Military Review

Pocket guard

101
The state is asked to share a monopoly on violence


We need not only the law on private military companies (PMCs), but also a wider toolbox for their use, said Vladimir Gutenev, first deputy chairman of the State Duma’s Committee on Industry, at a conference at the Academy of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces 27 on February 12.

“In my understanding, an employee of private security companies is at least a person whom the organization sends along with very sophisticated modern equipment,” said the deputy. And not just sends, but abroad, in a hot spot. Remembering Syria, he explained: there are situations of “conditional legitimacy” in which these PMCs should act, defending, say, leased Russian weapons and military equipment.

Why does the parliamentarian advocate the creation of private military companies, that is, in fact, for the formation of a parallel army in the country? After all, he does not have a direct relationship to the power structures, does not supervise this area on duty. It turns out that in the State Duma a draft law is being developed quietly that will allow private military companies to act not only domestically but also abroad.

Legal issues


According to General of the Army Yuri Baluyevsky, Chief of the General Staff in 2004 – 2008, back in 2009, State Duma Deputy Andrei Lugovoi proposed a bill No. 200435-5 “On Amendments to Article 11 of the Law on Private Detective Security Activities in the Russian Federation”. The bottom line was to allow our private security companies to act outside the Russian Federation. However, at the end of 2010, the project was withdrawn from consideration due to the revocation of the right of legislative initiative by the subject. In 2011, deputy Alexei Mitrofanov took up the case. He introduced the bill number 62015-6 "On state regulation of the creation and activities of private military companies." In June, the 2012-th Council of the Duma decided to wrap up the initiative "in connection with the violation of regulations". Nevertheless, a working group was created, which continues to deal with the issue. “Her result will be known soon,” said Yuri Baluyevsky. “But are PMCs of Russia needed at all?”

Pocket guard

On the one hand, they can be sent to Syria and anywhere, while claiming that they are not public, which means that the country is not responsible for them.

On the other hand, in the event of a conflict with our national interests, we will get a set of various problems. They cannot be resolved even by America with the rigor of local legislation, checks and balances. All dictate money, and the market for services of private security companies is 350 billion dollars.

Under “conditional legitimacy,” PMC employees are citizens with weapons in their hands they are forced to act semi-legally. How does this meet our standards of morality? Where is the edge in the use of weapons and military force that representatives of PMCs should not violate? Who is responsible for the consequences of their actions and their lives? After all, they are perceived as servicemen, solving combat missions, but the provision of combatants does not apply to them. However, the fighters have families. So, in the event of the death of the breadwinner, the social burden may be redirected to the state?

The peculiarity of the post-Soviet space is the struggle of financial-industrial groups, which often fight with each other, and even with the government. They are the main lobbyists of PMCs. Can the state rely on the loyalty of armed private traders in times of crises or election campaigns, inter-ethnic conflicts?

Implicitly, the thought is already implanted in the consciousness of citizens: PMCs are beneficial not only to business, but also to the state. This, they say, is a wonderful opportunity for employing military personnel who leave the Armed Forces. But can we be insured against enticing the best army specialists in PMCs? Does it not turn out that the best trained personnel of the RF Armed Forces will gradually be redistributed in favor of PMCs?

There are many questions, as well as opinions on this subject.

Unlimited contingent

Surprisingly, in Russia there are already de facto private paramilitary companies. There are about two dozen of them, the law is very simple - through offshore jurisdictions.

“I have in my hands an explanatory note of the draft federal law on PMCs, which was presented in 2010 by a State Duma deputy Nosovko on 35 pages,” shows the document Baluyevsky. “As it says, PMCs can be understood as any company offering services on a commercial basis related to training, training, coordinating and managing security personnel or reforming security institutions.”

The draft law after the revision states: “PMCs are a legal entity of the Russian Federation, which has a special permit and license from the FSB and specializes in providing military and security services to the state, individuals and legal entities (including foreign ones) on a contractual basis.” A private individual who has reached 18 years of age, has completed professional training, has passed a qualifying exam and has entered into a contract can become an employee of PMCs. If such a law appears, PMCs will draw upon themselves a considerable conscription contingent. It is very easy to seduce young people with big money. But in the explanatory note, the conclusion is as follows: the main beneficiary will be the Russian government, which will receive an additional tool.

“All this is a collection of words. It is said, for example, that PMCs will be used where the use of the Armed Forces is undesirable. This is naive. The summary of the bill states that, they say, ignoring the world practice of using PMCs will lead to the washing out of specialists from Russia who will leave abroad, to the loss of benefits in the key segment of the defense industry and even to the military lag of the Russian Federation. No one wants to understand that this is a violation of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the law “On Defense”, which refers to the state’s monopoly on the use of military force. In particular, the article 1, p. 9 says: "The creation and existence of formations with military organization or weapons, military equipment, or in which military service is envisaged, is prohibited and prosecuted," reminds Baluyevsky. - No matter what anyone says, money is at the heart of the creation of PMCs. This is essentially the pocket army of the one who founded it. The same Kolomoisky in Ukraine for a long time dictated the conditions to the president of the country, and no one could do anything about it. ”

It is possible that an oligarch who has committed economic crimes and who is trying to escape punishment collects a private army for 10 – 20 thousands of mercenaries, who do not allow him to detain him or bring him to justice.

Deputy Secretary of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation, international lawyer Sergey Ordzhonikidze analyzed history PMCs abroad: “The increase in their number was noted at the beginning of the 2000-s along with the growth of international corporations whose business involves the use of military force. First of all, in countries such as Papua - New Guinea, Sierra Leone, Colombia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Congo, Georgia, Somalia - where it was necessary to fight against the legitimate government. In Libya, with the help of PMCs, a coup d'etat was committed, the head of the Jamahiriya was brutally murdered. ”

In addition to political conflict, there is a legal one. The Criminal Code of the Russian Federation clearly states that the recruitment, training, financing and other material support of a mercenary, as well as its use in armed conflicts, are punished with an appropriate term.

“I don’t see a situation where a normal judge would be able to see the difference between a mercenary and a private security officer,” says Sergey Ordzhonikidze. - Any court in this case will be guided by two things: the Hague Convention on the Rights and Duties of the Neutral Powers in the Land Conflict of 1967, as well as acts of the Security Council, resolutions of the Security Council and the UN General Assembly, which states that the use of people who commit crimes against state, punishable by law. "

You can still remember the Additional Protocol to the Geneva Convention of the year 1949. These legal acts must be relied upon. Everything is written there. And talking about the absence of a legal field with regard to PMCs is just a trick in the interests of big capital.

“If PMCs appear in Russia, the state will lose many powers in politics, military and social spheres,” said military expert Igor Popov. - Transferring security to private companies will be a serious mistake. This trend was formed in the West, but the most important principle there - PMCs do not operate on their territory. However, the example of Ukraine suggests that this is possible. It is necessary to calculate such options. ”

Why are such bills being prepared almost in secret, and only fragments of conversations and explanatory notes reach society? Russian historian and political scientist Veronika Krasheninnikova agrees with this formulation of the question. Society is involved in the discussion of the problem with a clear delay. The discussion was supposed to start as early as 2010. However, the text of the draft law is still not available to the general public. Let's take courage, suggests Krasheninnikov, and let's say that Russia creates a semblance of a foreign legion, which is staffed by volunteers who understand that they will defend the interests of, for example, the Serbs. Then much will fall into place.

Associate Professor of the Military Academy of the General Staff Tatyana Gracheva considers the undercover development of PMCs with a time bomb: “Today we are being given a law to legalize them. And everyone picks up this new-minded idea. But the first version of the draft law a few years ago received a negative assessment of the Security Council of the Russian Federation. And now this initiative, and after the Maidan and the war in Ukraine, for some reason suddenly re-emerged. "

Blackwater gives rise to power


The fact that our PMCs will be subordinate only to Russia, to follow the instructions of its leadership is an illusion. Firstly, it is difficult to control. Private security contractors are commercial structures and will be integrated into the global network of transnational corporations in the field of private military business. Secondly, we are talking about military weapons. The state will thus lose its monopoly on violence. PMCs can make a contract even with our potential adversary and follow his instructions. Thirdly, it is a blood business. The name Blackwater has become synonymous with unpunished killings, the rampant growth of private military contracts and the inability of the state to control this industry.

