GRU: US military operations in the planning taken simultaneously on land, sea and air - World | США готовят глобально-интегрированную операцию против России – ГРУ
- Get link
- Other Apps
GRU: US military operations in the planning taken simultaneously on land, sea and air - World
США готовят глобально-интегрированную операцию против России – ГРУ
НАТО начало гибридную войну против России, - командующий ЗВО - ФОКУС
Did a Chinese-Russian-Iranian coalition opposing NATO debut in Moscow? - Center for Research on Globalization
Russia’s Information Warfare Targets Washington and NATO
.
.
Москва. 24 апреля. INTERFAX.RU - США разрабатывают планы ведения военных действий в форме "глобально-интегрированной операции", то есть одновременно на суше и море, в воздухе, космосе и интернете с использование единого разведывательно-информационного пространства, сообщил в пятницу начальник Главного разведывательного управления Генштаба ВС России генерал-полковник Игорь Сергун.
Заявление он сделал на военно-научной конференции руководящего состава ВС РФ в культурном Центре российских Вооруженных сил.
По словам Сергуна, реализация этой цели достигается "объединением всех имеющихся в ВС США разведывательных средств и органов управления группировок войск в единую глобальную информационно-управляющую сеть, организованную и функционирующую подобно глобальной системе Интернет, но только в военной области".
Как отметил начальник ГРУ, "глобально-интегрированная операция" представляет собой эволюционное развитие существующей стратегической операции межвидовой группировки войск, проводить которую США планируют в ходе конфликта высокой интенсивности.
По его словам, в ходе такой операции на базе развернутых в различных районах мира американских вооруженных формирований в короткие сроки будут создаваться высокомобильные межвидовые группировки войск.
Кроме того, сказал генерал, командование ВС США придает особое значение разведывательному и информационному обеспечению военных действий с использованием возможностей космических средств и стратегической беспилотной авиации.
Начальник ГРУ пояснил, что в войнах будущего Вооруженные силы США будут применяться в соответствии с концепцией "Единые силы - 2020", утвержденной в сентябре 2012 года.
"В последнее время в ходе строительства Вооруженных сил США повышенное внимание уделяется развитию "единых сил", которые представляют собой межрядовые формирования, включающие компоненты всех видов ВС, силы и средства других федеральных министерств и ведомств, коммерческих и неправительственных организаций, а также американских союзников и партнеров", - рассказал генерал.
Он отметил, что, согласно замыслу Пентагона, главной целью данного документа является "придание американской армии боевых возможностей, необходимых для обеспечения ее безусловного превосходства над противником в военных конфликтах будущего".
Сергун также прогнозирует, что европейские страны - члены НАТО в долгосрочной перспективе останутся стратегическими союзниками США и будут придерживаться американских взглядов на применение войск.
"В частности, - отметил генерал, - без активного участия ВС США европейцы способны организовывать лишь ограниченные по времени и размаху операции кризисного урегулирования".
Read the whole story
· ·
Search Results
Глава ГРУ рассказал о планах США воевать ... - Интерфакс
<a href="http://www.interfax.ru/russia/438353" rel="nofollow">www.interfax.ru/russia/438353</a> Translate this page3 days ago - RU - США разрабатывают планы ведения военных действий в форме "глобально-интегрированной операции", то есть одновременно ... США готовят глобально-интегрированную операцию ...
<a href="http://www.profi-forex.org" rel="nofollow">www.profi-forex.org</a> › Новости России Translate this page3 days ago - 24 апреля, что Соединенные Штаты Америки готовят против Российской Федерации глобально-интегрированную операцию. Более ...Генштаб РФ: США хотят вести глобально ... - РИА Новости
m.ria.ru/world/20150424/1060690935.html Translate this page3 days ago - Как отметил генерал Сергун, "глобально-интегрированная операция" представляет собой эволюционное развитие существующей ...Взгляды военно-политического руководства США на ...
pentagonus.ru › ... › Общевойсковые вопросы Translate this pageMay 16, 2014 - Концепция "глобально интегрированной операции" (Globally Integrated Operation) находится в процессе разработки. Ее основные ...Генштаб РФ: США хотят вести глобально ... - РИА Новости
lite.rian.ru/world/20150424/1060690935.html Translate this page3 days ago - Как отметил генерал Сергун, "глобально-интегрированная операция" представляет собой эволюционное развитие существующей ...
Search Results
В Москве состоялась военно-научная конференция с ...
3 days ago - 24 апреля в Москве состоялась военно-научная конференция с руководящим составом Вооруженных Сил России и Академии военных ...В Москве состоялась военно-научная конференция с ...
armyman.info/.../36559-v-moskve-sostoyalas-voenno... Translate this page3 days ago - 24 апреля в Москве состоялась военно-научная конференция с руководящим составом Вооруженных Сил России и Академии военных наук по ... руководящего состава Вооруженных Сил и Академии военных наук, ...В Москве пройдет военно-научная конференция с ...
armyman.info/.../36451-v-moskve-proydet-voenno-n... Translate this page7 days ago - 24 апреля в Москве состоится военно-научная конференция с руководящим составом Вооруженных Сил России и Академии военных наук по теме: ... руководящего состава Вооруженных Сил и Академии военных наук ... В Москве состоялась научно-практическаяконференция по МТО ...
С докладом на научном форуме выступил начальник Генерального штаба Вооруженных Сил Российской Федерации генерал армии Валерий Герасимов.
Next Page of Stories
Loading...
Page 2
Стороны обсудили состояние и перспективы дальнейшего развития сотрудничества в военной и военно-технической областях, рассмотрели ряд других важных для двух стран тем.
Контроль с воздуха позволяет получать более полные данные о практических действиях войск, следить за выполнением учебно-боевых задач в режиме реального времени.
В зимнем периоде обучения в мотострелковых соединениях, дислоцированных Чеченской Республике, проведено 6 тактических учений, более 100 боевых стрельб в составе подразделений и около 750 огневых тренировок с боевой стрельбой.
 Kyiv Post |
NATO says Russia building up forces along Ukrainian border
Kyiv Post BRUSSELS - NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has said that Russia is building up forces along the Ukrainian border and is actively delivering weapons and supplies to militants in eastern Ukraine, which allows them to start a rapid attack. and more » |
Former NATO Chief Targets Russia Irresponsibly
RINF Alternative News Washington installed former NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen to serve as a convenient US stooge. His predecessors operated the same way. So does his successor, Jens Stoltenberg. Irresponsible Russia bashing is part of the job. Rasmussen took full ... and more » |
 Lenta.ru |
Генсек НАТО обвинил Россию в наращивании военного контингента на границе с Украиной
NEWSru.com Генеральный секретарь НАТО Йенс Столтенберг обвинил Россию в наращивании военного присутствия на территории Украины и вдоль общей границы, сообщает американский журнал Politico. Выступая на презентации европейского издания Politico в четверг, 23 апреля, Столтенберг ... Генсек НАТО высказался о деловых качествах ПутинаLenta.ru Генсек НАТО дал оценку ПутинуДни.Ру Генсек НАТО рассказал об активизации российских поставок боевикам и подготовке к наступлениюПоследние новости в мире УКРАИНСКАЯ ПРАВДА- ГОЛОС АМЕРИКИ-Независимая газета all 161 news articles » |
Next Page of Stories
Loading...
Page 3
 Московский комсомолец |
В Минобороны ФРГ увидели "угрозу" в отношениях России и Украины
Московский комсомолец И мы без сомнений стоим на вашей стороне", — заявила фон дер Ляйен, добавив, что в случае военного конфликта Германия вместе с НАТО будет "защищать Польшу". При этом министр подчеркнула, что "двери в Европу остаются открытыми и Россия имеет возможность вернуться за ... and more » |
Stoltenberg: NATO ready for dialogue with big neighbor Russia
Russia Beyond the Headlines There is no variance between constructive cooperation between NATO and Russia and the strengthening defense potential of the alliance: Russia is a big neighbor and there should be dialogue but the alliance will not compromise on its principles of ... and more » |
 Цензор.Нет (Сатира) |
Украина подписала Меморандум о техническом сотрудничестве с НАТО
Цензор.Нет (Сатира) В штаб-квартире НАТО в Брюсселе состоялась церемония подписания Меморандума о договоренности между правительством Украины и Организацией НАТО относительно сотрудничества по вопросам консультаций, управления, связи, разведки, наблюдения и рекогносцировки в ... Украина – НАТО: долгий период «созревания»сайт города Славянска Почти два миллиона евро украинские военные получают от НАТО для налаживания связиТелеканал 24 Украина и НАТО подписали новый меморандум о техническом сотрудничествеПреступности.Нет Сайт Одессы all 12 news articles » |
 Минфин |
В чём суть программы сотрудничества Украины и НАТО?
