the same ... It’s like, like in Ukraine, marauding battalions. Do we need a private Voronezh battalion? I don't think so ...
      1. strannik1985
        strannik1985 1 February 2016 07: 13
        +1
        Dear author, confused terms mercenary and private contractor. The latter, unlike a mercenary, always works within the framework of the law, on the basis of an agreement with a local government, transnational corporation, etc.

        At present, the legislation does not restrict PMCs in any way, since they operate abroad, in a foreign legal field, in Russia they recruit and train people (renting classes, shooting galleries, racing tracks), and weapons are acquired on the spot.
        Representatives-RSB-Group, Moran Security, Orel-Antiterror, PMC Mar. There are few such (normal) companies.
      2. strannik1985
        strannik1985 1 February 2016 07: 27
        +5
        Why do we need a "private battalion Voronezh"?
        First of all, there are interesting domestic companies abroad, for example, to ensure the safety of Russian ships in problem areas, to ensure the safety of employees of mining and other companies in risk zones. There is a need now, whether we want it or not, if there are no Russian PMCs, they will pay foreign companies with all the consequences (if a local PMC is hired, its employees may disappear at a critical moment or get hit due to local troubles, it’s simplified the possibility of recruiting employees, etc.
        1. Zoldat_A
          Zoldat_A 1 February 2016 08: 06
          10
          Quote: strannik1985
          First of all, there are interesting domestic companies abroad, for example, to ensure the safety of Russian vessels in problem areas, to ensure the safety of employees of mining and other companies in risk zones.

          But can a platoon of marine corps ensure the safety of a Russian ship in ANY territorial waters? And it will be cheaper and more efficient. And just as the presence of the fleet, the demonstration of the flag provides security - never tell! The main thing is to have a larger fleet. And on land, we have enough forces at the army units to ensure the safety of ANY Russian mining company.

          By the way, I said above that these PMCs will be pocket armies of the oligarchs and nothing more. So we already have security companies. What is the reason to fence a garden with private MILITARY companies, if they are not military, but chain dogs that guard domestic property?
          1. strannik1985
            strannik1985 1 February 2016 08: 24
            13
            Will there be enough platoons in the Marine Corps to ensure the safety of all Russian ships in the same Gulf of Aden? But is it nothing for the MP of the Navy of the Russian Federation that the protection of civilian vessels is a purely secondary task?

            Do you suggest sending the RF Armed Forces to protect commercial companies? And the State Duma didn’t forget to ask? And the local government, does it need hemorrhoids with the presence of a foreign military unit on its territory, do not want to ask? PMCs and the army have completely different legal status, do not you understand this?

            Then, to make a fuss that their tasks (to work abroad) are not for the official army, the work of PMCs in Iraq will raise much fewer questions than the work of the army unit (both politically and publicly).
            1. igorka357
              igorka357 1 February 2016 09: 23
              +2
              I think after your detailed comment Zoldatu_A, he will not answer anything to you! He just does not understand what tryndit is about! The army was going to involve private sharags in guarding fool !
              1. strannik1985
                strannik1985 1 February 2016 09: 32
                +5
                Everyone has the right to a personal opinion, albeit erroneous. For this, there are similar platforms in order to consider a particular issue from different angles (different opinions). Unfortunately, judging by the estimates of the comments, the absolute majority have an extremely vague idea of ​​the issue.
              2. Zoldat_A
                Zoldat_A 1 February 2016 21: 57
                +2
                Quote: igorka357
                I think after your detailed comment Zoldatu_A, he will not answer anything to you! He just does not understand what tryndit is about! The army was going to involve private sharags in guarding fool !

                I did not talk about involving the army to protect private sharags. Where is it written that in a platoon of marine corps should be camped at every oil tanker? I just wrote that PMCs are pocket armies of oligarchs and oil workers as well.

                A "platoon of marines" is needed not to guard the oil tanker, but to patrol the area, to ensure a military presence. Can't you catch the difference?

                And when the FLAG will be afraid, then civilians can work without security.

                And further. Judging by the style of your comments with the Wanderer, I served more in the army than each of you has lived. And a significant part of the service was engaged in precisely this - it ensured the protection of the interests of the motherland where they clashed with the interests of other states. Therefore, what are the main tasks for the army, and which are secondary - take a word, I know no worse than you and the Wanderer combined. And I also know how to protect the interests of the country. Military presence and protection of interests is not a company of guards on towers by prohibition, nor a sailor at a turret, believe me ...

                And also, in the distant, distant childhood, they taught me to respect the interlocutor. And taught not to speak out about the mental abilities of a stranger. Apparently, since the time of the Palaces of Pioneers and Zarnits, something has changed in education ...

                G..o..unload..ach will not.
                1. strannik1985
                  strannik1985 1 February 2016 22: 44
                  0
                  And it’s not necessary, but it’s worth explaining some points.
                  This platoon will not carry out a combat mission on boats in the area, but on a warship? The resource of vehicles is infinite (unless, of course, we need the presence of the Navy in the area under the guise of fighting piracy)? What is cheaper - to drive a battleship or a group of 3-7 people with the organization of a "citadel" and passive means of protection?
                  Nobody will pay for "presence" in the region, all expenses are borne by the Russian budget. And there are many problem areas: the Gulf of Aden, areas near the coast of Somalia, Djibouti, Yemen, Tanzania, Kenya, Mozambique, the Indian Ocean.
                  1. strannik1985
                    strannik1985 1 February 2016 23: 13
                    +1
                    There is a system of sea convoys.
                    But. Waiting for the collection of ships up to 5-10 days, 2-5 thousand dollars per day of downtime for the shipowner, plus delivery times, the threat of damage to the cargo (if the port).
                    There are up to 10 vessels in a convoy, 1-2 ships, the distance between vessels is 1-2 miles, that is, the length of the convoy is up to 10-20 nautical miles.
                    It is good if marines (the same 3-7 people) are dropped off from the escort ship, in case the ship lags, and if not? Pirates calmly disguise themselves as fishermen and no one can forbid them to follow the convoy. They capture very quickly (watch videos, a person with the help of a cat runs on board in literally seconds). In the event of capture, the convoy and warship of the captured will be abandoned subject to the contract, will inform the Anti-Piracy Center in Kuala Lumpur and all. If there is a ship nearby with a group of anti-terror, and the pirates do not have time to overtake the ship, then maybe someone will be saved. If not, the same ransom song. No country whose warship has lost a civilian ship has yet to pay insurance. Plus, they organize such convoys only in the Gulf of Aden along the coast of Yemen, after the trial they disperse.
            2. nerd.su
              nerd.su 1 February 2016 11: 33
              +1
              Quote: strannik1985
              And the local government, does it need hemorrhoids with the presence of a foreign military unit on its territory

              Do you think the local government needs hemorrhoids with the presence of a foreign private military unit on its territory? What an optimist you are.
              1. strannik1985
                strannik1985 1 February 2016 12: 15
                +3
                This hemorrhoids is much less than from the presence of a foreign military contingent. It is one thing a private person within the framework of international law, another thing is a military representative of a foreign state on your land.
                Lukoil Overseas LTD, while working in Basra (Iraq), used the services of the British G4S (£ 1000 per day per person), refused in favor of a local PMC because of the high cost of services, while the quality of security fell.

                Many countries cannot guarantee the safety of citizens on their territory, so why should they sit on oil like a dog in the hay? I myself can’t get it and I won’t give it to another?
                1. nerd.su
                  nerd.su 1 February 2016 12: 48
                  0
                  Quote: strannik1985
                  This hemorrhoids is much less than from the presence of a foreign military contingent.

                  Not a fact. The cadre military is ultimately subordinate to his government. A private trader - to the employer, as a result, also to a private trader or a group of private traders. Relations with the government are always stronger and more reliable regulated by legislation, including international ones.

                  Why didn't Lukoil hire a Russian company? It's not because we don't have PMCs. A private security company can handle security if it is staffed with people specially trained for specific conditions and tasks. Lukoil's decision is influenced by the political situation. It is politically advantageous for our company to use the services of the Iraqi military or police, not the British. Precisely the military or the police, because only with the blessing of local security officials can local security structures function. Yes, it is more economical to use our security guards. But it is politically more profitable than the local one. The Iraqi "elite" must receive their share of the pie, otherwise it is more interesting for them to give this pie to someone else.
                  1. strannik1985
                    strannik1985 1 February 2016 13: 16
                    0
                    What is more reliable? It is easier to act on a private / legal entity than on the state. Namely, that the military is primarily subordinate to his state, who will guarantee that the interests of a foreign state coincide with the interests of the host state? Crimea to you as an example.

