In all Russian Presidential Elections since the fall of the Soviet Union, the Communist Party has come second. What if in the next elections (2012) or before due to world financial turmoil and nostalgia the Communist Party took power. Would we see the rebirth of the Soviet Union? How long would it take for Russia to rebuild its military strength? We Already saw last year that Russia defeated georgia using second rate units, with little US response. Surely Russia´s first rate units could reconquer the Ukraine, Belorussia, kazakhstan given proper funding and motivation. Is there much the USA can do in the face of close to 7,000 russian nuclear warheads? Would the United States risk nuclear annihilation for the Ukraine, Kazakhstan ? Could Russia ever be a Superpower again?
Resurgence of the Soviet Union?
- Thread starter Jecito
- Start date
- Status
In a brief answer: No. Soviet Union had close to 300 million population, an empire consisting of Eastern Europe and smaller client states around the world backed by ideological thought which had some appeal around the world until the fall of communism. Despite inefficience it had a number of fields where Soviet science and technology was either superior or practically equal to anything fielded in the world.
Russia of today has some 142 million population and not very wide fields of scientific and technological excellence. This is displayed by such statistics as Shanghait World Top 500 universities ranking where Russia has 2 universities on Top 500 when even tiny Western countries have several more (Finland: 5, Sweden: 10 etc.). Russian armaments complex has not produced completely new systems since the fall of communism but rather just updated old ones. In the future this may change, but I wouldn't bet on it until PAK-FA is in operational service and T-95 rumbles around.
Russia is lucky if it can become a medium power like Japan, France, UK or Germany. Unfortunately, the post-communist adminstration has not been able to diversify economy and we may see internal mayhem more severe than ca. 1989-1994 very soon.
Impossible. Despite being second in the elections, the difference is way too big. United Russia alone has more than 50% seats, which is about 300 something. And let's not forget, the Russian people are sick of Communism.
Let's also not forget the former Soviet Republics which have turned NATO. And, no even with first rate units, Russia is gonna have problems in terms of taking Ukraine and Belorussia over. Ukrainian Military is comparable to that of Russia, except for the numbers. Plus, they are NATO.
And, it's not 7000 nuclear warheads, it's 5000 nuclear warheads out of 8000 WMDs. WMDs include biological and other chemical weapons. Russia has the most nukes, but I don't think anyone within the CPSU or the current Russian Parliament would actually want to use them, except for retaliation.
that is very funny =) Russian system of education differs from western - western University makes fully complete specialist in a narrow area, while Russian university makes a widely educated with basic and advanced knowledge and only during practics during last two years student gets concrete knowledge. I'm not talking about who is right or wrong, I only show the difference in ideology, So this comparing is not enough truthful.
Communist won't return to power during next 10 years - this is my IMHO.
Yea I was thingking that. Russian education system cannot be compared to Western and they have some amazing stats when you see their engineering,scientist grads coming from their universities. If i'm not mistaken the Soviet Union produced the most numbers of engineers overtaking the Japanese in second spot, in 1 publication that I read a long time ago.
And regarding power, Russia certainly is a powerfull country. Germany,UK,Japan may have shiny new stuff, but Russia still has the capability to project large amount of force that cant be matched by those countries. If they managed to upgrade/replace their armament with latest products, they would be even more capable.
As far as Communist coming to power, not anytime soon. The current gov has an iron grip on power, Parliment, just like the Communists of Soviet Union had when they were in power. Its only when the communists gov became weak and started tolerating rebellion within its party, did a traitor or a sellout like Yeltsin was able to stage a coup and steal the power from the gov. until this current Russian gov replicate the weakness in the communist gov of Garbachev, it will stay in power for a long long time. Even Gorbachev said, that the current party in power is just like the worst communist party in holding onto power during the entire Soviet history.
Would you like to qualify that statement with some evidence? I doubt Russia could project force halfway around the world, like the UK did in the Falklands or the US did in Iraq. Russia might still have a large army but I suspect it is of little use unless used to defend Russia OR in the near abroad (ala South Ossetian War last year).
Beatmaster
New Member
I believe nevidimka is trying to say that Russia is still a formidable foe you certainly do not wanna have them knocking at your door.