However, in Russia there is a lobby that is objectively interested in taking military-political decisions in the interest of escalating the country's participation in conflicts. For the adoption of the PMC law, there are people who want to gain freedom in recruiting trained military personnel, and groups in the Russian establishment who plan to earn money on this.

Unfortunately, there are plenty of respectable citizens who do not understand what is behind the supposedly private initiative to legalize PMCs.
Author:
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/articles/29840
101 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. tiredwithall
    tiredwithall 25 March 2016 09: 58
    +16
    The classic work of an influence figure. Fuck the state and make money. And who will control the new financial flow from the nailed use of PMCs? In whose pocket will the money go?
    1. vlad66
      vlad66 25 March 2016 10: 06
      +25
      Well, yes Dill yielded natsgadah and battalions of all kinds belonging to the oligarchs, the same PMCs only look from the side and that they know how to rob and atrocity, they make their legs in the first serious collision. request
      1. Altona
        Altona 25 March 2016 10: 58
        +8
        Quote: vlad66
        Well, yes Dill yielded natsgadah and battalions of all kinds belonging to the oligarchs, the same PMCs only look from the side and that they know how to rob and atrocity, they make their legs in the first serious collision.

        -----------------------
        And ISIS-Daesh is also a Turkish-Saudi PMC that controls half of Syria and Iraq, and has already pushed its tentacles deep into Europe. A relatively small terrorist army of 100-150 thousand fighters terrifies powerful countries with police, modern army and intelligence services. In our country, as soon as "business interest" penetrates, an accelerated collapse of the main industry begins. Where is the guarantee that army men and special services will not go there, and even if they do not leave, they will not engage in insider information and leakage? What character will this drain be? There are more questions than answers. Even if "our" PMCs are completely "unmerciful and patriotic," the United States will easily put them outside the law. And as soon as they show themselves, it will be done right there. I won't even say anything about screeching.
    2. Lukich
      Lukich 25 March 2016 10: 10
      +11
      Quote: tiredwithall
      In whose pocket will the money go?

      oligarchs who will create them
      1. 34 region
        34 region 25 March 2016 12: 53
        +8
        Lukich! 10.10. It’s clear, because the organization will be private. We have already been told about the effectiveness of a private enterprise over a state-owned one, private security company over private security of the police department, a collection agency over bailiffs, a PLATO over the tax service, outsourcing in the army over civilian employees in the army, a private clinic over the state, private circles and tutors ... Protection of something Does it require PMCs? But does the PSC no longer suit you? Special operations abroad? How did the KGB deal with this? And what was the bad operation of our troops in Syria? And another malicious observation. Private business is well developed where something can be taken away and divided. For example, government procurement or outsourcing. Directly high efficiency where it is possible to suck off loot well. In the real sector, I do not see any advantages. While there is a suction of money, do not interfere with private business development. As problems, so help us the country!
        1. Lukich
          Lukich 25 March 2016 17: 12
          +2
          Quote: Region 34
          It’s clear, because the organization will be private.

          it will be the pocket legal army of the oligarch. and pressure method on the objectionable. it will be no longer illegal, but legal gang formation
        2. talot
          talot 29 March 2016 08: 50
          0
          Fully agree with you.
    3. Pinkie F.
      Pinkie F. 25 March 2016 10: 12
      +1
      Quote: tiredwithall
      In whose pocket will the money go?

      guess three times. Will you decode the PMC abbreviation?
      1. lysyj bob
        lysyj bob 25 March 2016 10: 51
        0
        Let's look at this problem from the other side. There are plenty of people who have not found themselves in a peaceful life, they need to do something, and they go into mercenaries, "wild geese" and so on. Their services are well paid. Money is not controlled by the state, much less activity. The state cannot fight this phenomenon, because it does not officially exist. BUT ... Both in the states and in Ukraine this phenomenon exists, in the states it is officially allowed, people have official jobs, they pay taxes to the state from their income, are socially protected, the state regulates and controls this area, which means it GETS money. In Russia, the opposite is true - the state is trying to prohibit mercenarism, but is unable to control everyone who wants to and hires. This is a black business, black cash. And people in this business are outcasts for society. The government spends money to combat this. As the political officers say: "you cannot prevent drunkenness - lead it and direct it in the right direction." With the adoption of the law on PMCs, a lot should change. There will be control, there will be a regulation of activities, there will be profit from taxes, there will be social protection for participants. It all depends on what our boozers from the State Duma prescribe in this law. But that is another story.
        1. Altona
          Altona 25 March 2016 11: 00
          +2
          Quote: lysyj bob
          With the adoption of the PMC law, much needs to change. There will be control, there will be regulation of activities, there will be profit from taxes, there will be social protection for participants. It all depends on what our GD’s balls will prescribe in this law. But that's another story.

          ---------------------
          In Ukraine, the National Battalions and the Government seem to be strongly "patriotic", but they cannot do anything with each other.
          1. Pinkie F.
            Pinkie F. 25 March 2016 12: 14
            -1
            Quote: Altona
            National bats in Ukraine

            what is the connection between these "bats" and PMCs?
            1. Altona
              Altona 25 March 2016 13: 37
              +2
              Quote: Pinky F.
              what is the connection between these "bats" and PMCs?

              -----------------------
              Direct, because the National Battalion is financed with private money. It is no secret that the armament and formation of the national battalions were led by Ukrainian oligarchs, Kolomoisky is the brightest and most luminous. And how you call it: Akademy PMC, Azov battalion or Batka Makhno's liberation division, the essence does not change. It is a privately funded armed group that is not subordinate to the state.
              1. Pinkie F.
                Pinkie F. 25 March 2016 14: 27
                -2
                Quote: Altona
                Direct, because the National Battalion is funded with private money.
                And how you call it: Akademy PMC, Azov battalion or Batka Makhno's liberation division, the essence does not change.

                clear. "I have no more questions" (c)
                You have a rather vague idea of ​​PMCs, I see.
                1. Oden280
                  Oden280 25 March 2016 15: 47
                  +2
                  About PMCs, there is only one idea - who pays the money, he steers. And all the talk about the patriotism of our capital is for fools.
          2. ANANATOLY PAULOV
            ANANATOLY PAULOV 25 March 2016 19: 35
            0
            For the participants of what? Maybe not social protection, the zone will be assigned to them.
        2. Lieutenant Izhe
          Lieutenant Izhe 25 March 2016 11: 07
          +1
          "And let's, then, and ..." "private" Strategic Missile Forces will be allowed! belay
          1. lysyj bob
            lysyj bob 25 March 2016 13: 08
            +2
            Quote: Lieutenant Izhe
            "And let's, then, and ..." "private" Strategic Missile Forces will be allowed!


            And let's not rush to extremes. With this approach, any idea can be brought to the point of absurdity. With this approach, we still cannot legitimize small aircraft and the right to wear a short barrel for law-abiding citizens. Everything needs a prudent and thoughtful approach. We need a clearly defined framework and boundaries of what is permitted, and for this, we need a law.
        3. Passer
          Passer 25 March 2016 11: 21
          +8
          Quote: lysyj bob
          And let's look at this problem from the other side ... With the adoption of the law on PMCs, much should change. There will be control, there will be regulations, there will be profit from taxes,

          Something everyone is so interested that the state made a profit?
          It will receive its own way, and if it doesn’t receive it, it will get from citizens. What taxes can I get with PMCs? In order to pay taxes you need income. In what area of ​​activity, in our country, PMCs can receive income? Just a couple of subkint ideas.
          And so we get several legitimate private armies, whose activities will not be controlled by anyone except the employer. Forward to the 90s? or to a new Civil War?
          PS If such a law were adopted in the 90s, then everything would have turned out differently with Dudaev ...
          1. lysyj bob
            lysyj bob 25 March 2016 13: 30
            0
            Quote: Passer
            And so we get several legitimate private armies, whose activities will not be controlled by anyone except the employer.


