Russian Army Fails to Impress Americans - April, 2008

The Heritage Foundation, a very influential Neocon establishment in the US, attended a conference in Washington DC during which they discussed the status of the Russian military. They more-or-less came to the conclusion that the Russian Federation will not be a military threat for the West... Putting aside their conclusions and assessments, this conference is somewhat of a candid look inside the foreign policy making apparatus of the US government. Is the Heritage Foundation's conclusions regarding Russia a smoke screen, telling their constituents not to worry about a resurgent Russia, or is it a honest assessment of Russia's military capabilities; essentially an underestimation? If the assessments reached by the "experts" at the Heritage Foundations proves to be a underestimations of Russian political and military capabilities, then the recent aggressiveness and recklessness of the West in their dealings with Russia becomes much clearer...

Arevordi


***

Russian Army Fails to Impress Americans

April, 2008

American experts doubt the effectiveness of the Russian military reform Yesterday an influential brain trust Heritage, Washington D.C. hosted a conference on the reform of the Russian armed forces. It took the participants two hours to unanimously acknowledge that there was no revival of Russia’s military might to be observed, and there was hardly any hope for Russia to create a modern and effective army by 2020. A former high-ranking CSI member told Ъ that “Russians won’t be able to make their army modern and effective until their government becomes modern and effective.” Ъ’s special correspondent Dmitry Sidorov reports from Washington, D.C. The participants of the conference in the Heritage foundation helped the Director of National Intelligence, John Michael McConnell define how high Russia’s military threat is, taking account of the increase in investments in defense and the reform of the armed forces on the part of the Russian government. In February, 2005 Mr McConnell featured this issue in his annual report on evaluating threats to the USA. In the document presented to the Senate he argued that “Russia’s military officials have set to the restoration of the armed forces after a long and deep crisis, which started before the collapse of the Soviet Union.”

Nevertheless the U.S. Naval Military College Professor Mikhail Tsypkin, the National Defence Professor of the Strategic Research Institute Stephen Blanc, the National Defense University Professor Eugene Rumer and Russian military analyst Alexander Golts stated with minor reservations that the reform of the Russian military forces was bound to fail. The conference though began with an alarmist speech on Russia’s military threat by the Heritage Vice-President Kim Holmes, who served under Colin Powell as Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs till 2005. He declared that Russia was no partner of the United Sates and criticised the Bush administration for their “sentimental conclusions” regarding Russia. Mr Holmes went on, “Russia’s spending on its armed forces is more than we know, whereas democratic reforms have been rolled back in the country.”

The Heritage Vice-President underscored a boost in public spending on the construction of strategic bombers and allocating definite sums of money for military exercises. Kim Holmes didn’t mention any specific exercises, but according to the source of Ъ in the White House, “There were large-scale military manoeuvres in the North-Caucasian and Leningrad military districts in 2007, with the Federal Security Service taking part. During the manoeuvres invading Estonia and Georgia was tested.” In spite of the fact that the experts rendered the reform of Russia’s armed forces a myth, rather than reality, practically everybody agreed with the conclusion that the current state of the Russian army is far better than it was in the 1990s. “Compared with the situation 10–15 years ago, one can state that it has changed for the better,” said Eugene Rumer, stressing at the same time that the money invested in the reform of the armed forces was used to pay salaries to the military mainly, rather than to purchase modern arms and weaponry. Mr Rumer noted that “Considerable funds are allocated for particular departments, for example the Russian Airborne Troops (VDV) and the Military Space Forces (VKS), whereas the financing of the Navy, Army and Air Forces remains at the same level.”

Stephen Blanc was the one to be most sceptical of Russia’s military might, proclaiming that the Russian armed forces were in a crisis. “It has lasted for 70 years at least,” Mr Blanc said. Professor drew attention to the fact that Russia’s military-industrial complex was unable to produce high-technology equipment and recalled the test of GLONASS (Global Navigation Satellite System), the “Bulava” (mace) missile and some of the air defense systems. Concerning the export of Russian weaponry, Stephen Blanc pointed to the fact that “Russia is competitive in those regions where the West has no trade links.” He reminded of Algeria’s return of the MiG-29 fighters to Russia and the problem with the price and delivery date of the Admiral Gorshkov aircraft-carrier to India. “Russia may lose a part of the Indian arms market, which accounts for 25% of the overall Russian military export.”

Russia’s military doctrine was also excoriated by the experts. “It feels like Russia is surrounded by enemies only. They might believe millions of people from Roumania and Bulgaria to approach Russia’ borders,” Stephen Blanc said. He means that “Russia’s opposing the integration of the CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States) into the EU is the evidence of the Russian neo-imperial policy.” “Russia wishes it were gendarme of the CIS, just like in the times of Nicholas I,” Mr Blanc added. Fritz Ermart, a former high-ranking CSI member, also present at the conference, summed it up for Ъ. He said, “In the long run, the world will need a Russia with modern armed forces, because its friendly relations with China and the weakness of Southern Asia can vanish.” He then added, “Russians won’t be able to create modern and effective armed forces until their government becomes modern and effective.”

Source: http://www.kommersant.com/p878513/Co...ld_in_America/

No comments:

Post a Comment

Dear reader,

New blog commentaries will henceforth be posted on an irregular basis. The comment board however will continue to be moderated on a regular basis. You are therefore welcome to post your comments and ideas.

I have come to see the Russian nation as the last front on earth against the scourges of Westernization, Americanization, Globalism, Zionism, Islamic extremism and pan-Turkism. I have also come to see Russia as the last hope humanity has for the preservation of classical western/European civilization, ethnic cultures, Apostolic Christianity and the concept of traditional nation-state. Needless to say, an alliance with Russia is Armenia's only hope for survival in a dangerous place like the south Caucasus. These sobering realizations compelled me to create this blog in 2010. This blog quickly became one of the very few voices in the vastness of Cyberia that dared to preach about the dangers of Globalism and the Anglo-American-Jewish alliance, and the only voice emphasizing the crucial importance of Armenia's close ties to the Russian nation. Today, no man and no political party is capable of driving a wedge between Armenia and Russia. Anglo-American-Jewish and Turkish agenda in Armenia will not succeed. I feel satisfied knowing that at least on a subatomic level I have had a hand in this outcome.

To limit clutter in the comments section, I kindly ask all participants of this blog to please keep comments coherent and strictly relevant to the featured topic of discussion. Moreover, please realize that when there are several "anonymous" visitors posting comments simultaneously, it becomes very confusing (not to mention annoying) trying to figure out who is who and who said what. Therefore, if you are here to engage in conversation, make an observation, express an idea or simply insult me, I ask you to at least use a moniker to identify yourself. Moreover, please appreciate the fact that I have put an enormous amount of information into this blog. In my opinion, most of my blog commentaries and articles, some going back ten-plus years, are in varying degrees relevant to this day and will remain so for a long time to come. Commentaries and articles found in this blog can therefore be revisited by longtime readers and new comers alike. I therefore ask the reader to treat this blog as a historical record and a depository of important information relating to Eurasian geopolitics, Russian-Armenian relations and humanity's historic fight against the evils of Globalism and Westernization.

Thank you as always for reading.