The role of military force in foreign policy of countries is undergoing significant changes. The nature of these changes is largely determined by the new correlation of forces formed after the collapse of the USSR, the development of new technologies and forms of warfare, the violation of the pre-existing system of international relations and evolution of the leading military powers on the ways and forms of use of force.
Countries ' economic interests become dominant. If there ever was one to talk about the prevalence of the ideological interests of some States, after the collapse of the USSR, the actual disappearance of the camp of socialism, an increasing transition of China on the rails of market economy, the struggle for economic benefits became the driving force behind the policy of almost all countries of the world. In the context of limited global resources, the rise of deficit as a result of population growth and global production of more and more countries base its foreign policy on the principle of "first, eat your, and then I'll eat his." NATO was included in the list of priorities is the energy security of the bloc members.
Due to the fact that economic interests become Central to the politics of countries may intensify competition for natural resources. A prominent example is the Arctic, which has claimed the resources of the country, even not having access to it. China, in particular, began to build a Navy, capable of operating in Northern latitudes. The West has been much talk that the resources of some countries, including Russia, should belong not to them but to the entire international community. Allowed, even forced, including the use of military force, redistribution of the national wealth. NATO is already in background documents ("Guaranteed access to the global Commons", etc.) requires an "equitable" distribution of world resources.
Gradually ends during "unipolar" world order, with its undoubted military and political dominance of the United States. The United States will remain the most influential player on the world stage, but will increasingly have to rely on key allies and partners in policy implementation.
Under pressure from Washington, NATO turns into organization, operating not only in Europe but throughout the world.
Speaking of a multipolar world, it should be borne in mind that a multipolar system is less stable, has a large number of degrees of freedom. The more of the world's poles, the more conflict and blood.
At the heart of modern U.S. foreign policy the desire to maintain global leadership. The main document, which plays the role of the defense doctrine called "Maintenance of global leadership of the United States: priorities in the field of defense in the XXI century".
In an effort to ensure military superiority over any potential adversary, the US is trying to get away from the existing concept of strategic deterrence in relations with Russia. Established command of the "lightning-fast global strike". It's not a command, which is responsible for quick single non-nuclear strikes on a global scale (using, for example, a single ICBM with conventional warheads), as stated and believed by many, and the command of the first strike, the strategic offensive operations with the use of all nuclear and non-nuclear means. This is easily seen, referring not to the declared policy documents, and specific doctrines and teachings for the US army. Created by the same global missile defense system, according to internal documents of the U.S. armed forces, should ensure the defense of the United States and its forces. The task of the protection of allies and partners is present only in declaratory policy documents and included in there artificially, only for their calming, and after they began to murmur.
In the near future Washington will continue to seek common ground for interaction with our country in resolving the Korean and Iranian problems. By this it pushes well and the need to contain claims of China as a new superpower. The US political leadership would like to make the Russian Federation as its partner in the fight against terrorism and proliferation of WMD; member of international coalitions engaged in peacekeeping and humanitarian operations; reliable supplier of energy resources to international markets; as a researcher in the implementation of large-scale, requiring large financial expenditures for space programmes (e.g. mission to Mars), which is ambiguously perceived by American society.
The United States gradually leaving the European continent in the Asia-Pacific region, laying the Russia-sitting on the Europeans. Talking about it openly in the U.S. Congress. Washington will continue to provide General guidance and specific steps to rapprochement of Russia with the West on the basis of the values last assigned Europe. The purpose of such convergence is the maximum binding of the Russian Federation to the West and turning it into a country, not a potential enemy, for which she is now ranked in official U.S. documents. If we translate such a policy on plain language, we simply must strangle in his arms.
Finland, building up its military capacity by 2016 will become a party to the NATO response force.
Such an approach has recently proclaimed by Washington as official policy against its enemies, which would provide for the maximum involvement in cooperation and thus re-educating on the values of the United States. If a potential enemy resists, then apply more stringent measures, up to military force.
The U.S. will continue strengthening bilateral and multilateral military cooperation, aimed at securing dominance in important regions (Asia Pacific, middle East, Central Asia).