            Adopting a law on PMCs does not mean giving them absolute freedom of action. I have already written that the activities of PMCs should be clearly regulated by law. For non-compliance with the regulations - revocation of the license and other "sanctions" up to criminal liability.
            1. Passer
              Passer 25 March 2016 13: 54
              0
              Quote: lysyj bob

              Adopting a law on PMCs does not mean giving them absolute freedom of action. I have already written that the activities of PMCs should be clearly regulated by law. For non-compliance with the regulations - revocation of the license and other "sanctions" up to criminal liability.

              This is all clear, but traffic rules are not very respected here. And the rest is not worth talking about. Vasilyeva, etc., is a living example.
            2. Oden280
              Oden280 25 March 2016 15: 49
              +1
              Look at the private security companies and laugh at their own implementation of the law.
            3. your1970
              your1970 25 March 2016 18: 52
              0
              And why do we need PMCs within the country? What tasks should it solve - which the police and other security forces cannot solve?
              If outside, again, but for what?
              Overthrow the government in Somalia / Nigeria / Congo / Libya? request
              What purpose is beyond the borders of the Russian Federation?
              Rent them out to foreign countries, so that everyone knows what kind of "roof" the local prince has?
        4. Sober
          Sober 25 March 2016 11: 30
          +4
          Quote: lysyj bob
          you can’t prevent drinking - lead it and direct it in the right direction "

          I wonder what direction you will head, heading the booze.
          A wonderful example. Nothing good will come of it.
          1. lysyj bob
            lysyj bob 25 March 2016 13: 11
            +1
            Quote: Sober
            A wonderful example.


            A life example, and really wonderful (without sarcasm), but it is not for everyone.
        5. Luga
          Luga 25 March 2016 12: 12
          +6
          Quote: lysyj bob
          Let's look at this problem from the other side. There are plenty of people who have not found themselves in a peaceful life, they need to do something, and they go into mercenaries, "wild geese" and so on.


          I believe that the first PMC in the Russian Federation will be created by someone R. Kadyrov - either himself or on behalf of some of his relatives. All he has to do is draw up and register papers - he has everything else. Then they (PMCs) will appear in other regions ... In short, in our realities it can easily happen that these same PMCs will be used inside the country, and not abroad. The central government will weaken a little and the "companies" will turn into armies. They will need to be fed, given contracts, money. The Anglo-Saxons will grab hold of them, start sending them dough, one more, the other less, so that they can quarrel. And they have a lot of dough, not enough - they will still print ...

          In short, I do not like this prospect for anything. It’s not in our nature to fight for money. It is in our nature to fight for the Motherland when it needs it. There is nothing to take examples from a mattress. Not our option.
        6. tomeng
          tomeng 25 March 2016 12: 45
          +2
          Quote: lysyj bob
          People who have not found themselves in a peaceful life abound, they need to do something

          There is a contract service.
          1. lysyj bob
            lysyj bob 25 March 2016 13: 14
            -1
            Quote: tomeng
            there is a contract service


            There is a difference in salary and there is a REGULATED number of aircraft.
        7. mark_rod
          mark_rod 25 March 2016 13: 13
          +1
          I agree! The state has put its head in the sand, as if we do not have professionals who want to make money with what they can do. Moreover, the state itself turns a blind eye to the participation of "otpusnikov" anywhere in the world ... And at the expense of control over PMCs - I do not agree! If specialists have already infiltrated ISIS and are quietly working there according to legends, then what prevents our special services from working according to legend in PMCs? There is even a plus in this - much that is covered in darkness in the world will come true, thanks to such agents.
          And yet ... in case of war with our partners, our armed forces will automatically increase by the number of PMC employees instantly, without any mobilization there!
          1. Oden280
            Oden280 25 March 2016 15: 51
            +3
            In the event of war, a very controversial question is what we will get - or operational reserve. or an alien partisan detachment in our rear. It all depends on the desire of the owner.
        8. your1970
          your1970 25 March 2016 18: 46
          0
          Why PMCs in the US? To protect COMMERCIAL interests in the first place.
          Why PMCs in the Russian Federation? Are you ready to die for someone’s commercial interests?
          It is one thing for people who can no longer help but fight for a cause that they consider to be right - "volunteers" who are in any country, and quite another thing - "soldiers of fortune" (purely for loot) - and in this situation I am categorically against any support of such people from all positions, both from moral and ethical - for do not kill, and from the state - why should I pay any money for people who kill for the loot?

          As far as I understand, the Russian Federation has no such COMMERCIAL interests outside its borders. In the case of the need to use the Russian Armed Forces abroad, the procedure for such actions has long been determined.
          Or do we need to overthrow someone by American methods?
        9. ANANATOLY PAULOV
          ANANATOLY PAULOV 25 March 2016 19: 01
          +1
          Very strange logic. If there are crimes, then it is necessary to issue a law that will allow them. Hooray! There is no crime. If there are individuals who cannot live like all normal people, then let's allow them to kill these people. That is: I would go to killers, let them teach me. And what's the difference who and against whom will hire. They can be hired to kill Russian citizens and it will be legal. Pay taxes and sleep peacefully. Just keep in mind: always and everywhere, all PMCs have never fought against regular troops or against other serious military organizations. No one knows PMCs fighting against Daesh. All PMCs howl only against civilians. These are just hired killers. And no more. I do not want such a dirty phenomenon in Russia.
        10. ANANATOLY PAULOV
          ANANATOLY PAULOV 25 March 2016 19: 30
          +1
          Do not confuse God's gift with fried eggs. A soldier needs to pay, just a must. You will not feed your army, you will feed someone else's. The army is bound by law, a soldier is sworn. What about PMCs? Not at all. They can be hired against us. Against our allies. Not once has a single country in the world hired PMCs to defend itself. And will not hire. At least for economic reasons. If there is no money for your regular, there will definitely not be money for PMCs. I'm not talking about the ethical side. Yes, you judge what they will fight? Automatons, from the power of grenade launchers and all. Who will entrust them with tanks, planes and something else more seriously. And you won’t even be able to fight with assault rifles. Only against the children of the elderly and women.
    4. vlade99
      vlade99 25 March 2016 10: 28
      +4
      Quote: tiredwithall
      Fuck the state and make money

