Military Review

Defense problems of the Republic of Belarus

80



Good work is always the fruit of collective creativity, and here it is: I read articles about the military capabilities of Belarus, comments on them on VO, and certain unusual thoughts naturally came to mind. Here we talk about the Belarusian people, that we are brothers, that nothing will separate us, and everything will be fine. But due to the nature of the resource I wanted to raise one interesting topic: what about the defense of the fraternal republic?

In the light of recent events in Europe and the Middle East, the question is not at all idle. The time today is restless, state sovereignty has finally turned into a ridiculous convention, it will not be out of place to look at the situation from such a purely military point of view. No, I’m not going to draw arrows and play operations, I’ll just appreciate the defense capability of Belarus as a whole.

So, as it became clear from the publications on “VO”: the Republic of Belarus itself has neither the resources nor the capabilities to carry out at least a short-term defense against the invasion of a powerful modern army. Even aviation, as it turned out, no (I, frankly, was shocked by this fact). So, Belarusians themselves cannot survive. Well, Russia, in theory, could supply them with modern technology. At his own expense, it is understandable: the western frontiers must be defended, Alexander Lukashenko is our closest ally and he does not have money for expensive weapons systems. Here is about something like that wrote on this resource by an author from Belarus. About the supply of air defense systems. And the fact that for Russia the commercial benefit (from the sale of these systems) is more important than the joint protection of the "dangerous" western borders.

At first glance, everything sounds very, very logical: having a well-equipped, friendly army in front of you is great, what doubts can there be? The problem is that Russia is the largest (largest) country in the world with limited resources. And modern weapons systems are required in the west, in the south, and in the east. And even in the north, oddly enough. But Lukashenka and his army will close Russia from the west ... This is where the main doubts lie: to pump Belarus weapons You can help bring the army to modern standards, too, really. The question is different.

Political question: for whom will this army fight? And will she fight at all? Here, vague doubts begin to torment me. All post-Soviet история Russia-Belarus relations proved one simple fact: Lukashenko prefers to build them according to the principle - “nipple system”. That is, everything good should go only in one direction (in the direction of Minsk). Any attempt to get something “backwards” leads to scandals, accusations of imperial dictatorship and complete sabotage. I somehow don’t recall the reverse examples. Even in the case of the fight against ISIS, Lukashenko did not support us (at least in words).

It is this sad story of mutual friendship that gives rise to certain suspicions. Time, as already mentioned, is hectic, Russia's resources are very limited, and modern weapons systems are literally worth their weight in blood. Our blood. And if these systems are transferred to parts of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, then with absolute certainty we can say that in the event of an attack on Russia, they will certainly be used for their intended purpose. What can be said in the case of the transfer of the same expensive systems of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Belarus? Who and what can guarantee in this case? As I understand it, on the one hand, we are allies, on the other hand, the troops of the Republic of Belarus can only be applied on the territory of the Republic of Belarus according to the adopted laws. Such here they are peaceful. That is, if these systems are suddenly required in the other direction, we are guaranteed not to receive them.

Arguing further, the end of the “zero” and the beginning of the “tenth” were marked by numerous political crises in the former post-Soviet space: Moldova, Georgia, Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan ... I don’t recall a single case where Belarus clearly, quickly and unequivocally sided with Russia . There was no such once. Rather, the father with some strange constancy chose the reverse side. You know, the reasons for this are no longer so important, the result is important: in the event of a political crisis (it is from there, the legs of all wars usually grow) we are quite likely that we cannot observe the official Minsk on our side of the barricades. The transfer of some modern weapons systems in significant quantities in these hands looks frankly absurd.

Next: Belarus can be “pumped up” with weapons endlessly, but you can always ask for more, even more (not only weapons - trite money for its maintenance). And in the case of any refusing to make a tantrum and start stomping your feet and threatening that if you don’t pay, then RB will stop serving as your western outpost ... Sorry, why do we need this? Even in the case of complete staffing with new equipment, it is not a fact that this army will receive effective leadership. So - not an option.

And what working version do we have now? The army of the Republic of Belarus, as we all understand, is relatively weak, and the army of the Russian Federation is not allowed to enter the territory of Belarus. Well, how will defense be ensured at H hour? That's all they say that we are reliable allies, but even in the purely military sphere this is not very visible. A strange story with a new air base - it clearly showed. Compare, Poland asks the US to send troops into its territory, insists, the Baltic States are asking. Belarus is actively “bargaining”. That is, for the Belarusians, the issue of Russia's security is a question of bargaining: pay - there will be security for you, do not pay ... And many Belarusians actively admire the “turnaround” of the father - oh the rogue!

As I understand it, in principle, they do not believe in a foreign invasion of their territory. The Old Man does not want war, which means it will never be there. Almost like Nicholas II before the Russian-Japanese. It is striking that the Belarusian leadership did not see the aggression of the West in neighboring Ukraine: the legitimate president was overthrown (he was recognized all and no one called it “the last dictator of Europe”), foreign puppets were put at the head of the country, mass murders of dissenters began. The Minsk Wise Men did not want to see anything of this. The West is holy. They saw the "annexation of the Crimea." That's where the threat is! And with new Kiev authorities can work well ... Well, a precedent has been created. (By the way, yes, our allies look at the situation through the eyes of the West, which is typical, and they require explanations from the “Russian aggressors”).

So, Belarus hardly prepares for a “repelling the threat from the West”, and it hardly believes it. Russians want to have an air base for self-defense - let them pay. Here again I met the reasoning that if the NATO threat increases, Russia and Belarus will have time to prepare and regroup the troops. I read and cried. "There is time - there is Möller ...", - so, probably, Army General Pavlov could talk in May 1941, if he had Möller ... "A real war always begins suddenly" (the film "Kill the Dragon"). No, if anything happens, dad immediately will remember the allied obligations of RUSSIA: Russia must save the fraternal people of Belarus. But not before.

The problem is that in the conditions of the conflict that began, the transfer of large masses of troops to the battle area is always a problem. Under the domination of NATO aircraft (we have no bases in Belarus, and Belarusians do not have aviation). To drive trains under bombing, as in 41, but because the old man did not wait for the war and did not prepare for it? Is it worth it? I do not know, but if this is not done, it will immediately be regarded as a “betrayal of the Belarusian ally”. Official Minsk in no way seriously opposes the West and does not want to, but in the event of an attack, it will absolutely count on the defense of Russia: “We are allies ...”. That is, they repeat this strange mantra and "sleep peacefully."

