Russian Federation New Military Doctrine

[Feanor]

On Feb. 5th the Russian president, Medvedev, approved a new military doctrine.

The text is available in Russian here: Президент РоÑÑии

An english link would be appreciated.

I haven't read the whole thing so far, but from the commentary surrounding it, it seems relatively moderate. It does note proliferation of BMD systems, and NATO expansion as security threats. However otherwise it seems almost neutral. Other noteworthy points is that it considers territorial disputes and large-scale training exercises by other countries near Russian borders to be points of tension.

 

[Spetsznaz]

On Feb. 5th the Russian president, Medvedev, approved a new military doctrine.

The text is available in Russian here: Президент Ð*оÑÑии

An english link would be appreciated.

I haven't read the whole thing so far, but from the commentary surrounding it, it seems relatively moderate. It does note proliferation of BMD systems, and NATO expansion as security threats. However otherwise it seems almost neutral. Other noteworthy points is that it considers territorial disputes and large-scale training exercises by other countries near Russian borders to be points of tension.

Feanor my English is better than my Russian, is there a place were I could read that in English

PLEASE PROVIDE A LINK

 

[Feanor]

Unfortunately I don't have one. I'll look for you though.

 

[Spetsznaz]

Thank you, its just that if I use a online translator the whole thing looks like crap

 

[nevidimka]

I think this new doctrine is more of a warning to the east european countries who are rushing head blind into NATO's arms and facilitating US missile/arms hosting in their countries. It speaks of ruins to their own country if any of those that they host threaten the sleeping bear.

I"m sure Russia is gonna increase its tactical nukes to target these east european countries. From being free of nuclear target, they have just invited themselves to become a target for nukes.

 

[Spetsznaz]

I think this new doctrine is more of a warning to the east european countries who are rushing head blind into NATO's arms and facilitating US missile/arms hosting in their countries. It speaks of ruins to their own country if any of those that they host threaten the sleeping bear.

I"m sure Russia is gonna increase its tactical nukes to target these east european countries. From being free of nuclear target, they have just invited themselves to become a target for nukes.

You could be right, but Yanakovych is president of Ukraine so Ukraine and NATO coming together is not happening any time soon. But how much of eastern Europe are we talking about?

 

[Feanor]

He's referencing first Czech and Polish, now Bulgarian and Romanian, willingness to host US BMD systems.

 

[nevidimka]

Exactly, from 1 form to another, it hardly changed. While POland and Czech had invited their fate earlier on, it seems quite surprising that Romania and Bulgaria would invite those same fate on to themselves. While it was the Iskander earlier on, Russi now knows, a simple missile like that is not doing its trick, and hence upgraded it to full Nuke catastrophe, n yet its surprising how these 2 other countries would still agree to it. Those missiles are not gonna save them from a nuke catastrophe n yet they continue to poke the sleeping bear.

And suddenly now we are hearing that russia is was "actually" facing some technical glitch in completing and sending the S300 missiles to IRan and then its delivery would go on. Its just a game between the 2 sides. If Us goes ahead with the missiles, in Romani/Bulgaria.. the S300's will go to Iran and Romania/Bulgaria would have achieved the fete of inviting their country as a nuke target.

 

[Feanor]

Except that nukes aren't really going to fly. It's not about the actual nuclear threat. It's about the perception, the bilateral relations, etc.

 

[Feanor]

The change in doctrine is followed by some major steps. The MVD troops are likely to be withdrawn from the MVD, and making them the equivalent of the National Guard, in which case they could end up under the MoD.

Внутренние войÑка могут быть выведены из МВД - Ñенатор Тулаев | Оборона и безопаÑноÑÑ‚ÑŒ | Лента новоÑтей "РИРÐовоÑти"

This is a major change both in the function, and structure of the internal troops. I'm not sure what consequence this will have for interoperability between internal troops, and the Army. But It's likely to lead to a change in their actual employment.

 

[ModestasBE]

I'm not pro in Russian language, but the Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation is enough clear. It's seems to be boring to read all 11 pages of this document. Some points of Doctrine are interesting to put on a round table. Notable articles are 7 (the 3rd part), 8 (points a and c – it's tricky to numerate points by myself from Cyrillic to Latin I don't translate Cyrillic letters, instead - numerate newly), 10 (point d), 20 and 26. All other articles and points about an implementation of the main goal, as mentioned in article 1, is projecting a system for preparation of military defence and protecting of the Russian Federation.
Look, how Russian military see a present cohesion/formation of power outside their border. The article 7, part 3: "Thus, despite the probability of large-scale war, then are used conventional and nuclear weapons, against Russia is diminished, a number of trends of military danger against Russia are intensified".
What are enemies for Russian Federation, the article 8 (Title "The main external military danger"). On the first stage is placed NATO. There is no analysis why NATO countries are enemies just only statement: (point a) "desire: to give the potential power for NATO' global function, implemented by violation of international law; to bring the military infrastructure of the countries – members of NATO, alongside the borders of Russia, including through the expansion of NATO." It is clear, for Russian: enlargement of NATO is threat; restructuring of NATO is threat; any kind of political activity of NATO is threat. (point c) "deployment (increasing of capacity) of military contingents of foreign states (groups of states) on the territories of neighbouring with Russia and its allies of the States, as well as in nautical territories". So Russia could feel safely in case of neighbour states are military neutral. In other way, such state with any kind of army is threat. In this situation valid clear rule "you are with us or, if not, against us". Only two attitudes – enemies and friends, no third party.
The most interesting issue is the article 10 (title "The main military threats") (point d): "demonstration of military force during military trainings on the territories alongside Russia or its allies on the provocative purposes". Russia would like to see NATO troops incapable and with rusty ammunition.
Like a cold shower is the statement of the article 20: "Russia considers being legitimate use the military forces and other troops to repulse aggression against it and (or) its allies, and maintaining (recovery) peace according decisions of the UN Security Council, and other bodies for collective security, also to protect its citizens outside of the Russian Federation, in accordance with generally recognized principles and norms of international law and international treaties of Russia". Be aware, Russia could act as it was in 1930-1940, then soviet troops invade Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland. The Russian military see an ability to act outside in purpose to protect their citizens outside its borders (the article 26).