Likely to be created the regional military blocs with the participation of the United States in the Asia Pacific region and the Persian Gulf. For example, in the USA have already considered the possibility of establishing a "mini NATO" in Asia-Pacific on the basis of the Union "the U.S.-Japan-South Korea-Australia". Moreover, we have analyzed and other configurations: "USA-Taiwan-Philippines", "U.S.-Japan-South Korea-India". The main thrust of the unions in the Asia-Pacific region to counteract China.
A military bloc with the participation of monarchies and the US may receive in the foreseeable future and in the Persian Gulf. It is necessary here to control the zone of vitally important interests of the United States. Already created a United defense system and ABOUT the Persian Gulf, the corresponding command structures.
NATO led by the United States transformed from a European into a global. NATO enlargement will continue, including with the involvement of non-European States, with the aim of increasing opportunities for global force projection, the confrontation between China and the containment of Russia. In the global partners of NATO are already listed such as Japan, Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, Mongolia, Afghanistan, Pakistan and even Colombia.
Poland acts as the main conduit of American interests in the Old World.
The Alliance still considers the US as the major power of the Institute of foreign policy and military strategy of the United States. The USA initiated the transformation of NATO, which will significantly expand the geographic boundaries and functions of the unit, in particular, ensuring energy security. Because the United States has managed to seize the initiative in the reform of NATO, a transformation of the latter focused primarily on significantly increasing its military capabilities, not "politicization", advocated by the Europeans and the United States saw the danger of losing the Alliance of his capacity. As a result of reform, NATO must become organization that provides, in the American sense, security is not only in Europe but in the world.
Begins to form "triad" of NATO, echoing American "triad" (offensive weapons – defensive weapons – providing infrastructure), the creation of which was actually announced in 2012 at the NATO summit in Chicago.
Formed total nuclear forces of the Alliance. Observed the actual Association of the nuclear forces of France and great Britain. Given that British nuclear forces have long been an almost seamless with the strategic nuclear forces of the USA, the creation of a collective nuclear forces of NATO, which required the U.S. in terms of nuclear arms reduction and the rise of confrontation with China and Russia.
United States together with the countries-members of NATO will increase its efforts to combat the opponents using the "soft power", i.e. through internal destabilization, the collapse or the establishment of controlled modes. A clear example is Ukraine, where the leading role with the tacit consent of the United States begins to play Germany, cloaked in the guise of the EU and trying to seriously strengthen its economic position, and then, perhaps, political. As you know, Germany has already quietly implemented economic occupation of almost all former socialist countries of Europe (Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary, Bulgaria, Baltic States).
Despite ambitious declarations, the approach of the NATO leadership to engagement with Moscow will remain the same and will be in the nature of a compromise between the interests of the allies, insisting on the strategy of "active containment" against Russia, and the members of the bloc, advocating the deepening of bilateral cooperation. In General, we can predict the model of "pragmatic partnership" NATO and Russia based on common values and mutual interests.
The withdrawal of NATO troops from Afghanistan will lead to destabilization in Central Asia.
In the foreseeable future there will be uncertainty in the construction of a "unified" Europe. The amorphous present the EU as a global political player will remain. However, if previously the US gave Europe to become self-reliant in matters of defence, but now, apparently, their position will change. In terms of the displacement of the center of gravity of U.S. policy in Asia, Washington will begin more and more to "pressurize" the Europeans to enhance their military muscles. So, at the 2013 summit of heads of state and government of the 28 member countries of the EU, where the defence were the major issues, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen has even stated that the US could lose interest in NATO, if Europe will not increase their defence spending to 2% of GDP.
It is likely that in 5-7 years in NATO will join Sweden and Finland. With the current governments that will not happen. The majority of the population of both countries against joining the Alliance, but appropriate pressure will melt, gradually changing public opinion in favour of membership in the Alliance.
By 2016, Finland will actually cease to be a neutral state. Formally, without entering into the Alliance, she will become a party to the NATO response force (NATO Response Force).
The role of the active conduit of American interests in the Old World will continue to play Poland, which will help the Baltic countries and some other former socialist States, in which the strong position of the United States.
