The international situation is tense: local conflicts and the growing problem of terrorism are forcing us to look at our army from a different perspective. We talked about its difficult past, the Syrian present and the technical future with Alexey Arbatov, head of the Center for International Security at IMEMO RAS.
How is the role of the army changing in the modern world?
IN Lately the role of military force in the world has increased - this is absolutely obvious to everyone involved in international relations and international security. This is especially noticeable in relations between Russia and the West. At the same time, experience shows that not all problems can be solved with the help of the armed forces. Wars with non-state actors, terrorist organizations like ISIS, drag on indefinitely and do not end in a clear victory for either side. The last 25 years have demonstrated that the armed forces cannot solve a single political problem on their own.
During the Cold War, when two nuclear powers competed with each other, the army was at the forefront. There was a stalemate: the USSR and the USA could not win a war against each other, because a nuclear conflict would be a disaster for both sides. Instead, they fought a huge number of wars through their allies and partners on the territory of other countries. These were times of extremely intense military activity. Then it dropped sharply, but over the past few years it has grown again. I would not say that we have returned to the previous state in terms of the intensity and scale of the confrontation. We do not fight directly, although we often find ourselves on the brink of conflict, as in the recent story with the downing of a Syrian plane or the demonstrative approach of ships and planes.
It is important to understand that the army cannot replace the economic power of the country. After the death of Mao Zedong, China spent 30 years modernizing its economy and achieved the fact that it became the second economic power in the world. Now it is matching its military power with its economic status through an extensive program to modernize and re-equip its troops. In many indicators, China is already ahead of the rest of the world, but it is behaving very carefully. Russia, on the contrary, has weakened economically as a result of the crisis of the raw material export model of the economy. Now we are trying to make up for the lack of our economic power through the active build-up and selective use of military forces.
In Russia, we see a significant increase in the potential of the armed forces in terms of equipment, mobility and combat readiness of the army. Huge amounts of money are spent on combat training. Unfortunately, all this is not based on a strong economy. Moreover, military power competes with other pressing needs of society for limited material and human resources and gives NATO a reason to build an unfriendly environment around the country. In the context of the current confrontation with the outside world, the transition to a high-tech economy is impossible - it requires a wide influx of capital and technology from abroad. Therefore, over time, the build-up of military activity will increasingly undermine the economic foundation of Russia, which will also affect our defense capability.
How does the state of the Russian armed forces correspond to the tasks that have faced them recently?
Generally Russian army shows a high level of combat training and technological equipment. From an operational-military point of view, all operations are carried out on high level: high-precision weapons are used, new types of weapons are being tested in huge quantities. Sometimes one gets the feeling that this is one of the goals of the Syrian campaign - to test new weapons on the battlefield, and not at the training ground. Dozens the latest systems have already been tried and shown to work quite well.
But all this time our enemy was not the one for whom Russian weapons were designed. In Syria we are fighting guerrillas, over whom we have a huge superiority from a military-technical point of view. The losses, although they are classified according to the new laws, apparently, we are suffering minimal, even compared to the operation in South Ossetia. Whether Russia will achieve its political goals and at what cost is a separate question.
How do you rate current results Syrian campaign?
There were two tasks: firstly, to suppress ISIS, al-Nusra and others terrorist organizations, to save the Bashar al-Assad regime from collapse, which would inevitably have happened if Russia had not entered this war. Secondly, to show that we are not a regional, but a global power, and can conduct military operations far from our borders. The second task has been completed, and the first - partially: with Russia's military presence and military operations against the opposition, which seeks to overthrow the regime, Assad can remain in power indefinitely. Otherwise, the first task has not yet been completed - despite whole line heavy blows to the terrorists, they were not defeated and still control a significant part of the country. Such a war can continue indefinitely, with great costs and certain losses for the Russian side. In this regard, we are entering a period when it is clearly necessary to lead the way towards peace and. Otherwise, dissatisfaction will grow among the Russian population that we are waging an endless war against the backdrop of serious problems in the economy.
The fact is that partisan armies have a number of advantages over regular forces. They are not limited by the military budget of their country and can count on constant influx money. They are not afraid of any losses - they are constantly replenished by volunteers from all over the world who join them for money or for an idea. For any regular army, losses are a very delicate issue. No country can afford to suffer heavy human losses for many years, especially in a war like the one in Syria. Guerrilla armies, on the contrary, are ready to fight constantly - this is the environment outside of which they die. For them, the more civilian collateral damage the better - it affects the media, creates psychological atmosphere rejection of war and affects the prestige of the warring country.
Conflicts with organizations such as ISIS cannot be resolved purely through military means. To defeat the partisan movement, you need to unite with all the other forces that are fighting against it, deprive it of the support of the local population, and close the borders of the territory. To do this, we will have to agree on the fate of Assad - it is no secret that many countries in the region are against maintaining his power. Here, interstate and religious contradictions that have developed between Saudi Arabia and Turkey on the one hand, and Iran on the other, play a role. Without agreements with them, ISIS will constantly feed itself and carry out acts of intimidation in different countries, including Europe and the USA.
What is the current state of the Russian army?
In the 1990s, the Russian armed forces were in deep decline, both materially and morally. The prestige of the army was very low, especially after the First Chechen war. Allowances were pitiful and were paid with huge delays. Everything that could possibly fall into disrepair fell into disrepair. This happened primarily due to a change in the government system and the political tasks of the leadership. Old problems were rejected, but new ones were never asked. Important areas of military-technical development were lost.
Let me give you an example. In the first half of the 1980s, in pursuit of the United States, the USSR built six giant Akula submarines - this was an analogue of the American Trident strategic missile submarines. Due to the lack of scheduled repairs in the 1990s, almost all of these boats fell into disrepair - only one remained, which was converted into a test platform. A little later, seven other submarines were produced, which still form the basis of the Russian missile submarine fleet. Of these, we have already lost one. Each such boat costs $700 million, the missiles for it cost another $800 million. Just to put one submarine into service, you need to pay $1.5 billion. That is, colossal money was simply lost.
Then, from the mid-2000s, the economy picked up. New goals appeared for the army and foreign policy: to revive Russia’s status and influence in the world. The situation in the army began to improve, primarily in terms of wages for officers and an increase in the number of contract personnel interested in serving among the rank and file. Two catastrophic problems that existed before - with food and with housing for the military - have been generally resolved. The share of modern equipment in service (that is, that which has a service life of no more than 10-15 years) has increased sharply: from 5-7% at the beginning of the 2000s to 60% today and the target 70%.
But around 2012, the economic crisis began. For some time, rearmament was carried out by inertia, but then they began to adjust it. “Program 2020”, designed for 23 trillion rubles, has already been revised, and some tasks have been postponed to a later date. The next state program will be more modest in terms of finances, but it has not yet been adopted because the economic prospects are not clear. Allocations for the “National Defense” item are being reduced - last year 3.2 trillion rubles were spent on it, this year it is planned to allocate 2.8 trillion. If we do not switch to a mobilization type of economy or fail to implement the reform of the raw material model of the economy, then our defense capability will continue to suffer increasing losses, especially in terms of the latest high-tech military systems.
What new types of weapons do you consider the most promising?
By new program they will probably buy less traditional types weapons: armored vehicles, artillery, aviation, ships, submarines - and focus on new promising systems that in 10-15 years will determine the face of the army. First of all, these are information and control systems that make it possible to perform new tasks with the same weapons: for example, carry out high-precision strikes and spend funds more efficiently. It's impossible without them modern management troops in wars that are becoming extremely dynamic - the situation changes every hour.
Then we are talking about high-precision long-range weapons based on land, aviation or sea. First of all, these are guided missile weapons and all kinds of unmanned systems, as well as weapons with artificial intelligence. UAVs have already become an important element of information and control systems, and in the future they will turn into long-range strike weapons. It is possible to introduce unmanned systems into ground forces. There will be combat vehicles that will operate remotely, without a crew. The next stage is maritime unmanned systems, including underwater ones, which can turn the entire naval art upside down, posing a threat to submarines and ships.
Another direction is space systems. Without space-class systems, that is, satellites, the army today simply cannot fight: they are needed to carry out strikes, conduct reconnaissance and evaluate the effectiveness of operations. Space strike systems are still in their infancy, but in 10-15 years, new systems of strikes against space objects may appear. It is possible that strikes from space against targets on the ground will become possible. For a long time, this idea existed in the imagination of military strategists and engineers, but in practice it was hardly feasible due to the objective laws of physics and celestial mechanics. Currently, placing weapons in space is still very expensive and impractical, but it is possible that this will change over time.
Is a complete transition to a contract-volunteer army possible in Russia?
Every year in Russia just over 300 thousand people are drafted into the army, of which 280 thousand are sent to the armed forces, and the rest to other troops and military organizations. We have 380 thousand contract workers and their number is growing, although more slowly than before the crisis. I believe that from an economic point of view we will be able to handle the transition to a contract system. To do this, we need to go for some optimization of the number of troops - now it is in no way justified by the tasks of the army and its equipment. A large, ill-equipped army is inferior to a smaller, but well-trained and armed army.
Various calculations show that if the transition is carried out over 3-4 years, it will additionally require only a few percent of the current budget allocated to national defense. And if you reduce the size of the army, you will even get savings: there is no need to call up twice a year, train, transport throughout the country - these are all quite expensive events. In addition, mass conscription produces a low-quality contingent. When a conscript studies for the first six months and waits for demobilization for the second six months, the result is not the kind of military man needed to govern complex systems weapons and participation in hostilities under enormous physical and psychological stress.
By 2030, the largest population group in Russia will be forty-year-olds, and the number of young people will decline sharply. How will this affect the military draft?
The demographic gap, given a certain attitude of the authorities, can lead to an expansion of conscription. Previously, you served in the army for 3 years, then 2 years, now a year. The service life can be extended again. Now 280 thousand people are conscripted a year - this is a quarter of the conscript contingent different ages. You can summon more - for example, half. Or you can go the other way and switch to a fully contract army, creating attractive conditions for military service. Then the result will be much better, but for this you need to make a number of strong-willed decisions and overcome the resistance of some organizations. In any case, reality has shown that contract soldiers are much better for the army than conscripts. Now the dispute is mainly around economics and organizational issues, and this is a positive shift in the psychology of society and the military elite.
What is the situation with the quality of military education in Russia?
The quality of military education in our country is quite high, but the approach to it is slightly different than in the West. Our military receives a very narrow specialization, while officers or senior officers in NATO countries are better versed in economics and foreign policy, but knows his immediate sphere less deeply. The level of training in Russian higher education institutions of the armed forces is high, but I would like to add more related subjects to the program that broaden the horizons of officers and allow them to think independently. For the army modern type it is necessary that the officer knows history, has an understanding of economics, social issues and even philosophy. Officers are the elite of any highly developed society, along with business and politicians. Unfortunately, in last years The political system in Russia is catastrophically bureaucratized, it subordinates everything to the main principle “I’m the boss, you’re a fool.” This does not at all encourage officers to show courage and initiative.
If we talk about military science in general, then there is a network of military scientific institutions and research institutes under the Ministry of Defense, but the situation here is deplorable. Until 2012, they were thoughtlessly reduced, and military science suffered great damage. Valuable personnel and entire scientific schools were lost, which cannot be restored in a few years.
How do you see Russia in 2035?
Russia, as a successful country, should occupy at least third place in the world in terms of economic size - after the United States and China. Taking into account our natural resources, territory and highly qualified personnel, this is quite possible. We will need an army with sufficient deterrence capacity so that any country understands that the benefits of military action will not be comparable to the damage. Already now, in terms of deterrence, everything is fine in Russia: we have many times more nuclear weapons, if we count operational-tactical ones, than in other countries of the world, and with the United States there is approximate parity.
Secondly, Russia will have to fight international terrorism, which may become even more dangerous in the future. And not only in our own and adjacent territories, but also in remote places where terrorists can settle. Today Russia is participating in this fight, but time will tell how effective it is. Our army is better suited for war with regular troops, but to fight terrorism we need a different troop structure, military training, and weapons systems. You can, of course, send a strategic bomber at the terrorists, but one flight will cost a hundred times more than the entire camp or warehouse that can be destroyed.
Thirdly, it is important that Russia actively participates in UN peacekeeping operations. Preventing military conflicts and enforcing peace is the most important function of the UN and the role of a great power. This is not just a noble mission, but also a step that enormously increases the influence and prestige of the state in the world. Now it is unacceptable for us low level participation in these processes.
Fourth and finally, while maintaining our nation's prestige and status, the Army must advance the economy by protecting key investments and communications through which we deliver or receive critical resources and products. And we will need to receive a lot if we want to move to an innovative economic model and begin to play a much larger role in world trade.
So far there is no such army in Russia, but I hope that in the future it will be created.
Why is it important to know your native language? Will total dictation make you smarter? Is there innate literacy and how do social networks affect our speech? The head of the Department of Russian Language and Mass Communication, Nadezhda Ilyukhina, helped us answer all these questions.
- Nadezhda Alekseevna, do we have to be literate?
There are a number of professions that require high literacy. This is taken into account when hiring. There is no such requirement for others, but I am convinced that anyone intelligent and/or educated person feels the need to be literate. It is a shame not to be able to speak and write correctly, accurately, expressively in your native language - out of a sense of self-respect and national dignity. And Russian is also the official language in our country. Every citizen must own it. Now there are text editors that correct errors and thus make the situation easier for the writer. Especially if this is a text that is important in one way or another. But let such a (useful!) editor only provide security for the writer, but not relieve him of “responsibility.” Otherwise, over time, we can trust the robot to think for us.