      Newigil are going to legalize.
      1. yushch
        yushch 25 March 2016 11: 02
        +1
        How everything is twisted and twisted in the article. PMCs cannot be a parallel army in any state a priori. This is the army, only in legal terms it was separated from belonging to the state by the term "private". This is a lot of money and the Anglo-Saxons, who control this market, try not to let anyone there.
        Does anyone really think that at the state level all this will not be tightly controlled? In the States and Britain, it means everything is under control, but we won't? I believe that the word "vacationers" should be called the term that it represents, namely PMCs. I do not mean volunteers, I mean military specialists who must be insured from all sides.
    5. SU69
      SU69 25 March 2016 10: 58
      +5
      Afraid of the junta of popular anger.
      He understands that the people have a lot of claims to power and in the event of a riot, the military will refuse to shoot at their people.
  2. avvg
    avvg 25 March 2016 09: 58
    +20
    Without a "pocket army" (PMCs), they were bypassed in the USSR, and now we can bypass too.
    1. Lyton
      Lyton 25 March 2016 10: 15
      +1
      About the creation of the likeness of a foreign league, where people will defend the interests of Russia, the idea is sound, because it is no secret that our guys are fighting outside the country.
    2. Thronekeeper
      Thronekeeper 25 March 2016 10: 58
      +2
      Firstly, during the Soviet Union there was an institute of military advisers, instructors and specialists (the latter, and sometimes the latter, took part in the database in third countries directly, I operate the supplied military equipment and trained local officers. As legal combatants, on the basis of international treaties about military assistance, along the line of the Ministry of Defense, along the line of the KGB of the USSR — the institute of liquidators also existed, but today you see how much slag the sky smokes beyond the cordon.
      The office now lacks special forces outside the SS, which have strike and fighter aircraft and air defense for special tasks, but this is being solved, and also does not apply to PMCs.
      The army cannot protect the civilian specialists of Rosneft, Rosatom, Gazprom, ROE, almost the entire FSB is simpler there, in conditions of unfriendly neighbors and terrorist threats. The construction of a nuclear power plant in Egypt, work on the Syrian oil fields and the gas-bearing shelf, nuclear power plants in Syria, the restoration of the Saudi oil industry after Iran gouges it, not without our help, this is already a matter of today - the Egyptian nuclear power plant has begun to be installed. On the one hand, Libya with the UG, tribals and others, with tpunks and, possibly, some kind of aviation, on the other, its own Muslim bros, Israel and the 6th fleet from which you expect any nasty things. In Syria - Turks, Jews, states, terror - the same set. Verta tanks, fighters and air defense systems to guard the civilian fleet and special forces can only be used by the "security corporation". Since the army, a priori, cannot work as a guard, this does not concern the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and it also has nothing to do with the Office with any expansion of powers.
      New goskorp, like ROE. Under the Office again zhezh. And the fact that the generals and colonels, God forbid that the majors, the FSB and the VKS, have a small packet of elite shares for the empire’s cause, is it so you feel sorry?
      It is not necessary to see "Bluewater" where it is not. Under the USSR, international law really existed, there was no terrorist threat that a small number of special forces would not stop, and there were no those PMCs with various weapons and military equipment.
      This is written by a purely army lobbyist, who is foul because of the corporate hatred of boots for jackets, where he sees the strengthening of the Office, there he sees the shadow of SEA and in a dream yells. Interestingly, Putin doesn’t scare him on TV yet?
      And the fact that there is a share of private capital in Rosoboronexport, and both the defense industry and the Office, and the army and state officials warm their hands, does not make one regret the "budget flows". First, Russia is the capitalist superpower of the Andropov-Putin project of a neo-colonial global empire. Second, a different level and a different structure of threats. A completely different degree of frostbite of our potential opponents and protivnimchat. I have already spoken about terror on tanks and planes, verts and UAVs at least. An appropriate reaction is needed in order to forestall the threat, and not then start a war with the provocateur.
      1. your1970
        your1970 25 March 2016 19: 04
        +1
        1) "Under the USSR, international law really existed, there was no terrorist threat that a small number of special forces would not stop, and there were no those same PMCs with various weapons and military equipment."
        Have you heard about the "Red Brigades", Basque separatists, the IRA and other terrorist organizations in 60-70-80 (and some have not yet been defeated)? , incidentally ... Nevertheless, the USSR did without PMCs
        2) "Tanks verta, fighters and air defense for the protection of civilian fleet" - who / what are you going to protect abroad with such forces? If the type of nuclear power plant, sorry, why build a nuclear power plant for the government that cannot protect it itself?
        What state would just allow the presence of foreign tanks on its territory? This is actually called occupation - well, or according to the modern "NATO" ...
    3. Hell's Angel
      Hell's Angel 25 March 2016 12: 46
      +4
      You won’t believe it, but in the USSR they did without the Internet ....
  3. Pvi1206
    Pvi1206 25 March 2016 10: 01
    +24
    The more armed groups there are in the country, the less stable the state will be.
    A strong state should have a single army.
    1. tchoni
      tchoni 25 March 2016 10: 23
      +6
      I agree. Private armies lead to feudal fragmentation
      1. Sober
        Sober 25 March 2016 11: 36
        +1
        Quote: tchoni
        I agree. Private armies lead to feudal fragmentation

        And besides, anyone can pay them. And what then is a hired army without a homeland and an oath and honor. ? Traitors and killers!
    2. tol100v
      tol100v 25 March 2016 10: 49
      +4
      Quote: Pvi1206
      A strong state should have a single army.

      PMCs are legalized armed gangs! And to carry out special operations in Russia there will always be "vacationers"!
      1. Pinkie F.
        Pinkie F. 25 March 2016 10: 52
        -2
        Quote: Tol100v
        PMCs are legitimate armed gangs!

        these are the pocket armies of corporations. You shouldn't call them "gangs". They are packed with personnel and equipment at such a level that this word is hardly applicable to them.
        1. ava09
          ava09 25 March 2016 11: 33
          +1
          Quote: Pinky F.
          Quote: Tol100v
          PMCs are legitimate armed gangs!

          these are the pocket armies of corporations. You shouldn't call them "gangs". They are packed with personnel and equipment at such a level that this word is hardly applicable to them.

          As I understand it, it was not about the level of training of personnel and weapons. If any military education works for money, then it inevitably works for the Master, who pays this very money. The interests of the oligarchs-conquistadors, as many already know, are directly opposite to the interests of the people. Russia is on the verge of global changes. In the presence of "private" armies, we will not succeed in 1991, there will be 1918 - 1922 and blood of no less scale.
          1. Pinkie F.
            Pinkie F. 25 March 2016 11: 52
            -3
            Quote: ava09
            If any military education works for money, it inevitably works for the Master

            Yes, to the state, receiving state orders.
            Quote: ava09
            The interests of the oligarchs-conquistadors, as many already know, are directly opposite to the interests of the people.

            Not only titans such as McDonell-Douglas have PMCs. For the most part, these are still relatively small offices, which are interrupted by orders of a protective nature.
            Quote: ava09
            In the presence of "private" armies, we will not succeed in 1991, there will be 1918 - 1922 and blood of no less scale.
            PMCs operate outside the country, in conflict zones of low intensity. Or do you imagine the Academy returning from Afghanistan as the arrival of Bumbarash to his homeland?
            1. Tuxuu
              Tuxuu 25 March 2016 14: 50
              +1
              Yes, it’s useless to explain to them, here the majority does not understand the essence of the issue. I read the comments and was horrified.
              1. ava09
                ava09 28 March 2016 08: 56
                +1
                Quote: Tuxuu
                Yes, it’s useless to explain to them, here the majority does not understand the essence of the issue. I read the comments and was horrified.

                The essence of the question is American, in one wise Soviet slogan, located on the parade ground of each military unit: "The people and the Army are one!" And those who look at him like a "ram at a new gate" or because of their age do not see him at all are horrified ...
            2. your1970
              your1970 25 March 2016 19: 14
              +2
              "Yes, for the state, receiving government orders." - you contradict yourself: either it is for state grandmothers or for private ones.
              "PMCs are not only among titans like McDonell-Douglas. For the most part, these are relatively small offices that are interrupted by orders of a security nature."
              "PMCs operate outside the country, in low-intensity conflict zones. Or do you imagine the return of the Academy from Afghanistan as the arrival of Bumbarash at home?"
              Do we have places of interests with low intensity of battles? Or have you confused us with the USA? If we have interests somewhere, we usually are friends with the local government and supply HIS army with weapons, but no more ...
              In general, the question is: YOU ARE READY TO DIE NOT FOR MOTHERLAND, BUT FOR BABLO?
              1. Cat man null
                Cat man null 25 March 2016 19: 45
                -1
                Man, you tire, like a holiday (c) Dolsky.

                So:

                Quote: your1970
                either it is for state grandmothers or for private

                - PMC is a Private Military Company
                - it can fulfill orders of both private companies (protection of oil fields where the thread is in the Congo) and the state (support LDNR, for example)

                Imagine a taxi ... well, I’ll take care of him, the state agency hired him, or a private trader. His job is to get it.

                A PMC is the same taxi. Only with very specific functions.