Аргументы и факты Президент Украины Пётр Порошенко своим указом утвердил национальную программу сотрудничества Украина-НАТО на 2015 год. Согласно документу, членство в Организации североатлантического договора объявляется «одной из стратегических целей внешней и внутренней ... Украина и НАТО подписали меморандум о трастовом фонде для ВСУNEWSru.ua Президент подписал указ о сотрудничестве Украина-НАТОМинфин НАТО держит двери перед Украиной открытымиФинансовый обзор ИА Nord News -inoСМИ.Ru all 1,040 news articles » |
 РИА Новости |
ГШ РФ: НАТО изменила акцент подготовки ВС на ведение военных действий
РИА Новости МОСКВА, 24 апр — РИА Новости. В подготовке объединенных вооруженных сил НАТОизменен акцент с решения задач по поддержанию мира и стабилизации обстановки на вопросы ведения военных действий высокой интенсивности в рамках "коллективной обороны", заявил в ... and more » |
ABD 100'den fazla ülkede asker bulundurmayı planlıyor
soL Haber Portalı-7 hours ago
Rusya Federasyonu Silahlı Kuvvetleri Baş İstihbarat Dairesi Direktörü (GRU) Igor Sergun, ABD'nin istihbarat ve denetim araçlarının internet benzeri bir "küresel ...
Uzbekistan Could Seek Foreign Assistance Against Islamic State
Modern Tokyo Times-Apr 23, 2015
... Colonel General Igor Sergun, said that the situation in Central Asia remains explosive as the combat potential of jihadist organizations, including the Taliban, ...
GRU: USA kavandab üheagseid sõjalisi operatsioone maal, merel ...
Postimees-Apr 25, 2015
... ühist luureruumi, ütles Vene relvajõudude kindralstaabi luurepeadirektoraadi (GRU) juht kindralpolkovnik Igor Sergun eile Moskvas sõjateaduse konverentsil.
Generální štáb RF: NATO přeneslo důraz ze zajišťování míru na ...
Sputnik Česká republika-Apr 24, 2015
Náčelník hlavní správy generálního štábu ruských ozbrojených sil, generálplukovník Igor Sergun má za to, že v přípravě spojených ozbrojených sil NATO byl ...
Russlands Generalstab: USA planen in 100 Staaten Truppenbasen ...
Sputnik Deutschland-Apr 24, 2015
... die für Kampfhandlungen in den betreffenden Regionen notwendig sind“, sagte General Igor Sergun, Aufklärungschef des Generalstabs, am Freitag in einer ...
Mosca accusa, la NATO ha spostato l'accento dal mantenimento ...
Sputnik Italia-Apr 24, 2015
Il generale Igor Sergun, responsabile della direzione dello Stato Maggiore delle forze armate russe, ritiene che nella preparazione delle forze armate unite della ...
Read the whole story
· ·
Next Page of Stories
Loading...
Page 4
Uzbekistan Could Seek Foreign Assistance Against Islamic State
Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor
By: John C. K. Daly
The Jamestown Foundation
The increasing presence of Islamic State (IS) militants in Afghanistan has raised fears in neighboring Uzbekistan. It is no longer a question of whether IS has a presence in Afghanistan, only its scope and intentions. Addressing a joint session of the United States Congress, on March 25, Afghan President Ashraf Ghani noted, the Islamic State “is already sending advance guards to southern and western Afghanistan to look for vulnerabilities. It is critical that the world understands the terrible threat that Daish [Daesh; another name sometimes used for IS] and its allied forces pose to the states of Western and Central Asia” (Nato.int, March 25)
Uzbekistan’s National Security Service (NSS) and its Ministry of Internal Affairs have established departments that work closely together on terrorism analysis and fighting militant groups. NSS anti-terrorism subdivision officer Mirzohid Sodiqov said, “It is necessary to keep a close watch on the situation in Afghanistan. IS emissaries are active in several districts there… Our cooperation with counterparts in neighboring countries and information exchanges are yielding results” (12news.uz, April 17). Accordingly, Uzbekistan is broadening its options by renewing its multilateral ties with nations and organizations that might provide assistance, from Russia to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
On April 18, a suicide bomber attacked a crowd in front of a branch of the New Kabul Bank in Jalalabad, killing 35 and wounding more than 100 (Khaama Press, April 18). The Taliban denied involvement, while IS spokesman Shahidullah Shahid claimed responsibility for the attack (Afghan Channel One TV, April 18). A statement issued by IS’s Wilayat Khurasan (literally Khurasan Province, a reference to a historical region broadly centering on Afghanistan and Pakistan) identified the bomber as IS member Abu Mohammad. The same bank branch, which is well-known for issuing soldiers’ salaries, was stormed by Taliban suicide bombers on February 19, 2011, leaving at least 42 killed and dozens wounded (Xinhua, February 19, 2011). Ghani said that the most recent attack, if verified, would be the first major IS operation in Afghanistan, adding, “Who claimed responsibility for horrific attack in Nangarhar today? The Taliban did not claim responsibility for the attack, Daish claimed responsibility for the attack” (Agence France Presse, April 18).
Even before the Jalalabad bombing, Uzbekistani analysts concluded that IS had established a significant presence in Afghanistan. NSS analyst Bakhtiyer Sharafov said, “The presence of IS on the Central Asian doorstep means that the potential threat has gone beyond terrorist attacks and hostilities” (Interfax, March 23).
Uzbekistan’s concerns about the threat posed by jihadis to Eurasia are shared by other post-Soviet states. On April 16, at the Fourth International Security Conference in Moscow, Russian Armed Forces General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) head, Colonel General Igor Sergun, said that the situation in Central Asia remains explosive as the combat potential of jihadist organizations, including the Taliban, Hizb ut-Tahrir (HuT), and the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU), remains high. He asserted, “As many as 50,000 militants are currently fighting in Afghanistan alone. The territory of Afghanistan and Pakistan houses a network of training camps for terrorists, including suicide bombers” (Interfax, April 17).
The rise of IS in Afghanistan has come at the cost of the Taliban, where there have been reports of growing frustration over the lack of leadership by Mullah Omar (The Regional Times of Sindh, April 6). On March 31, longtime Taliban ally the IMU, which is based in some northern regions of Afghanistan, released a video that it would join IS. The video shows Sadullah Ugenji, who describes himself as the IMU’s leader in Afghanistan, stating that his organization would no longer support and follow Mullah Omar as, based on Sharia, the leader of Muslims of the world was now IS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi—the self-declared “Caliph Ibrahim” (Tolo News TV, April 1). In contrast, Ugenji noted that his militant group had neither seen nor heard from Mullah Omar for 13 years, even though the IMU, like the Pakistani Taliban and al-Qaeda, had previously considered Mullah Omar as Amir al-Mu’minin (leader of the faithful) (Right Vision News, April 6).
One option that Uzbekistan has for international assistance against IS militants if they enter the country are programs being developed by the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). On April 11, the SCO’s Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure board met in Tashkent to discuss an agenda covering combating extremism and developing joint operations against IS threats. The Eurasian inter-state body also drew up a program of cooperation for 2016–2018 for SCO member states to combat terrorism, separatism and extremism (Trend News Agency, April 11). The Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure is a permanent SCO structure, established to promote coordination and cooperation among the relevant government agencies of the SCO member states. The SCO Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure includes the representatives of special services and law enforcement agencies of Kazakhstan, China, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.
Uzbekistan, despite no longer being a member of the Moscow-led Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), might also turn to Russia. Tashkent-based political analyst Rafik Saifullin said that Uzbekistan would cooperate with Russia in the event of any mobilization by IS in Uzbekistan itself (Interfax, April 13). Another possibility could be the North Atlantic Alliance, as Tashkent hosts a NATO Liaison Officer for Central Asia in Tashkent, and Germany maintains a presence at the Termez airbase on Uzbekistan’s border with Afghanistan.
While many Western governments believe that Uzbekistan in the past used the threat of terrorism to crack down on domestic dissent, the transnational nature of the Islamic State organization represents a qualitatively different threat. Quite aside from IS’s presence in Afghanistan, according to Uzbekistan Muslims Board Deputy Chairman Abdulaziz Mansurov, about 200 Uzbeks who worked in Russia, travelled to Syria to join IS (AKI Press News Agency, March 27). Russian media reported, in late January, that IS intends to spend up to $70 million to open a second front in Central Asia.
If the April 2015 Jalalabad attacks prove to be the work of IS and its militants, and if newly allied IMU jihadist fighters from Afghanistan concurrently attempt to open a “second front” in Uzbekistan, the government in Tashkent will need all the friends it can get.
The Jamestown Foundation kindly allows Modern Tokyo Times to publish their highly esteemed articles. Please follow and check The Jamestown Foundation website at http://www.jamestown.org/
https://twitter.com/JamestownTweets The Jamestown Foundation
Photo: Uzbek militants in Afghanistan pledge allegiance to IS. (Source: <a href="http://khaama.com" rel="nofollow">khaama.com</a>)
Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 12 Issue: 74
Read the whole story
· · · · ·
US plans to globally integrated operations, the simultaneous action on land, sea, air, and in cyberspace, using a common space of intelligence, said the Russian Armed Forces General Staff luurepeadirektoraadi (GRU) kindralpolkovnik leader Igor Sergun military science conference in Moscow yesterday.
This goal is achieved by " all the US armed forces and commands available to the intelligence pooling joint control of the global information network, which is organized and operates similarly to a global network www, only in the military field, " explained Sergun.
Globally integrated operation is a further development of existing strategic operations.
