FreeRepublic.com "A Conservative News Forum"
[ Last | Latest Posts | Latest Articles | Self Search | Add Bookmark | Post | Abuse | Help! ]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Russian Military Doctrine (2000)

Foreign Affairs News Keywords: RUSSIA, MILITARY DOCTRINE
Source: Arms Control Today
Published: April 22, 2000
Posted on 06/16/2000 14:46:46 PDT by Sawdring

Russia's Military Doctrine

Arms Control Today May 2000

Russia's Military Doctrine
 
 
 
 
On April 21, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a new military doctrine intended to replace the doctrine issued in 1993 and to elaborate on the military policies outlined in the new Russian national security concept, released in January. (See ACT, January/February 2000.) The doctrine, which Russia says is “defensive in nature,” states that it is designed for the current “transitional period” in both Russian politics and international relations.

The new military doctrine addresses a broad range of topics, including the nature and causes of modern wars, the internal and external military threats facing Russia, the organization and funding of the Russian military, and the principles governing Russia’s use of force. It also addresses a variety of specific, militarily relevant issues in the technical, political, social, and economic spheres, including the implementation of arms control treaties, the threat posed by “illegal armed formations” within Russia, and the effective imposition of international sanctions.

In keeping with the security concept it is intended to complement, the new doctrine appears to lower the threshold for Russia’s use of nuclear weapons below what was stated in the national security concept that was issued in 1997. Whereas the 1997 concept allowed the first use of nuclear arms only “in case of a threat to the existence of the Russian Federation,” the new doctrine allows nuclear weapons use “in response to large-scale aggression utilizing conventional weapons in situations critical to the national security of the Russian Federation.” It also explicitly states for the first time that Russia “reserves the right” to use nuclear weapons to respond to all “weapons of mass destruction” attacks. Furthermore, the doctrine reaffirms Russia’s negative security assurances to non-nuclear-weapon states and reiterates Russia’s extension of its nuclear umbrella to its allies. (See section I [8].)

The following is the full text of the doctrine, originally published in Russian in the April 22 issue of Nezavisimaya Gazeta and translated by the U.S. Foreign Broadcast Information Service (FBIS). Readers should note that the words and phrases enclosed in parentheses are part of the original text, while those in brackets are clarifications inserted by FBIS.

ACA Homepage
SUBSCRIBE TO ACT
BACK TO THE TOP
Arms Control Today
Internship Program
Fact Sheets
ACA Staff and Board

1 Posted on 06/16/2000 14:46:46 PDT by Sawdring
[ Reply | Private Reply | Top | Last ]


To: Sawdring

1997 Russian Military Doctrine

2 Posted on 06/16/2000 14:55:23 PDT by Sawdring
[ Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | Top | Last ]


To: Sawdring

3 Posted on 06/16/2000 18:39:25 PDT by howard wolf
[ Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | Top | Last ]


To: Madrussian, Vooch, Jerseygirl, Ohmlaw 00, Flamefront, Wallaby, Struwwelpeter

Security Council approves new Russian military doctrine
US sees nothing new in Russia's military doctrine
Russia May Expand Nuclear Doctrine (EFP)
Tough New Russian Military Doctrine is Reaction to NATO, Declares Putin
Putin signs new security doctrine
NATO Concerned Over Chechnya, Russian Army Doctrine
New Russian military doctrine casts critical eye at 'global monopoly'
Russia Updates Military Doctrine, sees new threats. (West is Enemy)

4 Posted on 06/16/2000 19:17:10 PDT by Sawdring
[ Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | Top | Last ]


To: Sawdring

There are some gems in here. The Russian Federation:

"...reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it and (or) its allies, as well as in response to large-scale aggression utilizing conventional weapons"

"...will not use nuclear weapons against states party to the Nonproliferation Treaty that do not possess nuclear weapons except in the event of an attack on the Russian Federation, the Russian Federation Armed Forces or other troops, its allies, or a state to which it has security commitments"

Not a word about pre-emptive strikes or destroying a neutral country for no reason. This policy reads the way I'd like to see the US's strategic policies spelled out.

In diplomacy and warfare, however, treaties are mere scraps of paper subject to the whims and fancies of whomever bought the Oval Office that year.

5 Posted on 06/17/2000 08:57:53 PDT by struwwelpeter
[ Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | Top | Last ]


To: Sawdring

thank you for this constant surveillance.....I just pull up your name and the work is done....

6 Posted on 06/17/2000 10:04:56 PDT by Jackie222
[ Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | Top | Last ]


To: Sawdring

Thank you so much! Valuable info here!

7 Posted on 06/17/2000 11:19:50 PDT by jerseygirl
[ Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | Top | Last ]


To: jerseygirl

Wars can be

".......— just (not contravening the UN Charter and the fundamental norms and principles of international law, and waged as self-defense by the party subject to aggression);

unjust (contravening the UN Charter and the fundamental norms and principles of international law, falling within the definition of aggression, and waged by the party undertaking the armed attack); ........"

odd, to compare this with the expanisionist version written by Strobe Talbott and Mad Cow.......they have lots of blather defining when and how the US should "intervene" in other people's nattions, but not one mention of why a intervention would be "just"

8 Posted on 06/19/2000 07:40:50 PDT by vooch
[ Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | Top | Last ]


To: vooch

well said!

9 Posted on 06/19/2000 12:40:04 PDT by jerseygirl
[ Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | Top | Last ]


To: struwwelpeter

In diplomacy and warfare, however, treaties are mere scraps of paper subject to the whims and fancies of whomever bought the Oval Office that year.

Here is the new doctrine in action. Russia steps up expulsion of US evangelists

10 Posted on 07/23/2000 17:58:20 PDT by Sawdring
[ Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | Top | Last ]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

[ Top | Latest Posts | Latest Articles | Self Search | Add Bookmark | Post | Abuse | Help! ]

FreeRepublic , LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
Forum Version 2.0a Copyright © 1999 Free Republic, LLC