                    Can you see the sources of your arguments regarding the choice of Lukoil Overseas LTD?
                    1. nerd.su
                      nerd.su 1 February 2016 13: 42
                      +3
                      Quote: strannik1985
                      Crimea to you as an example.

                      Good. Crimea clearly demonstrates what well-armed and trained people can do if the native army is weak and poorly motivated. And in the countries of the Third World, the army is an order of magnitude, or even two, weaker than the Ukrainian one.
                      And who will guarantee that the interests of a private owner who has his own army will not diverge from the interests of the host state? Especially considering that the interests of private owners and the state always diverge.

                      Quote: strannik1985
                      Can you see the sources of your arguments regarding the choice of Lukoil Overseas LTD?

                      Personal experience in third world countries and the belief that business and government relations are the same everywhere in content, although they may differ in form. I do not pretend to the truth, but I think that I am right. A large foreign company in a poor state can make big profits only by giving out generous chunks.
                      1. strannik1985
                        strannik1985 1 February 2016 14: 11
                        0
                        The laws. International, Russian, foreign. There is a contract with the government for the implementation of military security activities, a contractor, there is a contract with the opposition to overthrow the mercenary government.

                        That is speculation. Thank. I am glad to know your opinion, but without facts, the discussion does not make sense.
                      2. nerd.su
                        nerd.su 1 February 2016 14: 54
                        +3
                        Quote: strannik1985
                        The laws. International, Russian, foreign

                        "The bylaws are made to be broken." Popular soldier's wisdom.
                        And note, if the charter is violated by individual comrades, this can get away with it or the punishment will not lead to the liquidation of the comrade. And if entire units are ordered by commanders, then the liquidation of the unit is a foregone conclusion. Of course, if this is a serious violation, not a uniform.

                        Quote: strannik1985
                        There is a contract with the government for the implementation of military security activities, a contractor, there is a contract with the opposition to overthrow the government-mercenary

                        In such a framework, everything is clear and normal. But what if the opposition concludes a security contract and, under this protection, does what kind of thread? And there are still many possible collisions. So it is necessary to discuss all these conflicts in order to provide consequences in the law.

                        The fact that legislatively this issue will be somehow solved, despite the fact that I am against smile clear. And is it worth it to stop people from earning what they can do?
                        Only the scope should be exclusively abroad and extremely specific. Not military security activities, but the protection of objects in regions with an unstable military-political situation. If military consulting is only for the armed forces and law enforcement agencies of third countries, and only training. And such activities should not only be licensed (security in unstable regions - the FSB, and military consulting - the Defense Ministry), but specific contracts should be agreed with the Defense Ministry, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
                      3. strannik1985
                        strannik1985 1 February 2016 15: 21
                        -1
                        There are law enforcement agencies in Russia, in the country of work, there is Interpol. The law is not a charter, for its violation they will be jailed, at least alone, even as part of a group.
                        And what does it mean by order? Why should an ordinary employee carry out an unlawful order? Does the contract spell out the nuances of a coup?

                        Opposition is an officially recognized person, and a coup is a legal act?

                        And this will kill this type of activity, it’s better not to give a damn .. be approvals and licensing.
                      4. nerd.su
                        nerd.su 1 February 2016 16: 45
                        0
                        Quote: strannik1985
                        The law is not a charter, for its violation they will be jailed, at least alone, even as part of a group.

                        Firstly, the statement is incorrect, and secondly, you did not understand what I wanted to say.

                        Quote: strannik1985
                        Opposition is an officially recognized person, and a coup is a legal act?

                        This question should be addressed to you. You are saying something about the differences between contractors and mercenaries.

                        Quote: strannik1985
                        And this will kill this type of activity, it’s better not to give a damn .. be approvals and licensing.

                        Nothing, not one type of activity required for licensing has died.
                        And the lack of coordination will lead to the fact that our PMCs will prepare the Ukrainian army or the Syrian opposition. Business and nothing personal.
                        So, without a piece of paper you are a mercenary, and with a piece of paper - an employee of PMCs.
                      5. strannik1985
                        strannik1985 1 February 2016 17: 19
                        0
                        I somewhere argued that it is possible to legally organize a coup?

                        How? The organizers of the "Slavic Corps" were arrested without any licensing. How will law-abiding Russian citizens end up in the ranks of the Syrian opposition or the Armed Forces of Ukraine?
                      6. nerd.su
                        nerd.su 1 February 2016 20: 00
                        0
                        Quote: strannik1985
                        How will law-abiding Russian citizens end up in the ranks of the Syrian opposition or the Armed Forces?

                        If PMCs are organized legally and are not obliged to agree on contracts, then nothing prevents her from contracting to train soldiers of the Armed Forces and the same battalions of all kinds of Kolomoisk. On absolutely legal grounds, under a contract. Or guard the business of Kolomoisky or Donetsk airport.
                      7. The comment was deleted.
                      8. saygon66
                        saygon66 1 February 2016 20: 52
                        0
                        - You're right! Nothing gets in the way! In addition, that: For participation in actions directed against the interests of the state, the license for military security activities will be revoked, and as a result, the violating company will cease to exist ... remember the same "Blackwater"
                      9. nerd.su
                        nerd.su 2 February 2016 08: 32
                        0
                        Quote: saygon66
                        For participation in actions directed against the interests of the state, the license for military security activities will be revoked, and as a result, the violating company will cease to exist ...

                        On what basis?
                        And coordination with state bodies will make such participation of the Russian company impossible in principle. And not so that PMCs would first train the opponents to fight with us, or else they would fight, and then they would lose their license.
                        And do not forget that besides such obvious cases as Ukraine, there are many godforsaken places where, nevertheless, we carry out some kind of policy. And so that the private owner’s interest does not get in the way of the state, be kind, agree on the training of the tribal militia of the Tumba-Yumba tribe or the protection of their catering unit. You will not break the paper to carry and put a seal.
                        Blackter did not suffer for obstructing the interests of the state. And he did not cease to exist, but changed the sign. Bad example.
                    2. strannik1985
                      strannik1985 1 February 2016 21: 36
                      0
                      In theory, but in practice, the organizers and participants of such a formation, wherever the company is registered, will be arrested as soon as they enter Russian territory. The opposition is not an official, legal person, in order to conclude such deals with it, according to the Armed Forces, in theory, options are possible, but taking into account the experience of the "Slavic Corps" (a contract for the protection of deposits was concluded with the Syrian government, but this did not prevent the organizers of PMCs from being arrested for mercenary activity ), the "state house" is provided for such figures.
                    3. nerd.su
                      nerd.su 2 February 2016 08: 50
                      0
                      Quote: strannik1985
                      The opposition is not an official, legal person to enter into similar transactions with it.

                      Firstly, the statement is controversial. Is Zyuganov an official or not? The same thing.
                      Secondly, why order an illegal association if it can be done by a legally respectable member of this association, Sinbad the Sailor, to guard its shop, moorings and ships? Well, to teach the protection of neighbors, etc. And why then arrest PMC employees? But if they, having rejected the MoD, agreed anyway, then there are reasons.
                      How do you not understand this? How old are you?
                      By the way, the Slavic corps was burnt. Do not get confused under the feet of the state.
                    4. strannik1985
                      strannik1985 2 February 2016 11: 26
                      0
                      Is Zyuganov an official or not?

                      Actually, I meant the armed opposition, but not the point.
                      So what? Where in our country / in the world can a coup be turned as a legal act?
                      Well, to teach the protection of neighbors, etc.

                      How do you not understand this? How old are you?

                      Are you serious now? Organization of a coup and "train the guard of neighbors" are too different things, don't they? There are special services for criminals, from the SVR to the FSB. Actually, now they do not bother with this, many Russian citizens are fighting in the ranks of ISIS. Or do you think that our state is blind-deaf-dumb, that it cannot collect information about the activities of any persons abroad?
                    5. nerd.su
                      nerd.su 2 February 2016 19: 31
                      0
                      Quote: strannik1985
                      Are you serious now? Organization of a coup and "train the guard of neighbors" are too different things, don't they?

                      Why are you clinging to this coup? PMCs can stupidly hire a citizen Ibn Sinbad to guard the warehouse. And then the terrorists around and other looters, can Ibn Sinbad hire protection? And what is in that warehouse and for whom, before that PMCs by and large are not concerned, while the price of the question makes us refrain from the question. And if you have a deal, then you will have to leave the business quickly. So, so as not to protect unnecessary warehouses, and it is necessary to coordinate their contracts with the state. Or do you think in Britain differently?

