Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: A Cinfused Russian Military

  1. #1
    Ray
    Ray is offline
    Military Professional Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    20 Aug 03
    Posts
    19,624

    A Cinfused Russian Military

    Tuesday, September 26, 2006. Issue 3505. Page 11.
    New Doctrine Is Old Hat
    By Alexander Golts

    Something strange is afoot this year in the Defense Ministry. Every other month or so there information is leaked about a group of high-ranking officers in the General Staff that is wrapping up work on a new military doctrine, which it will soon unveil to the country's military and political leadership. Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov routinely denies the rumors, insisting that he knows nothing about a new doctrine.

    It would be unfair to accuse Ivanov of knowing everything that goes on in his ministry. He recently told President Vladimir Putin that the navy's attack submarines carried nuclear weapons. If this were true, it would mean that Russia had decided to ignore the obligation it assumed in the early 1990s to place all tactical nuclear weapons in storage facilities.

    In the case of the new military doctrine, Ivanov had to show some interest. Putin used his state-of-the-nation address this year to talk about necessary changes in the military doctrine to bring it up to date. There have also been reports that Ivanov will present the doctrine at a Cabinet meeting in the near future. Yet it seems increasingly clear that the Defense Ministry is not making any real progress on the doctrine

    The leaks have not simply been dreamt up by enterprising reporters, however. The people writing on this issue have obviously seen some sort of document, which they have quoted extensively. It is highly unlikely that someone in the ministry prepared a fake document just to swindle the press. More likely, the ministry drafted the new doctrine without direct orders from above.

    If, as seems likely, we are dealing with an initiative coming from the military leadership, the new military doctrine points to a deterioration in the armed forces that has been going on since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

    As the latest attempts to reform the military run out of steam, the top brass are beginning to demand a military doctrine from the Kremlin, arguing that they cannot build up their forces without a document that clearly identifies the country's enemies, its allies, and the sort of war we are supposed to be preparing for. In short, they're looking for the equivalent of the General Secretary's reports to the Soviet Communist Party congresses in the good old days.

    The main question, of course, is who should be included in the list of Russia's potential enemies. The journalists who wrote the latest article on the new military doctrine said it singled out the United States and NATO. If the document was drafted without instructions from the Kremlin, this means that the military leadership is pushing the country into a new confrontation.

    It's worth remembering that when the current military doctrine was being drawn up in 1999-2000, the General Staff argued that the United States and NATO posed a clear threat to Russian security. At the time, the Kremlin was irritated by the actions of the West in Yugoslavia, but Ivanov, who was then head of the Security Council, had the sense to remove this provocative statement from the final draft.

    Now it seems the generals are riding a new wave of anti-Americanism to throw the same old arguments at the Kremlin. And not because they seriously think a military confrontation with the United States and NATO is likely. Their only interest is in preserving the current structure of the armed forces so that they can hold on to their jobs as long as possible.

    At issue is the Soviet model of a mass conscription army designed exclusively to counter a global enemy. Since China does not fit the bill, only the United States and NATO are left.

    [B][/BIf the Kremlin agrees with the anti-American provisions in the doctrine, the generals will be able to dismiss complaints about the inefficiency of the military. And the result will be an unworkable situation, since Russia's chief potential enemy will be identified as a country with a military budget more than 20 times larger than ours. Criticism could be deflected by citing the lack of funding.]

    In this situation, leaks to the press are a none-too-subtle way to blackmail the political leadership. If the new doctrine is not approved, the brass will argue that the Kremlin is unwilling to face the truth and to take the country's security seriously. And the Kremlin, where the tone is becoming increasingly anti-American, will find it very difficult to counter such accusations.

    Alexander Golts is deputy editor of the online newspaper Yezhednevny Zhurnal.

    http://www.themoscowtimes.com/storie...09/26/008.html
    The Russian military is in turmoil without any cognisable direction and hamstrung with a lack of funds.

    Yet, what military doctrine could they be searching to formulate? Even if one does not have an enemy, it still can identify the potential adversaries by comparing the world events and the national interests and its internal problems.

    This article hardly gives the inputs desired.

    Anyone any idea as to what would be the new military doctrine that the Russians are so keen to develop?


    "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

    I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

    HAKUNA MATATA

  2. #2
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    24,150
    Like everybody else, Sir, the Russians have fallen in love with brigade size units to replace the division as the defacto deployment force. I will have to dig up my references (I believe which was included in the library I sent you) but essentially, they were going to remodel the regiment as an independent force instead of being part of the division.
    Chimo

  3. #3
    Ray
    Ray is offline
    Military Professional Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    20 Aug 03
    Posts
    19,624
    I knew I could expect a reply from you.

    I don't think I have seen the Russian concept for the brigade sized force.

    Why don't you give a link?

    Reproduce the stuff in the Colonel's Corner and let's have the views.

    That will be interesting.


    "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

    I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

    HAKUNA MATATA

  4. #4
    Banned Regular AntiSatellite's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Sep 06
    Posts
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by Ray View Post

    Anyone any idea as to what would be the new military doctrine that the Russians are so keen to develop?
    Pick any point on the globe, call it an enemy, and then push the red-button

    http://history.sandiego.edu/gen/USPics37/29-1252a.gif
    If you look close you can make out the ships being eaten by the cloud and fallout.
    Sure Russia is a bit backward, they never built a real navy and they've got problems being undemocratic but he Ruskies don't got many probelms when it comes to their military, they have a powerful growing economy and still are leaders in technology and their forces are still one of the most powerful on the planet.
    Last edited by AntiSatellite; 28 Sep 06, at 04:42.

  5. #5
    Military Professional Wiseman's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Dec 06
    Posts
    12
    Sir,

    The turmoil in the Russian Army you speak of only existed in the 90s. It is 2006 and things such as pay, housing, and equipment have changed. There are no draftee Soldiers serving in Chechnya or Tajikistan. Only people who volunteered are there. Dedovchina still exists in some units but this kind of thing has existed since the times of Peter the Great. My information comes from secondary source which are people I've spoken to that served in various units in the Russian Army. I wish I could have a retired Lt.Col who served in 16 Obr SpN GRU come in here and explain. He served both in Afganistan and 1st Chechen War.

    You can find some of his posts on www.militaryphotos.net/forums

    Look for 16 OBr SpN

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Top Ten Chinese Military Modernization Developments
    By oneman28 in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 96
    Last Post: 23 Jun 08,, 06:49
  2. Bangladesh plays the China card
    By Ray in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 136
    Last Post: 17 Oct 05,, 15:14
  3. Rivalry Brews in Russia's Backyard
    By Gio in forum Europe and Russia
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05 Dec 04,, 03:20

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •