Go Back   Defence Talk Forum > Global Defense & Military > Military Defense
Forgot Password? Join Us! Its's free!

Our Supporters
Contact us today!

Veterans can obtain information regarding VA Loan including how to get a VA Refinance

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures

Langley_09_T-33_MG_2767a.JPG

Langley_09_T-33_MG_2760a.JPG

Langley_09_F-22_MG_2898a.JPG

Langley_09_F-22_MG_2898a.JPG
Tag Cloud
Thread search tags
armed forces army artilery assault rifles balance of power battleship boeing book british british empire brt-80 cannon colombia cruise defense degree divide and rule education evolution f-16 f15 patrol france future of sidearms gcc gulf gunner guns history horn of africa information intelligence japanese empire leningrad lifestyle machine gun malaysian army missle national defence nazi soldiers new zealand northrop grumman nzdf policy raf rafale ran bluewater mrv rmn royal malaysian navy rus russia sas saudi russia bandar putin security ship singapore somalia south american strategies sweden tactics thai air force top uae ucav ukraine vehicle viking weapons weapons. wwii

Random Photos - DefenceTalk Military Gallery





Russian Federation New Military Doctrine

This is a discussion on Russian Federation New Military Doctrine within the Military Defense forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; On Feb. 5th the Russian president, Medvedev, approved a new military doctrine. The text is available in Russian here: Президент ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old February 6th, 2010   #1
Super Moderator
General
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 3,477
Russian Federation New Military Doctrine

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

The text is available in Russian here: Президент *оссии

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 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote

2 Lastest Threads by Feanor
Thread Forum Last Poster Replies Views Last Post
Double-barreled artillery? Army & Security Forces Feanor 14 1124 March 8th, 2010 02:43 AM
The Bible - Now in LEGOs? Intros & Off Topic wing fan 3 411 February 27th, 2010 03:20 PM

Old February 11th, 2010   #2
Junior Member
Corporal
 
Spetsznaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spokane,Washington
Posts: 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor View Post
On Feb. 5th the Russian president, Medvedev, approved a new military doctrine.

The text is available in Russian here: Президент *оссии

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
__________________
When many people look at a weapon they see death, when I look at a weapon I see art

-Me
Spetsznaz is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old February 12th, 2010   #3
Super Moderator
General
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 3,477
Unfortunately I don't have one. I'll look for you though.
Feanor is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old February 12th, 2010   #4
Junior Member
Corporal
 
Spetsznaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spokane,Washington
Posts: 146
Thank you, its just that if I use a online translator the whole thing looks like crap
__________________
When many people look at a weapon they see death, when I look at a weapon I see art

-Me
Spetsznaz is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old February 14th, 2010   #5
Senior Member
Major
 
nevidimka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 964
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.
nevidimka is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 4 Weeks Ago   #6
Junior Member
Corporal
 
Spetsznaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spokane,Washington
Posts: 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevidimka View Post
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?
__________________
When many people look at a weapon they see death, when I look at a weapon I see art

-Me
Spetsznaz is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 4 Weeks Ago   #7
Super Moderator
General
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 3,477
He's referencing first Czech and Polish, now Bulgarian and Romanian, willingness to host US BMD systems.
Feanor is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 4 Weeks Ago   #8
Senior Member
Major
 
nevidimka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 964
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.
nevidimka is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 4 Weeks Ago   #9
Super Moderator
General
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 3,477
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 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 3 Weeks Ago   #10
Super Moderator
General
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 3,477
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 войска могут быть выведены из МВД - сенатор Тулаев | Оборона и безопасность | Лента новостей "*ИА Новости"

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.
Feanor is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 3 Weeks Ago
Feanor
This message has been deleted by Feanor.
Old 2 Weeks Ago   #11
New Member
Private
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2
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 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 2 Weeks Ago   #12
New Member
Private
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2
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 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 2 Weeks Ago   #13
Super Moderator
General
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 3,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by ModestasBE View Post
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.

Quote:
(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.

Quote:
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"?

Quote:
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.
Feanor is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 2 Weeks Ago   #14
Junior Member
Corporal
 
Spetsznaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spokane,Washington
Posts: 146
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
__________________
When many people look at a weapon they see death, when I look at a weapon I see art

-Me
Spetsznaz is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 2 Weeks Ago   #15
Senior Member
Lieutenant
 
StevoJH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Armidale, NSW
Posts: 521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spetsznaz View Post
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.
StevoJH is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:12 PM.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17