This time, the operating units in the United States armeebaasidesse high mobility in different parts of the world, added the General.
"It shall be ensured for all participating entities and systems close collaboration at all levels. "
US military leadership will also give special attention to the information and intelligence support to military operations, using unmanned Air Force space systems and strategic potential.
NATO members in Europe to US allies in the long run, said Sergun.
США готовят глобально-интегрированную операцию против ...
Биржевой лидер-Apr 24, 2015
Генерал-полковник Игорь Сергун, возглавляющий ГРУ ГШ ВС РФ, заявил сегодня. 24 апреля, что Соединенные Штаты Америки готовят ...
США готовят глобально-интегрированную операцию против России – ГРУ (0)
Генерал-полковник Игорь Сергун, возглавляющий ГРУ ГШ ВС РФ, заявил сегодня. 24 апреля, что Соединенные Штаты Америки готовят против Российской Федерации глобально-интегрированную операцию. Более детально заявление руководителя ГРУ о планах США, направленных против РФ, изучали журналисты раздела "Новости России" издания "Биржевой лидер".
По словам Сергея Сергуна, Соединенные Штаты Америки занимаются разработкой планов по ведению военных действий в форме так называемой "глобально-интегрированной операции: иными словами, военные действия будут проводиться одновременно на суше, в воздухе, на море и в сети Интернет. "При этом, - отметил он, - будет использоваться единое разведывательно-информационное пространство".
Выступая на сегодняшней военно-научной конференции, в которой принимал участие руководящий состав российских Вооруженных сил, руководитель Главного разведывательного управления Генштаба ВС РФ заявил, что реализация данной цели достигается путем объединения всех имеющихся у Вооруженных сил США разведсредств и органов управления группировок войск в глобальную единую информационно-управляющую сеть, которая организована и функционирует наподобие глобальной сети Интернет, но только лишь в военной области.
Сергун отметил, что данная глобально-интегрированная операция является эволюционным развитием уже существующей стратегической операции межвидовой группировки Вооруженных сил, которую Соединенные Штаты намереваются реализовать в случае возникновения конфликта с высокой интенсивностью. Он объяснил, что в случае проведения подобной операции межвидовые высокомобильные группировки войск будут развернуты на базе вооруженных формирований, дислоцирующихся в различных районах нашей планеты, причем сделано это будет за очень короткий срок. "Кроме того, - добавил генерал-майор, - командование Вооруженных сил США особое значение придает информационному и разведывательному обеспечению военных действий – для этой цели будут задействованы средства стратегической беспилотной авиации и космические средства".
ВС США будут действовать в конфликтах будущего согласно концепции "Единые силы-2020" – Сергун.
По словам Сергуна, в будущих военных конфликтах американские Вооруженные силы будут применяться в соответствии с утвержденной осенью 2012 года концепцией "Единые силы-2020". Он напомнил, что повышенное внимание в процессе строительства Вооруженных сил США уделено развитию "единых сил" – межродовых формирований, которые включают в себя компоненты всех видов Вооруженных сил, наряду со средствами и с силами других федеральных ведомств и министерств, неправительственных и коммерческих организаций, а также партнеров и союзников Соединенных Штатов Америки.
"Согласно замыслу американского военного командования, - отметил генерал-полковник, - основной задачей данной концепции является придание армии США боевых возможностей, которые необходимы для обеспечения безоговорочного превосходства американских Вооруженных сил над противником в будущих военных конфликтах".
При этом глава ГРУ спрогнозировал, что европейские страны–члены Североатлантического альянса останутся в долгосрочной перспективе союзниками Соединенных Штатов – эти страны, по его словам, и дальше будут придерживаться американских взглядов в вопросе применения войск, поскольку без активного участия американских Вооруженных сил европейские страны Альянса способны организовать только лишь ограниченные по размаху и по времени операции, направленные на урегулирование кризисов.
Действия Соединенных Штатов могут нарушить существующий ядерный баланс – глава Генштаба ВС РФ.
Напомним, что вчера генерал армии Валерий Герасимов, возглавляющий Генеральный штаб ВС РФ, заявил, что реализация Соединенными Штатами своей концепции "глобального удара" наряду с развертыванием системы американской противоракетной обороны ПРО по всему миру может нарушить существующий в настоящее время ядерный баланс. Генерал армии напомнил, что Вашингтон в настоящее время, одновременно с созданием системы ПРО и ее развертыванием по всему миру, занимается также и реализацией концепции "глобального удара". "Уже известно, - объяснил Герасимов, - что в рамках данной концепции ведутся работы, направленные на создание высокоточных неядерных ударных средств с глобальной досягаемостью.
"В этой связи, - отметил он, - нельзя исключать варианта, при котором уже в обозримом будущем неядерные средства, разрабатываемые в рамках этой концепции, станут реальностью." На фоне реализации Соединенными Штатами своих планов по развитию системы ПРО это может стать угрозой для существующего сейчас ядерного баланса, являющегося гарантом стабильности во всем мире.
Руководитель Генерального штаба ВС РФ подчеркнул, что подобные действия американской стороны вынуждают Российскую Федерацию к принятию адекватных ответных мер. В частности, в числе подобных мер будут определенные действия в отношении стран, на территории которых Соединенными Штатами будут размещены объекты своей системы противоракетной обороны. "В итоге, - заявил Герасимов, - объектами первоочередных ответных действий окажутся не обладающие ядерным арсеналом государства, на территории которых Вашингтон разместит свои противоракетные средства".
Автор: Алексей Иванов
Read the whole story
· · · · ·
Внешняя политика США, целью которой в первую очередь является сдерживание России, подтверждает стремление Америки сохранить за собой свои лидирующие геополитические и экономические позиции. Кроме того, именно США являются инициатором всех современных военных конфликтов. Об этом заявил начальник главного оперативного управления Генштаба ВС России Андрей Картаполов в Москве на военно-научной конференции, посвященной 70-летию Победы.
— Заказчиком всех военных конфликтов единолично выступают США. Сегодня страны Запада стали позиционировать себя в качестве главных «архитекторов» системы международных отношений, а США — единственная сверхдержава в мире, — заявил начальник главного оперативного управления Генштаба ВС РФ Андрей Картаполов.
Как он отметил, за последнее десятилетие США и их союзники более 50 раз применяли военную силу, причем шесть раз операции проводились с решительными целями и переросли в локальные вооруженные конфликты.
Кроме того, по словам начальника Главного управления генштаба ВС РФ генерал-полковника Игоря Сергуна, сегодня Пентагон планирует расширение системы передового базирования своих вооруженных сил. По его данным, эта система предусматривает размещение американских войск на постоянной и временной основе на территориях более 100 иностранных государств.
— В этих государствах предполагается создание объектов заблаговременного складирования вооружения и военной техники, необходимых для обеспечения боевых действий в передовых зонах, — сказал Сергун на конференции с руководящим составом ВС РФ в Культурном центре вооруженных сил.
Как отметил генерал, в случае военных конфликтов американские войска будут действовать как самостоятельно, так и вместе с союзниками по НАТО или в составе коалиционных группировок.
— Вооруженная борьба в конфликтах современности приобрела ярко выраженный воздушно-морской характер. Роль основных ударных сил окончательно закрепилась за авиацией, в том числе палубной, и боевыми кораблями, оснащенными крылатыми ракетами, — сказал генерал Игорь Сергун.
При этом он отметил, что США могут применить военную силу сразу в нескольких региональных конфликтах. По мнению Игоря Сергуна, американское руководство считает, что Вооруженные силы США должны быть способны разгромить противника в ходе крупномасштабной операции в одном районе мира при гарантированном сдерживании еще одного агрессора в другом.
В Генштабе ВС России особо отметили, что жертвы современных войн — в большинстве своем не военнослужащие, а мирное население.
— Безусловно, сейчас количество жертв не идет в сравнение с истреблением миллионов в войнах ХХ века. Однако следует особо подчеркнуть: сегодня насилие в войнах направлено главным образом против гражданского населения. Как показывает анализ, более 90 процентов жертв в современных конфликтах — это мирные граждане, — подчеркнул Андрей Картаполов.
Напомним, что в Москве прошла военно-научная конференция Минобороны, главной целью которой являлось определение приоритетных направлений совершенствования обороны Российской Федерации на основе опыта Великой Отечественной войны и военных конфликтов XX и XXI веков и с учетом перспектив развития средств и способов ведения войны военными и невоенными средствами.
Если вы заметили ошибку или опечатку в тексте, выделите ее курсором и нажмите Ctrl + Enter
Read the whole story
· ·
Next Page of Stories
Loading...
Page 5
«Единые силы» Пентагона
Вооруженные силы США в конфликтах будущего будут применяться в соответствии с утвержденной в сентябре 2012 года концепцией «Единые силы – 2020», заявил начальник главного управления Генштаба ВС России генерал-полковник Игорь Сергун.
«В последнее время в ходе строительства Вооруженных сил США повышенное внимание уделяется развитию «единых сил», которые представляют собой межрядовые формирования, включающие компоненты всех видов ВС, силы и средства других федеральных министерств и ведомств, коммерческих и неправительственных организаций, а также американских союзников и партнеров», – сказал Сергун на военно-научной конференции с руководящим составом ВС России, передает РИА «Новости».