To regulate the rapprochement between Russia and Western European countries on the basis of Western values, the conductors of American interests in Europe will continue to artificially escalate tensions on the continent. In the framework of the program "Eastern partnership", the most active promoter which is Poland, will continue efforts to bring former Soviet republics such as Ukraine, Belarus and Moldova, under the influence of Russia and creation on their basis of the buffer zone, a kind of "wall" that separates Russia from Western Europe.
Apparently, you need to prepare for serious destabilization of the situation in Moldova and its further swinging in Ukraine, together with NATO. Moldova has long handles in the appropriate direction the member of the Alliance – Romania and Ukraine "unison" campaigning in the USA, Germany, Poland and the United Kingdom. Ukraine and Moldova proclaimed the policy of rapprochement with Europe, but as you know, to become an EU member, we must first become a member of NATO. All the former socialist States were first forced to join NATO, and only then allowed to join the EU. One time the EU had intended to suspend the admission of new members, which sharply reacted negatively to NATO leadership. In the end, the decision of the EU was revised and the parallel enlargement of NATO and the EU continued.
The rate of Moldavia to the West are likely to lead to aggravation of the situation around Transnistria, perhaps to unfreeze the conflict.
The military-political situation in the Caucasian region has become increasingly complex, which is associated primarily with the desire of the United States to bring Russia among the important geopolitical players in the Caucasus region and to form a geostrategic corridor for direct access of the West to the Caspian sea region and Central Asia. Measures are being taken to draw Georgia and Azerbaijan into NATO, the creation in the Caspian region military base to attack Iran. Thus military-political leadership of Georgia and Azerbaijan expects help from Brussels in resolving their territorial problems.
Probably at the next NATO summit in London will be another step on the path of Georgia and Azerbaijan to the Alliance. Apparently, we cannot exclude the possibility of Georgia's accession to this organization without Abkhazia and South Ossetia. And in the case of Azerbaijan, we can expect the exacerbation of the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh with the subsequent entry of Western peacekeepers there.
Very likely the next version of conflict resolution that promote the USA and discuss in Yerevan and Baku. Turkey opens the border with Armenia. Azerbaijan recognizes a specific sovereignty of Nagorno Karabakh and receives a number of areas, providing it with transport corridor to Turkey, from the operation of which will be income and Armenia. As a result the USA will have additional direct access via the Caucasus in the Caspian region and Central Asia, fall away grounds for the presence of the Russian military base in Armenia and raises the question of its derivation.
We cannot exclude also that the forces now fighting on the side of the opposition in Syria, will not appear in the future in the Caucasus or North Caucasus.
The Georgian leadership does not intend to accept the loss of Abkhazia and South Ossetia and will continue to take steps to create conditions for their return. As the main directions to achieve this goal, the intended use of the strategy "Involvement through cooperation", involving primarily the strengthening of economic relations. Surely at some stage of the development of cooperation with its former republics will be a question on the further stay in the territory of recent Russian military bases.
In connection with the withdrawal of NATO troops from Afghanistan, including through Azerbaijan and Georgia, these countries will appear, apparently, a U.S. military base. About it speak openly, for example, the American generals.
As for Turkey, it has a policy leading to the split of the South Caucasus and the creation of in the region of the axis Turkey – Azerbaijan – Georgia. The purpose of this policy is to transform the emerging economic bloc of the three States in the military-political Union. It should be noted, however, that Russia, the US and the EU, treating the Caucasus as a single region, do not support such a policy Turkey.
Between Turkey and Georgia have agreed about creation of joint military units for the protection of strategic communications, sea ports, pipelines, Railways, airports.
Turkey oversees the Azerbaijani Armed Forces (military-educational programs, operational work, drills to the level of the shelf, the reform of the armed forces with the aim of creating a small professional army, the restoration of air force and Navy, military intelligence). US opposition to the actual subordination of the armed forces of Azerbaijan, Turkey and military-political integration of these countries on a purely bilateral basis.
As for Iran, the decline of tension around it, apparently, won't be long. In the event of unleashing a large-scale military action against Iran, Tehran will certainly use all its capabilities for retaliation policy, including the areas that will be in effect in the USA.
And this can be the territory of Azerbaijan and Georgia.
