The Russian Military: Declining or Better?

[carl]

Well he says the right things. But I wonder if he actually means it, seeing as how he is an integral part of a government that does a pretty good mafia imitation. Nothing will matter anyway unless they can defuse their demographic time bomb.

[kaur]

Behind the golden doors.

Mr Medvedev’s article evoked memories of Mikhail Gorbachev’s perestroika speeches in the 1980s; he said this week that what went wrong with Mr Gorbachev was that he began but failed to complete his reforms. Mr Medvedev, however, has not ever started. But cynics also saw an echo of Mr Putin’s first state-of-the-nation address as president in July 2000. Mr Putin talked then of a shrinking population, a backward economy and the importance of freedom of speech and human rights.

So it is not surprising that many Russians were unimpressed. As one website visitor commented: “Mr President, your mostly correct words have nothing in common with what is happening in the country of which you are the leader. I don’t believe you. Do something first, something that would illustrate your readiness to modernise the country and move it forward. Fire the government or let Khodorkovsky out. At least do something!”

The problem, argues Nikolai Petrov of the Carnegie Moscow Centre, is that the economy cannot become dynamic and progressive if the political system is not fair and free. But Mr Medvedev’s liberalism is virtual not real. In 18 months of his presidency, the Russian media has not become any freer. Political opponents have not gained access to television. The number of murders and attacks on human-rights activists has gone up. And the trial of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, once one of the country’s wealthiest oligarchs, has turned into a showpiece of political repression.

As Mr Medvedev’s letter to Mr Yushchenko shows, he fits in with the Kremlin’s policy of confrontation and the search for enemies, particularly at times of crisis. The tension at the top of the government does not seem to make Russia any friendlier towards the West. Although his article said that Russian foreign policy should be defined by the goal of modernisation, Mr Medvedev shook hands with Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez on an arms deal (see article). “We will supply Venezuela with the types of arms it asks for, acting in compliance with our international obligations. We will certainly deliver tanks too, why not? We have good tanks.”

On September 14th, at a conference on global security in Yaroslavl, Mr Medvedev again lambasted America for causing the global crisis. He also called for a new European security architecture that would give Russia greater influence, particularly in the former Soviet space.

http://www.economist.com/world/europ...ry_id=14460297

The Vladimir and Dmirty show.

TO SEE Russia’s two leaders in quick succession is instructive. The more so if the issue is which should run for president in 2012, when Dmitry Medvedev’s current term expires. Vladimir Putin, tanned and muscular, positively twinkled as he told the Valdai club of foreign academics and commentators over lunch on September 11th that “we will reach an agreement. We understand each other. We are people of one blood, with the same political views…We will look at economic and political factors, and at the position of the United Russia party, which I head, and then decide.”

http://www.economist.com/world/europ...ry_id=14460354

[MikeF]

Tom put it best:

Vision v/s rhetoric...

That will be the challenge of the next generation. Facta non Verba- putting actions/deeds with words...

It will be interesting.

v/r

Mike

[AdamG]

MOSCOW (AP) — Russia reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in response to a conventional strike and sees them as a "great equalizer" reducing the likelihood of aggression, a senior Russian official said Wednesday.

While Russia amended its military doctrine years ago to allow for the possibility of using nuclear weapons first in retaliation to a non-nuclear attack, the statement by Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin reflected Moscow's concern about prospective U.S. conventional weapons.

Weapons that have been developed in the United States under the so-called "prompt global strike" program would be capable of striking targets anywhere in the world in as little as an hour with deadly precision. Russia, which has lagged far behind in developing such weapons, has described them as destabilizing.

http://news.yahoo.com/russia-may-ans...155829813.html

MOSCOW, December 10 (RIA Novosti) – Russia’s military will have 500,000 soldiers serving on professional contracts within a decade, Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said Tuesday.

Half of the armed forces will be made up of professional service personnel by 2022 under plans to shift away from conscripts and more than double the number of contract soldiers from the present 220,000.

http://en.ria.ru/military_news/20131210/185434281.html