                And all request
                1. your1970
                  your1970 26 March 2016 10: 57
                  +1
                  "A PMC is the same taxi. Only with very specific functions."
                  and you trust a "private taxi driver" - tanks / planes / helicopters? If you trust - this is already an army, even if it will be written in bold letters on it: "The army of Semyon Semyonovich Semyonov." In addition, I will put the taxi driver, but if the taxi driver will make a mess, no, they will poke him in the face and say -you, you hired you and answer
                  Z.Y. ABSOLUTELY NOBODY DISTURB LDNR itself to create a type of PMC (even with heavy military equipment) -2 problems only: 1) a very thin line of mercenarism, 2) where to get the money ....
        2. your1970
          your1970 25 March 2016 19: 07
          +2
          Snaryaga does not make an army out of "Aydar" and "Azov" - it is a gang, and for the criminal law of any decent state.
        3. talot
          talot 29 March 2016 09: 07
          0
          your logic, if you pack a group of ordinary bandits (gang) with gear and add frames, then this is not a group of bandits, but something else? ... Interesting!
  4. Air defense Valga
    Air defense Valga 25 March 2016 10: 03
    +6
    It’s better to pay the contract servicemen normally. To assign state security functions to such structures is the height of imprudence.
  5. guzik007
    guzik007 25 March 2016 10: 04
    +12
    The monopoly on violence must remain the prerogative of the state! only. Otherwise, it will start: the army of Gazprom, the army of Sibneft-quietly crush if unhappy hard workers and natives. Bam! and why are we better than americos?
  6. newcomer
    newcomer 25 March 2016 10: 04
    +11
    In general, I didn’t read the article to the end that the author wanted to convey clearly somewhere in the beginning. I can tell PMCs this is a fed army of money bags and an instrument of pressure on the population by them. no, we don’t need such football.
  7. salavat
    salavat 25 March 2016 10: 06
    +11
    Given the lawlessness and inviolability of our bureaucrats and oligarchs, it will be just private armies of mercenaries, without any moral principles, upholding the interests of the company that pays them. Which oligarch will resist the possibility of having hundreds of armed youths in his submission.
    1. Tuxuu
      Tuxuu 25 March 2016 14: 51
      0
      And nakoy them hundreds of armed people outside the territory of the Russian Federation, who are still very cheap?
  8. avg-mgn
    avg-mgn 25 March 2016 10: 06
    +2
    Why does the parliamentarian advocate the creation of private military companies, that is, in fact, the formation of a parallel army in the country?

    It seems offended. Not given a license for injuries? So in the certificate from the psychiatric clinic there is a bad diagnosis. Not ranked bodyguard? Probably not mature enough, but the president who is supposed to be - not when you will not!
    1. Lieutenant Izhe
      Lieutenant Izhe 25 March 2016 11: 05
      0
      "a parliamentarian stands up for PMCs" from the fact that ... has his OWN selfish interest in THIS BUSINESS!
  9. Dimontius
    Dimontius 25 March 2016 10: 06
    +5
    Knowing our corruption tendencies, it will become alarming if armed formations appear in the country that themselves determine politics in their own interests. The sixth sense suggests that this is not ours ... not for Russia. Plus, weapons were legalized in the United States, and these PMCs bred 350 yards. And we have nothing to add weapons to bad uncles in our hands, in a legal way. Indeed, for this, it will simply be necessary to create PMCs. Declare one thing and do the other + do not go to a fortuneteller, and foreign intelligence services will begin to be introduced in full. In general, well, what for these PMCs ...
  10. okunevich_rv
    okunevich_rv 25 March 2016 10: 09
    0
    To the lobbyists of this legislative initiative AAANAFIMA !!!
    1. V.ic
      V.ic 25 March 2016 10: 43
      0
      Quote: okunevich_rv
      The lobbyists of this legislative initiative of the AAANAFИMA !!!

      Novel: "Anathema - (Greek anathema)" - is written with "e"!
      1. Pinkie F.
        Pinkie F. 25 March 2016 11: 06
        0
        Quote: okunevich_rv
        AAANAFIMA !!!

        Quote: V.ic
        Novel: "Anathema - (Greek anathema)" - is written with "e"!


        "Fimka! Bring the blamanzhetki with jelly! "(C) laughing
  11. Million
    Million 25 March 2016 10: 11
    +6
    Every "prince" wants to have a pocket army.
  12. Mama_Cholli
    Mama_Cholli 25 March 2016 10: 15
    +2
    But what if a handful of oligarchs who have this kind of fighting detachment suddenly want to arrange something like a maidan in Moscow? Why then the constitution and elections?
    Not to mention the fact that with the help of such a tool they will be able to solve most of the "work issues", for example, squeezing someone else's property or dispersal of disgruntled workers at the enterprise.
  13. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 25 March 2016 10: 15
    +3
    planning to capitalize on this money.

    The word money is key. Why so lobby for PMCs when there is a law on the use of the country's armed forces abroad (if absolutely necessary). The adoption of the PMC law opens a niche for making huge money. It seems to me that here, in the first place, are not the interests of the country, but the banal mercantile interest.
    1. Pinkie F.
      Pinkie F. 25 March 2016 10: 57
      0
      Quote: rotmistr60
      The word money is key.

      of course. Always and at all times.
      The word "soldier" also has a monetary etymology)
  14. Pinkie F.
    Pinkie F. 25 March 2016 10: 17
    +1
    will we again copy the States, clicking on the fact that, they say, we need to be flexible in the new, hybrid format of modern wars? So you look, over time, we will give up military logistics to corporations as staff members. And there and to "corporate fascism" not far.
  15. Ros 56
    Ros 56 25 March 2016 10: 19
    +3
    This will be the first step towards the collapse of the state called Russia. I make another proposal: - the initiators of this law are 15 years of strict labor with complete confiscation without trial.
    1. Wheel
      Wheel 25 March 2016 12: 01
      +1
      Quote: Ros 56
      This will be the first step towards the collapse of the state called Russia.

      Not the first, alas, but the next.
  16. nikolaev
    nikolaev 25 March 2016 10: 20
    +7
    It is quite obvious that the oligarchs need PMCs to usurp power in the future. That is, this "legislative initiative" should be qualified as treason to the state, preparation of a coup.
  17. atamankko
    atamankko 25 March 2016 10: 23
    +3
    The government should control armed people, not the oligarchs, companies and organized crime groups.
    1. Tuxuu
      Tuxuu 25 March 2016 14: 54
      0
      To the point! And no one except! But only unofficially
  18. weksha50
    weksha50 25 March 2016 10: 24
    +7
    Our existing private security companies have essentially become legally legalized racketeer roofs ... As well as collection agencies ... In practice, they are legalized bandits, no matter how cynical it sounds ... And it doesn't matter if there are pure bandits or with "cover" from the security forces structures - the essence remains the same ...

    And here practically they also want to create a private army ... The army is with Kasyanov, with Gref, with Miller, with Prokhorov ...

    And let these lobbyists not try to cite the French Foreign Legion as an example - the structure and tasks are completely different there, and the legislation in the country is more or less respected, at least the appearance of its observance is created ...
  19. S_Baykala
    S_Baykala 25 March 2016 10: 24
    +7
    And what kind of PMC can have, say, Gazprom or Prokhorov? Sufficient to carry out a coup d'etat in some region of the country. Is it necessary?
  20. erased
    erased 25 March 2016 10: 32
    +4
    And the casket just opened ... Russian PMCs can work only outside the Russian Federation with the permission of the official authorities of the employing country in compliance with international norms and rights. And only after the preparation of the contract, where all the details of the work are prescribed.
    PMCs cannot operate on the territory of the Russian Federation. Enough and chop.
    1. Passer
      Passer 25 March 2016 11: 36
      +2
      Quote: erased
      And the casket just opened ... Russian PMCs can work only outside the Russian Federation with the permission of the official authorities of the employing country in compliance with international norms and rights.