Он отметил, что, согласно замыслу Пентагона, главной целью данного документа является «придание американской армии боевых возможностей, необходимых для обеспечения ее безусловного превосходства над противником в военных конфликтах будущего».
Сергун добавил, что в целях эффективного проведения военных операций ВС США полностью перешли на создание объединенных группировок войск из видовых оперативных формирований экспедиционного типа.
«Достигнутый в настоящее время уровень боевых возможностей позволяет им проводить различные операции (противоповстанческие, контртеррористические, по стабилизации обстановки и так далее) как самостоятельно, так и совместно с другими ведомствами, организациями, зарубежными союзниками и партнерами», – сказал Сергун.
В ходе применения «единых сил» США военные действия будут вестись в форме «глобально-интегрированной операции» одновременно в нескольких операционных средах – на суше и море, в воздухе, космосе и киберпространстве, сообщил Сергун.
Как отметил генерал Сергун, «глобально-интегрированная операция» представляет собой эволюционное развитие существующей стратегической операции межвидовой группировки войск (сил), проводить которую в ВС США планируют в ходе конфликта высокой интенсивности».
Кроме того, сказал генерал Сергун, командование ВС США придает особое значение разведывательному и информационному обеспечению военных действий с использованием возможностей «космических средств и стратегической беспилотной авиации».
Ранее в пятницу Сергун заявил, что Пентагон планирует разместить американские войска на постоянной и временной основе на территориях более 100 иностранных государств в рамках расширения системы передового базирования своих вооруженных сил.
19 апреля командующий сухопутными войсками США в Европе генерал-лейтенант Фредерик Бен Ходжес заявил, что США не заинтересованы в честной борьбе с кем бы то ни было, включая Россию.
16 апреля министр обороны России Сергей Шойгу, выступая на IV Конференции по международной безопасности в Москве, заявлял, что государства – члены НАТО стремятся к захвату геополитического пространства, наращивают военный потенциал в Восточной Европе, приближаются к российским границам.
- Вконтакте1
- Google+
- LiveJournal
- Одноклассники
- Мой мир
Опубликовано: 27.04.2015 08:13
Read the whole story
· · ·
The situation in the Middle East and Central Asia remains explosive as the combat potential of extremist organizations such as the Taliban, Hizb ut-Tahrir and the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan remains high in the region, Col. Gen. Igor Sergun, who heads of the Main Intelligence Department of the Russian Armed Forces General Staff, has said.
"As many as 50,000 militants are currently fighting in Afghanistan alone. The territory of Afghanistan and Pakistan houses a network of training camps for terrorists, including suicide bombers," he told the Fourth International Security Conference in Moscow on Thursday.
The prompt spread of radical Islam ideology is "negatively affecting the situation in South-East Asia," he said.
"In particular, the activities of the Jemaah Islamiyah extremist organization may entail unpredictable consequences because its main goal is to create a theocratic Islamic state to include Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and the Muslim provinces of Thailand and the Philippines," Sergun said.
The information in this section is provided by the Interfax news agency and is intended for personal use only. It may not be reproduced or distributed in any form without express permission from Interfax. To request permission to republish, email:
ifaxru@interfax.ru РИА Новости |
ГШ РФ: европейские члены НАТО останутся стратегическими союзниками США
РИА Новости Начальник Главного управления Генштаба ВС РФ генерал-полковник Игорь Сергун заявил, что в долгосрочной перспективе европейские члены НАТО будут придерживаться американских взглядов на применение войск, так как основной вклад в формирование потенциала НАТО вносят ... НАТО вместо мира выбирает войну - Генштаб РоссииФедеральное агентство новостей No.1 all 49 news articles » |
 Eynulla Fatullayev |
Кямаледдин Гейдаров в штаб-квартире НАТО
Eynulla Fatullayev К.Гейдаров встретился со специальным представителем генсека НАТО в Центральной Азии и на Южном Кавказе Джеймсом Аппатураем, заместителем генерального секретаряНАТО по операциям Стивеном Эвансом и первым заместителем генсека НАТОАлександром Вершбоу. Кямаледдин Гейдаров встретился со спецпредставителем НАТО по Южному Кавказу - ФОТОСЕССИЯVesti all 4 news articles » |
Москва, Пекин и Тегеран приближаются к созданию оборонного союза
Киевская Русь По мнению автора, участники прошедшей 16 апреля в Москве четвертой Конференции по международной безопасности показали США и НАТО, что другие мировые державы, в частности, Россия, Китай, Индия и Иран, не позволят Штатам поступать так, как им заблагорассудится. and more » |
 ФОКУС |
НАТО начало гибридную войну против России, - командующий ЗВО
ФОКУС Анализ действий США и их западных союзников показывает, что против России проводится первая фаза гибридной войны, заключающаяся в умышленной дестабилизации внутриполитической обстановки политическими и экономическими мерами. Об этом заявил командующий ... «НАТО переходит все границы». Война против России уже началасьUra.ru all 71 news articles » |
Next Page of Stories
Loading...
Page 6
 GIGAmir |
Система кибербезопасности, изучение иностранных языков, создание Сил спецопераций и другие пункты программы сотрудничества Украина – НАТО
GORDONUA.COM 24 апреля президент Украины Петр Порошенко своим указом утвердил Годовую национальную программу Украина – НАТО на 2015 год. "ГОРДОН" выбрал основные моменты плана взаимодействий Украины с Альянсом. О чем договорились Украина и НАТО: основные пункты программы сотрудничестваGIGAmir Эксперт назвал основные положения программы сотрудничества Украина-НАТОБиржевой лидер НАТО: Порошенко утвердил годовую нацпрограмму сотрудничества УкраинаНовости туризма Турции Архангельск-ИНФО all 9 news articles » |
ФОКУС |
«НАТО переходит все границы». Война против России уже началась
Ura.ru Все действия США и их союзников свидетельствуют о том, что против нашей страны развязана гибридная война, а именно первая ее фаза, в ходе которой никаких боестолкновений пока не происходит, однако образ врага формируется очень активно. Этому способствует и общая ... НАТО начало гибридную войну против России, - командующий ЗВОФОКУС all 72 news articles » |
 GORDONUA.COM |
Президент Словакии: ЕС и НАТО не должны поставлять оружие Украине
GORDONUA.COM При этом президент Словакии отметил, что ни Евросоюзу, не имеющему соответствующих инструментов для поставок оружия, ни НАТО участвовать в этом не следует. В то же время он отметил, что Словакия поддержала все санкции ЕС против России. Бой Кличко, геноцид армян и ... Президент Словакии против поставок Украине оружия ЕС и НАТОКорреспондент.net ЕС и НАТО не должны поставлять оружие в Украину – президент СловакииСЕГОДНЯ Президент Словакии выступил против поставок Украине оружия ЕС и НАТОРИА Новости Диалог.UA - Всегда два мнения -Газета.Ru all 75 news articles » |
 РИА Новости |
Аналитик: в НАТО не готовы воевать ни на Украине, ни за Украину
РИА Новости Президент Украины заявил, что вопрос присоединения Украины к НАТО должен решаться на референдуме. Однако альянс не готов на самом деле бороться за Украину и потенциальное вступление страны в организацию крайне маловероятно, считает украинский аналитик. and more » |
 EurActiv |
Latvian PM: If Russia attacks NATO, the treaty will be enforced
EurActiv Ahead of the Eastern Partnership summit in May, Prime Minister Laimdota Straujuma of Latvia, which currently holds the Presidency of the EU, warned that if necessary, Article 5 of the NATOtreaty will be enforced. We will not go back to the Soviet ... and more » |
 СЕГОДНЯ |
Украина должна привести свою оборону к стандартам НАТО – Климкин
СЕГОДНЯ Мы должны привести нашу оборону к стандартам НАТО, потому что это необходимо сейчас. Но наше решение о вступлении в Альянс является нашим суверенным правом как независимого государства. Также НАТО должно принять свое решение о принятии нас в союз. И Украина для ... Климкин: Украина должна сама решать вступать ли ей в НАТОНовости в Украине и зоны АТО Replyua all 28 news articles » |
Next Page of Stories
Loading...
Page 7
 ru.Delfi.lt |
Минобороны Литвы: за прошлую неделю ВВС НАТО два раза сопровождали российские самолеты Международная панорама 27 апреля, 12:34
Информационное агентство России ТАСС ВИЛЬНЮС, 27 апреля. /Корр. ТАСС Владимир Иванов/. Истребители НАТО, базирующиеся на литовской авиабазе Зокняй, в течение прошлой недели (с 20 по 26 апреля) два раза сопровождали российские военные самолеты, воздушное пространство Литвы не нарушалось. Об этом в ... На минувшей неделе истребители НАТО сопровождали российские борта два разаru.Delfi.lt В минобороны Литвы сообщили о двух случаях сопровождения российских самолетов ВВС НАТОВзгляд all 3 news articles » |
Норвегия продала России секретную базу НАТО
Версия Скажете, это невыгодное вложение денег? Секретная база подводных лодок, вырубленная в скале, досталась России по цене средней московской квартиры в центре, всего за 4,4 млн евро. И где – в Норвегии, входящей в Североатлантический альянс! Заполучить такую военную базу ... |
 RT (blog) |
Did a Chinese-Russian-Iranian coalition opposing NATO debut in Moscow?