                      Well, you’ve already set up a bunch of plans about the coup. Yes, they will just ask you to prepare the security, but how to prepare it, if you don’t understand how the attackers will act? Or people prepared to guard the facility will not be able to capture such an object? laughing
                      And other people will deal with the rest of the organization while you prepare the "security". Well, I naturally simplify everything, but the essence is that you should not get confused under the feet of your native state. Naturally, the protection of ships from pirates can be coordinated according to a simplified scheme - there is no ship owner, ship and captain in the black lists, consider it agreed, maybe in electronic form, through state services smile To prevent the Americans from taking Russian PMCs on a tanker that transports Igilov oil laughing
                      Quote: strannik1985
                      Or do you think that our state is blindly deaf and dumb, which cannot collect information about the activities of any persons abroad?

                      If there is no requirement to agree on a contract, what to present PMCs for the protection of a tanker with Igilov oil? There is a contract with the shipowner, and the fact that the oil of terrorists is the problem of the shipowner, not PMCs. It seems like there’s nothing to put in poor prison guards. And this is wrong.
                    6. strannik1985
                      strannik1985 3 February 2016 05: 00
                      0
                      In the USA, Britain, South Africa, it’s different because these countries themselves are actively promoting this business, for them it is one of the instruments of influence. In Russia, officially operating companies pieces of 5-10 typed.
                      A workaround to this procedure is simple, the company is registered in any offshore, then the procedure is completely the same, but without registration, since formally the company will have nothing to do with Russia, even if people are recruited in Russia.
                    7. nerd.su
                      nerd.su 3 February 2016 10: 25
                      0
                      Quote: strannik1985
                      In the USA, Britain, South Africa, it’s different because these countries themselves are actively promoting this business, for them it is one of the instruments of influence.

                      Yes, they are cutting the state budget. Although they do the work, this is what drank them from ours.

                      Quote: strannik1985
                      Bypassing this procedure is as simple as possible, the company is registered in any offshore, then the procedure is completely the same

                      Now, they’ll do all the muddy business through offshore. But all employees of such an office should understand that in their homeland a special article of the criminal code is provided for them. And Russian PMCs, if they are destined to appear, must coordinate their contracts with the Russian authorities.
                    8. strannik1985
                      strannik1985 3 February 2016 16: 05
                      0
                      Let's put a budget cut, and without PMCs they know how well. The tool is convenient, even China, with its desire not to oppose the United States openly, its PMCs to Africa, is actively promoting, for example, in Sudan, the special group of contractors together with the locals freed hostages, and in Eritrea PMC guards a whole city of Chinese workers (26 people, gold mining and something else that).
                      Actually, we began to use this, if the data on the Wagner PMC have at least some relation to reality, and in Syria we have gone too far to lose pace due to the weakness of the Syrian ground forces (the air operation began due to the fact that large-scale supplies of equipment could no longer turn the tide, there were simply no trained personnel left to use it).
                    9. nerd.su
                      nerd.su 3 February 2016 18: 34
                      0
                      How will the generals cut the budget just by retiring?

                      Quote: strannik1985
                      even China, with its desire not to oppose the US openly, its PMCs in Africa is actively promoting

                      Quote: strannik1985
                      Actually, we have begun to use this too, if the data on the Wagner PMC have at least some relation to reality

                      So our discussion began in the style of:
                      "- Do you see a gopher?
                      - Нет.
                      - And I do not see. And he is! "

                      I believe PMCs are not needed for world peace. But they will appear with us, because if someone really needs something, then the stars light up. And only the final victory of socialism will put an end to unnecessary bloodshed. Or an alien attack hi
                    10. strannik1985
                      strannik1985 3 February 2016 20: 58
                      0
                      How will the generals cut the budget just by retiring?

                      There are a bunch of near-army structures, and also (about) the military-industrial complex, the Ministry of Emergencies, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and so on, PMCs are just one of the options.

                      I believe PMCs are not needed for world peace.

                      No, you finally started telling the truth. You do not need state regulation of this type of activity, but remove PMCs in general. Practice shows that they are needed both as a tool of special services (the militia does not have targeted work, and especially to eliminate objectionable ones), and for commercial structures.
  3. nerd.su
    nerd.su 1 February 2016 15: 00
    0
    Quote: strannik1985
    That is speculation. Thank. I am glad to know your opinion, but without facts, the discussion does not make sense.

    But your opinion is not confirmed by facts.
  4. strannik1985
    strannik1985 1 February 2016 15: 07
    0
    RSBGroup blog. Article "Protection of assets of Russian companies abroad".
  5. nerd.su
    nerd.su 1 February 2016 16: 20
    0
    Quote: strannik1985
    RSBGroup blog. Article "Protection of assets of Russian companies abroad".

    I got acquainted. A very weak argument. An article of the same level with comments on VO. There are almost no facts. Let's start with the main mistake - everything is based on the assertion that Lukoil Overseas, which he produces there himself, engages security. Lukoil is a consortium participant, even a project operator. On Qurna-2, it is the Iraqi State Southern Oil Company, which exercises state control, Lukoil Overseas and the Iraqi State Northern Oil Company. At block 10, where there is no production, only exploration, Lukoil works with the Japanese. While the Norwegians participated in the project on Courne-2, there was an English guard. Norwegians piss ... afraid of the locals. The Norwegians left, most likely they were bordered, the British left too. And we are not afraid, we will work under local protection. And where to go, protection from the South Oil Company, which exercises state control over the consortium. So Lukoil there is forced for political reasons not to argue that the security is local. But the RSB-group, instead of children's fantasies about protecting deposits in a foreign country, we must think about the offer of advanced training for local personnel. And for this it would be necessary to have experience in protecting such complex facilities, at least in their homeland. Have such an experience?

    It seems to me that my personal experience in this case is more abrupt than your "fact".
  6. strannik1985
    strannik1985 1 February 2016 17: 05
    0
    Remarkably, can you confirm your theory with anything?
    There is an easier way, given the specifics of local cadres, the outer ring is from local, inside is from the British, Russian, Malays, and FSUs. EMNIP on such a scheme already worked in Iraq.
  7. nerd.su
    nerd.su 1 February 2016 20: 18
    0
    The data on the composition of the consortia are not confidential; you will find them on the Internet in five minutes. And to compare the output of the Norwegians from the project and the change of protection is not a lot of intelligence. And why the protection of the local state-owned company, which oversees the consortium from Iraq, has come to be implemented, is also understandable.

    I am not an expert in the field of security, the scheme with the outer and inner rings seems to be logical. But it seems to me much more promising to install and maintain technical means of protection, especially in combination with fire and other emergency alarms. There is a gold mine in the oil field ... Training of local personnel, development of action plans in various situations, conducting exercises, etc. And "to knock out the doors with their heads" on the spot, there are many who wish.
  8. strannik1985
    strannik1985 1 February 2016 21: 56
    0
    It is not clear that there can be financial success with equal success (while the Norwegians in the project were 1000 pounds, it wasn’t too large, third-party expenses increased with the decision, they decided to save some money), and there were other reasons.

    This is understandable, the organization of passive protective measures, etc. Of course, people are a separate issue. The problem with local personnel, in addition to professionalism, is that they are local. Large families: the elder brother in PMCs, the youngest in the police, the middle in organized crime groups, the uncle in the illegal armed groups. In the countries of the Middle East, Africa, Afghanistan, Central Asia, and the Caucasus, this is very common. And where the professional interest will prevail, and where the personal interest, the interest of the family, the kind of hell who can predict.
    Another problem is religious and tribal contradictions, Shiites on knives with Sunnis, Kurds with Sunnis and Shiites. The employer has other people's problems.
    This is more or less acceptable if the locals make up the external security ring, contacts with civilian personnel are limited, and there is someone to rely on at the facility.
  9. nerd.su
    nerd.su 2 February 2016 09: 18
    0
    May be. Or maybe the Norwegians had something from that thousand back.

    So they select people differently than we do. And given these features. Where do you find so many Russian guards who speak Arabic and understand the intricacies of local relationships? After all, the fact that this is Lukoil does not mean that there are only Russians. Russians are at most half, the rest are local, including the chiefs. And in the "inner ring", as you say, the main job is to maintain the access control. And he didn’t look like that, he dared to ask a respected person with a pass, or asked impolitely. And if he shot someone, and even in an ambiguous situation, then, depending on the political situation, consequences are possible, including parting with a part of the company for free. And if a political scandal in this regard also makes our Foreign Ministry very upset by the disruption of any process ...
    In general, therefore, our state and big business abroad are not interested in Russian private armed guards. Without a weapon is another matter. The locals are usually worse friends with our equipment if it is not Germany there or the states with Japan.
  10. strannik1985
    strannik1985 2 February 2016 11: 12
    0
    If you have a choice or experience, sources of information allowing you to establish in advance where the pitfalls are, if you believe the article, the quality of protection itself has fallen.
    You might think that the English through one speak Arabic, basic-English.
    But the abduction of Rusal employees in Nigeria, the seizure of a Russian cargo ship in the port of Lagos, the beating of Russian pilots in Somalia does not break anything? Without support from the state for protecting Russian interests, no business will work.

    Russians are at most half, the rest are local, including the chiefs. And in the "inner ring", as you say, the main job is to maintain the access control.

    Not so, in the case of hiring a PMC, there is a senior from a domestic firm, there is a local senior. Unlimited: conducting reconnaissance in the area of ​​deployment, including using technical means of reconnaissance, communicating with officials of the authorities, tribal elders, the ability to negotiate. Departures outside the location are inevitable. To escort the convoy in Iraq, if you please, notify 72 hours in advance of the departure of the convoy with armed guards (taking into account 70% of information leakage), calculate routes of movement, exchange information with "trusted" persons on the Iraqi side and American and British PMCs in the area of ​​deployment and route, carry out disinformation measures, provide for jammers on end vehicles, forward patrol (if necessary) on a civilian vehicle. There are many nuances.
  11. nerd.su
    nerd.su 2 February 2016 19: 54
    0
    Quote: strannik1985
    according to the article, the very quality of protection has fallen.

    And why should she believe? Well I say, apparently the level of commentary on VO. From the facts - only a change of protection. The statement of a decline in quality is unfounded. Maybe, for sure, it is. But what is expressed is not clear. While for the total income of the company this drop is not significant, the company will be happy with the protection.

    Conducting reconnaissance in the deployment zone. Yeah, how much should you hire to get this to work? In conditions when there are few Russians, almost all the surrounding locals know hu hiz hu. You’ll only put on camouflage (conditionally), and everyone will already know that the wanderer has gathered for reconnaissance.
    You cannot prevent the taking of hostages. Mine or metal production, any, too large object. Always where the thread will remain undisguised specialists. Especially in relatively peaceful countries such as Nigeria. Yes, and do not give a damn about Rusal experts, of which the turn at the gates, new recruits. But if a white guard shoots someone in Africa ... It’s cheaper for families of specialists to pay compensation, all the more insured.
  12. strannik1985
    strannik1985 2 February 2016 20: 35
    0
    Why not believe her? Do you have other information? Source?

    Wrong. Anyone in the area is being recruited, from beggars to police officers, security posts are equipped with thermal imagers, ground reconnaissance radars, the area is flown by UAVs, and radio broadcasts are being monitored. Motor vehicles, everything new is recorded in surveillance logs. Information is not a problem to collect, the main thing is to analyze it in time.
    I can. Kidnapping is the same business as others, and bandits want to live no less than me and you. People are needed, SSR-Group with 30 permanent employees and 250 reserves will not pull this, and the American / English PMCs with 1000 ... 2000 ... 5000 employees are quite. The whole difference in relation to the state, in the first case the state is funeral, in the second state uses PMCs as one of the tools to support their business.
  13. nerd.su
    nerd.su 2 February 2016 22: 38
    0
    Well, you are a specialist in the collection and analysis of information, easily repeat my actions. If specific problems with security were described in the article, I would probably believe that its author has sources of more serious Internet.

    You won’t be able to. The budget of most companies will not be pulled by 1000 guards. Even 500 will pull only if 400 of them are local, with a local salary and appropriate motivation. There in the main production, so many people do not always work. Such scope of protection can only be used for large government contracts, in the event of another invasion of American troops.
    And since our army prefers to do everything on its own, nothing shines on our PMCs.
  14. strannik1985
    strannik1985 3 February 2016 06: 28
    0
    What kind? You judge based on personal experience, but I did not work in the Gulf.
    The fact of the matter is that, most likely, the information is not from the Internet, but from personal contacts, there is little information on this topic, and that is not from official sources.

    Not necessarily, South Africa did not invade anywhere, however, Washington had to be involved in order for MPRI to move Autkamz Executive. If there were at least some guarantees for working with Russian companies, one could think about expansion (and this is money).
  • Nehist
    Nehist 1 February 2016 13: 17
    0
    You read the legislation on PSC carefully and then write
    1. nerd.su
      nerd.su 1 February 2016 14: 02
      0
      You, apparently, carefully studied. And what articles of which laws prevent our private security company from protecting our LUKOIL in Iraq?
      1. Fat
        Fat 2 February 2016 00: 23
        0
        Quote: bot.su
        You, apparently, carefully studied. And what articles of which laws prevent our private security company from protecting our LUKOIL in Iraq?

        Private security company provides only protection, and PMCs - protection and defense of the object, the difference is fundamental.
      2. nerd.su
        nerd.su 2 February 2016 09: 22
        0
        Quote: Thick
        Private security company provides only protection, and PMCs - protection and defense of the object, the difference is fundamental.

        Well, Chop imputed defense of objects in unstable regions and all. The licensing of the chopping rights to work in such regions should be transferred to the FSB, so that they are not fooled at home and sent verified personnel abroad.
      3. Fat
        Fat 3 February 2016 00: 16
        0
        Quote: bot.su
        Well, Chop imputed defense of objects in unstable regions and all. The licensing of the chopping rights to work in such regions should be transferred to the FSB, so that they are not fooled at home and sent verified personnel abroad.

        The legal justification for expanding the functions of the private security company for this will be required one way or another. Either change the law on the private security company, or adopt a new one.
      4. nerd.su
        nerd.su 3 February 2016 09: 34
        0
        Quote: Thick
        Legal justification for expanding the functions of the private security company will require

        Listen, without jokes, if you can, explain which articles of which laws prevent the defense of objects from being implemented by chop? And then somehow there is not enough time to disassemble the law yourself. And from the surface, nothing seems to interfere. And no one can name these people ...

        Quote: Thick
        Either change the law on the private security company, or adopt a new one

        Yes please. This is much simpler than the PMC law. And it’s safer for the budget.
  • Nehist
    Nehist 1 February 2016 13: 15
    +2
    Yes, let’s take it that our Rossneft slandered in Libya! Challiburton is working there now, which has its own PMC. Alas, for the lack of such a structure, we had to shed
    1. nerd.su
      nerd.su 1 February 2016 14: 04
      0
      Quote: Nehist
      Yes, let’s take it that our Rossneft slandered in Libya!

      Is our Rosneft missing out on something in Libya?

      Halliburton does not work there because he has his own PMC. By the way, what’s the name of PMC Hallyburton?
  • Zoldat_A
    Zoldat_A 1 February 2016 22: 01
    +1
    Quote: bot.su
    Quote: strannik1985
    And the local government, does it need hemorrhoids with the presence of a foreign military unit on its territory

    Do you think the local government needs hemorrhoids with the presence of a foreign private military unit on its territory? What an optimist you are.

    Let strannik1985 the governments of Europe, especially the eastern ones, the governments of the Baltic countries will be asked if the government needs hemorrhoids with the presence of a foreign army ... The armies are different, the presence is different and the governments are different .... Optimism and the number of militants viewed there is nowhere to put on the youth ...
    1. strannik1985
      strannik1985 1 February 2016 23: 31
      +1
      Mom didn’t teach that being rude is not good?
      Sir, are you aware that these countries are part of the NATO bloc? And are foreign military contingents present on the basis of all-bloc documents? With the same success, add Germany and a bunch of Western European countries.
      And the Russian Federation, within the framework of the CSTO, has military bases on the territory of Armenia (protection from Azerbaijan) and Tajikistan (protection against militants from Afghanistan and the stabilizing factor).
      Gulf countries (for example) have to do with it?
  • Glot
    Glot 1 February 2016 08: 45
    -3
    By the way, I said above that these PMCs will be pocket armies of the oligarchs and nothing more.


    Yes, they will work for those who pay more. No emotions, ideological ideas, only earnings. Or in life differently? We are all, to one degree or another, mercenaries. We work for money. What is the problem ?

    But can a platoon of marine corps ensure the safety of a Russian ship in ANY territorial waters?


