Competition between Russia and the West, primarily the United States, may lead the parties to a limited or full-scale military conflict. This conclusion was made in the report released on June 29 by the Center for Strategic Research (CSR). No less apocalyptic scenarios sounded at the annual Primakov Readings, which opened today in Moscow: a forum in which politicians, diplomats and experts from different countries of the world take part.
For instance, Director of the Center for International Security, IMEMO. E.M. Primakov RAS, Academician Alexey Arbatovdrew the attention of the forum participants to the new weapons systems that are currently being developed and deployed by Russia, the United States and China: “These systems blur the traditional border between nuclear and conventional, between offensive and defensive weapons, between regional weapons and global weapons. In these conditions, any local conflict, any incident can lead to a lightning-fast escalation of the armed confrontation to the scale of the most catastrophic. The tensions that exist between Russia and NATO in Eastern Europe and the situation in Syria create additional risks in this regard. Let me remind you: for the first time in history, Russia and the United States openly conduct military operations in the same country - in Syria - without being military allies and without full agreement as to who our common enemies and who our common friends are. And in the future, such situations can be reproduced: in Libya, in Afghanistan and other regions. "
According to Arbatov, the development of military technology entails new and very dangerous strategic concepts. “First of all, this is a concept that is now present in the military strategies of the United States, Russia and China and implies the selective use of strategic nuclear forces. A dangerous idea arose that after 25 years of deep cuts in nuclear weapons (and they were reduced by 5-6 times, if not by an order of magnitude), nuclear war allegedly ceased to be catastrophic, that it could be a means of politics and crisis management. As a result, the risk of conflict with subsequent escalation grows squarely. "
“If the Treaty on Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles (INF) collapses, followed by the START-3 Treaty, then we will find ourselves in a situation of nuclear chaos,” the expert said. - We are facing a multichannel arms race, more dangerous than in times cold war... Because, along with the offensive nuclear arms race, there will be a non-nuclear offensive and defensive strategic arms race, there will be competition in the development of space systems and cyber warfare assets. Worse, such an arms race will be multilateral, unlike during the Cold War. Indeed, in addition to Russia and the United States, China will participate in it, possibly India and Pakistan, Israel, North and South Korea. Against the background of such instability, new nuclear states may emerge: Iran, Japan, Saudi Arabia and others. In the end nuclear weapon will inevitably fall into the hands of terrorists who will end nuclear deterrence once and for all as a guarantee of peace. "
On the sidelines of the forum, Academician Arbatov answered questions from AiF.ru.
Vitaly Tseplyaev, AiF.ru: Alexey Georgievich, isn't the threat of an armed clash between Russia and the United States exaggerated? Indeed, even during the Cold War, the parties managed to avoid a worst-case scenario.
Alexey Arbatov:The possibility of a military conflict between the USSR and the United States has existed for many decades and has repeatedly brought both sides to the brink of war. Let us recall the Cuban missile crisis, the 1983 crisis associated with the deployment of American medium-range missiles in Europe. From this bitter and difficult experience, the parties finally realized that it was necessary to take measures to prevent a global catastrophe: we must not forget that a nuclear war between the two powers will inevitably lead to the death of all mankind. Then Moscow and Washington learned how to do it. And the very end of the Cold War was a logical continuation of that understanding.
However, a new tension arose between us a few years ago. But the problem is that the old fears and old methods of reducing conflicts have been forgotten, the people who were doing this are gone. Emotions, mutual claims, mistrust have reached very high level... And a new mechanism that would allow avoiding a catastrophic development of events has not yet emerged, and today we have to reinvent this wheel. And here we have to hurry: the previously concluded agreements collapse one after another. Take the 1972 convention on the prevention of incidents at sea and in the air: no one remembers it anymore. There was a 1989 agreement on the prevention of dangerous incidents, and it is also forgotten, I think today's military and politicians do not even know what was written in that document.
- How realistic is it to reach new agreements today?
- While we are in limbo. In addition, two big foreign policy tendencies collide: Russia is “getting off its knees” and wants to prove that it will no longer allow itself to be treated the way it was in the nineties. But America, in a sense, is also rising from its knees. In truth, she never really stood on them, but Trumpthinks differently. He is trying to prove that "the empire is reborn and strikes back", that America will not allow itself to be pushed anywhere and will remain the first on the planet. A head-on collision of these two tendencies is very dangerous.
In my opinion, today the first place on the agenda of Russian-American relations - and the sooner the better - should be the question of saving the nuclear weapons control regime. Other problems - Syria, Ukraine - will be more difficult to resolve, the contradictions there are deeper, but here you can achieve quick results. At the very least, it is necessary to save the INF Treaty and conclude a new treaty on strategic offensive weapons (START). Fortunately, we have experience in resolving contradictions even in the most acute situations. Recall that the first fundamental START treaty was reached during the Vietnam War, shortly after American aircraft bombed Hanoi. The INF Treaty was signed against the backdrop of the war in Afghanistan, in 1987, the Treaty on the Reduction of Offensive Potentials from 2002 - shortly after the NATO operation in Yugoslavia. That is, when our countries realize the importance of arms control, they can find a compromise, even with very sharp contradictions in other areas. Moreover, if we now focus on this topic and make a quick breakthrough, then our relations will progress more easily in other areas.
It's very cool - to run through the scorched wastelands, to fight off raiders, to sell all the looted goods. It's great when this happens in front of a monitor in a room with central heating, a food-filled refrigerator and a warm bed, waiting for the end of the next session of the game in Fallout.
In all other cases, this is not at all great.