The problem of international military presence in the Caspian region recently became topical in the context of its hydrocarbon resources. The Caspian sea is included in the list of zones of "vital interests" of the United States that in the event of certain adverse foreign policy of the Russian Federation of conditions may induce in the region of NATO military forces.
We should expect the rising tensions and destabilize the situation in Central Asia. Here crossed the interests of such leading players as Russia, USA, China. Show interest in the region, India, Europe. There is intensifying competition for resources and transport corridors. Furthermore, the time comes, when leaders of the Central Asian republics due to their age will be forced to leave the stage, and on change by it will come a new generation of politicians. In particular, the serious deterioration of the situation in such a scenario possible in Kazakhstan. To accelerate regional destabilization can and new wave of the economic crisis, as well as the partial withdrawal of NATO troops from Afghanistan in 2014, followed by a splash of tension outside this country.
The U.S. and its NATO allies are horrified to think that after the withdrawal from Afghanistan formed there the vacuum can fill in China and spread its influence throughout the region. Western countries are passionate about seeking Russia's help in containing China.
Japan ceases to hinder the development of their aircraft and preparing to become a global player.
To exacerbate the situation in Central Asia needs to prepare the Organization of collective security Treaty (CSTO). The potential danger for Russia is reforming the armed forces of member States of the CSTO and the CIS in accordance with NATO standards, the training of military personnel of the former Soviet republics in the West, there is the purchase of weapons and military equipment. All this facilitates the process of accession of the Commonwealth countries to NATO, reducing Russian military exports and, in General, reduces the influence of Moscow in its near abroad.
Unfortunately, in the framework of the CSTO has not been developed a common conceptual approaches to military construction. In particular, national military doctrines are not only not consistent across member States, but often are developed with the participation of experts from countries belonging to other military-political blocs. You do not have an approved inter-state language, which significantly complicates the command and control hampers the development of cooperation. There is no understanding of common threats, which could become the locomotive of development of the CSTO.
In these circumstances each of the member States of the organization tends to define its own hierarchy of threats and security challenges that differ substantially from systems threats to other members.
There is no clarity in the management created in the framework of the CSTO regional grouping of troops (forces). So, the Collective rapid response forces (CRRF), the decision on creation of which was in February 2009, are subject exclusively to the national commanders of their States, and only if necessary starts the procedure of using that in the context of ongoing hostilities precludes the timely application of the CRRF.
Would like to see the efforts exerted by the leadership of the CSTO, were implemented faster in the escalating power of the organization.
Gradually the "center of gravity" of world politics and economy becomes the Asia-Pacific region, not Europe. "Axis" a new geopolitical game become us-China relations, which already significantly influence the nature of the transatlantic relationship. While the United States see in China a threat, we Europeans see it largely as a huge additional market.
Will continue the rise of China as the second world military and economic powers, which, according to some estimates, by 2030-th years of the present century, will press with the leading position of the United States.
If you look at the Asia-Pacific countries with which the United States actively strengthen military cooperation (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, the Philippines, Australia, New Zealand, India), the obvious conclusion is that Washington is building around China containment zone.
India and Japan likely to the leading players not only in the Asia-Pacific region and the world. Now, India is making rapid progress in almost all spheres of state activity, while Japan, building on already existing economic potential on a global scale, takes a course of its so-called military and political "normalization". Created by the Ministry of defence, reviewed the law on the prohibition of the export of arms. In the foreseeable future in Japan, apparently, will be revised and the Constitution, limiting military construction in the country.
Potentially hot spots for the ATP in which conflicts can occur with the participation of leading world powers, are the Korean Peninsula, Taiwan Strait, South China sea, the border between India and China, the Strait of Malacca and along the Indian ocean route for the transportation of hydrocarbons.
The influence of the United States in the Asia Pacific region decreases, China is growing. Foreign policy of Japan and South Korea is becoming more independent. All countries in the region are trying to establish good neighborly relations with China, are increasingly forgetting about US.
It is possible that in 5-10 years the situation in East Asia is significantly destabilized, if not to accept urgent measures on creation of system security. However, the prospects for a common system of security is illusory, because countries pursue different goals too.