- Nowadays the transformation of the Russian language is particularly evident. Do you think this is degradation or evolution?
It is wrong to talk about the transformation of language. Yes, now, under the influence of many reasons, the processes of language development proceed much faster than even 30 years ago. And the language, especially vocabulary and style, is changing noticeably before our eyes. But this does not affect the core of the language system. We are only observing the acceleration of evolutionary processes in the language, which must always follow changes in society and maintain communicative usefulness in new conditions for all generations of speakers of this language. Although some phenomena in modern speech practice really worry linguists.
- Innate literacy - truth or myth?
Of course, this is a myth. Even language is not innate; it is more correct to talk about the innate ability to master language, which is transmitted genetically, and the child, as we know, assimilates the language spoken in his environment. It is even more wrong to talk about innate knowledge of the rules of spelling and punctuation. Another thing is that there are certain inclinations - like music, drawing, design. Some people have a good sense of the syntactic structure of a sentence, others - the nuances of meaning and easily formulate it with punctuation. People who are called visual learners benefit from visual memory. 
First of all, social networks (chat rooms, forums, etc.) reflect oral speech. It's nothing more than oral speech, expressed in written form, with its special norms, strikingly different from the norms of written speech. Of course, it’s not always literate. All this together catches the eye. Over time, we will get used to it, since this sphere and this method of communication have unconditional prospects. Additional graphic means, abbreviation methods, and non-verbal language, characteristic specifically for Internet communication, are already being developed.
For people of my generation and those close to me, literacy was brought up in different conditions - we lived mainly surrounded by literate texts: books, magazines, newspapers, television captions, which were edited by professionals and did not contain errors. Now from early age children “live” in social networks, that is, in an environment of different texts, which are not always literate. Therefore, their speech, and written too, is formed in a more difficult conditions. In this regard, it is impossible not to mention the methodology for preparing for the Unified State Exam. We see that students entering all majors are much less literate than before. Everyone can write, they write more than before. But not everyone can write competently. Therefore, you need to specifically engage in the culture of your speech, and not only in childhood and adolescence. 
- How to improve literacy?
You need to work on yourself: pay attention to your speech, try to find time to read good books, look in the dictionary - there are many of them on the Internet. By the way, philologists also resort to the help of a dictionary. You can never be sure that you are using one or another complex form correctly. Recently, courses on studying the difficulties of one’s native (and not just a foreign) language have become in demand. They are attended by adults, “established” people who want to improve their literacy level, want to be told interesting things about their language and help improve their speech.
And, of course, this is facilitated by the “Total Dictation” campaign. It draws attention to the problem of literacy, provides an opportunity to get an assessment of one’s literacy and improve it, especially since the dictation is held annually. It is preceded by free preparatory courses for almost two months. They are led by qualified specialists who can be asked any question. There are a lot of people willing - which means it can be considered a total dictation in a good way improve your literacy level.
Photo: Artem Onoprienko (photo club "Illuminator")
Law. Just the law. Its observance and, possibly, further addition.
Better yet, even a separate law on harassment, covering borderline cases and describing in detail the essence of the phenomenon. As with domestic violence: a separate law is also needed, since abuse is not only about the notorious beatings.
Likewise, harassment is not only about sex with subordinates.
And an independent court.
We open the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
Article 133 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Compulsion to perform sexual acts:
1. Forcing a person to have sexual intercourse, sodomy, lesbianism or commit other acts of a sexual nature by means of blackmail, threats of destruction, damage or confiscation of property or using the financial or other dependence of the victim (victim) -
shall be punishable by a fine in the amount of up to one hundred twenty thousand rubles or in the amount of the wages or other income of the convicted person for a period of up to one year, or compulsory work for a term of up to four hundred eighty hours, or correctional labor for a term of up to two years, or forced labor for a term of up to one year, or imprisonment for the same term.
2. The same act committed against a minor (minor) -
shall be punishable by forced labor for a term of up to five years with deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for a term of up to three years or without it, or imprisonment for a term of up to five years with deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for a term of up to three years, or without one.
Because such a problem really exists, and women suffer from it.
At the same time there is back side medals in the form of incentives for victims, when for women, say, this option often turns out to be almost the only working social elevator, and conscience (and moral suffering), as we know, cannot be spread on bread, cannot be poured into a glass, or put in a pocket . Meanwhile, the female culture of opportunism under patriarchy is not at all simple...
Ideally, it would be good to explain in the law what is considered blackmail, and in what cases an intimate relationship becomes a voluntary-compulsory matter. That the events preceding the failed sexual contact nevertheless do not cease to be harassment. What to count sexual harassment Any verbal or physical assessment of another person's attractiveness may be necessary.