Remember, several times in human history, we were all just one step away from making this nightmare a reality.
Once and forever!
After World War II, when the USSR and the United States received powerful nuclear weapons and effective means of delivering them to the enemy, the world was faced with the unprecedented threat of total destruction of all living things; the possibility of waging a war with the use of nuclear weapons was considered by both sides absolutely seriously.
Nuclear weapons were assigned a decisive role in the forthcoming large-scale military conflict. It was viewed by both countries not only as a reliable means of restraining each other, but also as a way to once and for all resolve all ideological and political contradictions. As the main concept, the possibility was considered in which both sides would inflict a massive defeat on each other with nuclear weapons, both for military and civilian purposes. All military thought was aimed at ensuring a massive attack as soon as possible, which would provide an advantage to the aggressor side.
Now, thanks to the numerous scientific research, we know that a large-scale conflict with the use of nuclear weapons would provide, and the country that struck first would not receive any advantage.
The effect of "nuclear winter", when clouds of soot and ash cover the sun, radioactive contamination of fertile lands and fresh water, multimillion-dollar direct casualties and a wave of epidemics and hunger would make it impossible for further life on planet Earth. If a full-scale Third World War were unleashed, human civilization would come to an end without any reservations.
Always ready!
If you want to win, then the first priority is to detect a nuclear attack from the enemy. For this, there are over-the-horizon early warning radars and space satellites that record the launch of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) from almost anywhere in the world. In command centers, data from multiple sources are analyzed automatically, the trajectory of the ICBM is calculated, and on the basis of this, a decision is made on further actions.
The nuclear weapons control system is designed in such a way as to minimize the possibility of human and hardware error. Multi-stage protection system, multiple launch confirmation conditions are designed to exclude the possibility of accidental or malicious launch by some crazy rocket officer.
At the same time, this system should provide the fastest possible retaliatory strike in the event of an enemy attack. For this, semi-automatic and automatic nuclear weapons control systems were created.
If the dastardly saboteurs make their way to all command posts at the same time and, in the ninja style, cut the throats of the officers responsible for launching the retaliatory missiles, or the officers refuse to press the buttons for humanistic reasons (well, this is completely impossible, as we believe!), Even then the answer will not be long in coming.
Doomsday machines will start working, which will automatically send all of humanity into the flames of nuclear hell. These systems are designed in such a way as to automatically (or with minimal human participation) make a decision on the appropriate retaliatory strike in a short time. But at the same time, they retain some probability of error, which can lead to irreversible consequences. Their existence, of course, is monstrously immoral and violates the first law of Isaac Asimov: "a robot or an automatic system cannot harm a person or, by its inaction, allow harm to be done to a person." These machines are just designed to cause catastrophic harm to humanity.
However, their existence is a harsh reality that we have to put up with. On the other hand, it is precisely the existence of such a guarantee of a retaliatory strike that deter the countries possessing nuclear weapons from unleashing this senseless catastrophic slaughter.
USSR - "Perimeter"
In the USSR and modern Russia "Doomsday machine" is called "Perimeter". Its development began in 1974 at the height of the Cold War. The basis of the system is the command-analytical computer center, which evaluates all the initial data and decides on a retaliatory strike. This is a complex hardware and software complex that takes into account many factors at once: seismic and radiation activity, atmosphere pressure, the intensity of radio traffic on military frequencies, monitors telemetry from the observation posts of the Strategic Missile Forces and the data of the missile attack warning system.
For example, when detecting a powerful electromagnetic and radiation the system compares them with the data on seismic activity, and if they match, it makes an unambiguous conclusion that a nuclear strike was inflicted. In this case, the "Perimeter" can act automatically, if it is provided for by the set danger level.
Another option provides that top management countries, having received information about nuclear attack, puts the "Perimeter" into combat mode and begins to check the information.
If after a strictly set time there is no cancellation due to the death of the leadership or his indecision, then "Perimeter" independently initiates a retaliatory strike.
The second part of the system are command ballistic missiles (UR-100U), which are equipped with transmitters of special codes. If a decision is made to launch an automated "retaliation strike", these missiles will take off over Russia and send a launch command to all standard nuclear weapons delivery vehicles: ICBM launchers, submarines, mobile complexes and bombers. Those of them that are prepared to work offline, simply launch their program. Their control blocks already contain data on purposes and delivery routes. Further human participation is not required - the apocalypse is provided automatically.
We failed to find out for certain whether the "Perimeter" is still in effect. In an interview with Komsomolskaya Pravda, the Commander of the Strategic Missile Forces Sergei Karakaev noted that "". We do not know whether this is true or misinformation, but certainly the existence of such a system in today's Russia would not surprise anyone.
USA - "ECRS" and "Mirror"
About creating such automatic system in the USA it is not known (and we should not have known anything about "Perimeter" if not for one of its creators who emigrated to the USA). In America, there was an analogue of command missiles - the Emergency Rocket Communications System (ERCS) project. They were put on alert in 1963 and were ordinary ICBMs equipped with transceiver devices, and, if necessary, were launched into near-earth space, providing communication in the event of defeat of traditional communication systems between command centers and nuclear weapons delivery vehicles. ERCS was removed from duty in early 1991.
In addition to these missiles, the United States operated another system that ensured reliable control of military forces even after the defeat of ground command posts as a result of a nuclear strike or the actions of saboteurs - Operation Mirror.