    There are not enough platoons.
    And the Moscow Region will not protect every businessman abroad, they have other tasks. The army serves the state. PMCs - to those who pay. As already said above. This is a business and nothing more. Normal business.
    Why, then, not remove all the private security companies by transferring protection to the Ministry of Internal Affairs?
  • kotvov
    kotvov 1 February 2016 12: 06
    +1
    And can a platoon of marines not ensure the safety of a Russian ship in ANY territorial waters ?,
    and if the ship is flying a foreign flag, but with a Russian crew? PMCs are operating there. in general, it’s a convenient tool where the state’s army can’t light up, there is a company that will defend the interests of the state. At the beginning, I was against it, but after receiving certain data , I decided that they (PMCs) are needed.
  • Nehist
    Nehist 1 February 2016 13: 12
    +1
    For the death of a marine fighter, our media will raise such a high !!! I will repeat once again that it’s not always profitable to use the Armed Forces for the prestige of the state! Sometimes it’s even contraindicated!
  • Glot
    Glot 1 February 2016 08: 40
    +1
    "Security companies", opened by former cops and former bandits, do not count.


    Yes, where does the chop? I was talking about PMCs.

    The motivation is not that, the skills are not ...


    They have only one motivation - money. In my opinion, not the worst motivation. smile And skills ... so there are enough specialists.
    1. soldner
      soldner 1 February 2016 09: 57
      +2
      The English word "mercenary" (mercenary) comes from the Latin "Merces", which means "wages" or "wages". Thus, literally, a mercenary is any person who serves only for wages. Although this definition can be applied to many workers, it is most closely related to the concept of a "professional soldier", or someone who is hired by some political force to participate in a conflict (war, coup, etc.). The term "mercenary" throughout for many years it meant many concepts, but gradually began to reflect the low public opinion of professional soldiers, in such combinations as: soldier of fortune, soldiers for hire, hired guns, dogs of war. To be more precise, the German word Söldner - soldier, means "mercenary" ... This word appeared in Russian only in the XNUMXth century, and before that the word howl was used (similar to "warrior"). The word soldier was born in Italy and goes back to the name of the coin - soldo (in Italian soldo) and the verb soldare formed from it - "to hire", the literal meaning of the word soldat - "receiving a salary".
      1. Fat
        Fat 1 February 2016 13: 13
        0
        Quote: soldner
        The English word "mercenary" (mercenary) comes from the Latin "Merces", which means "wages" or "wages". Thus, literally, a mercenary is any person who serves only for wages. While this definition can be applied to many workers, it is most closely related to the term "professional soldier"

        Comes from Italian. soldato "soldier", lit. "Receiving payment", from late. lat. soldum, further from lat. solidus “solid; solidus ”(Roman coin, originally in the expression nummus solidus). Russian. the soldier is found in the Book. about ratn. slender. and Kotoshikhin (XVII century), borrowed. through it. Soldat, or Dutch. soldaat or French. soldat. http://znanija.com/task/3025826
        So, "mercenary soldier" and "professional soldier" are butter oil (tautology)
      2. Nehist
        Nehist 1 February 2016 13: 18
        0
        A soldier comes from the same Latin soldi what does money mean and further?
  • Nehist
    Nehist 1 February 2016 13: 09
    0
    Who told you that light infantry? :) Even heavy armored vehicles
    1. Dante Alighieri
      Dante Alighieri 2 February 2016 17: 16
      0
      Quote: Nehist
      Who told you that light infantry? :) Even heavy armored vehicles

      Here is an excerpt from my article on this issue:
      "The analysis of the structure of such organizations (primarily based on the number and quality of employees, in accordance with the functions performed by the company) allows us to come to the conclusion that there is a certain hierarchy of Private Military Companies. And the point here is not only that the newly created subcontractors occupy hitherto vacant This structured structure suggests that there is an old principle in its construction: “more power - less power, more power - less power.” All PMCs engaged in military operations are built in such a way that in case of disobedience to the authorities, the army subunits could dust a private group, but not vice versa. And this principle is strictly adhered to. As for those PMCs that are engaged in intelligence and information analysis, the number of their personnel is initially small. This fact, due to their real opportunities through the data provided to influence the adoption of political and managerial decisions eny, again fully complies with the above principle.

      The question arises: who is the arbiter who compels private companies, many of which have quite real power, to play by the general rules and within the outlined boundaries? Is it really the notorious state of which the postmodern world is so tired? As unsurprisingly, it is. The state, despite the statements of a number of researchers, is still not only the initiator, but also the strongest, and even the only regulator of the process of “privatization of violence”. Semantically, this can be represented in the form of a process of reducing the share of assets of the US incorporated company, which at the same time continues to retain a controlling stake. This claim is further supported by the fact that a number of senior officials, including former Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney, are directors of a number of private military firms that provide various services to the Pentagon. Government officials in general quite easily move from state offices in Washington to luxurious offices on Wall Street and back, and in principle, both there and there, are engaged in the same activities. There is no corruption or conflict of interest - just the interests of the government and corporations coincide in almost everything. "
      1. Dante Alighieri
        Dante Alighieri 2 February 2016 17: 17
        0
        “The fact that the main source of income for PMCs is government orders only confirms once again that it is not legitimate to talk about Private Military Companies as free subjects of the global political process. You should also not mislead ordinary people with a system of tenders, in which, allegedly, on the basis of free competition and within the framework of equality of starting opportunities, the strongest should win.And in Russia, America, and in the Autonomous, but no less the United States of Europe, tenders are not won by random people. However, if the merger of the political elite with representatives of large industrial business there is a recognized fact by everyone and publicly (that is, due to the creation of various kinds of commissions and committees, as well as the adoption of legislation that control the size and intensity of financial flows), such a connection of congressmen, senators and deputies with PMCs, especially those whose income reaches multibillion-dollar appropriations, in every possible way denied. And it's not just only in the freedom of methods and means that these structures allow themselves and which, accordingly, can cast a shadow on this or that politician. The very sphere of activity of PMCs largely predetermined this trend.
        Despite the creation of various international institutions, the sphere of foreign policy is still not public, remaining in the shadow of behind-the-scenes agreements that cannot be monitored and accountable to any audit bodies. And PMCs - being an integral part of this sphere, quite predictably bear the generic imprint of those objective conditions in which they live and function. This is confirmed by the fact that all legislative initiatives voiced by the deputies of Great Britain and the United States aimed at creating systems of control over such organizations, and, consequently, their transit from the sphere of non-public backstage politics and the sphere accessible to the public, inevitably collapsed, crashing against bureaucratic stones national legislatures. And, indeed, it would be strange if ordinary people were not only aware of how taxpayers' money is spent, but also of how, in violation of, or rather bypassing, all norms of international law, regardless of the sovereignty of other participants in international relations, their governments conduct their foreign policy , in which under the concept of "national security" quite different goals and objectives are often pursued. "
  • zoknyay82
    zoknyay82 1 February 2016 07: 55
    +3
    Yes, where does the knowledge and skills? Go to the army and manifest. or to the police. or chop. And PMCs will be the personal army of different oligarchs, Chubais and different Abramovichs. Otherwise, why the hell is it needed? Defend the homeland for lave?
    1. Glot
      Glot 1 February 2016 08: 50
      0
      Yes, where does the knowledge and skills? Go to the army and manifest. or to the police. or chop. And PMCs will be the personal army of different oligarchs, Chubais and different Abramovichs. Otherwise, why the hell is it needed? Defend the homeland for lave?


      If Abramovich pays for knowledge and skill more than the Ministry of Defense, the Ministry of Internal Affairs or the Private Security Company, then I’d better go to Abramovich.
      You won’t be fed up with the idea, and you won’t feed your family.
      And what does "Motherland for Lave" have to do with it? This is not about defending the Motherland. No need to substitute concepts. smile
      1. nerd.su
        nerd.su 1 February 2016 11: 51
        +3
        Quote: Glot
        if Abramovich pays for knowledge and skill more than the Ministry of Defense, the Ministry of Internal Affairs or the Private Security Company, then I’d better go to Abramovich.

        This is so that Abramovich could not, according to his own mind, send such hungry, but with skills, people where he pleases and we do not need PMCs. Or at least the law on them must go through all the "circles of hell" during discussion in order to tie the hands of the Abramovichs in the legal field.
        1. Glot
          Glot 1 February 2016 12: 23
          +1
          So that Abramovich couldn’t guide such hungry, but with skills people, wherever he wanted, and we don’t need PMCs


          Yes, here I think everything is simple.
          If the State fears that PMCs will be sent to him to the detriment, then it is necessary to clearly regulate the activities of these companies at the legislative level.
          And if the State is afraid of the hungry ... So do not make your hungry, and you will not have to be afraid. smile
          1. nerd.su
            nerd.su 1 February 2016 13: 13
            0
            Quote: Glot
            then it is necessary to clearly regulate the activities of these companies at the legislative level.

            So the process goes on. After all, military pensioners need to be occupied with something, given that the majority at the time of retirement is still very cheerful.