In general, the Germans used the phrase “ballast type ally” to characterize their “friends” in two world wars. Remember the old joke about how many German divisions are needed to attack / defend Romania? Something like that. About Belarus we can say - an ally of the "problem" type. I have absolutely no idea how to defend Belarus in the existing scenario, when our soldiers are simply not allowed in there. It takes time to organize the defense. Will it in case of what? I doubt it. But modern Russia doesn’t have so many troops that, following the example of 1941, ruin them in a border meat grinder ...

So Belarus is a minus rather than a plus. But if something happens, well, then they will immediately require the Russian troops, just like they require fast delivery pizza. But not before. They will decide when they need our troops. (We must learn to respect their sovereignty?) So everything is sad here. No, from the point of view of a civilian (like Lukashenko) everything is logical: we were attacked, we are allies - save! From a military point of view, everything is sad ... and late and hopeless. He probably thinks that the Russian group in Belarus, if necessary, can be deployed in half a day. Alas. And even for a week ...

I've met the opinion that Lukashenka will not “ruin the country” in case anything happens. And what are his options, forgive him? And who will ask him? He was given security guarantees? And Steinmeier signed on paper? It is important. So the neutrality of the Republic of Belarus is from the realm of fantasy. It is too unsuccessfully located - this is Belarus-Belarus ... Or too well, this is how to look. I know someone will voice the topic of nuclear weapons. Say, if anything, then we will strike at once. Is not a fact. Nuclear weapons are the last hope of foul. If nothing else at all.

That is, in today's situation it is not at all clear how to defend it - Belarus. Militarily, it’s unclear, even more unclear politically. Ally, well, let's say, but a great power defense plan cannot depend on the whims of one person. Even if this person heads the union state. Either he wants, he does not want, he does not decide. And for each of his sneeze to have a separate version of the plan? It is clear that no one will do this. How is this done, for example, in South Korea: in the event of a war, the South Korean army automatically goes under the command of the United States, the United States Army in peacetime feels at home in Seoul, in return, that's it - only in return, the United States guarantees security to its South Korean ally. By the way, even with Germany and Japan - something like that. Although not so much, but they have a different position.

In the event of war, there is a clear military vertical and none: "I changed my mind." I’m even afraid to imagine how our relations with Lukashenka will be built in the event of a military conflict. They say: "shoulder to shoulder." Already interesting. The military structure assumes only 1 (one) decision-making center in this theater. All attempts to "experiment" always and everywhere ended the same way. So who will be in charge? Knowing Alexander G., one can say for sure: he will not give up his army under the command of Moscow. That is, two army structures: Russian and Belarusian will defend in the same territory in parallel? Without a general command? Funny.

As there: “There is no talk of any support at the teaching. The armies of the two countries in the status of equal partners are learning to repel any external aggression (2013 West). ” He wrote obviously a military man. Two partners, equal. In the case of a real war, this can only end in one - a crushing defeat. War is not a theater. And not even "role-playing games." Here in NATO - the order - there are no "equal partners". There is a clear army vertical. And they invented it - I am not your subordinate, I am an equal partner! And I do not need to order - I myself know what to do!

No, in principle, if another person were at the head of Belarus, one would assume that behind the scenes ... But not with Alexander Grigorievich ... I still wonder what our “joint defense” will look like. Will you transfer the Russian units directly to the subordination of Lukashenko, and will he, in the Polissya swamps, pretend to be a new Zhukov? You understand that it will not work - today we don’t have enough parts for such “experiments”. Create a collegial Russian-Belarusian advisory body? Oh, he will win. History lovers - tell me about examples when “equal partners” successfully fought with someone ... And even if there is something to be “coordinated”, then in fact “Lukashenko will lead his own army and only himself, and the joint plan it's for Russians. A man like that.

Of course, it is possible to conduct exercises for a specific scenario, but in real life ... In real life, one command is needed, otherwise it is impossible to fight. And who will be the commander? I wonder how all this is represented by the Belarusian military? They have little of their strength, and in any case they will not obey Moscow. So what? As I understand it, in the “case of what” Mr. Lukashenko will decide everything himself. He loves this business and the person unpredictable. I will say this: with such muddy alignments, it is quite difficult to give RBs any guarantees there. Well, it does not happen like this: one side needs something clearly and concretely, while the other “will look at the circumstances.”

Let's say, Russia gathers serious defense forces on the territory of the Republic of Belarus (based on intelligence). And in last moment Alexander Grigorievich declares that there is a conflict between NATO and Russia, and he has no conflict with NATO and is not foreseen, and he will not allow anyone to fight on his land. So what? Rewrite all defense plans? Is it fast to bring troops east to an open field? Further, the funny thing is, even such a “swift conclusion” will have to be coordinated with Minsk - the land is Belarusian! And the dad can "brake" him. And he will be right. He cannot allow all the roads to be driven by Russian equipment. And conflicts are possible.

So, as is the case in NATO, it was taken in the Warsaw Pact: it’s up to someone to decide. And it will be necessary to decide quickly. And we have a question with the air base for half a year frozen. How do you imagine making decisions in the event of hostilities? Also decide on half a year? As the Belarusians expressed about the base - there will be bargaining ... An interesting approach. Russia is obliged to provide general security, but Belarus is not obliged to provide it with WFP for this purpose at all, however you wish. Provide. But if anything happens, the Belarusians, of course, will remember: we counted on you, thought you were allies.

Something like this, the Serbs suddenly remembered Russia just before the NATO bombings. And in fact, which is typical, at the time, too, refused to place the naval base of the USSR, he would have prevented them from being friends with the West. And then they remembered when it was hot, and they were very offended when we did not save them. But during the Cold War, no one in Belgrade recalled that the Russians and the Serbs were brothers. It was unprofitable. Then he remembered. It turns out that all these decades, when the fate of the Cold War was being decided, and when they looked through us as if through glass, they secretly considered us allies. That's it, Mikhalych ...

As a result, lost to the USSR and the SFRY. It does not matter that separately. And the SFRY was destroyed at once after the USSR. “Neutrality” and distancing from the Russians did not save them. And they considered themselves Europeans. But not burned out. By the way, the collapse of the USSR almost coincided with the fall of another “independent” European dictator - Ceausescu. By the way, he was shot. He was needed (with his “distancing from the USSR”) - he was cherished and cherished, stopped being needed - was shot like a dog ... So the idea that Belarus is separate and the Russian Federation separately is quite funny. Nobody will ever leave Belarus alone - this is the sweet illusion of the name Tito-Ceausescu.

You see, the leaders of the Anglo-Saxon world have such a joke: first, they give the indigenous leaders "security guarantees", and then, when the need for "leaders of the Redskins" disappears, they are fed to dogs. Something like this. No, if you have a paper with Steinmeier's signature, sleep well. Steinmeier is an honest guy.

So, I think, the possibilities of the Russian Armed Forces in Minsk will be remembered immediately after the situation becomes completely catastrophic. That is, when it will be somewhat late to do something. There is also a catch: the plan of war is always drawn up in advance in peacetime. Detailed such, with cards, secret. But in advance. And here we need complete certainty: what we have and what we can do. There may be several options, but not fifty in any way, for all occasions - otherwise we will get confused in our plans and, until we unravel, the war will end. And when drawing up such a plan in modern Russia, several questions immediately arise about Belarus. We must defend this cell, but we cannot go there yet, and it is unknown when we can and can we even ...

In short, total uncertainty. And how, forgive, to take this into account in the plans? There will be a war, will we decide there? It is interesting. All the arguments that we are two fraternal peoples cannot help in military planning. To plan the movement of troops on a friendly-neutral territory, where we are stupidly not allowed, is absurd. Conclusion: the Russian defense plan will be drawn up without taking into account the need for the defense of Belarus. Exactly. To remain in the most intense period of deployment of troops in complete uncertainty - no one can afford. Therefore, when Lukashenka starts “cutting off the phones”, demanding help, there simply will not be free troops, and even later they will be moved to the Republic of Belarus.

No, it will certainly help to help him, but it is unlikely to save at any cost. Two equal "partners" ... You guys started playing politics. For example, the US Air Force sits down and takes off in Japan like at home - they don't even need permission. And why? No, not because. The fact is that the United States guarantees the security of the territory of Japan. How do you do it with bare hands? If there is a danger from Russia, China or S. Korea - the USA required parry her. And this duty gives rise to the right to freely transfer combat aircraft into Japanese territory. Imagine - at the weekend there was a military crisis, no one of the Japanese could get through, the translators were all away on the street. And what to do? Nothing, and then refer to the lack of permission?

Therefore, as a last resort, no one will ask anyone: the US and Japan allies and the US guaranteed the security of Japan. Compare the military-industrial potential of Japan and Belarus. And yet. By the way, Japan highly appreciates guarantees from the United States and is carefully studying the circumstances in which they will be implemented and to which territories they extend (in the Y. Kuriles, they by the waydo not apply). They are even more appreciated by South Korea, who has a powerful industry and a good army. Even after the monstrous wiretapping scandal, Germany’s position was very calm: the US is our ally, they ensure our security. In principle, in the context of the weakness of the Bundeswehr - it is logical. And Germany, which has a strong economy and has no hostile neighbors, appreciates US security guarantees. By the way, based on historical experience, it can be assumed that the obligations of the United States will never conflict with the interests of the United States. But in any case, no one expects the United States to take any action beyond their written commitments. It does not occur to anyone.

Thus, the leading industrial powers of the planet, such as Japan, South Korea and Germany, very highly value those “security guarantees” and are prepared to pay dearly for the American “umbrella”. Well - it is quite understandable in our anxious time (without irony). In Belarus, on the other hand, security matters are openly disregarding: there is no serious work, no resources, relations with Russia are incomprehensible and they are constantly deteriorating. But dad actively pretends to be a "defencist". What, they say, something, and the security of the Belarusians, he provided. I wonder how? And what? Maybe "security guarantees" received? Or the magic phrase at the moment X: "And we thought - our Russian allies!". And then you do not need to “think”, you need to build a joint defense.

And in this case, there can be no talk of any “equal partners”: the Russian Federation will ensure the security of the Republic of Belarus, and not vice versa (Belarusians, like medieval feudal lords, fight only on their own territory). And the role of the army of Belarus, with such a scenario, is to be part of the joint first echelon and, oddly enough, to carry out the commands of Moscow, and not Minsk. But this, as we all understand, is unscientific fantasy. And what will happen in the current reality? And in the current reality, Lukashenko, surprisingly, the future of his country only in no way binds Russia and will “float up” separately or try to do it. By the way, this also sounds in official Belarusian sources: on the one hand, NATO, on the other - Russia, and between them - the conflict.

And in the middle "Polesie Switzerland", which has found its own unique historical path.

Author:
Photos used:
topwar.ru
80 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Wiruz
    Wiruz 22 March 2016 12: 42
    -5
    What is it? Again article on the topic "we need to arm ourselves, otherwise Russia will occupy Mogilev tomorrow"? wassat
    1. siberalt
      siberalt 22 March 2016 12: 47
      +35
      Come Belarus to the Russian province and the defense problems will disappear. But there will be one less president. Maybe this is the whole problem? hi
      1. maxiban
        maxiban 22 March 2016 12: 49
        +12
        It is necessary to work with Belarus, to support it whenever possible. Whatever happens, as with Ukraine. It is clear that Lukashenko is defending his interests; compromises must be found.
        1. vovanpain
          vovanpain 22 March 2016 12: 56
          +26
          Quote: maxiban
          Whatever happens, as with Ukraine

          That's it, that it wouldn’t work out like with Ukraine, the dad doesn’t have to sit on 2 chairs, Yanukovosch tried, now he is wiping his tears in Rostov. hi
          1. Pravdarm
            Pravdarm 22 March 2016 13: 05
            +18
            Quote: maxiban
            support
            This is what Butska needs! And the fact that he said to couple Ashenka that Russia annexed Crimea is for normal diplomatic relations! And the trucks from Kaliningrad annexed - also nonsense!
            Give gas, oil! Do not forget about weapons! By reduced, fraternal, so to speak. And then I'll go to Europe! Ooooh, scared!
            That one is a cunning friend!
            1. marl
              marl 22 March 2016 13: 33
              +4
              Quote: Pravdarm
              That one is a cunning friend!