Since 1961, for 30 years in the air continuously, 24 hours a day (in the entire history there was a pause of only 8 hours), there were two air command posts of the Strategic Aviation Command. On board each aircraft were all the necessary personnel to control the US nuclear forces, led by an army general or admiral of the fleet. They were equipped with all the necessary equipment and communications for the immediate interception of control of strategic forces in the event emergency... Now this program is suspended, and a similar system operates within the framework of the TACAMO mission, and four air command posts are on duty in full readiness for departure at air bases in different parts country.
In the United States, the DEFCON system operates, which is a scale of combat readiness of the armed forces depending on the impending danger.
It has five stages from 5 to 1, where 5 is the normal peaceful environment and 1 is the highest danger, meaning that the United States is in full-scale war. Depending on the value of this scale, combat units, including strategic missile forces, receive a different set of standard instructions, and the closer DEFCON is to one, the more stringent these instructions are.
DEFCON 1 was announced only once in history, and even then for training purposes during the 1983 exercise "Experienced Archer" in Western Europe... But in the state of DEFCON 2, the United States remained throughout the Cuban missile crisis. After the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, DEFCON 3 was declared in the United States.
And all these imperfect systems, served by even more imperfect people, have failed more than once.
Cuba, the warm sea, beaches, coconut trees, rum, beautiful girls and the young communist regime of Fidel Castro is just an idyll, if not for 40 Soviet medium-range missiles carrying nuclear warheads.
In the early 1960s, the USSR, led by Nikita Khrushchev, found itself in a difficult situation. American military bases with strategic bombers were deployed along the perimeter of its borders, Jupiter medium-range missiles were deployed in Great Britain, Italy and Turkey, which could reach all the vital centers of the Soviet Union and pulverize the country's military and civilian industry within an hour. There was nothing to answer until the socialist revolution triumphed in Cuba.
Then the adventurous operation Anadyr was born - the Soviet leadership decided to place its missiles right next to the United States.
The first missiles were brought to Cuba in September 1962, right after US President John F. Kennedy imposed a temporary ban on reconnaissance flights over Freedom Island to prevent an escalation of tensions with the USSR. By October, the Soviet military group already had 16 launchers for R-14 missiles and 24 launchers for R-12 in Cuba. All of them could carry nuclear charges up to 2 megatons. Ballistic missile battalions were deployed in the west of the island near San Cristobal and in the center of Cuba near the port of Casilda. The P-12 could fly directly to the Capitol and the White House in Washington, while the P-14 covered almost the entire continental territory of the United States, except Alaska.
On October 14, an American U-2 reconnaissance aircraft took the first pictures of Soviet missiles in Cuba, on the morning of October 16, Kennedy saw them, events began to develop with lightning speed.
The Americans announced a naval blockade of the island, the Soviets said they would ignore it. In the United States, the transfer of troops to Florida and preparations for a full-scale invasion of Cuba began, in the USSR the troops were put on high alert: all vacations were canceled, demobels were prohibited from leaving their duty stations, despite the demobilization order.
It got very hot on October 27, when Soviet anti-aircraft gunners in Cuba shot down an American U-2 (the pilot was killed), and also fired at two American reconnaissance aircraft RF-8A ("Crusader"), damaging one of them. "Hawks" from the US General Staff urged Kennedy to give the order to start a military operation, but he hesitated, hoping for a peaceful resolution of the conflict. If the war began, it would not be limited only to the Cuban theater of military operations, but would spread to Europe, where the interests of the two opposing systems clashed especially hard. And a large number of nuclear weapons were concentrated.
On the night of October 27-28, on the instructions of the President of the United States, his brother Robert Kennedy met with soviet ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin and offered decent conditions in exchange for the withdrawal of Soviet missiles from Cuba.
In the morning, at a meeting of the Presidium of the Central Committee of the CPSU, Khrushchev discussed these proposals with the party bosses and gave the order to withdraw the missiles. In exchange, the United States ended the blockade of Cuba and gave guarantees of non-aggression against the Castro regime, as well as removed the Jupiter missiles in Turkey, which especially irritated the Soviet leadership.
The world breathed a sigh of relief, total mutual destruction was postponed indefinitely. After the arbiters of the world's destinies realized what power was concentrated in their hands, the process of first limiting and then reducing nuclear arms was finally launched, but it has not yet reached its goal.
When the Cuban Missile Crisis seemed to be behind us, and everyone breathed a sigh of relief, the duty officer at the Okinawa Missile Base, William Bassett, during a daily routine exchange of messages with headquarters, received the order to attack the USSR, Korea and China. The base's total arsenal was 32 Mace B missiles, each carrying a 1.1 megaton nuclear warhead.
They targeted Beijing, Pyongyang, Hanoi and Vladivostok.
Bassett doubted that this was a real order: three of the four targets were outside the USSR, which formally remained the main potential enemy at the moment.
In addition, the threat level was indicated at the DEFCON 2 level, and the command for the missile attack could proceed, according to the instructions, only with DEFCON 1. He immediately canceled all preparations for launching on the launchers under his control. But one of the junior commanders - a young lieutenant - refused to obey the "illegal" order. Bassett then sent two armed soldiers to him, ordering the lieutenant to be shot if he did not stop wandering.
After that, Captain Bassett contacted higher command and stated that he received a garbled teletype message. The instructions were sent again, and they again contained an order to launch missiles across the USSR.
Bassett then stated in plain text: "Either raise the threat level to DEFCON 1, or cancel the attack order!" Then the chiefs were alarmed. After carefully checking the instructions sent earlier, they discovered an error and immediately canceled the order for the missile attack. Following the incident, an investigation was carried out and the command officer who mistakenly transmitted the false message was demoted.
Not the most serious punishment for a man who almost destroyed the whole world. This story became known quite recently, Bassett had already died and did not have time to receive any recognition for his brave act.