China, apparently, is ready to turn the SCO into a military-political Alliance, but without formalizing this transformation in order not to cause sharp reactions and the aggravation of the situation in the region. The PRC is not able to resist the U.S. and its allies and needs the help of Russia. To strengthen regional security must, apparently, to create mechanisms of interaction between the SCO and the CSTO, to form the corresponding patterns.
The main purpose of Washington's strategy in East Asia is to maintain and strengthen the U.S.-centric order. The basis of this strategy are alliances, particularly with Japan and South Korea, allowing you to save in the region of forward-based forces.
The rise of China represents a big risk for the regional interests of the United States, Japan, South Korea and some other countries. In American society, for example, there is no unity about what's best for the USA: rich and peaceful China, or the decaying and living in chaos.
Japan sought to limit the influence of the United States and China, trying to create a Japanese-centric community in East Asia by concluding economic agreements with Singapore, Malaysia and the Philippines, building a economic bloc on the basis of the yen.
China is not yet interested in destroying the us-Japanese Alliance, since, as in Beijing, coming out from under the American guardianship, will dramatically boost Japan military construction, will expand the zone of its interests, that will seriously complicate the situation in the region.
Tokyo supports the peaceful reunification of the two Koreas, the improvement of relations between the PRC and Taiwan. The probability of establishment by Japan of nuclear weapons will depend on further developments in the region. Those military operations in which we participate today, Japanese aircraft carried out in the framework of the fight against terrorism and are inherently peacekeeping that does not require changing the Constitution. However, in the foreseeable future, the amendments are apparently made, because the leadership of Japan intends to extend the use of national armed forces abroad.
The level of Japanese-American interaction approached the level of cooperation of the United States with NATO allies.
Believed in South Korea, the U.S. is increasingly sacrificing its interests if it suits them. One such possible "victims" is the withdrawal of American troops from the country, advocated by many in Washington. The departure of the Americans will increase the tension in relations between Seoul and Tokyo have not ruled out the initiation of the Republic of Korea (ROK) games against Japan and China for the purpose of survival. If at the same time in Japan will continue military presence of the United States, the Republic of Kazakhstan may become neutral or go for an Alliance with China.
Many in South Korea think that Beijing opposes the unification of the two Koreas as it did not want the connection of nuclear power between the North and the economic strength of the South and the appearance next door of a new powerful player. Because the keys to solve the North Korean nuclear program, discussed in the framework of the six-party talks are the United States and China, the meeting will be held again and again, because the main persons involved are not interested in their completion because it would remove one important obstacle to the reunification of peoples.
The US is trying to draw Russia into the process of further nuclear arms reductions that the significant superiority of NATO in the high-precision and conventional weapons will only increase the existing military imbalance.
Gaining momentum awareness campaign for the international non-governmental organization "Global zero" (Global Zero), calling for the elimination of all nuclear weapons. Understand the unreality of this situation in any foreseeable future, however, this initiative was formally launched by President Barack Obama.
The U.S. and its NATO allies are seriously considering the possibility of concluding a new Treaty on conventional armed forces in Europe, whose main goal is to make "visible" the Russian Armed Forces and of their teachings. Allies are very concerned about the lack of information about the armed forces.
The United States actively increasing military space activity. Currently, the U.S. armed forces are already 90% dependent on space systems – this is reported by representatives of the Pentagon. Already released operational guidance on the use of force in space, from space – the earth, from the earth towards space. Pass flight tests of space systems, which may become a space weapon. While the U.S. does not intend to enter into any agreements to restrict military space activities.
What to do about Russia? First of all, to become stronger. In addition, to pursue a policy of active neutrality, implying equidistance from such power centres as the US and China, and active promotion of initiatives that strengthen global security.
- 13-06-2019Bruce Schneier about the digital threats of the future
- 16-01-2019The biggest danger 2019 — this is war
- 01-01-2019Subcommissie race
- 05-11-2018A Navy without ships. The Russian Navy is on the verge of collapse
- 07-04-2018Diversionary war against Russia
- 29-05-2012Drugs in the service of the Third Reich
- 12-09-2010Many experts believe the best tank Merkava main battle tank in the world
- 12-09-2010The Minister of defence of Germany introduced draft large-scale reform of the armed forces
- 21-04-2001To the question about the war of the fourth sphere