Russia's army may not be that big as it use to be and it may be not that hightech as they would like but it will certainly get the job done.
There are not many country's in the world that have the ability to turn into a war machine like Russia could be if it really have to.
There Tanks/Ships and other moving systems may not be that hightech as the western variants but they still have enough older gear that could be used to fightoff any reall foe.
Russia has more than 5000+ battle ready MBT, more than 1000+ support and offensive vehicles/weapons for infantry/tanks, tactical nukes for battle space, hundreds of long range tactical bombrs, fleet of Blackjack/bear/backfire bombers from its strategic air force that can nuke anywhere in the world, airforce that can transport a large number of troops, tanks, ground support anywhere in the world, a navy that has a carrier/battlecruiser + others that can project force beyond its shores, and nuclear armed submarine, not mentioning its 1000+ nuke warheads from ICBM's ready for launch.
And what I said was that Russia can project large amount of force, and that certainly applies.
And what I said was that Russia can project large amount of force, and that certainly applies.
Yes, but this is my point! On paper, it can, but could it do it in reality? Has it done it beyond the odd token deployment of a task group or the odd Bear carrying out longe range training flights.
Can its airforce deploy troops around the world in force?
Are its ICBMs ready for launch (in large numbers)?
Is its navy capable of projecting power beyond its EEZ? As in more than a task group sailing through friendly(ish) waters with the odd tug in case they breakdown.
Is the money there to maintain Russias military at a high enough alert to do this?
Could Russia carry out a Falklands style operation (i'd say no, and that is just by looking at the state of their navy!)?
Can Russia move its 5000 MBTs to the other side of the world to project its power? (Or any of its MBTs?)
You didn't answer my question for evidence, you just stated facts which I already knew. 'Power Projection' is more than owning the equipment, its the ability to move it, its operators and to then operate it beyond your borders in a sustained fashion. I cannot see Russias military, in its current state, deploying a large number or men and machines to places like Africa or South America and then sustaining that deployment for any length of time.
Don't get me wrong here, i'm not trying to belittle the Russian Armed Forces or its capabilities, but you need to qualify your statements, which to someone like me, are a bit generalistic.
Last edited:
marcellogo
New Member
They can have a lot of problems about it but...
...until they will have only some of these beasts working they can surely doing a LOT about it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilyushin_Il-76
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-124
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-225
And you have also to consider that russian have another definitive advantage above USA regarding deployement: they have BORDERS in common with almost half of word's potential troublemakers.
...until they will have only some of these beasts working they can surely doing a LOT about it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilyushin_Il-76
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-124
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-225
And you have also to consider that russian have another definitive advantage above USA regarding deployement: they have BORDERS in common with almost half of word's potential troublemakers.
This an excellent point of my statement above which I also mentioned. I remember reading an article on strategic arms lift which makes a superpower. Until this day, Only US and Former Soviet Union/Russia has large strategic airlift capability planes. This planes allows these 2 countries to airlift massive troops and armaments halfway across the globe very rapidly to build up forces in any conflict. Europe still struggles with this strategic airlift and it is also why China is actively trying to build its strategic airlift ability, because its domestic market cant produce transport planes of that caliber, they decided to team up with the Ukrainians. it is also why Europe is set on an ambitious project of building its medium lift capability in A 400 transport.
So yes, Russia is capable of projecting large amount of force across the globe.
Russia has proven to have the capability to deploy small-medium sized units around the world through peacekeeping missions (Russian engineers in Lebanon, Russian helo group in Sudan). Russia has proven the ability to deploy at least small naval task forces around the world, several at a time. Russia has also proven to have a fairly large number of operational strategic bombers including the Tu-95 and Tu-160. Could Russia fight an Iraq war style conflict away from it's borders? Not likely. Could Russia project force? Definetly.
What's force? Where are we trying to deploy? Do we have friendly bases/landing strips, or are we paradropping?
I suspect so. The RSVN have a disproportionately large amount of funding.
Most likely. Though it would not be able to project power in more then one trouble spot at a time.
That depends on how large of a response window you're looking at.
No. But Russia could bomb the Falklands into oblivion.