Even Clausewitz compared war with extended single combat, defining it as an act of violence aimed at making the enemy do our will. Outstanding Russian and Soviet theorists of the early 20th century Andrei Snesarev and Alexander Svechin made a significant contribution to the development of the science of war. The subject of their research was the main tendencies in the conduct of war, which is a consequence of not only political, but also economic, social relations. By the beginning of the 90s, a stable understanding of war had developed as a means of achieving political goals solely on the basis of armed struggle.
In the United States, a classification has formed that includes traditional and non-traditional wars. And at the beginning of the XXI century, American theorists proposed to supplement it with a hybrid war. They refer to it actions during a period that cannot be attributed in pure form to either war or peace.
"In the conflicts in the Middle East, the mobilization capabilities of social networks have been widely revealed for the first time"
In domestic science and practice, a more balanced approach to the classification of modern armed conflicts. It takes into account more features. At the same time, there is no definition of war in international and domestic official documents. In the Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation, it is called a form of resolving interstate or intrastate contradictions with the use of military force.
An active discussion on the clarification of the concept itself continues. Some scientists and specialists adhere to the classical interpretation. Others propose to radically reconsider the views on the content and essence of the term "war", considering that armed struggle is not an obligatory attribute. Currently, you can find such definitions as information, economic, hybrid war, and many other options.
The General Staff pays due attention to the discussion of this problem. In 2016, on the basis of the VA GSh, a discussion of the essence of the concept of "war" in modern conditions was organized. This issue was considered at a meeting of the scientific council section of the Security Council. In the course of the discussions, a general orientation was developed on the need to analyze the characteristic features and characteristics of modern armed conflicts, to identify trends in their emergence and development.
Hybrid replaced contactless
| Photo: novostimira.net |
Such conflicts of the late XX - early XXI centuries differ from each other in the composition of the participants, the weapons used, the forms and methods of actions of the troops. And at the same time, they do not go beyond the general content of the war, but include, as components, various types of struggle - both directly armed, and political, diplomatic, informational and others. Now new features have emerged. This is a change in the ratio of the contribution of this or that type of struggle to the overall political success of the war, the overwhelming superiority of one of the parties in military strength and economic power.
A number of features are characteristic of modern conflicts.
The experience of the NATO operation in Yugoslavia, which ushered in the era of so-called contactless or remote warfare, did not become widespread. The reason is objective - geographical and economic restrictions are imposed on the achievement of the goals of the war. The factor of the cost of weapons and war as a whole began to play an important role in the choice of methods of conducting military operations.
An essential feature is the growing use of the latest robotic systems and unmanned aircraft for various purposes and actions.
New forms of using diverse forces and means have appeared. For example, during the operation in Libya, a no-fly zone was simultaneously created, a naval blockade was carried out in combination with joint actions of private military companies from NATO member states and armed opposition groups.
In the concepts of using the armies of the leading states, the conquest of information superiority is declared an indispensable condition for hostilities. To solve this problem, the media and social networks... At the same time, forces and means of information-psychological and information-technical influence are involved. Thus, in the conflicts in the Middle East, the mobilization capabilities of social networks have been widely revealed for the first time.
The conflict in Syria is a good example of the use of hybrid methods. It simultaneously used traditional and non-traditional actions of both military and non-military nature.
At its first stage, internal Syrian conflicts were transformed into armed opposition demonstrations. Then, with the support of foreign instructors and active information support, they were given an organized character.
Subsequently, terrorist groups supplied and sent from abroad entered into confrontation with government forces.
Hybrid actions are being actively introduced by the United States and NATO countries into practice in the international arena. This is largely due to the fact that such a course of action does not fall under the definition of aggression.
The combination of these methods has been dubbed "hybrid war" in the Western media. However, it is too early to use this term as an established one.
New perception of the familiar word
The analysis points to a number of trends that indicate the transformation of armed conflicts at the beginning of the 21st century. Today, the blurring of the line between the state of war and peace is evident. The flip side of hybrid actions is a new perception of peacetime, when military or other open violent measures are not applied against a particular state, but its national security and sovereignty are threatened and may be violated. The range of reasons and reasons for the use of military force is expanding, which is increasingly being used to ensure the economic interests of states under the slogan of protecting democracy or instilling democratic values \u200b\u200bin a particular country.
Non-military forms and means of struggle have received unprecedented technological development and acquired a dangerous and sometimes violent character.
Their practical use can cause a collapse in the energy, banking, economic, information and other spheres of the state's life. An example is the results of cyber attacks on Iran's energy infrastructure in 2015.
An analysis of the characteristic features, features and trends in the development of modern conflicts shows that they all have common feature - the use of means of military violence. And in some it is almost a classic armed struggle, as in the two US wars against Iraq or as during the NATO operation against Yugoslavia. In other conflicts, such as in Syria, the armed struggle was conducted by one side in the form of anti-terrorist operations, and the adversary in the form of the actions of illegal irregular armed formations and terrorist structures. Thus, the main content of wars in the present and foreseeable future will remain the same. And their main feature is the presence of an armed struggle.
At the same time, the question of defining the essence of war is not closed, it is relevant and requires constant study and careful study.
To this end, the scientific and business program of the international military-technical forum "Army-2017" in August this year included a "round table" on the topic "Modern wars and armed conflicts: characteristic features and characteristics." AVN scientists should take an active part in this. It is necessary to continue work on interdepartmental standardization of military-political and military terms and definitions.
The growth of the conflict potential in the world underlines the urgency of a number of tasks in the field of the country's defense.