RT (blog) Civilian and military officials from over seventy countries, including NATO members, attended. Fifteen defense ministers took part in the event. However, aside from Greece, defense ministers of NATO countries did not participate in the conference. |
There are six men. All dressed in black like the ones in the famous movie. They have black cases too but they are not using their technology to erase your memory. Their name: NATO Rapid Reaction Team, or RRT. Their aim: to provide assistance to NATO nations or facilities suffering a cyber attack.
 NATO HQ (press release) |
NATO-Ukraine agreement paves the way for further technical cooperation
NATO HQ (press release) On 24 April 2015, the NATO Communications and Information (NCI) Agency and Ukraine signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MoA), which will facilitate the implementation of the NATO-Ukraine Trust Fund on Consultation, Command, Control and ... NATO and Ukraine sign C4I modernisation agreementIHS Jane's 360 all 2 news articles » |
 Wall Street Journal (blog) |
In NATO Cyber Wargame, Berlya Fends Off Arch-Enemy Crimsonia
Wall Street Journal (blog) Somewhere near Iceland, a new NATO member, Berlya is under cyber-attack, most likely launched from its arch-rival Crimsonia, although the Berlyans can't be completely sure. The Berlyan government has lost control over its drones, now assumed to be ... and more » |
Next Page of Stories
Loading...
Page 8
A challenge in the south for NATO
Washington Post The Cold War made Europe's Atlantic identity paramount in the Old Continent's dealings with the world and particularly with its American ally. Mediterranean and Central European countries developed habits of cooperation and consultation in NATO that ... |
LIVERPOOL, UK – Three of NATO’s Standing Naval Forces have completed their participation in the UK-led Exercise JOINT WARRIOR 15-1: Standing NATO Maritime Group TWO (SNMG2) and Standing NATO Mine Counter-Measures Groups ONE and TWO (SNMCMG1/2), following nearly two weeks of intense multi-national training. NATO’s three SNFs joined more than 40 additional warships and submarines and 70 aircraft. In total, around 13,000 personnel participated in the exercise.
 Center for Research on Globalization |
Did a Chinese-Russian-Iranian coalition opposing NATO debut in Moscow?
Center for Research on Globalization Civilian and military officials from over seventy countries, including NATO members, attended. Fifteen defense ministers took part in the event. However, aside from Greece, defense ministers of NATO countries did not participate in the conference. |
On April 16–17, the fourth Moscow International Security Conference was held amidst continued disagreement between Russia and the United States and its allies over Ukraine. As usual, the conference was addressed by Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, as well as Army-General Valery Gerasimov, the chief of the General Staff, and other members of the Russian political-military leadership. In addition, in the context of the United States and European Union’s ongoing sanctions regime against Russia, the only foreign government to send a senior representative to the Moscow conference was Greece. The theme of this year’s event, shortly before the celebrations to mark the 70th anniversary of end of the Great Patriotic War (World War II), was to link the defeat of Nazism with Moscow’s recent efforts to confront modern security challenges. The underlying message was for Washington and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO): the Kremlin understands that the current confrontation will persist and has no intention of backing down (Lenta.ru, April 18).
Given the fragility of the ceasefire in southeastern Ukraine and steps to implement the Minsk Two agreement, combined with the depth of the crisis in Moscow’s relations with the US, NATO and the EU, it was hardly surprising that the conference resulted in senior Russian politicians and top military brass pointing their fingers at potential adversaries. Previous iterations of the conference had examined missile defense, European security, and the problems of global and regional stability. Indeed, the 2014 conference was a platform to expound Kremlin-backed thinking on the need to counter the threat of color revolutions. Although President Vladimir Putin did not attend the conference, his written speech was declaimed by Nikolai Patrushev, the Secretary of the Security Council and former head of the Federal Security Service (FSB). Unsurprisingly, Putin linked the defeat of Nazi Germany 70 years ago to the challenges and threats facing Russia today: deviations from the international security system are marked, in Putin’s view, by a lack of respect for the internal affairs of countries and the promotion of color revolutions (Krasnaya Zvezda, April 16).
The keynote speech was delivered by Defense Minister Shoigu. It contained no real surprises. He referred to the historic confrontation between the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, saying it is equally important today to oppose fascism and other forms of extremism. However, according to the Russian defense minister, a serious threat to international stability has emerged, due to a number of “countries” trying to impose their will on others, “arbitrarily” interpreting the “basic norms of international law,” using “double standards,” and interfering in the internal affairs of “sovereign states”—in clear reference to the US and its NATO allies. Take as an example, the case of Ukraine. Shoigu told the audience of defense specialists and academics from 70 countries, the US and its allies promoted regime change in Ukraine and plunged the country into Civil War. Moreover, Shoigu dismissed Western assertions that Russia has acted aggressively in Ukraine, reminding the conference about the NATO bombing of Serbia in 1999 and the later separation of Kosovo, the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and bombing of Libya in 2011 destabilizing “entire regions” (Krasnaya Zvezda, April 16).
The perpetrators of these actions, including the promotion of color revolutions, were the US and NATO, according to Shoigu. On this basis he cast aside Western criticism of Russia’s seizure of Crimea. And linking sanctions to a Western information war against Russia, Shoigu alleged that Washington and NATO still push further expansion close to Russia’s borders. He closed by saying that despite these problems in international security, Moscow is willing to cooperate with foreign partners on the basis of “equal and indivisible” security. These themes were underscored in the speeches by both Gerasimov and Lavrov, with the former explaining Moscow’s current concerns about NATO, including increased exercises and the creation of the spearhead rapid reaction force with temporary basing rights in Eastern Europe and the Baltic States. Gerasimov told the conference that NATO’s recent measures are not regarded by Moscow as “defensive” and said that missile defense is about a US quest for “global domination” (Krasnaya Zvezda, April 16).
Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov was so wrapped up in the undeclared conference theme of attacking the US and NATO that he continued even after the conference ended. He tried, for example, to portray Moscow as being perfectly open and reasonable with the Alliance, offering to discuss how to restore confidence in NATO’s relations with Russia. However, he soon added a host of problems that Moscow has with US and NATO policy. Antonov highlighted Moscow’s earlier need to suspend its participation in the Conventional forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty in 2007, and the negative reaction by NATO following the Russia-Georgia war in 2008. But he never drifted from the official script to attack the Alliance for its constant eastward enlargement since the end of the Cold War (Rossisyskaya Gazeta, Lenta.ru, April 18).
By far the greatest public relations coup for Moscow was to secure as a conference participant the Greek Defense Minister Panos Kammenos. On April 15, Kammenos told Shoigu: “Greece and Russia are two countries with historic and religious ties, and in our meeting we reaffirmed the friendly relations of the two countries.” He also addressed the conference, and according to the Greek media the defense minister disagrees with the EU sanctions against Russia and promises that his government will work to change this policy (Athens News Agency, April 15). Of course, the recent change of government in Athens and their economic hardships in the Eurozone are clear factors influencing Greece’s newfound friendship with Russia; but, the Kremlin will doubtless see this as clear evidence of the lack of unity in Europe over Moscow’s actions in Ukraine.
The Moscow International Security Conference has become an intrinsic part of Russia’s informational warfare tools being used against Washington and NATO. Its language and signals are unmistakable: the Kremlin considers the United States and NATO to be far greater threats to Russian security than international terrorism or other transnational security threats. It also demonstrates no willingness to back down in its confrontation with Western governments over Ukraine. With NATO’s efforts to reassure some member states and deter Russia, coupled with American military trainers arriving in Ukraine, or possible US lethal aid options, the chances of either side misreading the other remain very realistic. The tone of the conference, markedly more anti-Western than in 2014, highlights the somber mood permeating the power circles in Moscow.
Read the whole story
· · · ·
Informational warfare has been a critical part of Russia’s hybrid war against Ukraine. As Russian military reporter and veteran of the Russia’s two wars in Chechnya, Arkadiy Babchenko, argues, “I believe this [the ongoing Russian-Ukrainian war] is the first war in the entire history triggered solely by Goebbels-style propaganda. Had it not been for Russian TV, this war would never have happened” (Openrussia.org, April 15). Faced by such a formidable challenge, the Ukrainian government’s solution to the problem—the formation of a cabinet-level information ministry—fails both in form and in fact.
On December 2, 2014, many months since the start of Russian aggression and after many years of tolerating Russian propaganda in the Ukrainian media space, Ukraine’s parliament gave the green light to the formation of the Ministry of Information Politics. The new ministry will “assist communication among state bodies, create the country’s information strategy and respond to foreign information attacks” (Mip.gov.ua, accessed April 17).
The vote on the new agency—buried within a larger bill—was pushed through the legislature with little public notice and even less debate, immediately sparking criticism. Yuriy Stets, the would-be information minister, who had earlier produced the Fifth TV channel (controlled by President Petro Poroshenko) and was the president’s close personal friend (Pravda.com.ua, April 10, 2013), did not even speak before the vote—unlike his colleagues.