5000? Probably not. The entire Russian Army only has ~5000 MBTs (at least by my estimates).
marcellogo
New Member
Agreed...
On my first post, i've given a quick and maybe ironic response to the question posed by ASFC.
Now let's develop it:
- Today Russia is not a superpower like former Soviet Union, meaning has no more interest to directly get involved in every part of the world (Angola, Mozambique, Nicaragua), but can still act on a global scale, throught alliances and mutual defence pact
- It retain an huge airlift capacity, so large that she, together with Ukraina, use to rent a part to it to the Nato itself, via commercial air companies
- This capacity is magnified by some quite unique features:
-one is geostrategical, given its titanic extension Russia can haul military materials over half of the norhtern hemisfere without leaving her own state borders and so also the flight path from her own airfields to the development areas is usually much more shorter than the one from Usa or western europe, making her usually able to pack hers cargo to the maximum load alloved .
-Another one, and probably the most important one is that the others nations (also the Usa) only got airlift, meaning that they use (plan)to transfer their troops via cargo aircrafts from a base to another, maybe a forward, advanced,rugged airstrp on the Afgan mountains but nevertheless from friendly base to another.
Russia got Desant, meaning she can instead (she got the troops, the equipments, the training, the military doctrine) airdrop a full mechanized intervention force up to divisional level directly over the battlefield.
On my first post, i've given a quick and maybe ironic response to the question posed by ASFC.
Now let's develop it:
- Today Russia is not a superpower like former Soviet Union, meaning has no more interest to directly get involved in every part of the world (Angola, Mozambique, Nicaragua), but can still act on a global scale, throught alliances and mutual defence pact
- It retain an huge airlift capacity, so large that she, together with Ukraina, use to rent a part to it to the Nato itself, via commercial air companies
- This capacity is magnified by some quite unique features:
-one is geostrategical, given its titanic extension Russia can haul military materials over half of the norhtern hemisfere without leaving her own state borders and so also the flight path from her own airfields to the development areas is usually much more shorter than the one from Usa or western europe, making her usually able to pack hers cargo to the maximum load alloved .
-Another one, and probably the most important one is that the others nations (also the Usa) only got airlift, meaning that they use (plan)to transfer their troops via cargo aircrafts from a base to another, maybe a forward, advanced,rugged airstrp on the Afgan mountains but nevertheless from friendly base to another.
Russia got Desant, meaning she can instead (she got the troops, the equipments, the training, the military doctrine) airdrop a full mechanized intervention force up to divisional level directly over the battlefield.
Agreed as well!
Pointless exercise in strength, but a nice fireworks display would ensue!
Thank you. Notice my first post in this thread questioned whether Russia could project, and I quote "large amount of force". I haven't questioned directly their ability to project any force, but in asking these questions I wanted to know how much force it could project, rather than nevidimkas generalistic 'large amount of force' claim which he has repeated several times and has nothing to compare it to (i.e, a large amount compared to who?).
Pointless exercise in strength, but a nice fireworks display would ensue!Why not?? A number of Il-76 could drop VDV division anywhere in a radius of 2000 km from its base. So if we have an agreement to use some base "near" our - so why not??
And guys country in the world except US, China and India needs more then 1000 MBT or even 500 - I am counting only tanks, without IFV and other? How much tanks US have in Iraq?
And guys country in the world except US, China and India needs more then 1000 MBT or even 500 - I am counting only tanks, without IFV and other? How much tanks US have in Iraq?
The said ranking (Shanghai Jiang Tou) doesn't compare educational systems in respect of educational concepts but mainly in amounts of scientific publications in fields of natural science, medicine etc. While Russian students are smart and there's a number of gifted people in Russia the university system itself is in shambles due to under-resourcing and endemic corruption at all levels. This has resulted to a downfall in scientific research which, after all, forms the basic of sustained economic growth nowadays.
Larger amounts than small powers (Netherlands etc.) but the capacity is not near such countries as France, UK or Germany (if the latter was willing to do so). Russia has a large number of large transport planes but the problem is with them, as with much other Russian military resources, that they were produced during Soviet Union. After the Soviet collapse the Russian industry has been unable to produce more as displayed by problems with Chinese orders.