              Erdoganization is taking place with Dad - he saw enough of him blackmailing Europe and decided to use this toolkit.
              1. Temples
                Temples 22 March 2016 14: 35
                +16
                It is necessary to work with Belarus, to support it whenever possible.

                You need to work for yourself.
                In Russia, you need to make a decent life.
                No one drove the Belarusians and all the other fragments.
                They themselves decided to reign. So flag in hand!
            2. Amatar
              Amatar 23 March 2016 13: 42
              +1
              Is it called something differently? When Germany annexed Austria, there, too, almost 100% of the population were "For" and the fraternal people were greeted with flowers. So it is in the Crimea. And it doesn't matter what arguments and excuses are given.
              The fact remains, as the saying goes, one cannot erase words from a song.
              1. avt
                avt 23 March 2016 14: 58
                +2
                Quote: Amatar
                ? When Germany annexed Austria,

                And when, in fact, Austria was part of Germany in the historical period BEFORE the period described by you ?? Nothing that there were different empires in general?
                Quote: Amatar
                And it doesn’t matter what arguments and justifications are given.

                So start with this, and then about some kind of "Anschluss" Well, if oh-oh-very impatient to draw historical analogies, then this is more likely the return of the territories rejected by the results of the Versailles Peace. personally, on the map, Crimea was cut off from Russia, when the results of the First World War were cut, about which this map is quite preserved in the library of Congress.
          2. maxiban
            maxiban 22 March 2016 13: 25
            +7
            That's it, that it wouldn’t work out like with Ukraine, the dad doesn’t have to sit on 2 chairs, Yanukovosch tried, now he is wiping his tears in Rostov.


            Yanukovosch completely rotten scum. It was necessary to put a more adequate person in his place. At the same time work on the elimination of rags, battered and other riffraff. And it would be all quiet. Kalamoisky would pump gas, Valtsman would make chocolates. American agents would sit at headquarters in Warsaw or Vilnius, and not in Kiev, and would scratch their turnips on what to do about it.
            1. scientist
              scientist 22 March 2016 15: 05
              +17
              Quote: maxiban
              support whenever possible. Whatever happens, as with Ukraine

              Russia has invested more than $ 40 billion in the Ukrainian economy. The amount of investments in the economies of Belarus and Kazakhstan is several times less, but the result may be exactly the same. This is the main proof that it is impossible to buy friendship for money, even very large ones. Russia's artificial support for clan and dictatorial regimes could end in disaster. In words, they talk about friendship and brotherhood, in fact, hiding behind a multi-vector policy, they are trying to drag not only "chestnuts out of the fire", but also actually make military plans against Russia, with great pleasure they cooperate in the military sphere with those whom Russia is forced to resist.
              For example, on the school maps of "friends of Russia" Crimea continues to be Ukrainian. Now hundreds of Ukrainian and Turkish companies are now dumping the prices of goods and services in the CSTO countries, trying to get into the EAEU and CU markets. It's amazing that no one notices this. Moreover, if 10 years ago “quite by accident” there would have been a fuss about the implementation of the project for modernizing the air defense of Kazakhstan, now the entire region from the borders of Russia to Afghanistan would be controlled by the British company Bae Sistems or the American Lockheed Martin.
              The next important factor is the investments of the CSTO countries in the common treasury of defense capabilities. For example, NATO countries have agreements that the defense budget should be at least 3% of GDP. But the allies of Russia, I think it is possible to have a military budget of less than 1% and at the same time buy NATO weapons and communications systems that can interact with the Russian only through open channels. And this is due to the fact that the West sells military systems to these countries at market prices, from which the proteges of the eternal presidents have decent kickbacks. But Russia sells all military and military equipment at domestic prices of the manufacturer’s factory, under the CSTO agreement, and there can’t be any kickbacks there. So the Russian weapons in Belarus and Kazakhstan are scammed by everyone.
              1. Vikmay16
                Vikmay16 22 March 2016 22: 39
                +2
                Gold words! All right!
            2. Vikmay16
              Vikmay16 22 March 2016 22: 32
              +2
              The West will not let anyone sit still! The silent war has been going on for a long time!
          3. Ros 56
            Ros 56 22 March 2016 13: 25
            +5
            Quote: vovanpain
            , now in Rostov wipes away tears.


            I would like to wipe away the tears with billions. Yes, he stared at it all, big and fat.
        2. avt
          avt 22 March 2016 12: 57
          +8
          Quote: maxiban
          It is necessary to work with Belarus, to support it whenever possible.

          wassat This is much more support then ???
          Quote: maxiban
          Whatever happens, as with Ukraine.

          Or maybe they themselves should do something in this direction? And while everything, not even what is being done - they say, is perceived more and more as “Russian imperialism.” And after all, remembering Batskino what is between the anvil and the hammer, you can really find yourself on an anvil under the hammer.
        3. Leprekon
          Leprekon 22 March 2016 17: 53
          +6
          Quote: maxiban
          It is clear that Lukashenko is defending his interests; compromises must be found.
          In less than two yearshow we begin to forget about how Yanukovych "defended the interests" of Ukraine, while Russia, according to "some experts", was obliged to "seek compromises." After the coup in Ukraine, these same experts suddenly started talking about the fact that Yanukovych was sitting on two chairs, but the GDP and the Government did not notice this!
          Maybe enough to believe and invest in irreplaceable personalities, and work more with the people?
      2. Ros 56
        Ros 56 22 March 2016 13: 22
        +5
        That's right. Pride, she killed many, but people are such idiots, frankly, nothing suits them for the future.
      3. PHANTOM-AS
        PHANTOM-AS 22 March 2016 13: 28
        +7
        Quote: siberalt
        Come Belarus to the Russian province and the defense problems will disappear.

        But there will be many other problems
        Quote: siberalt
        But there will be one less president.