      And what in this situation prohibits the use of state armed forces?
      1. Passer
        Passer 25 March 2016 12: 25
        0
        There is a minus - there are no comments, as always.
  21. Kazakh
    Kazakh 25 March 2016 10: 35
    0
    then, they say, a wonderful job opportunity for military personnel who are leaving the Armed Forces. But can we be insured against luring the best army specialists into PMCs? Will it not turn out in the end that the most trained personnel of the RF Armed Forces will gradually be redistributed in favor of PMCs?
    (Feed) better they will not fly away.
    Dimontius RU Today, 10:06 AM New

    Knowing our corruption tendencies, it will become alarming if armed formations appear in the country that themselves determine politics in their own interests.
    In America, corruption is all right, the beacon of democracy. In general, Peter was probably the first to be the boyars, "why do we need these regiments of the new system? The archers were coping for years. And also foreign officers, well, how those who are sent to us will take the soldiers away from the battlefield. Yes, foreigners and even mercenaries for money to fight "as an adult" they only give money. " Gentlemen that it was a joke don't take it seriously laughingRomanian what to take with me laughing
  22. Whowhy
    Whowhy 25 March 2016 10: 36
    0
    PMCs in Russia can become the basis of a military coup and the overthrow of legal power in the country. They are extremely difficult to control.
  23. askort154
    askort154 25 March 2016 10: 38
    +1
    The question is, of course, twofold. In Soviet times - "special business trips" were often uploaded by subsequent
    showdowns with military enlistment offices, where they ran into a stupid - "we did not send you there."
    It's fashionable to create a PMC, but it's a double-edged sword. They can be "officially" sent over the "hillock", they will
    secured by "law" upon return. But where are the guarantees that they are not being used to their advantage
    modern billionaires to overthrow an unwanted power or secession of the republic.
    If PMCs are created, then only with strict regulations for their use and the possibility of disbandment.
  24. avg-mgn
    avg-mgn 25 March 2016 10: 41
    +1
    When the Americans climbed into Ukraine, they started precisely with PMCs, our deputies shouted in unison, and now the working groups are creating substantive considerations. But what about the constitution of the Russian Federation? After all, this is an army, not a chop!
  25. Lanista
    Lanista 25 March 2016 10: 45
    +2
    Do you not understand the essence of PMCs?
    Do you think PMCs are not state-controlled?
    In this case, I will tell you some interesting things about PMCs.
    Firstly, orders for PMCs are not taken from the ceiling. Not all the tasks facing the armed forces / special services of the state should be carried out using "clean" methods, sometimes it is better for some leftist citizens to do it. And PMCs in this case are helping the state a lot.
    Secondly, suffering over "this is the army of oligarchs!" - are simply groundless. PMCs are not able to carry out a serious coup d'etat (this is why a law on PMCs is needed, imposing restrictions on them), and a "coup" on a regional scale is impossible in principle (there is such a word - "legitimacy").
    Thirdly, PMCs in our, Russian, case are a way of at least some kind of legalization and protection of the rights of our volunteers defending the interests of Russia in various "conflicts of low intensity." PMCs will at least provide normal monetary and material allowances for volunteers, as well as decent insurance.

    It is possible that an oligarch who has committed economic crimes and who is trying to escape punishment collects a private army for 10 – 20 thousands of mercenaries, who do not allow him to detain him or bring him to justice.

    And this is generally a joke of the day.
    He gathered an army in a week, yeah. Armed, created headquarters and other governing bodies, deployed, provided all kinds of allowances, and even captured a region along the way. I haven’t laughed like this for a long time, thanks to the author.

    “I don’t see a situation where a normal judge would be able to see the difference between a mercenary and a private security officer,” says Sergey Ordzhonikidze. - Any court in this case will be guided by two things: the Hague Convention on the Rights and Duties of the Neutral Powers in the Land Conflict of 1967, as well as acts of the Security Council, resolutions of the Security Council and the UN General Assembly, which states that the use of people who commit crimes against state, punishable by law. "

    Sergey Ordzhonikidze? Why not Mikhail Frunze?
    Question to this leader of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) of the 1920-x model: careful Ordzhonikidze, do you know that the laws of the Russian Federation prevail over international laws in Russia? There will be a law on PMCs - and all of your late acts and other pieces of paper of the United Nations will only fit for manning the bathrooms. The use of UN Security Council acts in legal proceedings of general jurisdiction ... haha.
    1. Pinkie F.
      Pinkie F. 25 March 2016 10: 58
      +2
      Quote: Lanista
      And this is generally a joke of the day.

      a hint of Kolomoisky?
      ))
      1. Lanista
        Lanista 25 March 2016 11: 11
        +2
        Kolomoisky is a slightly different case. Perhaps he originally wanted to do just that - that is, create a personal army. However, he fell into an ideological trap, and that's how.
        In total, he created 3 battalions, all three - let's say, of highly questionable combat effectiveness, but still quite acceptable for the conditions of Ukraine. For his own protection, he had to keep them with him - in the Dnepropetrovsk region. At first it was like that (the first battalion, "Dnepropetrovsk-1" or "Dnepr-1"), but then he was asked from Kiev: like, your region is calm, the DPR does not seem to be formed, why are you keeping a battalion there? And Kalomoisha sent this battalion to the "ATO zone". The same crap happened with the second and third battalions. He could not legitimately substantiate why he needed these formations.
        And where is that Kolomoisky with his battalions now?
        1. Pinkie F.
          Pinkie F. 25 March 2016 11: 34
          +2
          Quote: Lanista
          Kolomoisky is a slightly different case ..... And where is that Kolomoisky with his battalions now?

          Thanks, I liked the comment. In general, Kolomoisky's battalions cannot be called PMCs.) In general, while here (on the forum) we have complete terminological and conceptual confusion, the private security companies have already recalled "wild geese" and even (huh!) Collectors. laughing
    2. mishastich
      mishastich 25 March 2016 11: 02
      +1
      I can’t disagree with you, but there is always a but. PMCs should not operate on the territory of the Russian Federation. Protect Gas Oil Towers in Africa / Asia / Latin America - yes. But to overthrow unfavorable regimes / replace the Armed Forces of a certain country / carry out counter-terrorist operations - no. For this there is a MTR / GRU / Ministry of Internal Affairs / Defense Ministry and others.

      There must be very cruel legislation regarding PMCs.

      I am not a lawyer, so I just can’t formulate it more clearly.
    3. Tuxuu
      Tuxuu 25 March 2016 15: 00
      +1
      When combining the letters of PMCs, people have a strange clouding of reason ...
  26. Pinkie F.
    Pinkie F. 25 March 2016 10: 49
    0
    Quote: avg-mgn
    When the Americans climbed into Ukraine, they started precisely with PMCs

    Yes, and the topic of "our" PMCs was also raised in connection with the events in Donbass (and was actively discussed at the VO). The Syrian epic has once again returned interest in PMCs: like, if the Russian Federation had its own "blackwater academy", then for land presence would be removed moral barriers. It seems like a compromise - we are "there", but this is not a "second Afghan". At least such remarks took place on the air of the news.
    1. your1970
      your1970 25 March 2016 19: 39
      0
      "like, if the Russian Federation had its own" blackwater academy ", then moral barriers would be removed for the ground presence. It seems like a compromise - we are" there ", but this is not a" second Afghan ". At least, such remarks took place on the air of the news. "
      The number of PMCs required for victory in any military operations in the most miserable forgotten country? 3-5-10 divisions? otherwise, in smaller numbers, only cut the dough ...
  27. Vega
    Vega 25 March 2016 10: 53
    +1
    The country has already created an official gangster structure for extorting debts, why not PMCs?
    1. Pinkie F.
      Pinkie F. 25 March 2016 10: 59
      +1
      Quote: vega
      gangster structure for extortion of debts, than not PMCs?

      collectors mean? Nonsense.
      By nothing
      Quote: vega
      not PMCs

      Primitive.
  28. Izotovp
    Izotovp 25 March 2016 10: 58
    +3
    Something you guys somehow waved with coups! PMCs by law should act ONLY abroad! In the case of only the thought of some kind of power activity within the country, criminal liability. FSB control.
    From ancient times Russian squads acted abroad and were hired by other rulers.
    And now there are enough militants inside the country: from ordinary bandits to chop employees who have all the permissions to act inside the country.
    Before you panic, you need to look at the regulations that describe their activities.
    A question for all-prowlers: does not the state need a piece of such a pie from the PMC services market and the possibility of semi-official power influence in the right areas? Yes, and no one bothers to oblige to transfer a controlling stake to the state.
    Plus, the number of PMCs is not taken into account when calculating the armed forces and, in fact, during a real big war, this is a good reserve.
    1. your1970
      your1970 25 March 2016 19: 36
      0
      "Meanwhile, in the first 9 months of Obama's presidency, the number of armed employees of contractor companies of the US Department of Defense has grown by 236% - from 3 to 10 712."
      The US Army will directly die immediately, if without such a frantic reserve - 10000 people (a whole division) are not trained to START / DEFEAT, but only to protect ..
      1. Izotovp
        Izotovp 25 March 2016 22: 13
        0
        And who told you that they do not know how to advance and defend? In fact, there, almost all of them have experience in the armed forces and often in special units and participated in hostilities. Therefore, as a combat unit, such a division is a very impressive force.
        1. your1970
          your1970 26 March 2016 11: 06
          0
          a combat unit such a division is a very impressive force.