High precision measures
The main one remains the same - guaranteed reflection of possible aggression against Russian Federation and her allies from any direction. At the same time, in peacetime, during the implementation of measures of strategic deterrence, it is necessary to ensure the neutralization of threats to the country's security, relying on the available forces and means. In this regard, the role and importance of forecasting military dangers and threats is growing, which is advisable to carry out in conjunction with an assessment of economic, informational and other challenges.
"The strike potential of high-precision weapons in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation will quadruple by 2021"
The improvement of the capabilities of the Armed Forces is realized through the balanced development of all types and branches of troops (forces), the development of high-precision weapons and modern means of communication, reconnaissance, automated control and electronic warfare. Currently, there is a large-scale equipping of the Strategic Missile Forces with modern complexes. The fleet receives new nuclear submarines with ballistic and cruise missiles that have no analogues in the world. Strategic aircraft, our legendary Tu-160 and Tu-95MS missile carriers are being actively modernized. This will make it possible by the end of 2020 to bring the equipment of the strategic nuclear forces with modern weapons in general to 90 percent. The strike potential of high-precision weapons in the Armed Forces will quadruple, which will ensure the security of Russia along the entire perimeter of the borders. By 2021, the share of modern weapons and military equipment in Ground forces will reach at least 70 percent. The Aerospace Forces will receive aircraft of a new generation, which will increase the combat capabilities of aviation by 1.5 times. IN Navy modern ships equipped with long-range high-precision missiles will be delivered.
Robotics plays a significant role in enhancing combat capabilities. Large-scale, but well-grounded use of RTKs for various purposes will increase the effectiveness of troop actions and ensure a significant reduction in personnel losses.
Preemptive science
Today the Armed Forces are gaining combat experience in Syria. They received unique opportunity check and test in challenging climatic conditions new samples of weapons and military equipment. It is necessary to continue to generalize the experience of using the means of armed struggle in the Syrian campaign, to draw lessons for their refinement and modernization.
It must be remembered: victory is always achieved not only by material, but also by the spiritual resources of the people, by their solidarity and desire to resist aggression with all their might. The military-political leadership of the Russian Federation is making serious efforts to restore people's confidence in the army. Today, the Armed Forces are approaching fundamentally new level combat readiness and it finds full support in society. In the interests of further enhancing their authority, it is important to develop ties between the army and society, and for this to improve the systems of training military personnel and the patriotic education of young people.
The solution of urgent tasks of the country's defense is impossible without their careful and advanced study. In this regard, it is worth focusing on the priority tasks of the Academy of Military Sciences.
First of all, this is the study of new forms of interstate confrontation and the development of effective ways to counter them.
An urgent task is the formation of scenarios, long-term forecasts of the development of the military-political and strategic situation in the most important regions of the world. It is necessary to quickly study the features of modern armed conflicts. On their basis, develop methods for the operation of military command and control and actions of troops in various conditions.
A separate study is required for the problems of organizing and carrying out regrouping of troops (forces) to remote theaters of operations. The general tasks of military science, which need further elaboration, do not lose their relevance.
The article is based on the report "Modern wars and topical issues of the country's defense", with which the NGSH spoke at general meeting Academy of Military Sciences
# Clausewitz # Gerasimov # Hybrid war # military science
The war in Syria, which is expected from day to day, could end with World War III, as both experts and ancient prophecies say. Moreover, it is already clear that 20 countries can be drawn into the operation declared as a three-day bombardment in order to prevent the use of chemical weapons against civilians.
“If the Americans go for a ground operation, Russia may well get involved in the war. Then it will definitely be World War III,” said Russian military expert Viktor Baranets. “Certainly, Iran will side with Syria, ready to deploy several million bayonets, and then maybe Israel will also get involved. In general, everything will be very serious. "
Several prophecies at once say that the end of the world will be triggered by the war in Syria. So, the famous clairvoyant Vanga repeatedly spoke about the impending global change in the world, however, without naming exact date... "Will this time come soon? No, not soon. Syria has not yet fallen! Syria will fall at the feet of the victor, but the victor will not be the one! Russia alone will be saved. There is an ancient Indian (Aryan) teaching. It will spread throughout the world. It will be printed about it. new books, and they will be read everywhere on Earth. It will be the Fiery Bible. The day will come and all religions will disappear! New teaching will come from Russia. She will be the first to be purified. "
The Revelation of Ivan the Theologian "Apocalypse" describes the events preceding the end of the world and the second coming of Jesus Christ: "The sixth Angel sounded the trumpet, and I heard one voice from the four horns of the golden altar standing before God, saying to the sixth Angel, who had a trumpet: release the four Angels connected by the great river Euphrates ". The four angels freed at the Euphrates River may be Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran, through whose territory this river flows.
According to the scripture of another prophet Isaiah, Damascus will turn into a heap of ruins: “Damascus is excluded from the number of cities and will be a heap of ruins. Damascus with the rest of Syria; with them will be the same as with the glory of the children of Israel, says the Lord of hosts. "
Now the issue of bombing is slipping in the US Congress. But it is possible that the Americans will return to this topic in a few weeks or months.
"Obama has repeatedly made it clear that he does not trust Assad. The Americans may demand the export and destruction of Syria's chemical reserves, but Damascus will not agree to this. The conflict could escalate again," Russian political analyst Sergei Markov said.
There is a way out of the crisis
There was a chance to avoid the bombing of Syria and, accordingly, a possible Third World War. Barack Obama agreed with Russia's proposal not to attack Syria if Damascus transfers chemical weapons under international control. Damascus doesn't seem to mind.