Stets made public the new ministry’s regulations only a day after the vote. He said his ministry’s activities will be informed by the experience of Great Britain and France after World War I, as well as that of Israel. According to him, the ministry was going to “develop and implement professional standards in media sphere,” “ensure freedom of speech” and prevent personal harm caused by “incomplete, outdated or unreal information” (Kyiv Post, December 4, 2014).
However, journalists and watchdog groups broadly consider the new ministry an ill-conceived idea, fearing it will try to regulate the media, restrict free speech and inhibit reporters’ work (Kyiv Post, December 4, 2014). Many also believe the information ministry will be a waste of money. “The country is now collecting money for bullet-proof vests, but we found [state] money for the ministry,” complained Nastya Stanko, from Hromadske TV (Facebook.com/nastya.stanko, accessed April 17).
Stets assured that his ministry was going to use four million hryvnia (about $180,000) out of 2015 budget funds for salaries for its 30 officials and to rely on foreign donors or grant money for other expenses (Pravda.com.ua, February 17, 2015; December 3, 2014). But when commenting on his first 100 days in office, the minister complained that he had not been able to accomplish anything, as he had no access to state funds (Zik.ua, February 22). According to Stets, his agency has been working on drafting a Concept of Information Security (Mip.gov.ua, March 17, 18) to be completed by this May, which would be followed by public discussions until September, when it may be finally approved by the legislature.
Compared to the Ukrainian government’s slow process in conceiving new ideas with which to confront Russian information warfare, Ukraine’s volunteer sector has long ago taken the initiative, just like in the case of the shooting war. Even the information ministry’s website has been designed and hosted entirely by unpaid volunteers (Slovoidilo.ua, March 16). Tapping into the wide pool of ready volunteers and the entire nation’s patriotic sentiments, Stets’ agency launched the so-called Ukrainian Information Army (I-army.org), a volunteer force of Internet commentators tasked with spreading government-approved content and combating Russian trolls.
Though lacking funds, Minister Stets also announced plans to found Ukraine Tomorrow, a worldwide TV channel to “counter Russia’s formidable propaganda machine” (Mip.gov.ua, March 16; Deutsche Welle–Russian service, February 22). Yet, the information ministry has, until recently, been unable to even secure the broadcasting of domestic TV networks over the country’s entire territory, to let alone the globe. Thus, Moscow-backed rebels in Luhansk and Donetsk used Ukrainian equipment and state funding to transmit Kremlin propaganda (Sprotyv.info, December 25, 2014). Stets only declared in mid-March that Ukraine’s TV channels were finally again being broadcast to the occupied eastern regions thanks to transmitters donated by Poland. He also noted plans to restore radio broadcasts to Russian-annexed Crimea (Radiosvoboda.org, March 21).
Creating one more TV channel—like Ukraine Tomorrow—would be useless, believes Iaroslav Kovalchuk, from the Kyiv-based International Center for Policy Studies (Apostrophe.com.ua, March 11). Critically, it would compete with pre-existing UTR Worldwide Service and Ukraine Today, English-language channels launched by Ukraine’s state-run broadcasting company and Igor Kolomoisky’s 1+1 Media group, respectively (Deutsche Welle–Russian service, February 27).
Grygoriy Shverk, the deputy chairman of Ukraine’s National TV and Radio Council, estimates the new TV channel would cost $5–10 million a year in just maintenance fees, compared to the information ministry’s entire annual budget of $180,000 and would be trying to compete with the billions of dollars Russia pumps into its TV propaganda effort each year (Apostrophe.com.ua, March 11). Whereas Oksana Romaniuk, the director of the Kyiv-based media watchdog Institute of Mass Information and Ukraine’s representative for Reporters Without Borders, criticizes the Ukrainian government’s unproductive, symmetric attempts at “battling propaganda with propaganda” (Deutsche Welle–Russian service, February 27). “There is no place for creativity in the present-day bureaucratic machine,” Kovalchuk maintains, arguing that the state should have instead backed existing private ventures.
Even anonymous officials from the presidential administration asserted that “the way to fight Russian propaganda is with honesty and transparency, not trying to beat Russia at its own game” (Mashable.com, December 2, 2014. According to Romaniuk, Ukraine should do more to “integrate Ukraine into global news coverage, specifically by providing access [to Ukraine] to foreign correspondents, by encouraging international broadcasters to open their offices in Ukraine, as well as by improving the operational pace and quality of the governmental bodies’ press services, namely those of the defense and security agencies.” These agencies’ blunders, Romaniuk notes, “have been one of the reasons for [Ukraine’s] defeats in the information war” (Deutsche Welle–Russian service, February 27). To this list, journalist Oleksandr Kochetkov adds a need for involving famous and respected global media personalities (Obozrevatel.com, February 2).
“This country was saved by volunteers, including in the information field,” says Dmytro Kuleba, the Ukrainian foreign ministry’s ambassador-at-large. “So to secure Ukraine’s efficient information policy, it is necessary to synergize efforts of our governmental agencies, civil society and international partners,” he concludes (Apostrophe.com.ua, March 11).
Ukraine clearly needs to adopt and follow a well-developed information policy. But as experts and professional journalists maintain, so far Kyiv has unwisely tried to reinvent the wheel or imitate the better-funded, more experienced Russian “information warriors.”
Read the whole story
· · · ·
This week (April 21), Russian prime minister and former president Dmitry Medvedev spent several hours presenting to the State Duma (lower house of parliament) the annual government report on policies and achievements in 2014, as required by the constitution. According to Medvedev, Russia is under siege and “there should be no illusions—the present economic crisis is not transient”; if oil prices stay low and “external economic pressure [sanctions over Ukraine] continues, we will all be forced to make sacrifices.” Medvedev called the present situation “unique” and an unprecedented combination of challenges: “The addition of Crimea to the Russian Federation did not leave a single sector of our economy unaffected—financial institutions have been deprived of foreign credit, while industry cannot import technologies.” According to Medvedev, in 2014 sanctions cost Russia some 25 billion euros ($27 billion at the present exchange rate) or 1.5 percent of GDP; “in 2015, losses may be several times more severe” (Government.ru, April 21).
According to Medvedev, the government has successfully dealt with the immediate consequences of the economic crisis: inflation seems to be slowly subsiding, the ruble has stabilized after a dramatic devaluation last December and is in fact strengthening, while industrial production has not fallen as steeply as initially feared. The Ministry of Economic Development predicts an overall economic depression in 2015 of around 3 percent of GDP, but by 2016, some growth in the economy is expected. The defense industry, according to Medvedev, is in good shape and is producing tens of thousands of new weapons (the news was met with ovation by Duma deputies). Still, long-term prospects are not rosy: Budget revenues have fallen, while expenditures have increased. Russians will be forced to adapt to a new reality, and Medvedev believes they will persevere. The prime minister insisted: “The severe outside economic pressure on Russia is the result of the main political decision of 2014—the return of Crimea, which was a correct and an only possible choice. We all—the entire nation, the government and parliament—supported it [the annexation of Crimea], fully understanding its possible consequences and now, together, are responsible to solve [these resultant] economic problems, [as well as] maintain social stability and development” (Government.ru, April 21).
He continued, “2014 carried Russia into a new epoch—it is surely the year of Crimea; the vast majority of people believed it [the annexation of Crimea] was just; despite the formality of post-Soviet borders, Crimea was always our land—shared pain, shared pride, shared hardships, shared victories.” Medvedev compared the Crimean peninsula’s annexation with the return of Hong Kong to China and the reunification of Germany: “The present unprecedented foreign economic and political pressure is the result of our collective decision—we all understood we could not do otherwise, no matter the cost” (Government.ru, April 21). The cost of integrating Crimea into Russia will indeed be high: the region needs subsidies and massive infrastructural investment, while the rest of Russia remains mired in recession. Medvedev and his government are directly responsible for the economic wellbeing of Russia, and the prime minister was apparently passing the buck. He called for unequivocal solidarity, austerity and social stability in the face of outside enemies—led by the United States—which purportedly want to undermine Russian pride and statehood and are the prime reason of any possible future and present calamities.
Of course, not all in Russia share the official Crimea-connected jingoism, and Medvedev’s attempt at fiery patriotic rhetoric did meet some response. Boris Vishnevsky from the liberal Yabloko party—a member of the opposition Yabloko fraction in the St. Petersburg legislature—accused Medvedev of being wrong about the total unanimity of Russian popular support for the Crimean annexation. A significant minority of Russians (10–15 percent of the population) has not succumbed to the vicious state propaganda and does not support the Kremlin. The Yabloko deputies in the St. Petersburg legislature publicly denounced Crimea’s seizure as illegal and invalid. In March 2014, according to Vishnevsky, Medvedev did not say anything about the possible soaring price of annexing the peninsula, and it makes no sense to invoke the notion of collective responsibility of the entire nation for a wrong decision taken by several men behind closed doors in the Kremlin. Since the economic fallout from the Crimean annexation has hit ordinary Russians the hardest—generating lower incomes, higher retail prices and greater unemployment—discontent may grow, and the responsibility for these effects will increasingly be attributed to the true creators of the havoc (Ekho Moskvy, April 22).