          1) 1,4 million people the size of the US Army - 10000 real funny pennies
          2) For actions where? In Africa, maybe it’s not rich, in the country there are 404 meager forces ... The smallest number of OKSVA was 65 thousand, and that was not enough ..
  29. asiat_61
    asiat_61 25 March 2016 11: 17
    +1
    The fact that our PMCs will be subordinate only to Russia, to comply with the instructions of its leadership, is an illusion..Here I completely agree with this.
  30. cyberhanter
    cyberhanter 25 March 2016 11: 24
    0
    In my opinion, the creation of a VK, a military company that can provide services to private owners on a contractual basis, is necessary, but the company must be state-owned and in fact should be a branch of the armed forces
    1. Pinkie F.
      Pinkie F. 25 March 2016 11: 42
      +2
      Quote: cyberhanter
      the creation of a VK, a military company that can provide services to private owners on an agreed basis, is necessary, but the company must be state

      that is - exactly the opposite? Sorry, but this, in my opinion, is stupid: to create GVK to serve private corporate interests abroad? Develop your thought, please. Just curious train of thought.
  31. fif21
    fif21 25 March 2016 11: 40
    0
    1. Wealthy "friends" of the United States have the opportunity to conclude an agreement with PMCs and they use it.
    2.What is the Russian PMC for? The operation in Syria has shown the effectiveness of the RF Armed Forces!
    3. Alternatively, it is possible to allow the Russian Ministry of Defense to have several PMC regiments, i.e. to allow the regiment commanders, with the consent of the Minister of Defense, to conclude agreements on the provision of paid services in the conduct of hostilities in other countries.
    4. Scheme: RF Ministry of Defense - agreement with the regiment of military unit 00001- and instead of military unit we get Hitler Kaput PMC with the owner of the PMC Ivanov I. And the former colonel and commander of military unit 00001
    4.1 The Russian army is funded by foreign partners.
    4.2 The state of the Russian Federation is not officially involved in a military conflict.
    4.3 The activities of PMCs are under the strict control of the RF Ministry of Defense
    1. Pinkie F.
      Pinkie F. 25 March 2016 12: 02
      +2
      Quote: fif21
      2.What is the Russian PMC for? The operation in Syria has shown the effectiveness of the RF Armed Forces!

      VKS of the Russian Federation, which is important)
      So, here one "expert" on the radio was crucifying that if we had a PMC, the question with the "second Afghan" would have been, like, removed - and the man in the street was reassured, and "ours" were conducting a ground operation. I don't understand how such cretins are invited to broadcast half the country - PMCs do not participate in offensive operations - otherwise a goodbye license and blacklists. And the armed forces are quite capable of guarding the bases. Yes, of course, auxiliary functions - no matter where you go, but shifting the functions of regulars to PMCs is nonsense!
      1. fif21
        fif21 25 March 2016 12: 18
        0
        Quote: Pinky F.
        PMCs do not participate in offensive operations
        ????? Poles (Polish PMCs) in Ukraine are blacklisted? They were deprived of a license?
        US PMCs in Iraq guarded bases? Could the French Foreign Legion accompanied UN humanitarian convoys in Africa? The UAE generally wanted to hire the US Army to eliminate the Assad regime in Syria! They promised to pay all expenses!
        1. Pinkie F.
          Pinkie F. 25 March 2016 12: 49
          0
          Quote: fif21
          ????? Poles (Polish PMCs) in Ukraine are blacklisted? They were deprived of a license?

          ASBS Othago guarded the positions of xoxlak artillery in Karachun. I did not participate in offensive operations.
          Quote: fif21
          The UAE generally wanted to hire a US army to eliminate the Assad regime in Syria!

          no need to distort, my dear.
          Quote: fif21
          US PMCs in Iraq guarded the base?

          Abu Ghraib was guarded, the head of the coalition government was guarded. Blackwater was stripped of its license for the incident in Baghdad.
      2. The comment was deleted.
  32. fzr1000
    fzr1000 25 March 2016 11: 40
    +1
    The stiff looks here are the majority. After all, it is proposed that PMCs carry out activities ONLY abroad of the Russian Federation. De jure through offshore our business already has them. Or maybe not at all in business. Business is a cover. So why not take it under legislative control? Plus, as noted above, our PMCs could carry out special operations on instructions from the FSB or GRU. Moreover, all this is already happening, only these specialists are not called the word PMCs.
    By the way, and the deputy from the article can draw a line between the contractor of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, who acts outside the borders of the Russian Federation, for example, hypothetically, somewhere in the Donbass in the occupied territory and a mercenary? From the point of view of international law, the line here is very thin.
    1. Pinkie F.
      Pinkie F. 25 March 2016 12: 08
      0
      Quote: fzr1000
      The stiff looks here are the majority.

      well, not most. The primitive approach is generally explainable. But some pearls, of course, are interesting: "It is the oligarchs who create their own oprichnina !!!! They are preparing a coup !!!"
      For some reason, "Ivan Vasilievich ..." I recall: "The army rebelled! ..."
      So - and why then, in your fantasies not to go further - a new Streletsky revolt, like ...
    2. Pinkie F.
      Pinkie F. 25 March 2016 12: 12
      0
      Quote: fzr1000
      our PMCs could carry out special operations on instructions from the FSB or the GRU.

      right - back to the roots. Stirling, himself a native of SAS, initially positioned his WI.
  33. x587x
    x587x 25 March 2016 12: 03
    +1
    Quote: Lieutenant Izhe
    "And let's, then, and ..." "private" Strategic Missile Forces will be allowed! belay

    They launched a rocket and said: the state is not responsible.
  34. Wolverine
    Wolverine 25 March 2016 12: 11
    +1
    The root of evil is in the word (lobbied) by the fact that the government does not need it, we are already loaded with power agents and I don’t want to and the people are more afraid of them than bandits. To protect what interests abroad is this necessary? I believe only the oligarchs, you can not arm them. Here Syria asked, we helped and everything is legal from an international point of view, but I am against it.
  35. Tambov Wolf
    Tambov Wolf 25 March 2016 12: 23
    0
    And no one thought that under the guise of a PMC there would be the same special forces of Russia, only hidden under a different name? Advantages: no fees of the Federation Council and other burdensome things, work in any direction, including illegal ones, no "human rights" and "Democracy" - hands are completely untied. And subordination will remain in the General Staff and the Ministry of Defense. And to shouts: - "What is going on here?", the answer follows: - "We are not in business here, private business, you know, nothing personal." The same Blackwater does everything she is ordered to, otherwise she will not be there in a day. No one has canceled the secret operations. But with PMCs it will be very easy. And the name of the customer for the whole world has never been disclosed and will not be disclosed. mystery, everything is according to the law, you see.
    1. tiredwithall
      tiredwithall 25 March 2016 14: 19
      +1
      "subordination will remain in the General Staff and the Ministry of Defense" - fantastic!
      1. your1970
        your1970 25 March 2016 19: 29
        -1
        or rather nonsense, because if subordinate to the State body, then the Russian Federation right responsible for their actions, as they are not called: PMCs, ZhBK, EKLMN ...
    2. tiredwithall
      tiredwithall 25 March 2016 14: 19
      +1
      "subordination will remain in the General Staff and the Ministry of Defense" - fantastic!
  36. serezhasoldatow
    serezhasoldatow 25 March 2016 12: 34
    -2
    These "formations" contradict the very essence of the Russian person. We already went through this in the 90s. Do we want repetition? Now there are enough problems within the country with collectors, do we want internationally with PMCs?
    1. Pinkie F.
      Pinkie F. 25 March 2016 12: 50
      +2
      Quote: serezhasoldatow
      These "formations" contradict the very essence of the Russian person.