Even with 40 year lifetime (comparable to similar era C-141) the force is bound to drop very rapidly as production of Il-76 started already in 1971, 38 years ago, and virtually ceased in 1991, 18 years ago. The numbers are bound to drop.
One also has to consider the huge transport capacity available to other medium powers via mobilization of civilian resources. Consider German corporations such as Lufthansa cargo and DHL which boast much more cargo capacity than most air forces. Granted that Russian civil aviation uses a lot of ex-RusAF planes.
On a related note, I think Il-76 definitely has to be on a list of any "Most important military aircraft in the world" in transportation category second only to ground-breaking C-47. C-130, while important aircraft, comes nowhere close in importance.
The Russian military is in a great deal of flux at the moment, on paper they have large numbers of combat material, but in reality a large proportion of this is either obsolete or unserviceable. The current military needs to change from a large monolithic Soviet doctrine driven force to a more mobile technically advanced expeditionary warfare force making use of the latest surveillance and network centric assets. This will take time, a recent study by the United Services Institute in London who undertook a detailed study of current Russian operational / deployable assets (Georgian Campaign studied in detail) came to a very negative conclusion (weapons, communications, tactics - very antiquated). They went on to conclude that Russia is a 'Paper Tiger' (conventional forces) when compared to its heyday.
Recent reports in the press (Telegraph) highlighted the military's growing anger with Putin et al over the fact they are not receiving adequate funds to improve the daily lot of the average soldier / NCO / officer and also that the modernization process to turn the military into a true 21st Century net-centric force is way off track.
Like everyone else Russia is in deep financial shit with the price of oil/gas being so low.
Recent reports in the press (Telegraph) highlighted the military's growing anger with Putin et al over the fact they are not receiving adequate funds to improve the daily lot of the average soldier / NCO / officer and also that the modernization process to turn the military into a true 21st Century net-centric force is way off track.
Like everyone else Russia is in deep financial shit with the price of oil/gas being so low.
I'm here in Russia and I see all this corruption and so on. And even with all this Russian education is not as bad as you. If someone want to know something or to become a specialist - there almost anything for him =)) Even if we have lack of materials for study in universities then we always have plants and factories,
RUSSIAN UNIVERSITY MAKES A WIDELY EDUCATED WITH BASIC/ADVANCED SKILLS THEORETIC-MAN WHICH BECOME PRACTIC-MAN ON PLANTS AND FACTORIES. Please read attentively what I write.
And about economics - our economics works and everybody in the world see it, who want to see.
About old planes and other things - and what have US?? Modernized C-130 HErcules which were designed when?? They are older then Il-76. There is a program of modernizing all RU Airlift fleet. and remember that almost 10 years RU aircraft were standing on land without fuel, airframe lifetime is not near end, there is need in repair and modernizing - that's all.
About C-130 I mean exactly DESIGN time.
That's the goal of virtually any university training program anywhere in the world; gaining theoretical skills for coping practical problems in working life. But this does not change the fact that Russian universities are currently in very bad shape despite years of economic growth. This does not mean lack of, say, video projectors in classrooms etc gizmos and shit. After all, power corrupts but Power Point corrupts absolutely.
There are problems with salaries of university staff understandably resulting in widescale practice of "buying" way in and out of the university. The situation also has the result that many people are deterred from an academic career. This is not written to insult a large number, most probably a large majority, of Russian scientific educators and researchers who do an admirable job.
All this results in a system of in-built problems which is displayed by very poor standing in world scientific arena. See this for example:
http://sciencewatch.com/dr/sci/08/feb24-08_1/
Russian share of scientific publications is lower than it's share of world GDP (PPP), and more worryingly, the impact factor is ca. 50% lower.
No it doesn't. Granted, all the world has economic problems now but problems facing Russia are much more severe than in most countries.
Yes, basic design of Hercules is very old but they're still constantly produced which has a result that there won't be a block obsolescense problem as with Il-76's. Il-76's, on the other hand, have not been produced in some 12 years and there's widescale doubts supported by Chinese experiences that cost of restarting production would be very high.
As far as I know, RuAF airlift fleet was fairly busy during 1990's too with various deployments, Chechen conflict etc.
Last edited:
- Status