"This proposal was agreed in advance and it is very beneficial to the Syrian side, since the threat of an attack on the chemical depots of the militants was very real," said Russian orientalist Said Gafurov, who met with the Syrian Foreign Minister on Monday. under the control of international experts.It is even advantageous for Syria to declassify these warehouses, since they exist not so much for the use of these weapons as for intimidation of a potential enemy - Israel.At the same time, such a way out of the crisis is beneficial for Obama - Congress will not give him permission to bomb and somehow the president will have to abandon his military plans. "
World War III - US strategy
In 1938, England and France pushed Hitler into war with their own hands, allowing him to occupy Czechoslovakia and authorizing the Anschluss of Austria. But then the onset of the brown plague could have been stopped. Had London and Paris been more determined, Europe would not lie in ruins in 7 years and there would not have been 70 million dead. A new global empire - the United States - has emerged on the European ashes. North America received huge financial income from both World War II and the post-war reconstruction of Europe and was able to fully recover from the effects of the Great Depression.
Now we are in the initial phase of a global crisis, which may last for ten years, and similar, and possibly even stronger than the depression that befell the world in the 20-30s of the last century. But the United States is already preparing to overcome the crisis.
At the same time, the United States creates conditions both for the process of reindustrialization - the restoration of North American industry in the full technological cycle, and for the emergence of an enemy with whom, after the end of the crisis, a new one could be unleashed. world war, capable of giving the United States more than 100 years of progressive economic development.
Over the past 10 years, the Americans have made a significant step in the development of their fuel and energy complex, which influenced the change in US policy in the Middle East. If 10 years ago the White House, conducting military interventions, pursued the goal of controlling a comfortable level of oil prices, now the United States is interested in only one thing - to increase the difference in quotations between the exchange grades of Brent oil traded in Europe and WTI, quoted on North American market. The USA benefits from the growth of Brent quotes, since it allows to lower production costs in America relative to Europe and Asia without reducing the cost of labor.
As the goals changed, so did the policy. America does not seek to create controlled regimes in the Arab world, whose task would be to ensure uninterrupted supplies of oil and gas. Now the US is leaving behind civil war chaos, death and destruction.
The United States set fire to the entire Middle East and North Africa - quotations of Brent crude oil remain above $ 110 per barrel, in Europe and China there is a reduction in production. However, if we look at the countries in which the so-called Arab Spring has recently swept through, we will see that secular nationalist regimes have formed in all of these countries.
Despite the specific conditions for Europeans, the development of nation states in the Middle East and North Africa is similar to the development of nation states in Europe from the late 19th century until the outbreak of World War II. After the collapse of the continental empires caused by the aftermath of the First World War, nationalist states were formed in Europe. In many of them, the rights of national minorities and religious confessions were respected. Roughly the same situation was in Libya and Egypt and still persists in Syria. By the way, Iran, one might say, follows the path of Spain during the reign of General Franco.
Strengthening of national states inevitably leads to the formation of an elite, vitally and financially interested in the preservation and enrichment of their national state. And even if the members of the elite were nourished by foreign states, these elites themselves begin to defend national interests, which often run counter to the interests of former sponsors.
For Iran, Syria, Egypt and Libya, the European market is the only one where oil and gas can be supplied with low transport costs. Which means a lower energy price for Europe. But this goes against the US plans for a new industrialization. It is no coincidence that the unrest in Syria began exactly after agreements were reached between Syria, Iran and Iraq to lay a gas pipeline through which Iranian gas destined for Europe was to be supplied to the Syrian LNG terminals.
In the 30s of the last century, in Europe, not without the influence of Nazi Germany and fascist Italy, with the tacit connivance of France and Great Britain, the elites of the new national states in a short time neutralized democratic institutions, establishing pro-Nazi or pro-fascist regimes. Persecution of national and religious minorities gradually began. Organizations such as the Muslim Brotherhood, professing radical forms of Islam, can be classified, according to European tradition, as religious pro-fascist organizations. The Muslim Brotherhood, trying to establish radical religious regimes in the Arab world, is sponsored by the closest allies of the United States Qatar, Jordan and Saudi Arabia - countries, to put it mildly, not distinguished by either democracy or religious tolerance. Against their background, Iran can be called a state that is making great strides in democratization and in the development of a secular society.
After the chaos sown by the United States in the Middle East, radical religious regimes may form in the Arab world, which will be united into one huge caliphate. Like the Third Reich, this caliphate will have close ties to the US financial world. As with Nazi Germany, many North American bankers and industrialists are interested in creating such a caliphate.
As the American economy emerges from the crisis and a new robotics industry develops in the United States, the religiously extremist caliphate will be able to stockpile enough weapons to wage full-scale war. At the same time, in Europe, which has found itself in a deep crisis, a socio-political situation will be created in which a new authoritarian empire may emerge. At the same time, the role of outsiders, on whom it will be possible to write off all the troubles, and, above all, expensive oil, will be played by Muslims or Arabs. A world war will become inevitable. The reason, perhaps, will be a terrorist attack on the territory of Europe, which will be a response step to the deportation of Muslims or the organization of concentration camps for Arab terrorists.
The third world war will bring destruction on such colossal proportions that the United States will be able to develop systematically for more than 100 years without social upheavals on its territory. Not to mention the profits that the Americans are planning to get from the war itself.