        For me, of all the presidents in the vast expanses of the former USSR, the Old Man is my cutest.
        And for understanding, go to Belarus, look and discuss wink
      4. DimYang
        DimYang 22 March 2016 13: 43
        +1
        Quote: siberalt
        But there will be one less president


        It is high time. I repeat the same thing many times. Collective farm ub ... ok friend only to himself. The people he has long been in the tail and mane. There is nothing to feed Ashkenaziks from their environment. Won one planted. It's time to solve the gypsy issue.
      5. Ingvar 72
        Ingvar 72 22 March 2016 14: 57
        +3
        Quote: siberalt
        But there will be one less president. Maybe this is the whole problem?

        First you need to leave one president in Russia, and then discuss the topic of Belarus. No.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  2. chikenous59
    chikenous59 22 March 2016 12: 43
    +6
    Thanks to the author, this article urgently needs to be sent to our General Staff, open the eyes of the military leadership, so to speak laughing
    For so many years Belarus lived and forgot to arm Russia, respectively, and Russia.
    Interestingly, the author is not an economic columnist? It’s very similar in writing style.
    1. dorz
      dorz 22 March 2016 12: 50
      +1
      The army of the Republic of Belarus, as we all understood, is relatively weak

      A very interesting and "capacious" definition. smile
      1. Ros 56
        Ros 56 23 March 2016 07: 23
        +1
        And this is nothing that in the Second World War every third Belarusian died, and the Germans in the rear were shaking with fear at the mere mention of the word "partisan". After all, it was not for nothing that they burned villages together with the inhabitants, remember at least Khatyn, believe me - healthy men cry when they see this. So let this writer Egorov not drive wedges into our relations, it is not his business. In the General Staff there are men who are no match for him. Lukashenka is certainly cunning, but what did you want from the collective farm chairman? I’ll even say more, I was also called a miser, but remember forever, the one who ever led something, they are all like that, life forces you to be economical and have some kind of reserve for a rainy day. Well, as for the war, do not worry, Belarusians will stand nearby.
    2. kot28.ru
      kot28.ru 22 March 2016 13: 02
      +2
      We have a lot of Egorovs, including on Snob, this one didn’t find, but often about Lukashenko in the article, he’s not the same, it doesn’t seem that they threw it softly, it’s not suitable to change anyone’s question, well, if I’m wrong, I’ll dig some more! Lukashenko is popular in Belarus, what’s the view from Russia, who suits them?
      1. PHANTOM-AS
        PHANTOM-AS 22 March 2016 13: 59
        +5
        Quote: kot28.ru
        We have a lot of Egorovs

        Just about, the Author did not even bother to say that the mattresses did not withdraw their occupation troops either from the geyrope or the japia. They are "vassals" of the mattress according to the results of the 2nd MV, and then add them.
        And we, and we threw everyone, not just the republic, but the Warsaw Pact, the Viet Cong, and now Cuba, generally Cuba for a long time, but they waited a long time, and now the grandmother flies there, only our media are silent about this. Why? Or have they betrayed us again?
        And what can we offer our potential allies? Gassprom interests? Naibulin? Mardashova?
        Maybe the ideology of oligarchic capitalism? The anti-crisis program of the "smartest" government? The speeches of the "darkest"? Show-business of the Russian Federation with a certain color laughing ?
        It seems that they will not get such "good".
        1. Olezhek
          22 March 2016 15: 03
          +1
          And what can we offer our potential allies? Gassprom interests? Naibulin? Mardashova?
          Maybe the ideology of oligarchic capitalism?


          Comrad, I can suggest YOU change the flag on the avatar.
          Do not disgrace Russia.
          1. PHANTOM-AS
            PHANTOM-AS 22 March 2016 15: 26
            +7
            Quote: Olezhek
            Comrad, I can suggest YOU change the flag on the avatar.

            If only in Soviet!
            Quote: Olezhek
            Do not disgrace Russia.

            Russia disgraces people without me fellow
            For example, child allowances of 50 rubles angry
            A place in health care below "ganduras" and at the same time Sechin's salary of 5 Lyamas a day - that's a real shame!
  3. avvg
    avvg 22 March 2016 12: 44
    +3
    In my opinion, definitely Old Man is not a traitor and he is for the Russian World.
    1. avt
      avt 22 March 2016 12: 53
      +9
      Quote: avvg
      In my opinion, definitely Old Man is not a traitor and he is for the Russian World.

      And yen for this in the know! ??? laughing Well, if you recall his own statement about the fact that en with Belarus is between a rock and a hard place? How do you see Russia, taking into account his statements - Russia is a hammer, or is it an anvil? Again, do not accidentally decipher what it is
      Quote: avvg
      and Russian World

      Just not vaapche, yak with "sayuzny state", but specifically with regulatory documents and ... well, at least some philosophical rationale, well, like Gumilev's Eurasianism. And so we are all for "peace in the whole World", who is against it ?
    2. Igor V
      Igor V 22 March 2016 15: 33
      +6
      Quote: avvg
      In my opinion, definitely Old Man is not a traitor and he is for the Russian World.

      About that article, that the impression is created, but there are no words or actions in this direction. It turns out that Belarusians, who repeatedly suffered from aggression, who lost a quarter in the Second World War and, according to some sources, a third of the population, justify the aggression of Georgia ... I perfectly understand that the people in Belarus are overwhelmingly adequate, but I would like to take some steps, at least in words , in support of Russia. About this and the article.
    3. Igor V
      Igor V 22 March 2016 15: 33
      0
      Quote: avvg
      In my opinion, definitely Old Man is not a traitor and he is for the Russian World.