            Quote: Glot
            So do not make your hungry, and you will not have to be afraid

            Yes, how many wolf do not feed ... So here only the presence of young, healthy and fulfilling commands wolfhounds will save. It is still more important to control the activities of the owners of private "wolves".
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. strannik1985
          strannik1985 1 February 2016 12: 31
          0
          Let me tell you a little secret - "Abramovich" cannot deal with the law or without mercenarism, for this period. Private military security activities can, as it is allowed by international law and the laws of the countries where the contract is executed. The only difference is that this company will be registered in Russia (that is, taxes to the Russian budget) or in another country.
          The demand for such services (legal!) Is huge and it will not change due to the presence / absence of a law.
          1. nerd.su
            nerd.su 1 February 2016 13: 22
            +1
            Quote: strannik1985
            All the difference is this company will be registered in Russia (that is, taxes to the Russian budget) or in another country.

            That is, the creators of PMC laws are solely pleased for Russia? Fresh tradition, but hard to believe.
            If international laws allow, let them work on them, what’s the problem? And the instrument is more subtle, in which case it’s worse for Russia - to be responsible for the actions of the Russian company or which Cypriot thread? We will not answer for Cyprus, let the Cypriots understand. And the fact that Russian citizens are involved, so we will make sure that their rights are not greatly violated. But if they are to blame, let them answer. This is a delicate tool. And the Russian company that made the thread like a coup or a war in another state is an ax, and a laser.
            1. strannik1985
              strannik1985 1 February 2016 13: 37
              -1
              According to the first version of this law, I met the opinion that the law was dragged under someone specific to occupy the market, it seems that the law only complicated the activities of PMCs in Russia (for example, the requirement of 50 million rubles of registered capital for a company, etc.)
              Now, without the law, there are Russian companies involved in this type of activity.
              1. nerd.su
                nerd.su 1 February 2016 14: 08
                +1
                Quote: strannik1985
                Now, without the law, there are Russian companies involved in this type of activity.

                It turns out that the law is not needed.
                1. strannik1985
                  strannik1985 1 February 2016 14: 39
                  0
                  In fact, yes, the question is regarding the government from such companies, this business needs the same support as any other.
                  This, if you do not take the possible issues of using PMCs within the country.
                  1. Fat
                    Fat 2 February 2016 00: 38
                    0
                    Quote: strannik1985

                    This, if you do not take the possible issues of using PMCs within the country.

                    PMCs inside Russia are not needed. Already have private security companies and native police nearby hi
                    1. strannik1985
                      strannik1985 2 February 2016 05: 55
                      0
                      They do not always overlap functions, such as civilian mine clearance. Work in this area is already underway in Chechnya, but if necessary, the Chechen government could attract Russian firms by profile (there are such companies operating in Malaysia and the countries of the former Yugoslavia in Russia).
                    2. nerd.su
                      nerd.su 2 February 2016 09: 26
                      0
                      Quote: strannik1985
                      They do not always overlap functions, such as civilian mine clearance.

                      Ministry of Emergency Situations is also MO. Their sappers will not be hindered by the actual experience of mine clearance, there’s nothing else to spend budget money on private owners.
                    3. strannik1985
                      strannik1985 2 February 2016 10: 46
                      0
                      Ministry of Emergency Situations is also MO. Their sappers will not be hindered by the actual experience of mine clearance, there’s nothing else to spend budget money on private owners.

                      Two battalions (600 people) of the engineering brigade of the Southern Military District, 11 ammunition in 000 years are working. The CTO regime relatively recently ended, before it was completed there was no one to deal with mine, full-time engineering and engineer units in the IRD were involved. This land was stuffed with ammunition for two decades, and the combat training of a sapper is not limited to mine, and you can’t send anyone to it, the deminer must know about 4 different ammunition. The tasks of the Ministry of Emergencies and the Ministry of Emergencies are not limited to Chechnya; iron is creeping out of the land throughout Russia, and in Ingushetia and Dagestan they regularly throw new wahs.
                      There is a federal budget, and there is a local one, the republic’s authorities are free to spend it at their discretion.
            2. Glot
              Glot 1 February 2016 14: 56
              -2
              It turns out that the law is not needed.


              Of course ! It is necessary to allow the free sale of any weapon. And there, we will figure out who is right, who is wrong. laughing laughing laughing
              1. nerd.su
                nerd.su 1 February 2016 15: 04
                0
                if you are so free to interpret my words, then why allow something? Let's figure it out laughing
                1. Glot
                  Glot 1 February 2016 15: 12
                  0
                  if you are so free to interpret my words, then why allow something? Let's figure it out


                  Yes, this is SHUT. laughing
            3. The comment was deleted.
  • fif21
    fif21 1 February 2016 09: 37
    +3
    Quote: zoknyay82
    And PMCs will be the personal army of different oligarchs, Chubais and different Abramovichs. Otherwise, why the hell is it needed? Defend the homeland for lave?

    Familiarize yourself with the activities of American PMCs in Iraq, Afghanistan, Polish PMCs in Ukraine. PMCs can take part in any armed conflict, anywhere in the world where the activities of the armed forces of a particular country are impossible. In Russia there is an institute of ODR, but these are groups of several people, and their legal status is very slippery. hi
    1. nerd.su
      nerd.su 1 February 2016 11: 40
      0
      But what, some Polish PMCs openly declare their participation in the armed conflict in the Donbass? Can be more?
      And if they do not openly declare, can PMCs really take part in any armed conflict?
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Fat
    Fat 1 February 2016 13: 28
    0
    Quote: zoknyay82
    Yes, where does the knowledge and skills? Go to the army and manifest. or to the police. or chop. And PMCs will be the personal army of different oligarchs, Chubais and different Abramovichs. Otherwise, why the hell is it needed? Defend the homeland for lave?

    Remember why in the Russian Federation there is not even a civilian small arms in free circulation. The question of PMCs is of the same plan. IMHO A well-thought out, non-readable law on PMCs is needed yesterday. And weapons, and chop, and PMCs are just tools, however. hi
    1. strannik1985
      strannik1985 1 February 2016 13: 47
      0
      What kind of weapon? From civilian in the Russian Federation it is impossible only to CCW;
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Fat
        Fat 1 February 2016 23: 55
        0
        Quote: strannik1985
        What kind of weapon? From civilian in the Russian Federation it is impossible only to CCW;