In this regard, the reluctance of Europe and the main US ally of Great Britain to get involved in a war with Syria is understandable. The NATO bloc also decided to distance itself from the Syrian adventure. But, in principle, the US refusal of the alliance only plays into the hands. In the scenario described above, the Americans do not need NATO, because they will try to wage the third world war with someone else's hands, having entered it at the last stage, as it was in the first and the second world wars. The North Atlantic bloc, on the other hand, may prematurely, and quite possibly not on the right side, involve the Americans in the carnage. Most likely, NATO will face the fate of the UN, which the United States has long disregarded and uses it as a tool to advance its interests exclusively.
The interests of the United States and Europe have never been more opposed than they are now. However, just as in the 30s of the 20th century, France and Great Britain were more frightened by the chimera of the communist threat than by the obvious facts of Hitler's preparation for war, so now Europe prefers to see the threat in Russia rather than admit the obvious fact - the United States has ceased to be the guarantor of the European security and become a force pushing Europe and the world towards a third world war.
The existence and fear of US President Donald Trump before the head of the Kremlin. At the same time, now the world community is getting closer to a decisive blow against Vladimir Putin, because of which he will have to think about maintaining his power, and not about a war with Ukraine and other adventures.
About it in an interview with "Apostrophe" said the Russian political scientist and publicist ANDREY PIONTKOVSKY, who now lives in Washington.
- The presidential elections have passed, and the "godfather" is still in power ( ", - "Apostrophe") in Russia. Do you think the Russian elite will try to remove Putin? Is a similar scenario possible in the coming year?
In general, these regimes end only with a scenario of a palace coup. In elections, power in authoritarian regimes does not change. Everyone spoke about this twenty times, but I want to emphasize that there was a lot of noise in the Russian media about what an outstanding result Putin got, and the elections themselves were called free.
But let's not forget two fundamental things. First, of the two opposition candidates, one was shot practically on Red Square (Boris Nemtsov, - "Apostrophe"), and the other was unjustly convicted and, - "Apostrophe"). So what kind of fair elections can we talk about?
But that's not all. Now we have the mathematical methods of Sergei Shpilkin (analyzing electoral statistics - "Apostrophe"), that is, an analysis of statistical data by polling station, by turnout, which simply shows the imprints of falsifications. According to the summed up, 10 million votes were thrown in for Putin.
You see, after that the person deserves a life sentence, because we see both murders and large-scale falsifications - these crimes are organized, first of all, by Putin himself.
Therefore, elections are manipulation. But this does not negate the fact that even if 10 million were attributed to him, then 45 million voted, even if some of them were under the administrative resource. And some part of those who voted were inspired by this militaristic, but essentially fascist propaganda, where the annexation of the territories of neighboring states and aggression are considered a merit and a heroic deed.
Photo: kremlin.ru
Such regimes leave only as a result of serious geopolitical defeats, and their scale depends on the determination of the West. And, of course, not by military means, since no one wants to fight, especially with a nuclear power headed by a fucking man, as Nemtsov once said to Ukrainian television. But the West has enormous economic resources, and I am telling you this from Washington.
Let me remind you that on January 29, a Kremlin report was prepared that could deal a fatal blow to the Putin regime. After all, showing in detail the illegally acquired criminal state of all these people, and this is all the Russian elite. For some mysterious reason, as a result of the visit of the heads of the Russian special services to the United States, this information was transferred to the secret part of the report and was not made public.
And the struggle that is being waged in America now is essentially a struggle between President Trump and the majority of the American military-political establishment. Now no one has any doubts, they say about it openly, that Trump is terribly afraid of Putin, firmly knowing that he has very serious dirt on him. The last thing that aroused indignation here was when all Trump's advisers wrote to him in large letters not to congratulate Putin, and he called, congratulated and once again showed the degree of his dependence and fear.
In my opinion (Robert Mueller is investigating Russian interference in the 2016 US elections - "Apostrophe"). I don't know if Ukraine and your readers are widely known, but all of America was shocked by a 15-minute interview with former CIA Director John Brennan. First, it is unprecedented in the harshness of the accusations - Brennan calls Trump an animal cornered. Second, one that will shake America.
All this has a lot to do with your question. When all this huge financial information about one trillion dollars stolen from the Russian people is published, it will make a very strong impression on Russian society.
Plus another half a trillion dollars in the UK, where we see the same story. Them british Foreign Secretary] Boris Johnson, and [British Prime Minister] Theresa May said that London is not a place for the criminal capital of Putin's elite, but still something is stopping them.
All of them are on the verge of this decisive step. And I assure you that 99 percent will greeted with glee the publication of a report on the Russian elite. There will also be a big blow to all this anti-Western propaganda, because it is backed by the same criminals who in the West are piling up their stolen treasures. I think that the system of the Russian kleptocracy will not withstand such a financial, economic, psychological and political blow, and there will be a very serious discord in it.
- Will this be a good reason to overthrow Putin?
I would not mention the word "overthrow". In this situation, it will be very difficult not only for Putin, but for the entire Russian political class, for the entire elite to remain in power.
- Speaking about. Many said they were illegal because Crimea is the territory of Ukraine. But they declared and forgot.
It's the same story. A summit of the EU countries is being held in Brussels, and it will probably also be emphasized there that this was a violation of the constitutions of Ukraine and Russia, international law and whatever. Nevertheless, almost all the leaders of European states, except for Great Britain, gritted their teeth, but congratulated Putin on the so-called victory in the so-called elections.
Why congratulate the criminal who killed one of his opponents, condemned the other and threw in 10 million votes? They all know this very well.
It is this inconsistency of the West that prolongs the existence of this regime.
Veche against elections in Crimea Photo: krymr.com
- Are they really afraid of Putin's "nuclear club" or are there other reasons?
Still crazy crazy, but he does not eat soap. And nuclear weapons are mutual suicide. But he is not a martyr and is not going to commit suicide.