      About that article, that the impression is created, but there are no words or actions in this direction. It turns out that Belarusians, who repeatedly suffered from aggression, who lost a quarter in the Second World War and, according to some sources, a third of the population, justify the aggression of Georgia ... I perfectly understand that the people in Belarus are overwhelmingly adequate, but I would like to take some steps, at least in words , in support of Russia. About this and the article.
  4. Symarokov897
    Symarokov897 22 March 2016 12: 52
    +3
    Old Man can not be not for the Russian World, otherwise it will be with him as in Ukraine ..... But there are ambitions ....
  5. pts-m
    pts-m 22 March 2016 12: 52
    +6
    No matter how many words are in the article, the author is 100% right. There is no need to bargain on defense issues. There are many examples in history when money and betrayal were present in security treaties. The results are deplorable. Cities with their population were destroyed and in addition yasak was imposed for many years. Ruin has already been drawn into the Pendos yoke with a noble intention. .. make urine a democratic country of geyropa ...
  6. shark
    shark 22 March 2016 13: 00
    +12
    I warmly treat the fraternal people of Belarus. I appreciate their attitude to Russia. (This is by the way the topic of a separate conversation). But I do not trust! It is necessary to build defense, relying on OWN forces and capabilities. To guarantee that the plans are destined to come true, and the troops are guaranteed to deploy. Without political populism.
    1. Sally
      Sally 22 March 2016 14: 42
      +1
      I hold your words. But with trust, problems are with both allies (not even both if we take the CST) and, alas, not without thoroughness (.
  7. Severodvinsk
    Severodvinsk 22 March 2016 13: 06
    +4
    I fully agree with the author
  8. Glaz8000
    Glaz8000 22 March 2016 13: 11
    +9
    I still hope that if, God forbid, you have to, Old Man will not tell my hut from the edge. I must understand that only if an ally has a strong Russia will he remain president in the future. Russia will not be at hand, nor will anyone stand on ceremony with him or with Belarus.
    1. sq
      sq 22 March 2016 13: 26
      +7
      Our Sly One will get out to the last. and not a plan on which chair to sit, in the sense of "who has more milking that and mom." In any case, Belarus is a bargaining chip in a serious war and can only act as a cover in case of a first strike. Russia will arm Belarus, and for the beautiful eyes in the first place (unfortunately). But the number of weapons and their composition will correspond precisely to the objectives of covering the deployment of the main forces.
      1. Olezhek
        22 March 2016 13: 37
        +1
        In any case, Belarus is a bargaining chip in a serious war and can only act as a cover in case of a first strike
        But the number of weapons and their composition will correspond precisely to the purposes of covering the deployment of the main forces


        If RB is clearly "registered" under the Russian military-political umbrella, then yes - only a frontal attack-apocalypse.
        BUT if the Republic of Belarus is separate (and Lukashenko insists on this), then there is a non-zero probability of the option of Ukraine according to Yanukovych ...

        "Nezalezhnosti" the only thing that gives - opens such an option ...

        Minsk 1 Minsk 2 ... as if hinting ...
      2. avt
        avt 22 March 2016 14: 17
        +3
        Quote: kvm
        ". In any case, Belarus is a bargaining chip in a serious war and can only act as a cover in case of a first strike.

        If, as of today, within the framework of the amorphous jelly of the CSTO, the reaction time of the Russian troops ... to put it mildly, is quite long from the coordination and subsequent planning of forces and means to their deployment in battle formations. Well, this, again, is not in Russia, but precisely to Butler's hammer-hammer theory of existence. Naturally, from a military point of view, a full-fledged base of the Air Force / Aerospace Forces of the Russian Federation is needed on the territory of Belarus, and not one with the joint basing of what is left of the Air Force of Belarus, naturally, a unified air defense system and a single center of command and control with a calculated and approved algorithm for responding to threats by the political leadership. should be in practice, we see in Syria, well, of course, there should be an amendment to the specifics of the region and threats. BUT, since, at least, the center with a single command of the troops will be in Moscow on the Frunzenskaya embankment, and not in Minsk and Astana, if only because He just is there and copes with his task completely. Here common sense ends and political desires begin a la "I don’t trade in hype" and all attempts to solve realistically within the framework of common sense and military science the tasks of military development are adequate to threats, they run into donkey stubbornness in search of empire and ANY deployment of our troops in Belarus will be, to one degree or another, a headache for us, what was the basing of the Black Sea Fleet in the then Krajina Crimea up to the return of the long-suffering Crimea to Russia.
        1. Olezhek
          22 March 2016 14: 27
          +1
          and ANY deployment of our troops in Belarus will be, to one degree or another, a bunt for us


          In principle, the headache was already an attempt to post ...
          Lukashenka, it seems, lives in some kind of "parallel reality" and does not believe in any "color revolutions" in principle.
          There are no them and in Ukraine there was nothing either ...

          He does not seem to care at all about all the "global military planning" his current budget issues are of concern.

          From his point of view - Russia needs this childish "game of soldiers with NATO" - let it fork out.
          1. avt
            avt 22 March 2016 14: 40
            +2
            Quote: Olezhek
            In principle, the headache was already an attempt to post ...

            good Moreover, it was previously agreed and, suddenly, But Father was not in the know. laughing The clearest example of that yak-yong
            Quote: avvg
            and he is for the Russian World.
            y ,, sayuznam state "
    2. k174oun7
      k174oun7 22 March 2016 13: 50
      0
      When the NATO aggression against Yugoslavia was brewing, the only CIS President Lukashenko expressed his readiness to provide military assistance to the Yugoslavs. At the same time, the drunkard of all Russia EBN, in a drunken stupor, "distanced himself" so to speak. Let's not forget.
      1. Olezhek
        22 March 2016 13: 54
        +1
        When the NATO aggression in Yugoslavia was brewing,


        Ischo and ischo once: Serbs after WWII were friends with the West ...
        So all the screams that we did not save them - they look strange enough

        But Lukashenko wanted to save everyone: from Kennedy to Gaddafi ..
        But the reptilians did not allow
        1. prosto_rgb
          prosto_rgb 22 March 2016 19: 04
          0
          Quote: Olezhek
          from Kennedy

          maybe theoretically and wanted, but obviously could not
          first because I was still in 1st grade
          then because it was too late
          But really flew to Yugoslavia, and then, when the bombing has already begun

          Quote: Olezhek
          to Gaddafi ..

          and why not, the West lifted sanctions from it, it was possible to unblock accounts and participate in the development of the Libyan economy, but not fate.
  9. Pvi1206
    Pvi1206 22 March 2016 13: 13
    +5
    The President of Belarus is trying to suck two queens. And somewhere he does it.
    It’s not bad that he cares more about the welfare of his state.
    But at whose expense?
    But he speaks smoothly.
    So the author’s doubts are well founded.
  10. VohaAhov
    VohaAhov 22 March 2016 13: 18
    +5
    And who is Belarus going to fight with? Take the closest entourage. Maybe this is the Baltic with one tank? Maybe this is fraternal Ukraine, which still cannot defeat the LPR and the DPR. The only worthy adversary is Poland, and already with it Belarus has armament parity. Therefore, Belarus has at the moment adequate and sufficient armed forces. Of course I want to upgrade weapons. I would like newer tanks and more modern fighters, but ... everything depends on finances.
    1. Olezhek
      22 March 2016 13: 28
      +2
      The only worthy adversary is Poland, and with it Belarus has armament parity with it