        Free? I haven’t been to the gun shop for a long time belay We need to take a passport and visit, the SWR will suit me.
        1. strannik1985
          strannik1985 2 February 2016 05: 17
          0
          Under existing law, a license to acquire, five years of ownership of a smoothbore, and so on.
  • 34 region
    34 region 1 February 2016 07: 08
    +6
    Power support of multinational companies. This is the exact definition of PMC tasks. Here they are trying to bring the legal framework under this.
  • Pre-cat
    Pre-cat 1 February 2016 07: 30
    +3
    If you can’t prevent the booze, head it.
    Like it or not, there are mercenaries in Russia. But whose interests are they protecting? Only not state. In light of this, it seems to me that a PMC law is needed. But, very tough. For example, with an unconditional ban on activities in our country. On the prohibition of activities harmful to state interests (including abroad). Etc. A couple - another PMC of Russia would not hurt. To defend their interests in other countries without the involvement of official armed forces. Moreover, these companies, being private in form, should essentially be state-owned. It is quite simple to do this by holding a controlling stake in the state through shell companies. It would be a desire.
  • Maegrom
    Maegrom 1 February 2016 07: 34
    +3
    The introduction of PMCs automatically reduces the financing of the army and, ultimately, the state’s defense capabilities. The size of the budget and the list of tasks does not change. And in critical situations, PMCs always have the right not to take an order.
    1. fif21
      fif21 1 February 2016 09: 43
      +2
      Quote: Maegrom
      The introduction of PMCs automatically reduces the financing of the army and, ultimately, the state’s defense
      Controversial thesis. The army is financed from the state budget, PMCs with the money of the employer. And the fact that the state will be able to hire PMCs to help the army will only strengthen the state’s defense capabilities.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • vladimirvn
    vladimirvn 1 February 2016 08: 22
    +1
    It seems to me that I can go along the path of expanding the functions of private security companies. Their activities are well regulated. Some functions, protection of activities abroad would be useful.
  • TRex
    TRex 1 February 2016 08: 45
    +5
    Here, comrade ZOLDAT-A offers to put a platoon of marine corps for every transporter passing in the risk zone ... Of course, no pirate will risk attacking such a ship. Just let's figure it out - how many such platoons will be needed? And how much is in stock? I report: on each of the fleets, one MP brigade.
    It turns out - to hell with all the problems, combat training, military service, a special operation in Syria and to seat the Marines on commercial sides? Even if not just marines ... You can attract special forces, landing, internal troops.
    No guys. Talk about PMCs is still only in the form of projects, etc., but there is a need for them. It is for the performance of specific tasks that imply the presence of some armed force with certain powers. This is world experience and no matter how we sing about our mentality, about our laws, etc., at some point they will be created.
    The army cannot be "a plug in every barrel." Let him do his own thing.
  • 3vs
    3vs 1 February 2016 09: 05
    +2
    There should be no PMCs or "collectors" on the Russian soil!
    This is not our method!
    There are enough shpans ...
    1. soldner
      soldner 1 February 2016 10: 01
      +2
      And here the punks? In France, it would never occur to anyone to call Charles de Gaulle a mercenary, who in 1919, with the rank of Major in the Polish Army, marched through Volhynia with an infantry and tank detachment, and the United States honors the memory of the Poles Kosciuszko and Pulaski, the Frenchman Lafayette, and the German von Steuben, who served for hire. Here the question may arise about the distinction between the concepts of "mercenary" and "volunteer", "volunteer". But from the point of view of international law in the British interpretation, there is no fundamental difference between them. We can only talk about the difference in the motives of participation in the conflict on foreign territory.
  • taseka
    taseka 1 February 2016 09: 06
    +5
    But in vain! I also remember A. Lebed said - "There are people in the spirit of a lamb and there are wolves, and our task is to examine them and the wolves on the front line, and the sheep in the laundry !!!"
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. saygon66
      saygon66 1 February 2016 21: 50
      0
      - Shortly before his death, A. Lebed expressed the idea of ​​creating a "Russian Legion" - an organization similar to LE ...
  • soldner
    soldner 1 February 2016 09: 12
    +2
    Here again they carried them to the mercenaries in the spirit of Soviet propaganda. And this is a respected profession for centuries. January 22, 1506, when Pope Julius II hosted a reception in honor of his first 150 Swiss Guards. This day is considered the official date of the creation of the Swiss Guard. Its full name is "The Pope's Holy Guard Infantry Cohort of the Swiss," or in Latin, "Cohors pedestris Helvetiorum a sacra custodia Pontificis". This unit can rightfully be considered the oldest mercenary army in the world that has survived to this day. Today, only 100 Swiss serve in it, recruited in the Catholic cantons and must have served in the armed forces of their country. They are followed in seniority by the mercenary units of the Gurkha, serving Great Britain since 1816, and the Foreign Legion of France, created in 1831.
    Both Great Britain and Nepal and France are proud of these units of mercenaries, and in Switzerland they have become examples for education on military traditions. For example, in the city of Lucerne, a majestic monument was erected in honor of the Swiss guards of King Louis XVI of France - "The Dying Lion". Honest mercenaries on August 10, 1792 defended the Tuileries Palace from commoners, when King Louis and his family fled, forgetting to give the order to the guards to lay down their arms. They defended the empty palace, and, true to their word, they fought to the death. When the king realized it was too late, all the guardsmen, up to 850 people, were massacred.
    1. Fat
      Fat 1 February 2016 13: 43
      0
      Probably, it makes sense to remember both the Gurkas and the "foreign legion" to you, although "mercenary" in Our country is a crime.
  • igorka357
    igorka357 1 February 2016 09: 27
    0
    Did everyone ... kill Zoldata-A? And at the beginning, he began so briskly "PMC-kaka, they only know how to thump", and the fact that there people went through several points, he did not even think, if only to create a show-off, why couldn't for the first comment of the plus signs to grab wink and Zoldaten_A?
    1. goblin xnumx
      goblin xnumx 1 February 2016 11: 54
      +2
      people on the site become smaller, then PMCs are discussed, but someone sees the current rating :)
  • Alexander S.
    Alexander S. 1 February 2016 09: 45
    +2
    if they are so persistently trying to promote the law on PMCs ... then something is unclean here. And nafik is needed. Here only one business is going. And in general ... many people write here ... that there are people ... who have gone a few points ... experienced ... they can be used ... so what's the problem ... let them go to the army ... serve the Motherland. Or it doesn’t roll them .. more importantly serve your pocket? in the fire chamber of PMCs. There is an army ... so let it protect us .. our citizens .. at home and abroad. Moreover, it is her direct duty. And then first the state will cease to protect us abroad ... then one police force will remain .. and then will we remove everything? But there is one conclusion. The scarecrow for America has not gone away.
  • Andrew
    Andrew 1 February 2016 09: 55
    +1
    A private military company is an armed gang killing for hire, which should not be subject to any international standards of warfare.
  • strannik1985
    strannik1985 1 February 2016 10: 20
    +2
    Quote: Andrew
    A private military company is an armed gang killing for hire, which should not be subject to any international standards of warfare.

    That is, the employees of the Maritime Division of the RSB Group, to whom the captains of the tankers Glard 1 and Glard 2 wrote letters of thanks, are the criminals?
    1. Villon
      Villon 1 February 2016 12: 55
      0
      Quote: strannik1985
      Quote: Andrew
      A private military company is an armed gang killing for hire, which should not be subject to any international standards of warfare.

      That is, the employees of the Maritime Division of the RSB Group are criminals?

      A gang is not necessarily criminals.

      Quote: Wikipedia
      "In the Middle Ages, a gang were called units of knightly and other cavalry, and sometimes illegal formations (for example, feudal lords). The word comes from ribbons, an identification mark in the form of an armband, which was used in battles by brightly dressed mercenaries of the late Middle Ages.
      (One of the basic meanings of the word "band" is tape.)

      Quote: Wikipedia
      In Russia, the term gang has become commonly used since the Polish uprising of 1863, as Polish rebels called their units "parties" or "gangs"
      1. strannik1985
        strannik1985 1 February 2016 13: 31
        0
        So now the conversation is not about the past, but about the present. Who else can be people killing for hire, which should not be subject to any international standards?
  • Vega
    Vega 1 February 2016 12: 00
    +1
    Well figured out how to breed legalized, armed and trained gangs of money "aces", otherwise they do not sleep well.
    1. Glot
      Glot 1 February 2016 12: 34
      0
      Well figured out how to breed legalized, armed and trained gangs of money "aces", otherwise they do not sleep well.


      Why, I think they sleep very well and sweetly. laughing
      On the contrary, it will be bad for you personally to sleep, knowing that we have PMCs in the Country, and that these PMCs are guarding someone's private interests somewhere? I personally do not, it will be parallel to me. smile As well as absolutely in parallel which yacht Abramovich has or how much money Chubais paid for dinner in a certain restaurant. smile
  • carabiner sks
    carabiner sks 1 February 2016 12: 41
    +2
    Question: why do we generally follow these international rules - where can the armed forces be used, and where not? We have state-owned armed forces, and use them in the interests of the state, without regard to American fashion. We don’t have enough marines to guard ships - so create units adapted for this. And private sharashka we do not need. My view of things.
  • Nitarius
    Nitarius 1 February 2016 13: 16
    +1
    And what prevents .. THE LAW to indicate .. that Private companies can rent a GOS.VOYSKA for security overseas?
    WHAT prevents that ??? GOS.ARMII-to fulfill such contracts .. in fact, IF PROPERTY IN THE RUSSIAN JURISDICTION (private .. but pays taxes, etc.) then the property of citizens of the Russian Federation! Defend like it should!
    Two honest to say relationship ..
    1. ALEA IACTA EST
      ALEA IACTA EST 1 February 2016 19: 56
      +1
      Quote: Nitarius
      Rent GOS.VOYSKA

      The army is not a prostitute to trade in herself.
  • Lanista
    Lanista 1 February 2016 13: 19
    +2
    Do you know who I envy?
    Iran.
    As Alexander III said, "Russia has two allies - the army and the navy." And that's all.
    But Iran has an army, navy, Hezbollah and the IRGC.
    Where it is impossible to use the army for foreign policy reasons, the IRGC can be used: they say, "it was the decision of the IRGC leadership, and we, the official government of Iran, are out of business." With Hezbollah, it's even easier - "it's not us at all, it's some kind of Palestinian-Lebanese movement, but the fact that they are Shiites is half of the Shiites in Lebanon. They are not Persians, then what are the claims to us?" As a result, Iran has a VERY flexible toolkit for solving delicate military-political issues.
    And we have (in addition to the army and navy) unless semi-official Cossacks.
    Oh yes, even Rospotrebnadzor is "the most effective subdivision in all law enforcement agencies of the Russian Federation."
    In general, my IMHO - we need PMCs.
  • LPD17
    LPD17 1 February 2016 14: 05
    0
    But how is Israel regulated in the field of PMCs?
  • COLLECTOR-2015
    COLLECTOR-2015 1 February 2016 14: 05
    0
    I don’t know who is right in the debate about whether PMCs are needed in Russia or not, but I can say that sailors of ships flying under Russian flags should not fight off pirates armed with machine guns with the help of hoses and slingshots (this is not a joke but a story of one sailor). As practice shows, shots from a ship at approaching boats with pirates sober up filibusters and make them turn back.
  • TsUS-Air Force
    TsUS-Air Force 1 February 2016 14: 35
    0
    Why do we need rabid mercenaries who do not obey anyone? it’s better to develop your army and if special units are really needed, so develop and finance special forces!
    1. Glot
      Glot 1 February 2016 14: 54
      0
      Why do we need rabid mercenaries who do not obey anyone?


