The main possible factors of this confrontation are the following:

1. The end of an era of sustainable development and the welfare state. When every other day in the center of the world-system conceived as the best in relation to the day yesterday. It became apparent that the money ran out (the U.S. national debt already exceeds the mental scale [8]) , there are not enough resources (not only hydrocarbons, but also water supplies);
2. The war, according to S. Pereslegin, is "a specific mechanism to ensure the absolute sociality selfish predator which is the species HomoSapiens, through controlled aggression. Sport, cinema and the Internet cannot yet replace a full war in this regard" [2, 579] ;
3. War can be used as a tool of dismantling inadequate modern economic institutions, with the aim of creating new, can be an engine of economic development. And also as a factor of economic stimulus. (an example of U.S. policy during the First and Second world wars) [7] ;
4. Post-industrial crisis and the end of legitimizing his transcendence. In this regard, there is a decline in such key areas as education, management, production. The critical point here was the collapse of the dot-com in the beginning of the two thousandth. As discussed by Hoffmeister, war stems from weakness policy. And the impotence of the policy, it is the inability to effective treatment of power as a political tool [9, 274] ;
5. In connection with the fourth factor you need to consider and the fifth, namely, the potency of the creation and distribution of a new ontological project, that is a fight for the senses, the ability to define existential-cognitive picture of tomorrow;
6. The illegitimacy of the existing borders (the recognition of Kosovo's de jure abolished all previous European agreements on the inviolability of borders);
7. At least a part of the society (not military) is preparing for war. This is evident by the reflection of the militaristic and apocalyptic moods in art, fiction literature [12,13];

To understand the nature of possible future war I think we should ask the theory of the partisan of a prominent German jurist and political theorist Carl Schmitt. The work "Theory of the partisan. Interim comment the notion of political" written in 1963. Schmitt begins its work with an analysis of the actions of Spanish guerrillas in the war against Napoleon and the consideration of Clausewitz attempts to give a theoretical justification to this type of war. And then he gives and reveals the essence of guerrilla.

Partisan determine four characteristics:

1. Telluric nature. The guerrillas waging war against the invaders, and he stops her when he manages to free his land.
2. Irregularity. Don't be like a soldier, in the sense of a fundamental principle of warfare.
3. Mobility. Mobility is not only and not so much motorisierung, the ability to quickly overcome large distances and thereby ensure the rapid response plans and actions of the enemy, but more the ability to quickly "change his existence"
4. Intense political involvement revives the original meaning of the word "partisan", which comes from the word "party" and "indicates a relationship with some fighting, warring, or politically active party or group" [1,27].

In XX century the phenomenon of the partisan was seriously way reinterpreted by theorists such as Lenin and Mao, and made to serve a more abstract, ideological goals. Therefore, Partizan was to play a crucial role in the global civil war. But in this war, guerrillas, in the service of "an interested third force" (which, according to Schmitt, is constantly striving to bend it to their interests), changed its own identity: "now he seeks not the liberation of his native land, but to the absolute destruction of the enemy", which deprives him of the specific telluric legitimacy. Now his recognition is dependent on the third (ideological power).

Schmitt's theory needs to be updated in relation to today. In the 90s some liberal theorists predicted the end of history and policy. Now in their place had come the office, with a gradual withering away of the state mechanisms [10].

Then there came the era of politicization. USA polutorapolnoy as the center of world-system into the world's policeman monitoring the implementation of the programme of the Washington Consensus. Formally involving more and more people in the area of policy, neoliberalism itself is a political neutering diligently trying to assign a monopoly on legitimate violence solely for this policeman, refusing to recognize this tool in the struggle for power over the other bearers of sovereignty.

That's why the work of Schmitt, focused on the search for a political and struggle against Atlanticism becomes important to us. But the German theorist is explicitly a defender of the past, of bygone norms, values and orders of Prussia. His mythologization of the image of the guerrilla is giving the phenomenon a conservative nature, However, the value of Schmitt as a theorist is that he gave us concepts and tactics for the cognitive analysis of reality.

Let us now consider guerrilla and quasiparticle actions and forces in Russia and among its citizens.

I. 1992-1996 in Yugoslavia acted Russian Volunteer corps (RBD-1, RBD-2 (the Imperial Wolves), RBD-3, the First Cossack Sotnia). [14] Also in the Serbian divisions were Russian war (White Wolves). [15]. The volunteers went to war to support the brothers in blood and faith. The nature of their actions was generally irregular, although they wore uniforms, sometimes acted together with the Serbs. Attended high mobility and intense political involvement (monarchical and panslavists). There are all the hallmarks of a partisan "except telluric nature". However, it is not so simple. This is a space war in the minds of a number of Russian participants was his own, blood, space of the "family". That is, the old notion of space, that surrounds the person directly left. Globalization, education has expanded horizons and the borders of the imagined communities with which the subject identifies himself stepped far over the edge of political boundaries.