      We recruit in a search engine of NATO ... yes
  11. dchegrinec
    dchegrinec 22 March 2016 13: 22
    +7
    The defense of the Republic of Belarus without Russia is a ridiculous defense!
  12. 2s1122
    2s1122 22 March 2016 13: 23
    +8
    In general, these kings were embittered after the collapse of the USSR. And Ukraine is an example of this, damn it.
  13. cap
    cap 22 March 2016 13: 26
    +5
    “You see, the leaders of the Anglo-Saxon world have this joke: first they give the native leaders“ security guarantees ”, and then, when the need for the“ red-skinned leaders ”disappears, they are fed to the dogs. Something like that. No, if you have paper with Steinmeier's signature - sleep well. Steinmeier is an honest guy. "

    Personally, I never believed and do not believe ANY obligations written in English, even in translation into Russian, even in Swahili. The very existence of an island that considers itself to be the navel of the earth, and as a result of megalomaniac, cannot cause confidence in a sane person. hi
    1. Vikmay16
      Vikmay16 22 March 2016 22: 48
      0
      That's right! Gorbaochev was promised that NATO would not expand, Yanukovych was asked not to touch the "peaceful" demonstrators!
  14. PKK
    PKK 22 March 2016 13: 30
    +4
    In case of pre-war time, it’s not difficult. Those who attacked Amin’s palace are still alive, and they will easily repeat. After that, there will be a unified command. But there remains the question of communication, the ability to quickly deploy communications and bring one-man command to everyone. To bring everyone's task to all parts. The detachments will again become relevant. The distance will also benefit, this is the "golden" time for making a decision. And it is important to bring to the "Old Man" that his behavior will lead him to the same end as Gaddafi, the same posed as the Globalist. It is interesting to hear what the Old Man is doing to avoid the fate of Gaddafi?
  15. shurup
    shurup 22 March 2016 13: 31
    +3
    Is it too lazy for the staff to draw up plans for all occasions? Why then they were provided with expensive office equipment and soft chairs, in which they play more tanks.
    Belarus is a border outpost, which needs only to hold out a bit and die heroically. After that, NATO / Daesh / LGBT marching convoys will be destroyed by Russian tactical weapons based on the MZKT, and not on Russian territory. Few?
    If the author is interested in a bridgehead for an attack, then yes, in Belarus there is a complete lack of opportunities on this topic, which is taken into account by Western neighbors.
    And with all the neighbors you need to live peacefully and amicably ... in Swiss.
    1. Olezhek
      22 March 2016 15: 30
      0
      If the author is interested in a bridgehead for an attack, then yes, in Belarus there is a complete lack of opportunities on this topic, which is taken into account by Western neighbors.


      "Western neighbors" take into account a single life principle "The strong eat the weak ...

      And with all the neighbors you need to live peacefully and amicably ... in Swiss


      Then what interests you on Military Review ??
  16. Alexander S.
    Alexander S. 22 March 2016 14: 11
    +2
    Belarus to Russia and all ... there are no problems.
    1. Vikmay16
      Vikmay16 22 March 2016 22: 51
      0
      The Union State has existed longer than Santa Barbara, there is no end in sight!
  17. maverick5334
    maverick5334 22 March 2016 14: 25
    +1
    Article is nonsense from beginning to end!
    Example - an aerodrome is indicated on the map (the city is not indicated, but I will indicate it) in the area of ​​Luninets (Brest Region), because there is a catch, the aerodrome is indeed there, but has long been abandoned.
    Under the USSR, there were a lot of planes, now there is nothing.
    Not far from the city of Pinsk (Brest region) there is an aerodrome, the air fleet is minimal (several planes), how many are not known exactly, but no more than ten, the figure changes due to the departures for repairs.
    1. Olezhek
      22 March 2016 14: 39
      +2
      Under the USSR, there were a lot of planes, now there is nothing.
      Not far from the city of Pinsk (Brest region) there is an airfield, an air fleet is minimal (several aircraft),


      Here's the article about it ...
    2. Sally
      Sally 22 March 2016 14: 56
      0
      The top map is completely inadequate (according to the territory of Belarus)) where there is no and where there is not (not always true). A striking example is the Bobruisk district, see for yourself though through Google maps)
      Ps is the map in the article to confuse a potential adversary when viewing?))
  18. cyber
    cyber 22 March 2016 14: 35
    +4
    Not only the author has distrust of Belarus. The Russian government is not very trusting. Example "Nord Stream 2" And the first one too. Why not expand the gas pipe to the European Union through Belarus? Yes, and dad offered his transit services wassat It is much cheaper than pulling along the bottom of the sea! But no ... it’s better to stretch out by sea than contact Lukashenko. This is a clear indicator of confidence in the Republic of Belarus which is not fully available. In addition to chatter, the Old Man did nothing significant to strengthen this trust, moreover, he has already done much more to undermine this trust.
    1. ydjin
      ydjin 22 March 2016 15: 10
      0
      Quote: cyber
      Not only the author has distrust of Belarus. The Russian government is not very trusting. Example "Nord Stream 2" And the first one too. Why not expand the gas pipe to the European Union through Belarus? Yes, and dad offered his transit services wassat It is much cheaper than pulling along the bottom of the sea! But no ... it’s better to stretch out by sea than contact Lukashenko. This is a clear indicator of confidence in the Republic of Belarus which is not fully available. In addition to chatter, the Old Man did nothing significant to strengthen this trust, moreover, he has already done much more to undermine this trust.

      Dear, surround yourself! How can a pipe be dragged through Belarus! Via Lithuania? But Syabrov does not have access to the Baltic. Do you even study the cards!
      1. cyber
        cyber 22 March 2016 15: 45
        +2
        Are you the one who will "take" - Poland is not the European Union? laughing Russia sells gas and oil to the European Union! One of the routes goes through Belarus, if there was confidence in Belarus - it could be expanded!
        But as they say: If you want to lose a friend, borrow him money! If you want to lose the brotherly state, take the gas pipeline through its territory! bully
        1. Olezhek
          22 March 2016 16: 27
          +1
          Are you the one who will "take" - Poland is not the European Union?