First, these trillions of dollars are at work in the Western economy. And they have legislation on combating money laundering, obtained by criminal means - in fact, no new sanctions are needed, why are they fooling around? It is clear that Russian leaders could not honestly, in their free time from doing their state work, earn tens or, as in the case of Putin, hundreds of billions of dollars. And they do not apply this legislation.
Why? This money is a very important part for the functioning of the Western economy, and a trillion dollars is colossal money.
Take the same Trump. Even if there is no compromising evidence - and now in Washington everyone is sure that everything described in the report of the British intelligence agent Christopher Steele (with compromising evidence on Donald Trump - "Apostrophe") is true, then what are the purchases of Russian oligarchs or dummy houses from Trump, which were worth 2-3 times the market value? That is, Russia is exporting corruption.
In addition, all Russian agents in the West are still repeats all sorts of nonsense, which many Americans are subject to, that "we need Russians to solve some international problems in Korea, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Ukraine." The West cannot face the truth in any way and does not understand how to fight international terrorism without the Russians. They do not understand that the so-called Russians, in fact the Kremlin, create these problems, including international terrorism.
But, in my opinion, the matter is nearing a denouement. And we see a number of facts showing what Moscow is actually doing in the Middle East, Korea and other regions. I watch all this from Washington.
If we talk about some kind of temporary forecasts, then I think that Trump will not remain the President of the United States by January 1, 2019. And without Trump, the opposition to the Putin regime will go much more vigorously.
Already, Trump is suspended on many issues. Take the Ukrainian question, where the entire policy is carried out by Kurt Volcker, who has a more pro-Ukrainian position than your leadership before the adoption of the law on Russian aggression (the so-called law on the de-occupation of Donbass, - "Apostrophe"). After all, before that, only Volcker clearly said that we were talking about the occupation, and there are russian troops... Yes, and accepted. So the situation is changing.
Moscow's mistake is this: they thought they had put Trump in the White House and will now rule America, but nothing of the kind happened. Institutions there are stronger than the president. But so far, in many serious issues, he manages to slow down. In particular, if we talk about those decisive sanctions that should have been announced on January 29. This will be a decisive blow to the Putin system.
- Rex's replacement as Secretary of State, what role will this play in the relations between the United States and Russia?
Tillerson was smarter than Trump and did not give himself out so clearly, although he was also a pro-Putin man. After working for 19 years in the Russian oil industry, how could it be possible not to get smeared from head to toe, and get an order?
And Pompeo is a man who is definitely negative about the Putin regime. And he has a good personal relationship with Trump. And it is good that he will use these relations in order to maintain Volcker's position at least in the Ukrainian direction.
All processes are slow, but developing within the United States is not in favor of Putin. But the final step will be Trump's removal from power.
Mike Pompeo replaces Rex Tillerson as head of the US Department of State Photo: Gage Skidmore
The FIFA World Cup in Russia is ahead. Do you think Putin will be calm until June or can he put pressure on one of the conflict zones?
Of course, he wants to host the World Cup. It is unlikely that he will go to any serious aggravation. But where can he? After all, he perfectly understands that he was defeated in the main directions. Take Ukraine - where is his "Russian world" and "Novorossiya"? It failed. Donbass is not what Putin dreamed of. Remember, he had a plan "Novorossiya" with the capture of 10-12 Ukrainian regions and he hoped to unleash an ethnic war between Russians and Ukrainians? But he did not succeed, and he suffered a huge defeat. The majority of the Russian population in Ukraine remained loyal to the Ukrainian state and its choice. This was Putin's first fundamental defeat.
And in Syria, he had already triumphantly withdrawn troops three times, and then at the first clash with the Americans suffered such a shameful defeat that neither the fact of the battle, nor the three hundred dead were reported in Moscow at all.
Therefore, he can only arrange a nuclear tantrum ,. But this has been known for 50 years. But it has also been known for 50 years that the United States also has weapons. If he can destroy the States 10 times, then they can destroy Russia 20 times. Everyone knows that. With this, the Russians and Americans somehow learned to live, and in 50 years neither the US presidents, nor the secretaries general by stupidly waving these same dummies atomic bombs did not study. This is a typical behavior of a gopnik from the gateway: "Now I'm hitting with a Finn." That's all of it foreign policy... But gradually they begin to deal with it.
-. What was Putin trying to show by this?
He has competent military and diplomats who understand how a large-scale escalation of the war in Ukraine will end, say, a campaign to Mariupol or, God forbid, Kiev. He has no time for these things now. The main thing for him is to somehow hold out in power. And how and on what - he does not know.
You see, he has raised the stakes so much that he does not know how to take some elementary steps. For example, if he really left Donbass, remaining in Crimea - ukraine would not like it very much, but the West would welcome... Nobody will admit it, of course, but the West will close its eyes to it for a while. Let's remember how it was with the Baltics. The states have never recognized the annexation of the Baltic states (by the Soviet Union - "Apostrophe"). But he cannot even go for this, because he has created for himself the image of the great leader of the "Russian world", and any step towards some kind of compromise will be regarded as his defeat and he will not hold out even in his brigade. He has a very difficult position.
How did the United States react to Putin's victory in the elections? What is the general assessment of the so-called elections in Russia?
The overall assessment of the election is outrageous, and Trump exacerbated it with his congratulations. which is not always supported. But in this case, it is the general opinion of the entire establishment that it was completely disgraceful for the American president to congratulate a dictator who won a fraudulent election.
Adrian RadchenkoFound a mistake - select and click Ctrl + Enter