      Which one?
  37. Landwarrior
    Landwarrior 25 March 2016 12: 39
    0
    PMCs have Russian oil and gas workers working abroad. So here it is more about legalization, IMHO.
    1. Pinkie F.
      Pinkie F. 25 March 2016 12: 53
      0
      Quote: Landwarrior
      PMCs have Russian oil and gas workers working abroad. So here it is more about legalization, IMHO.

      deoffshorization? smile
      1. Landwarrior
        Landwarrior 25 March 2016 13: 30
        0
        Quote: Pinky F.
        deoffshorization?

        Of its kind. yes
        Somehow a long time ago they already showed a program about a peasant, a former officer who organized a PMC somewhere in Malta, or in Cyprus (right now, I don't remember, I watched it as they say). What type of Russian and his employees are all exclusively from the former CIS. He then said that he would be glad to work in Russia and even pay taxes (they say the demand for services is great, at that time they were mainly engaged in protecting ships from pirates), but alas, there are no laws, therefore, he has to keep an office "for hillock ".
        1. Pinkie F.
          Pinkie F. 25 March 2016 13: 38
          0
          Quote: Landwarrior
          Somehow, quite a while ago, they showed a program about a peasant, a former officer who

          Yes, I also looked, although I vaguely remember) There was also in the plot about protection from Somali pirates, I think. In general, a PMC with a "human face", not like the BW thugs who killed 16 civilians in Baghdad.
          1. Landwarrior
            Landwarrior 25 March 2016 13: 51
            0
            Quote: Pinky F.
            Yes, I also looked, although I vaguely remember) There was also in the plot about protection from Somali pirates, I think. In general, a PMC with a "human face", not like the BW thugs who killed 16 civilians in Baghdad.

            Yes, exactly, from Somali pirates. Well, then you know what I mean drinks
            But BlackWater ... BW is no longer there (I mean by name), they were later called XE, right now, like ACADEMY ... As they do, they run to rename.
            1. Pinkie F.
              Pinkie F. 25 March 2016 14: 30
              0
              Quote: Landwarrior
              BW is already gone (I mean by name), they were later called XE, right now like ACADEMY ...

              Yes, they took away the license ... issued another ...)
  38. ovod84
    ovod84 25 March 2016 12: 49
    0
    You can create them only with certain conditions, for example, the protection of large deposits, mainly their activities should be related to abroad
  39. Tuxuu
    Tuxuu 25 March 2016 12: 56
    +1
    It’s like adult men, and write such nonsense ... and here are PMCs and the territory of our country?! Who told you that PMCs will be used in Russia?! Only outside our state, and from the word private there will only be a word and nothing more. it should be a state structure to protect our interests in the world. All our companies will go there and conclude contracts for the protection of certain objects outside our country. Again, the state will have money from this. I see some advantages in organizing PMCs and none minus if horse but to do everything pravilno.S respect.
    1. your1970
      your1970 25 March 2016 19: 22
      0
      Tuxuu exactly your flag repeat meets you

      "Increasing the use of private military companies can be problematic due to the potential higher prices, less risk tolerance and issues related to the effective integration of military and government operations with the companyand. Problems supporting military operationsThese often include unclear command-subordinate relationships., depending on opportunities that might suddenly be unavailable, reduced control over key functions, ethical considerations and legal issues.
      (Key concept of the US Army for 2016-2028 Operational Adaptability) "
  40. pts-m
    pts-m 25 March 2016 13: 54
    -2
    Having PMCs, it is easier for the state to fight with its people, who are outraged by the unfair distribution of material values.
    1. Pinkie F.
      Pinkie F. 25 March 2016 14: 43
      +1
      Quote: PTS-m
      Having PMCs, it is easier for the state to fight with its people, who are outraged by the unfair distribution of material values.

      yes with what "own" people? What is a PMC in your opinion? By God, it's like asking "what is a duck?" from the birdwatcher and the nurse and get two completely different answers.
    2. fif21
      fif21 25 March 2016 16: 52
      +2
      Quote: PTS-m
      Having PMCs, it is easier for the state to fight with its people, who are outraged by the unfair distribution of material values.
      The state has the FSO, the FSB, the Ministry of Internal Affairs in such a way that you will not indulge much. The rich have their own guards and call them differently (bodyguards, security managers, private security companies) The natural monopolies of Russian Railways, Gazprom, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Rosneft ... have their own departmental security, but the Ministry of Defense does not have PMCs, and the need for them apparently exists. .k the protection of a clothing or food warehouse, in the absence of conscripts, becomes a very costly undertaking, from the comments I understood that this is not about "wild geese", but about auxiliary security functions.
      1. your1970
        your1970 25 March 2016 19: 20
        0
        "here the Ministry of Defense does not have PMCs, and the need for them seems to exist because the protection of a clothing or food warehouse, in the absence of conscripts, becomes a very costly measure," - such as a PMC will be cheaper than the current non-departmental one ??? !!!!
        "From the comments I understood that we are not talking about" wild geese ", but about auxiliary security functions." - with a heavy rifleman, including mortars and armored vehicles, there will be a clean "guard" !!!!!!!!!
        By the way
        USA
        “Increasing the use of private military companies can be problematic due to the potentially higher cost, lower risk tolerance, and issues related to effectively integrating military and government operations with company operations. Challenges in supporting military operations by private contractors often include unclear command-line relationships. , dependence on opportunities that may unexpectedly be unavailable, reduced control over key functions, ethical considerations and legal issues.

        (Key concept of the US Army for 2016-2028 Operational Adaptability) "
    3. The comment was deleted.
  41. kam4atka
    kam4atka 25 March 2016 15: 26
    0
    Another step towards the abyss. The bureaucrats are not thinking about that. As the saying goes, "dashing trouble began"
  42. am808s
    am808s 25 March 2016 18: 23
    0
    I categorically negatively treat all PMCs. Where the only driving force is money, there is no place for conscience, where there is no conscience there is cynicism and cruelty. Cynicism and cruelty in relations with the people is already an ENEMY ACTION!
    1. Izotovp
      Izotovp 25 March 2016 19: 02
      0
      That is, the work of a soldier should not be paid? Do you yourself work for money or for conscience? And why should the performance of one's duties be accompanied by cynicism and cruelty? It depends on the moral qualities of the person and the functions underlying the organization. If these are punitives, this is one thing, but if they are people protecting peaceful people, this is quite another. Our contractors differ from Western ones in their greater humanism and the desire to "negotiate" so that it is quiet and peaceful and without unnecessary shooting. Education, however !!!
  43. gammipapa
    gammipapa 25 March 2016 20: 15
    -2
    Yes, this is not a law - this is state wrecking, this is a state in a state. And what good goals are voiced, but this is all a hoax.
    As soon as the law passes, each oligarch will build his Cheka, the benefit of money is enough, but there is no confidence in their safety. And these Cheka will not be driven for good purposes abroad, but at home among themselves, as in the 90s, whose strength is right.
  44. Nehist
    Nehist 26 March 2016 00: 32
    0
    Wow !!! Well, how much nonsense in the comments! The fact that PMCs are already de facto recognized even by our guarantor, who incidentally gave a tip to PMCs of steel and de jure. And in general, view the composition of foreign PMCs! Who heads them, it’s all for the security services. And there, as you know, there are no big ones.
  45. fa2998
    fa2998 26 March 2016 09: 39
    0
    Quote: SU69
    Afraid of the junta of popular anger.
    He understands that the people have a lot of claims to power and in the event of a riot, the military will refuse to shoot at their people.

    I agree! In our country, the authorities have completely ruled out the possibility for ordinary citizens to arm themselves, but punitive bodies and bandits are well armed. Now, PMCs are again for the elect and the rich (often grown together with power)! Here people will not trample with forks and cobblestones! negative hi
  46. serkhan
    serkhan 26 March 2016 12: 23
    0
    Who is responsible for the consequences of their actions ...
    - this is the main question. The ability to avoid responsibility for the actions of PMCs is the main incentive for their creation. The American government is not responsible for the actions of Blackwater. Should he be like him?