      Well, why immediately mad, and disobeying anyone?
      You should not go to extremes.

      it’s better to develop your army and if special units are really needed, so develop and finance special forces!


      Here it is.
      But, PMCs, they are still not special forces. Yes, and special forces ... What exactly do you mean by this?
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • would
    would 1 February 2016 16: 57
    +6
    In general, in the comments, as always, people who (I hope I'm wrong) know what PMCs are only from computer games and films where there are huge armies of unprincipled mercenaries that capture entire states and even the USA. And generally speaking

    A private military company is an armed gang killing for hire, which should not be subject to any international standards of warfare.


    And now a little bit of sober thoughts from me. Typical PMCs are engaged in the same thing as ordinary private security companies, that is, the protection of persons and property. The only difference is that they do it on the territory of foreign states and often in zones of military conflict. Why are they needed if there is an army? Take hundreds of ships that constantly pass through pirate-hazardous areas and need protection. At least a platoon of fighters should be assigned to each of them, and there should be some kind of floating control base in their area of ​​action ... Where will we get so many people? It is necessary to create either a separate "branch" of the Marine Corps with a bunch of personnel and fighters, or even a separate branch of the military. Let's say they created ... but how will the payment take place? Any army of the world cannot be hired by an individual or a private organization, a contract cannot be concluded with it and, as a result, payment is made. This is in principle impossible logically. Are we going to pay from the budget? And even if there is a payment, it is worth remembering that a soldier has a bunch of different benefits, insurance, allowances and he will come out significantly more expensive than a foreign PMC. Sense then if they will hire private traders anyway?

    Ok, skip it. And how to provide the necessary flexibility in contracting and work? The army as a huge state structure is famous for its comparative slowness. But what about the legal consequences of being in the military contingent near certain states?

    Everyone understood a long time ago that the state army is physically incapable of effectively protecting private individuals and private organizations even in the territory of their country, and there is nothing to talk about abroad. That is why PMCs were created which, possessing the broadest flexibility in the legal field, are capable of performing these tasks. They can be hired by a private person or organization without problems, they have a very flexible number, minimal legal consequences and maximum flexibility in the market. Yes, the market. PMC as a private organization provides services to the security market. Contrary to films and computer games, most PMCs are physically incapable of serious participation in any military conflicts, they have too few people and no equipment. Move on

    Other PMCs train foreign units. I don’t know for certain (well, you understand, all these are fairy tales and you don’t need to believe this at all) that the Ministry of Defense is sending military specialists to ... certain countries, including Africa, through military commissariats. That is, in this case, such a structure exists. Only now the state must first request such specialists, then it must go through the Ministry of Defense and not only and at the exit we get a lot of time and again the slowness of a large state organization. But if there is a PMC, then the state can simply and very quickly conclude a contract with them for the provision of certain services.

    But there are PMCs that are far from being so popular in computer games and films. They are engaged in mine clearance and other sapper works, servicing military equipment (hmmm ... why do I remember Kamaz and Uralvagonzavod?), Transporting military goods, analyzing intelligence information (Snowden worked in such PMCs) and there will probably be something else. And all these companies are uniquely controlled by their government and without its rarefaction can not conduct their activities. A number of them are generally intelligence tools in their dirty games.
    1. TsUS-Air Force
      TsUS-Air Force 1 February 2016 22: 49
      0
      chevek chevek even as an honest military company call them. protection of our deep departments abroad? and what’s our special what is doing? Who is the guardian now? in your pennant, zenith, KUOSSovtsy what were they doing? and besides security, don’t start it so planes with foreign rulers fell and all the most secret special operations happened under the guise of accidentally walking, gypsum fell, woke up if you woke up. and he is a mercenary and a mercenary! Your day is ours tomorrow. now they are changing everywhere everywhere the departmental Ministry of Internal Affairs for Chopovites. and who are they these Chopovtsy? I myself worked in them for 2 years. sharash office all !!!
    2. TsUS-Air Force
      TsUS-Air Force 1 February 2016 22: 52
      +1
      But if there is a PMC, then the state can simply and very quickly conclude a contract with them for the provision of certain services .---- and the rest of the time until these chevek are involved by the state, they will walk and carry children in their arms and on weekends Families have a walk? and what will they feed on? it is correct that to fulfill orders of gangs of all the states of the world who lost their lives and had something to live on !!!
  • ALEA IACTA EST
    ALEA IACTA EST 1 February 2016 17: 24
    +2
    Only the state should have troops.
  • 8140
    8140 1 February 2016 19: 39
    +2
    Hedgehog it is clear that it is impossible to turn a blind eye to such an instrument of foreign policy. If you do not have such leverage, then it is not a fact that the one who has it will not apply it against you. Especially on limited TVD and in troubled conflicts.
    As you are not tired of a full-length white horse, they still give birth.
    The mind is not weakness.
    In foreign policy, and everywhere there is no white and black, everything is gray.
    You must be able to use skillfully with tools, and not be afraid of them.
    And if it is not a victory with us, so at all costs.
    There is a layer of professionals who will do the job and save a lot of lives of conscripts and contractors.
    State control, yes, but such that only it knows about it) and the rest is guesswork)
  • 1536
    1536 1 February 2016 20: 12
    +2
    In my opinion, the law on PMCs should be adopted, because they still exist. But their activities should be regulated by this law. So as not to fall into the service of ghouls, to whom the skin is more expensive than soldier's honor and duty. And without law, these PMCs will really serve anyone, for what, anything, and whatever. It should be pleasing to the law, protecting first of all the interests of the country and its capital. And not the local kings and bandits.
  • Idiot
    Idiot 1 February 2016 20: 15
    +2
    If there is demand, then there must be supply. There is a category of people who are professionally trained and for some reason left our power structures, who do not know and do not want to do anything else. These people, at best, leave the country, go into crime ... For example, it would be foolish to deny that we have prostitution or gambling. PMCs exist all over the world and they are profitable, and most importantly, as it was often said above, PMCs help the state solve various delicate problems abroad. If it is impossible to fight against something, this something should be headed and, accordingly, profitable. Are we more stupid than others, or let our somewhat reckless, but no less native guys, solve other people's problems of countries alien to us? In the "foreign legion", for example. In my opinion, Russian PMCs are needed, but they should not be used on the territory of the Russian Federation or allied countries without their consent, the activities of PMCs should be necessarily licensed by the special services of the Russian Federation and strictly controlled by them, and possibly financed through certain funds. It is possible by law to prohibit foreign citizens or citizens of the Russian Federation with a criminal record from working in PMCs. Something like this.
  • saper2463
    saper2463 2 February 2016 01: 25
    0
    We must look into the future, let's say 10 years ahead, this is the minimum. If PMCs are not strictly controlled by the state, and within the meaning of the law, I understand that they will not, then in the future we are legitimate !!! arming the financial elite of our country. And since the interests of financiers do not always coincide with the interests of the state, then ...
    Thus, PMCs not subordinate to the Defense Ministry, the FSB, or the government are just an additional tool for manipulating our "Western partners" through our financial elite to ours !!! the state. That in the future, after 2020-25, and this is not hidden, should lead to the division of the Russian Federation into several countries ...
    1. Mikhalychch
      Mikhalychch 2 February 2016 03: 55
      0
      But how can it be controlled by the state, since this is a private unit, yes.
  • Mikhalychch
    Mikhalychch 2 February 2016 03: 53
    0
    There is not enough money for defense, but they are about PMCs. The state is afraid to create a municipal police, such as the MOB during the Soviet era, but here it will suddenly create some sort of "Makhnovist subdivision".
  • iouris
    iouris 2 February 2016 16: 10
    +1
    Who is there all the time "tossing us"? PMCs only fight for money. The one who pays the most is the PMC. If the army is not able to solve its problems, then that's it - we have arrived, we need to change something in the state.