          Russia sells gas and oil to the European Union!


          Right! As soon as oil / gas crossed the Polish border, it’s the EU!
          And if the panovie begin to greet, these are EU problems.

          However, Lukashenko ... request
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. Lieutenant Izhe
      Lieutenant Izhe 22 March 2016 15: 31
      +4
      The Russian government has little confidence. Example "Nord Stream 2" And the first one too.

      In the end, gas TRANSIT will turn out to be CHEAPER than through the "old syabra" + Poles ... yes
  19. Swed
    Swed 22 March 2016 15: 29
    +3
    In Belarus, revolutions and similar phenomena are unlikely, since for every citizen there is one employee of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. And as for the army, I agree with the author, this is how things are. Nobody is going to fight.
    1. Olezhek
      22 March 2016 19: 18
      +1
      In Belarus, revolutions and similar phenomena are unlikely, since for every citizen there is one employee of the Ministry of Internal Affairs


      In Romania, Securitate Ceausescu was also not a weak structure.
  20. ydjin
    ydjin 22 March 2016 15: 41
    +1
    Most of all I am freezed by all these vysers of the two undersuperstates, the Commonwealth and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. At one time, trying to crush Russia, overstrained! And now they pour bile on Russia because of the missed opportunities? In a word, losers, humble yourself since there isn’t enough darling!
    1. tiredwithall
      tiredwithall 22 March 2016 16: 20
      +2
      Do not get so excited. You only help your temperaments pouring bile.
  21. tiredwithall
    tiredwithall 22 March 2016 16: 17
    +1
    Congratulations to the author with a great article.
    1. Olezhek
      22 March 2016 16: 24
      0
      Thanks for your kind words.

      hi
  22. Army soldier2
    Army soldier2 22 March 2016 16: 41
    +1
    Quote: chikenous59
    Thanks to the author, this article urgently needs to be sent to our General Staff, open the eyes of the military leadership, so to speak laughing
    For so many years Belarus lived and forgot to arm Russia, respectively, and Russia.


    Do you really think that the General Staff doesn’t monitor the military-political situation in Belarus and doesn’t take its conclusions into account when planning?
    A good article. I agree with many thoughts. Although, probably, it makes sense to consider the problem as a whole: the CIS, the CSTO, the integrated air defense system, the Union State.
  23. skeptic
    skeptic 22 March 2016 16: 42
    +3
    I have never considered "Belorussia", my favorite place, as something separate from Russia, and even more so as a "fraternal people."
    Brad!
    Simple Russian people live there, they speak with a very slight accent, and are often better than in some parts of Russia.
    Old Man, miraculously, has preserved this wonderful land from the folly of single-rooted redheads - Svidomo privatization.
    But time is running for power
    Recently, a well-deserved man began to play in an independent manner and hit Svidomo.
    It cries trouble otherwise.
  24. Gorinich
    Gorinich 22 March 2016 17: 05
    +5
    The article is correct. But I disagree with something. In the event of a global conflict for Belarus, there will be a drum on which side a crowd of people will run through its territory. Either from west to east, or from east to west. The destruction in general will be the same, but there is no gain for the country and the people. Apparently, therefore, such a situation is not even considered.
    As a layman, I am more concerned about the fact that in the event of the complete collapse of Ukraine, a continuous hot line will be formed along the border. But even for this option, we do not see any preparation :(
    1. prosto_rgb
      prosto_rgb 22 March 2016 19: 11
      0
      Quote: Gorinich
      that in the event of the complete collapse of Ukraine, a continuous hot line will be formed along the border. But even for this option, we do not see any preparation :(

      how is it not visible?
      last year, hot heads on foot on horseback or horseback on foot, generally riding horses tried to cross the border, but the high-speed 5,45 / 7,62 callers did not really please them and very quickly cooled their fervor.
      In addition, 15 ditches have already begun to dig at the border in the fall.
      So what exactly is already being prepared for this option.
    2. Olezhek
      22 March 2016 19: 16
      +2
      In the event of a global conflict for Belarus, there will be a drum on which side a crowd of people will run through its territory. Either from west to east, or from east to west.


      In the event (God forbid) a global conflict, everything is serious and everyone will "burn in hell", not just Belarusians ...

      But in the case of a local conflict like the Ukrainian ...
      Very big difference.
      If all the documents are signed and Russian troops are deployed on an ongoing basis, it makes no sense to climb Westerners there.

      If Belarus is completely "independent", work options open up.
    3. tiredwithall
      tiredwithall 23 March 2016 10: 52
      +1
      Try, dear, to think about the difference in the consequences of the actions of the "western" and "eastern" winds for Belarus in the longer term. History can give you a lot of instructive information. It is also appropriate to recall the actions, for example, Nalivaiko. This alone perfectly illustrates your fears of the "south" wind.
    4. tiredwithall
      tiredwithall 23 March 2016 10: 52
      +1
      Try, dear, to think about the difference in the consequences of the actions of the "western" and "eastern" winds for Belarus in the longer term. History can give you a lot of instructive information. It is also appropriate to recall the actions, for example, Nalivaiko. This alone perfectly illustrates your fears of the "south" wind.
  25. VohaAhov
    VohaAhov 22 March 2016 18: 12
    +2
    Quote: dchegrinec
    The defense of the Republic of Belarus without Russia is a ridiculous defense!

    We recruit in the search engine the Strategic Missile Forces of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation
    1. Olezhek
      22 March 2016 19: 10
      +2
      What do they have to do with it?
      Since Old Man doesn’t let our planes come to him, will we immediately throw missiles at the adversary?
      Will it be bold?
  26. afrikanez
    afrikanez 22 March 2016 19: 45
    +1
    Such an ally as RB will be worse than enemies. "Old Man" is still a fruit, we have not heard enough of it and we will still hear a lot. In any case, you need to think first of all about yourself and your boundaries, rather than about others.
    1. Olezhek
      22 March 2016 20: 46
      +1
      Distinguish between Belarus and Lukashenko.
  27. Vikmay16
    Vikmay16 22 March 2016 22: 57
    +2
    Good article! As the saying goes, "if you want peace, prepare for war."