The Glade 4.0

"Turn the lights down, the party just got wilder."
It is currently Mon Nov 25, 2024 8:02 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 9:23 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Changing Russian military doctrine

Quote:
08:49 GMT, October 9, 2009 NOVOSIBIRSK | Russia's new military doctrine will contain some changes to the situations that could trigger the use of nuclear weapons or preventive strikes against potential foes, the secretary of Russia's Security Council said on Thursday according to RIA Novosti.

Russia will soon adopt a new military doctrine that aims to transform the Armed Forces into a more effective and mobile military force. Their structures will be "optimized" through the use of combined arms units performing similar tasks.

"In respect to the possibility of preventive or nuclear strikes we will formulate some provisions that will be somewhat different from those contained in the current doctrine," Nikolai Patrushev said.

The draft doctrine, called "The new face of the Russian Armed Forces until 2030," is still being developed by the General Staff and will be given, according to Patrushev, to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev for consideration by the end of 2009.

The current military doctrine was adopted in 2000. It outlines the role of the Russian military in ensuring the defense of the country and, if necessary, preparing for and waging war, although it stresses that the Russian military doctrine is strictly defensive.

The doctrine lists factors that the Russian Federation perceives as potential threats, both internal and external and declares support for a multipolar world, in preference to a unipolar world dominated by a single superpower that is quick to resort to military force.

The current document also emphasizes Russia's commitment to military reform, with continued use of conscription, but a gradual shift towards a professional army.

But the Security Council believes that since 2000, drastic changes have occurred in the geopolitical and military situation in the world and in the nature of threats against national security, which makes it necessary to revise the specific tasks facing the Russian Armed Forces and related security agencies.

"We would like to make this new military doctrine transparent so that people in the country and abroad will know what we have developed and how we want to work. We will set goals and lay out how to achieve them," Patrushev said.

President Dmitry Medvedev announced last year that Russia would make the modernization of its nuclear deterrent and Armed Forces a priority in the decade up to 2020.


Hilarious that Russia accuses us of being "quick to use military force" despite their own actions in recent years.

However, despite rosy predictions of more nuclear cuts, the fact that Russia is envisioning modernizing its nuclear deterrent pretty much puts the kibosh on a "world without nuclear weapons" if anyone actually thought that was going to happen. It would be nice to know more about what doctrinal changes they're pursuing but it doesn't say.

[url=http://www.defpro.com/news/details/8400/Of course their analysts are telling them not to go below 1,500[/url]

Quote:
12:53 GMT, July 1, 2009 MOSCOW | Russia must not cut the number of its nuclear warheads to a few hundred under a new strategic arms deal with the U.S., as it needs to maintain superiority over developing countries' nuclear arsenals, a Russian analyst said according to RIA Novosti.

Sergei Karaganov, chairman of the Council for Russia's Foreign and Defense Policy, said on Wednesday that a "huge gap" between the size of the nuclear potentials of Russia and these countries, including North Korea and potentially Iran, must be maintained because nuclear weapons continue to be "the backbone of Russia's political, and to some extent economic, influence."

Russia and the U.S. have been involved in comprehensive talks over a new nuclear arms reduction deal to replace the START 1 treaty, which expires in December.

The START 1 treaty obliges Russia and the United States to reduce nuclear warheads to 6,000 and their delivery vehicles to 1,600 each. In 2002, a follow-up agreement on strategic offensive arms reduction was concluded in Moscow. The agreement, known as the Moscow Treaty, envisioned cuts to 1,700-2,200 warheads by December 2012.

Russia, which proposed a new arms reduction agreement in 2005, expects Washington to agree on a deal that would restrict not only the numbers of nuclear warheads, but also place limits on all existing kinds of delivery vehicles.

"We could go as low as 1,600, or even 1,500 warheads. This is acceptable, especially if we increase their effectiveness and reduce the response time," Karaganov told a RIA Novosti news conference.

"We are also ready to reduce the number of delivery vehicles by several times," he added.

According to a report published by the U.S. State Department in April, as of January 1 Russia had 3,909 nuclear warheads and 814 delivery vehicles, including ground-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM), submarine launched ballistic missiles (SLBM) and strategic bombers.

The same report said the United States had 5,576 warheads and 1,198 delivery vehicles.


Note that Russian warheads are typicall of a higher yield, so the numbers of weapons and delivery systems isn't the whole story.

In any case, this is precisely why the attitude of both the President and many Americans is naive regarding nuclear arms. The U.S. sits on a continent with countries that have neither the inclination or ability to attack us on our borders. This isn't necessarily true with Russia, which, depsite its own displays of belligerance certainly has much more pressing concerns as to its territorial defense. Its certainly valid and understandable for Russians to want to maintain nuclear superiority over both developing countries and China. However, we shouldn't kid ourselves that we can afford to allow our deterrent to decay compared to theirs. Ultimately, if they are the sole nuclear superpower (and make no mistake, they are never going to give up nuclear weapons after what they suffered in 2 world wars) they will use that as leverage to the benefit of their own country.

Despite a verbal agreement to cut to around 1,600 strategic warheads apiece, there is still not a treaty in place to replace START, which expires this year. Frenkly, I think we're in a headlong rush to cut weapons for the sake of cutting weapons, while we're talking to an opponent who has a floor they won't go below and wants to cut for the sake of making his aresenal newer, better, and more affordable.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:06 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
In other news... (a blog, so take with a grain of salt)

Quote:
The Russian naval program goes ahead. After declared intention to buy in one of the European countries (France, Nederland or Spain) an amphibious assault ship, also known as a helicopter carrier, a Russian military top said that two additional now conserved nuclear-propelled cruiser Kirov's class can be resurrected and enter the Navy service. The deputy MoD Vladimir Popovkin said to 'Moscow Echo' radio-station yesterday that the program for this is already developed. The atomic cruisers 'Admiral Nakhimov' and 'Admiral Lazarev' will come back to service on Pacific and Northern fleets. For the force projection in the remote pelagic areas Russia needs at least two such cruisers on the North and one – on Pacific he said. The current activation of Russian military policy in Latin America has to be supported by additional transportation and strike capacity. Russia needs it urgently otherwise its old and new friends there never can be calm about US invasion.

Since most of Russian shipyards are occupied with domestic and foreign orders, seem that the Russia's tops are ready to use any opportunity for accelerating their Navy program including reviving old ships and new orders abroad. Up to 3 additional helicopter carriers can be built in Russia itself in addition to one bought off-the-shelf. If 'Nakhimov' and 'Lazarev' come back to service they would be modernized with much more advanced seekers, longer range missiles and networking capabilities then they had in Soviet era.


Planning on buying a new amphibious assault ship.. for a military strategy that they claim is "defensive" in the articles above.

As for the underlined portion, well... this is a blog. I doubt very much that Russia has any military policy of active defense of "friends" in Latin America against some hypothetical U.S. invasion since A) its right in our back yard but thousands of miles away from them, and B) Latin America isn't worth enough to them to risk direct military confrontation with the U.S., any more than we were going to go to war for Georgia.

I don't see any major problem with Russia reviving its naval power, but it is a clear indication that they intend to regain superpower status. Nuclear powered battle cruisers are not the stuff of a country no longer interested in military strength.. especially not when most of their pressing threats are land-based.

Also note that Admiral Nakhimov is now being reactivated according to the article, but was reactivated in 2005 according to Wikipedia, which also indicates it will rejoin the fleet in 2010. Apparently its taken them a while to get it back in working condition.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 52 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group