Also this week (April 22), President Vladimir Putin signed into law a revised budget for the current year (2015). State spending has been cut, and revenues are planned to decrease some 2.5 trillion rubles ($50 billion) because of lower oil prices. The federal budget deficit is planned at 2.7 trillion rubles ($55 billion). Under the sanctions regime, the Russian government cannot borrow abroad, and the possibility of borrowing on the internal money markets is severely limited. Most of the deficit will be covered by depleting the sovereign reserve fund created during years of high oil prices. At present, the reserve fund stands at 4.4 trillion rubles ($90 billion). Serious discussions between financial analysts of leading Russian banks currently revolve around the question of when the reserve fund may be fully depleted—which would potentially send Russia into a financial meltdown. If the price of oil stays low and the ruble stays strong, the budget deficit may increase by an additional $12–13 billion. Many Russian regions are broke and may require emergency budgetary transfers from Moscow. The sovereign reserve fund could be depleted by the end of 2015, according to some analysts, or last through 2016 according to others, when the price of oil may significantly rebound and Moscow might be able to renew foreign borrowing (Top.rbc.ru, April 22).
In an atmosphere of growing internal tension and economic/financial unpredictability, the Russian government has been amplifying its anti-Western rhetoric. Maintaining a siege mentality as well as portraying the US and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) as enemies at the gates is apparently seen as essential to deflect the Russian public from the harsh economic reality and keep the regime stable.
Read the whole story
· · · ·
Next Page of Stories
Loading...
Page 9
In his annual phone-in conversation with Russia’s populace and in follow-up interviews, President Vladimir Putin has expounded at length on Russia’s current policy objectives regarding Ukraine (Interfax, Kremlin.ru, April 16, 17).
Putin’s remarks evidenced both strategic consistency and tactical adjustments necessitated by Ukraine’s ongoing political consolidation. Although Putin’s annual phone-in ritual is always held in the third week of April, the timing holds special relevance for Ukraine this year, amid conjectures that Russia might resume military operations against the country in the spring. Putin’s remarks addressed the bilateral Russia-Ukraine relations, the conflict in Ukraine’s east, and a Russian definition of Ukrainian national identity.
On the level of state-to-state relations, Putin must view the coherence of Ukraine’s leadership across party lines as frustrating his expectations. The Kremlin did attempt to play on factional differences in Kyiv, but those attempts have brought no results. While persisting with destabilization operations, Putin seems resigned to having to deal seriously with Ukraine’s incumbent leadership, an unusually cohesive one by Ukrainian historical standards.
Accordingly, Putin no longer attempts at this time to differentiate between President Petro Poroshenko and an alleged “party of war” in Kyiv. Nor can Moscow any longer identify specific Ukrainian political constituencies as potential allies (other than the secessionist leaders). In his telephone dialogue, Putin took a swipe at Ukraine’s pre-2014 regime as “corrupt” and “oligarchic.” With this, he implicitly disavowed the current Opposition Bloc in Kyiv, a direct descendant of Viktor Yanukovych’s Party of Regions. During his call-in event, Putin meditated about Ukraine’s political forces: “We are not guided by sympathies or antipathies, we are guided by our country’s interests”; and “The political leadership [in Ukraine] may change from time to time, but the people remain.” He was closely paraphrasing 19th-century British prime minister Lord Palmerston and Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin, respectively, without attribution in either case.
Putin outlined a basis for “normalization” of Russia-Ukraine relations in general terms for his listeners in Ukraine. He named conflict-resolution in “Donbas” (occupied parts of the Donetsk and Luhansk provinces) at the top of the agenda.
Regarding the reform of Ukraine’s constitution, “it is not for us to impose this or that on Ukraine, but we have the right to express our opinion,” specifically on the “rights and interests of Russian-speaking people” in Ukraine. Next, Russia would reactivate bilateral economic relations with Ukraine, in the mutual interests. Finally, the “Kyiv authorities must treat us as equal partners in all aspects of cooperation”—apparently implying equal status of Russia and the West in terms of Ukraine’s national priorities. Given the European Union’s consent to re-negotiate the EU-Ukraine trade agreement with Russia’s participation as a third party, Putin can now stop short of attacking Ukraine’s European choice for its one-sidedness.
Putin used this phone-in forum to launch into one of his periodic disquisitions about Ukrainian national identity and its relationship with the Russian identity. His message to the public in both countries each time contends that the Ukrainian identity is practically indistinguishable from the Russian one and subsumed to it. Barely conceding that the matter can be debated, but “not now,” Putin told his audience: “The Ukrainians are very close to us. I see no differences at all between Ukrainians and Russians, and I consider on the whole that we [sic] are one people [odin narod].”
Contradicting that part of his message, Putin goes on to argue that “Russians” (russkie) in Ukraine are distinguishable after all from Ukrainians, and in need of special protection of that distinctiveness. He defines Russians in Ukraine in the same infinitely elastic terms in which he had previously defined the “Russian World.” Thus, the Ukrainian government should “observe the legitimate rights of Russians living in Ukraine, and of those who consider themselves Russian regardless of what their personal documents say [as to ethnicity], and the rights of those who consider Russian their native language and Russian culture their native culture, and the rights of those people who feel inseparably bound with Russia.”
Such remarks are intended to affect Ukraine’s internal debates on revising the constitution. Putin’s remarks also presage the tenor of Russian diplomatic demarches in that context. On April 22, Foreign Affairs Minister Sergei Lavrov gratuitously warned Ukraine’s president and government against resorting to “Ukrainization” (Interfax, April 22).
Denying Ukrainians’ national distinctiveness from Russians, while emphasizing Russians’ distinctiveness from Ukrainians, are mutually contradictory theses; but they form two sides of a coherent whole in terms of the Kremlin’s policy. The first thesis seeks to portray Ukraine’s national statehood as unnecessary, unnatural and temporary, ultimately fated for amalgamation with the Russian state. The second thesis, conversely, seeks to claim a “right” of the Russian state to “protect” a potentially infinite gamut of citizens of Ukraine, with droits de regard for Russia in Ukraine, and potentially paving a way for border revisions in line with the Novorossiya and Russian World concepts. Putin himself has stopped using these specific terms publicly since August 2014, but his latest remarks in the phone-in session convey a message with similar content.
*To read Part Two, please click here.
Read the whole story
· · ·
Addressing Russia’s populace and, implicitly, Ukraine in his annual phone-in dialogue (see Part Onein EDM, April 23), Russian President Vladimir Putin torpedoed the Minsk Two agreement beyond repair: “I say outright and unequivocally: there are no Russian forces in Ukraine” (Kremlin.ru, April 17).
Quite apart from the United States’ and North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s (NATO) intelligence consistently proving Russia’s military deployments in Ukraine’s east (one new operative term is “combined Russian-separatist forces”), Putin’s brazen denial is tantamount to saying “no deal” under Minsk Two.
Indeed, it was Moscow who designed the February 12 agreement and the ensuing “Minsk process” basically as a tradeoff: Ukraine would legitimize the Donetsk-Luhansk secession in return for a promised withdrawal of “foreign forces” from that area. Putin now repudiates Russia’s part of that bargain by denying the facts of Russia’s military presence there. Some of the Russian forces carry Donetsk-Luhansk flags by now. In unison with other Russian officials, Putin maintains with finality that there is nothing for Russia to withdraw from Ukraine.
Yet, Putin continues demanding of Ukraine to accept the de facto secession of Donetsk-Luhansk, which Russia has framed as Ukraine’s part of the Minsk Two deal: “It is possible to devise some (kakie-to) elements to restore some sort (kakoye-to) of common political framework with Ukraine. But ultimately, the right to pronounce the decisive word—who would live with whom, and on what conditions—must be accorded to the people who live in those territories. This will largely depend on the flexibility and wisdom of Ukraine’s leadership.”
With that, the armed Donetsk-Luhansk “people’s republics” (DPR, LPR) would reserve a right of full secession; and Russia, the power militarily in control, would be given the decision on whether or when to enforce such a secession. The “common political framework” implies Donetsk-Luhansk being “in” Ukraine’s political institutions to the degree of wielding blocking powers, as well as receiving social subsidies; while separating from Ukraine at the same time in all other respects, as the Minsk Two agreement foreshadows.
During this interim period, Putin wants Ukraine to pay salaries, pensions and other social benefits to residents of the Russian-occupied territory. Having Kyiv finance the “people’s republics’ ” social budget is currently the main criterion by which Moscow acknowledges Ukraine’s “unity” (an emergent operative term, instead of “territorial integrity”).
Apparently, for the first time since the start of this war, Putin ventured to suggest a “little-homeland” Donbas identity: “I know that the residents of Donbas are great patriots of their small ‘motherland’ (rodina).” The subtext seems to acknowledge the defeat of Russia’s more ambitious Novorossiya (“New Russia—Tsarist-era term for lands comprising southeastern Ukraine) project at this stage. The open message to Donetsk-Luhansk, however, is “away from Ukraine” but “not yet in Russia.”