 

[ModestasBE]

I'm not pro in Russian language, but the Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation is enough clear. It's seems to be boring to read all 11 pages of this document. Some points of Doctrine are interesting to put on a round table. Notable articles are 7 (the 3rd part), 8 (points a and c – it's tricky to numerate points by myself from Cyrillic to Latin I don't translate Cyrillic letters, instead - numerate newly), 10 (point d), 20 and 26. All other articles and points about an implementation of the main goal, as mentioned in article 1, is projecting a system for preparation of military defence and protecting of the Russian Federation.
Look, how Russian military see a present cohesion/formation of power outside their border. The article 7, part 3: "Thus, despite the probability of large-scale war, then are used conventional and nuclear weapons, against Russia is diminished, a number of trends of military danger against Russia are intensified".
What are enemies for Russian Federation, the article 8 (Title "The main external military danger"). On the first stage is placed NATO. There is no analysis why NATO countries are enemies just only statement: (point a) "desire: to give the potential power for NATO' global function, implemented by violation of international law; to bring the military infrastructure of the countries – members of NATO, alongside the borders of Russia, including through the expansion of NATO." It is clear, for Russian: enlargement of NATO is threat; restructuring of NATO is threat; any kind of political activity of NATO is threat. (point c) "deployment (increasing of capacity) of military contingents of foreign states (groups of states) on the territories of neighbouring with Russia and its allies of the States, as well as in nautical territories". So Russia could feel safely in case of neighbour states are military neutral. In other way, such state with any kind of army is threat. In this situation valid clear rule "you are with us or, if not, against us". Only two attitudes – enemies and friends, no third party.
The most interesting issue is the article 10 (title "The main military threats") (point d): "demonstration of military force during military trainings on the territories alongside Russia or its allies on the provocative purposes". Russia would like to see NATO troops incapable and with rusty ammunition.
Like a cold shower is the statement of the article 20: "Russia considers being legitimate use the military forces and other troops to repulse aggression against it and (or) its allies, and maintaining (recovery) peace according decisions of the UN Security Council, and other bodies for collective security, also to protect its citizens outside of the Russian Federation, in accordance with generally recognized principles and norms of international law and international treaties of Russia". Be aware, Russia could act as it was in 1930-1940, then soviet troops invade Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland. The Russian military see an ability to act outside in purpose to protect their citizens outside its borders (the article 26).

 

[Feanor]

What are enemies for Russian Federation, the article 8 (Title "The main external military danger"). On the first stage is placed NATO. There is no analysis why NATO countries are enemies just only statement: (point a) "desire: to give the potential power for NATO' global function, implemented by violation of international law; to bring the military infrastructure of the countries – members of NATO, alongside the borders of Russia, including through the expansion of NATO." It is clear, for Russian: enlargement of NATO is threat; restructuring of NATO is threat; any kind of political activity of NATO is threat.

In short the existence of a military alliance that can overpower Russia on a conventional level, is a threat. By definition.

(point c) "deployment (increasing of capacity) of military contingents of foreign states (groups of states) on the territories of neighbouring with Russia and its allies of the States, as well as in nautical territories". So Russia could feel safely in case of neighbour states are military neutral. In other way, such state with any kind of army is threat. In this situation valid clear rule "you are with us or, if not, against us". Only two attitudes – enemies and friends, no third party.

Rubbish. This clause is specifically addressing presence of foreign militaries (say NATO for example) in the territories of the near abroad. You either don't know the context or are choosing to ignore. Your translation is also rather misleading.

The most interesting issue is the article 10 (title "The main military threats") (point d): "demonstration of military force during military trainings on the territories alongside Russia or its allies on the provocative purposes". Russia would like to see NATO troops incapable and with rusty ammunition.

Now I'm inclined to think you're misinterpreting intentionally. Notice the conditionals "alongside Russia" and "provocative purposes"?

Like a cold shower is the statement of the article 20: "Russia considers being legitimate use the military forces and other troops to repulse aggression against it and (or) its allies, and maintaining (recovery) peace according decisions of the UN Security Council, and other bodies for collective security, also to protect its citizens outside of the Russian Federation, in accordance with generally recognized principles and norms of international law and international treaties of Russia". Be aware, Russia could act as it was in 1930-1940, then soviet troops invade Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland. The Russian military see an ability to act outside in purpose to protect their citizens outside its borders (the article 26).

Yes. Just as the US acted in Grenada. I'm sure if you want to look for precedents you will find plenty.

 

[Spetsznaz]

Why would he be misinterpreting it on purpose?

Oh just out of curiosity Feanor, are you from Britain? Do you serve in the British military

 

[StevoJH]

Why would he be misinterpreting it on purpose?

Oh just out of curiosity Feanor, are you from Britain? Do you serve in the British military

He just stated in another thread the other day that he is Russian but living in the US.

 

[Feanor]

Why would he be misinterpreting it on purpose?

Oh just out of curiosity Feanor, are you from Britain? Do you serve in the British military

Russian moves in the near abroad are imperialistic. But no more so then most other major powers in what they perceive to be their sphere of influence. He put a clearly accusatory spin on it, which makes me wonder what angle he's coming from.