II. Russia in the post-Soviet era are faced with a situation pseudoparticle struggle against the Central government in Chechnya. In response, applied mobile division – VDV, Marine infantry. [16] Politically, too, was made right move – charges the local fighters in terrorism. Here a distinction must be made between the terrorist and the guerrilla. Terrorism today when carrying out the verge between it and the partisan struggle. It is a struggle for money and information influence, the attempt of discursive control. The difference between terrorist and partisan, it is likely that the terrorists dominate the desire to information control. The guerrillas, laying a mine under the rail, rely on military or economic impacts that the trains reach the destinations. In Chechnya, Federal troops had to deal with local extremists and mercenaries from Muslim countries.

III. Sports clubs (chair). On the basis of sports associations are established politico-military organization proektremstroy sense. In the event of armed conflict can act as organized groups. Now they are irregular, are tied to ethnicity and politicized.

IV. Seaside guerrillas. Guerrilla war here, is the result of weakness, inability to influence the power. "A group of young people several months terrorized the guards. The killing of law enforcement officers, really being committed and only attributed to these people was done in different districts of Primorsky Krai". [17]

V. Agents of various law enforcement agencies (FBI, ISI, Mossad e.g). The agent differs from his partisan regularity. Although the specifics of the action are the "partisans of the state", using not only technical, but also practical progress in its activities. All seek to fight a guerrilla means.

This does not mean that the fighting in the spirit of total war will not be conducted. On the contrary. They will be conducted openly, on camera, with real bayonet attacks to gain legitimacy among the population. In order to create ideological and political engagement, shaping public will to win. The theory of war future Slipchenko and Capitance. [3] For them, the war of the future is when the strategic and tactical problems will be solved by means of high-precision remote destruction of key military and civilian targets at any depth enemy territory.

This concept makes a great focus on technique, but the person remains far from its focus. Very true to the concept suggested by Messiner. He argued that the military clashes will go in line with his concept of the world natively, in which will participate not only the army and the government of the people's movement and the irregulars, and psychology, agitation and propaganda will be more important than weapons. [6] In my opinion, any war that may happen in the future will be asymmetric in nature.

It will probably be a series of short, but violent conflict (Messiner), peretekayuschim from one to another, and trade relations, in my opinion, will be saved (consequences of globalization). The role of nuclear weapons recently measured [2]. According to the models, the use of tactical nuclear weapons less effective than modern conventional. So its possible scenarios of controlled and restricted use. The war will be conducted in all spaces from conventional military thought of the land and sea to-earth and virtual.

The main weapon in the fight against the increasing number of irregular and mobile units will be humanitarian technologies associated with the destruction of his identity, both public and personal. And the armed forces, which will adopt these technologies will achieve absolute superiority over the old powerful industrial armies consisting of tanks and aircraft. The figure of the partisan change in the world. Now it's not just a defender of his native land.

He is a defender of certain values. And these values can be and are extraterritorial in nature, because the world has expanded and became tightly linked. Domestic philosopher, the translator and interpreter of Heidegger V. bibihin noticed that "Limit, whether it be lightning or war, not of this kind, to him it was possible in principle to prepare. Every meeting here is still a shock. In this case, the country should be considered advanced and not delayed by an imagined absolute standard of motion or development is the idol of historicism, and the ability or inability to notice the gap, from the standing from the events of the world. For this measure we have long or always been ahead of Europe" [11,14-15c.] And how is not a metaphysical partisans may notice their distance from the world? We can say that Partizan as a philosophical subject, is able to transcend and be mobile remains the most important figure in the development of military conflicts and out of them. And it is likely that such units will be born a new society and the army.

Kochedykov I. E.

The sources used

1. Carl Schmitt, the Theory of partisn. Moscow: Praxis, 2007. – 301 S.
2. The Pereslegin C. Hazardous Occam's razor M.: AST: Astrel, SPB.: Terra Fantastica, 2011, - 644 c.
3. Slipchenko V. I. the war of the future. — M.: Moscow public scientific Fund. 1999;
4. Messner E. world materially. — Moscow: Kuchkovo Field, 2004. — 512 with
5. Creveld, M. van. The transformation of war. — M.: Alpina Business books, 2005, — p. 344
6. Capitanes I. M. the War at sea. Actual problems of development of naval science. — Moscow: Vagrius, 2001. http://militera.lib.ru/science/kapitanetz/index.html
7. Utkin A. the Diplomacy of Woodrow Wilson M.: International relations, 1989
8. http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/debt/current
9. Hofmaster H. the Will to war, or the Impotence of policy. Philosophical-political treatise. SPb.: CI "Academy", 2006. – 288 p.
10. Fukuyama F. the End of history and the last; per. s angl. M. B. Levin. — Moscow: AST, 2007. — 588 p. — (Philisophy).
11. Bibihin V. V. Another start SPb.: Science, 2003, 230 p. 12) http://fantlab.ru/series164
12. http://fantlab.ru/series793
13. Polikarpov, Mikhail Russian hundred. Our people in Serbia. — Moscow: Eksmo, 1999. http://artofwar.ru/p/polikarpow_m_a/serbia.shtml
14. Walecki, Oleg. Wolves are white. — Moscow: Griffin M, 2006. — 288 p.
15. http://army.lv/ru/chechnya/76/42 http://www.russ.ru/Mirovaya-povestka/Esche-raz-o-tom-pochemu-shumit-Primor-e

Tags: assessment , armed forces , A.Snesariev's competition , winner work of a competition of A.E.Snesarev