Asked whether he would consider bestowing Russia’s official recognition on the DPR-LPR, Putin replied in a follow-up interview that Russia could do so on its own timing: “I would rather not address this for now. We shall assess the matter according to how things develop in practical terms (v realnoy zhizni).” As to “whether there would be a full-scale war,” he answered, “I proceed from the assumption that this would be impossible” (Rossiya 1 TV, April 18). Again, it all seems to be a matter of practicality. The Kremlin implicitly reserves the option to resume limited-scale offensive operations of the kind that have already compelled Ukraine to sign Russian-framed armistice agreements. Moscow treats those agreements as binding on Ukraine only, not on Russia and DPR-LPR.
Beyond the specific terms and beyond even the obvious loopholes of the Minsk agreements, it is the ambiguities leaving room for interpretation that threaten Ukraine with more Russian warfare and potentially more Minsks. Putin had alluded to that possibility promptly after the signing of Minsk Two (see EDM, February 20); and “DPR president” Aleksandr Zakharchenko threatened Ukraine with more “Minsks” following Putin’s phone-in session (DNA, April 20).
Given Russia’s in-theater military superiority, the German-led appeasement of Russia in Europe, Washington’s exit from the negotiation format, and Moscow’s successful crippling of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe’s (OSCE) monitoring mission, Russia can enforce its interpretation of the military clauses of the Minsk Two agreement almost by default. German and French underwriting of Minsk Two in the accompanying “Normandy Group” declaration and subsequent Normandy meetings has merely resulted in sanctifying Russia’s unilateral interpretations and ensuing breaches. The post-armistice grab of Debaltseve by elite Russian military units, without consequences from the Berlin and Paris “guarantors,” is one example of this process.
The Minsk Two deal was, from the outset, an illusory trade-off. While Ukraine was supposed to legitimize the Donetsk-Luhansk secession, Russia’s quid-pro-quo promise to withdraw its forces from that territory was patently a false promise. The military clauses, as written, would allow Russian forces to stay on indefinitely, without technically violating the Minsk Two agreement (or any of the ancillary subsequent documents). That deception was meant to induce Kyiv to legitimize the existence (not yet officially the outright secession) of the Donetsk-Luhansk “people’s republics.” It was also meant to facilitate German-French endorsement of Minsk Two as an ostensible trade-off.
Putin has now terminated that supposed deal. His highly publicized remarks maintain irrevocably that Russia has no forces deployed in Ukraine, hence nothing to withdraw. And he reserves the right to either delay or precipitate the “DPR-LPR’s” full official secession, depending on circumstances, including (as he implies) military opportunities. Putin’s interpretation of Minsk Two is unchallengeable precisely because of its unilateral character in a situation of military superiority. It merely demonstrates the dangers to Ukraine inherent in the Minsk process. Rather than offering protection, Minsk Two opened a trap to Ukraine.
President Petro Poroshenko and the Verkhovna Rada, however, have found an exit from that trap with the legislation approved on March 17, which should (if consistently implemented) rule out any political legitimization of the DPR-LPR. Following Putin’s latest remarks, Ukraine has every justification to stop the creeping process of legitimizing the DPR-LPR; and German diplomacy no longer has any excuse to hope for OSCE-blessed “elections” to be held in the DPR-LPR.
Read the whole story
· · · ·
Adolf Hitler’s birthday, April 20, is traditionally a time when the Russian Far Right (along with extremist organizations all over the world) “celebrate” by attacking those who are ethnically and culturally different (see EDM, April 29, 2013). The most notable event this year was the dispersal by OMON (Russian riot police) of neo-Nazis in a Moscow nightclub who had gathered to commemorate the birth of their idol. According to reports, police arrested 17 people, including one of the leaders of the “ethno-political” movement Russkiye, Dmitriy Demushkin (Versia.ru, April 21). The police reportedly found pistols and clubs as well as portraits of Hitler among the arrested.
Similarly, in Vologda (about 250 miles northeast of Moscow), vandals marked Hitler’s birthday by drawing graffiti on the side of a mosque (Sova-center.ru, April 21). The climate of xenophobia and veneration of Hitler comes at a time when many are questioning the implications of Russia’s racist subculture for the 2018 Soccer (Football) World Cup. The event will bring many ethnically and racially distinct fans and players to the country for potentially a period of two months and so poses many risks. In contribution to this debate, Moscow’s SOVA center for information and analysis as well as the international FARE organization, which pledges to use the power of soccer to promote equality, released a combined report on the state of racism in the Russian game.
The report, which is available on SOVA's website (Sova-center.ru, March 4), provides analysis of the connections between Russian Far Right groups and soccer fans, statistics on the scale of racist activities, and seven recommendations for the Russian authorities to prevent racism from being a problem at the World Cup. The SOVA report found that during the 2012 and 2013 seasons, neo-Nazi symbols were displayed in the stands by soccer fans on no less than 72 separate occasions. SOVA also notes five attacks on anti-fascists by fans and 15 assaults on people of Caucasian origin. As remedial actions, the report calls for a national action plan “for dealing with discrimination in football in all of its guises,” especially at schools and universities. Similarly, the Russian Football Union should “develop a national program to tackle far-right organized groups among football fans” and encourage progressive fan movements. Violators should be dealt with harshly and more “non-Europeans” should be welcomed to the Russian game. Perhaps the two most interesting recommendations (“promoting diversity and tolerance in host cities” and “host city protocols”) are those that recognize the broader social origins of racist violence in the Russian Federation. Xenophobia is indeed a widespread social issue in Russia. In a 2014 poll conducted by the Levada Center, 14 percent of survey respondents called for restrictions on “all foreigners,” 38 percent called for special restrictions on the residency of people from the Caucasus, and 8 percent demanded special restrictions on Jews (Levada.ru, 2014, p. 144). Making the country safe for the World Cup will require changes in social behavior and not just change among the fan clubs.
Other significant incidents underscore soccer’s connections to the Far Right in Russia. First, the Moscow team “Torpedo” was recently fined and forced to play its games without TV broadcasting due to its fans displaying Celtic runes (a Nazi symbol) at a match against Tula’s “Arsenal” (Sova-center.ru, April 9). Second, the supporters of St. Petersburg’s team “Zenit” infamously published a “manifesto” that called on the club not to hire black or gay players in 2012 (Novostimira, December 12, 2012). Third, the murder of “Spartak Moscow” fan Egor Sviridov by a Caucasian migrant notably precipitated the pogrom on Manezhnaya Square in December 2010 (Grani.ru, December 11, 2010). Members of the “Spartak” supporters’ club claimed later that neo-Nazi elements tried to hijack a memorial march for Sviridov and use it to instigate an anti-Caucasian pogrom in the center of Moscow (Richard Arnold, “The Kondopoga Technology,” forthcoming). Fourth, Russian soccer fans have frequently “celebrated” Hitler’s birthday by carrying out such actions as unveiling a banner at a “Ryazan”-“Arsenal” match that read “Happy Birthday, Grandad,” on April 21, 2012 (Sova-center.ru, April 24 2012). Given the incitement of ethnic sentiments by the Russian authorities and persistent chauvinistic propaganda (see EDM, March 20, 2013; April 4, 2014; October 16, 2014), one might expect to increasingly see more such displays. Yet even without further violence, the affiliation of Russian soccer fan clubs with Far Right ideology poses additional problems for the authorities in 2018.
While FIFA (Federation Internationale de Football Association) has been more preoccupied of late with concerns over the 2022 World Cup in Qatar, there are still questions over the 2018 championship games. For example, the persistent fighting in Ukraine threatens the safety of fans all across Russia, but particularly in Rostov, where certain matches will be held at the Levberdon stadium (Fifa.com, accessed April 22). Indeed, following Russia’s annexation of Crimea immediately after the Winter Olympics in Sochi, there were calls for the entire World Cup to be taken from Russia as a punishment (Lcmedia.com, March 12 2014). More recently, a bipartisan group of United States Senators asked FIFA to consider moving the World Cup out of Russia because the pomp and circumstance of hosting the games will be used as a massive propaganda victory for Vladimir Putin’s regime (Tbo.com, April 1). Losing the Cup at this stage would be a sizeable blow to the legitimacy of the Russian government, particularly as construction work has already begun on a number of new stadiums. The persistent presence of Russia’s Nazi subculture and the findings of the March 2015 SOVA report may offer another and more immediate rationale for doing so.
Read the whole story
· · ·
West Wants Ukraine as ‘Anti-Russia’ by therearenosunglasses
West Wants Ukraine as ‘Anti-Russia’ That’s what it wants Ukraine to be and is helping it to become Nikolai Starikov (Vzglyad.ru) But there are Ukrainian citizens who did not sign up for that sort of Ukraine This article is a recent one from Nikolai Starikov. It was extremely well received among Russian readers. This article […]
Putin accuses US of direct contacts with North Caucasus militants by Shoaib-ur-Rehman Siddiqui MOSCOW: Russian President Vladimir Putin in a documentary broadcast Sunday accused the United States of directly contacting and providing logistical support to North Caucasus separatist militants. In the documentary “President,” which has already been broadcast in far eastern Russia on Rossiya 1 […]
- Get link
- Other Apps
Comments
Post a Comment