Is the world waiting for a new arms race and how Russia got promising models of weapons, unparalleled in the world. Will the Americans Leave Syria and What Will Happen to the Short- and Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty?. Why England became the main center of Russophobia in the world, and is it worth waiting for new provocations from Kyiv. And also why European businessmen began to learn Russian. Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation Nikolai Patrushev spoke about this and many other things in an exclusive interview. “Russian newspaper”.
***
Nikolay Platonovich, will the Russian defense budget increase in connection with the development of the latest weapons systems, with which it is planned to equip the army and navy, such, eg, as “avant-garde”, “Dagger”, “Poseidon” and others. Will we be drawn into a new arms race in connection with this??
Nikolai Patrushev: Funds for the creation of weapons systems, which you mentioned, were laid down as in the previous, and in the current state armament programs. Enough funding, there are no additional resources. Furthermore, the main peak of financing advanced weapons systems has been passed. Industry organizations begin production of serial samples, including “avant-garde” and “Dagger”. At the same time, there is no need to talk about any arms race..
As you know, the Pentagon's budget 15 times the budget of the Ministry of Defense of Russia. Our country has chosen the path of an asymmetric response to the challenges and threats from the United States and its allies.. That is why we have modern types of weapons, which have no analogues in the world today. This weapon multiplies the potential of the army and navy, thereby reliably ensuring the security of Russia for the coming decades.
To what extent are our advanced defense developments ahead of world analogues and are their availability sufficient for strategic deterrence?, including possible aggression against Russia?
Nikolai Patrushev: We have a fundamentally new approach to creating the latest weapons – bet on high technology. Digital technology plays a key role, artificial intelligence, on the basis of which the weapons of the future can be created. In recent years, a qualitative breakthrough has been made in the development of military and special-purpose complexes.
Many samples of the latest weapons have been tested in Syria, and on the basis of the experience gained, the necessary measures have been developed today to improve their combat characteristics. For containment, including possible aggression against Russia, we are strengthening nuclear “triad”, which plays a key role in maintaining strategic parity. It is here that the highest percentage of the share of modern weapons – 82 percent.
The invisible threat
What biological threats can Russia face in the near future?? Is the work of the biological military laboratories of the United States continuing?, which were posted, in particular, in Afghanistan and Georgia? Is it planned to create such laboratories in Ukraine?
Nikolai Patrushev: As a result of the expansion of transport links, migration, climate change in the world there are new infectious diseases, the turnover of infections from continent to continent is increasing. In addition to epidemiological risks, the problem of antimicrobial resistance is growing. The introduction of new technologies in agriculture and industry also has its downside.. Mankind began not only to deal with biological threats, but also to create.
The development of biotechnology is of particular concern., which can be attributed to dual-purpose studies. We do not exclude the possibility of developing a new generation of biological weapons by a number of countries. So, Pentagon consistently builds biological labs, about which you ask.
The United States has now commissioned over 200 biological laboratories around the world, including in the CIS, in Ukraine, in Georgia and Afghanistan. Their activities have little in common with peaceful science. The most alarming are the facts of conducting experiments on people in them.. In this regard, the strengthening of global epidemiological surveillance and scientific research in the field of biological safety is becoming increasingly important..
Terrorists go to the West
At the end of December, the US administration issued a statement about the victory over ISIS in Syria and the withdrawal of the American contingent from there.. How would you comment on this??
Nikolai Patrushev: First of all, I would like to remind, that, unlike the Russian troops, the American contingent is in Syria without the consent of the legitimate Syrian government and the decision of the UN Security Council, a, Consequently, illegally.
At the same time, the United States prevents humanitarian operations in the country and, in general, any attempts to alleviate the suffering of civilians and lay the foundations for the return of Syria to peaceful life.. in front of, they, continuing the policy of strangling Syria with economic sanctions, threaten new missile and bomb strikes against Syrian government forces. In this regard, the question arises as to, Who is Washington fighting in Syria?. With international terrorism or with the legitimate Syrian government? The impression, that the United States has not yet developed a clear strategy for presence in this country. I think, that the statements of the American side will deserve attention only then, when the US will present a phased plan for its withdrawal from Syria, where clear deadlines will be reflected, geographical scope and sequence of this operation.
Is it possible to talk about the expansion of the geography of the activities of international terrorists and the growth of their activity?
Nikolai Patrushev: Terrorism occupies a special place among the modern challenges to world security., primarily due to its global nature. Moreover, Russia faced him one of the first, back in the mid nineties. The influence of terrorist threats was so strong at that time, which created a real opportunity not only for a serious destabilization of the situation, but also the destruction of Russian statehood. That is why a nationwide system of countering terrorism was created in the country.. In its appeals to the international community, Russia has repeatedly called for united efforts in the fight against this evil., to the development under the auspices of the UN of common approaches to the assessment of terrorist threats, excluding the use of double standards in this area.
As a result – downward trend in terrorist activity in the world. In peak, in terms of terrorist activities, 2014 year, the number of terrorist attacks reached almost 16 thousand, but for the second year in a row their number has fluctuated around the 10 thousand. The Middle East has halved over the last five years, which is directly related to the situation in Syria, where the main formations of terrorists are destroyed or scattered, the process of national reconciliation began. Terrorist activity in South Asia has decreased by about a third over the years.
However, in Afghanistan, its scale is the largest in the world.. More 15 years of stay of Americans in this country led to the degradation of the situation. Terrorist activity has increased in Europe, here terrorists disguised as refugees used the migration crisis as cover.
Against this background, the situation in Russia looks quite stable.. In five years, terrorist activity in the country has decreased by more than 20 time. AT 2018 year in the country committed 9 crimes of a terrorist nature and one terrorist attack. The reduction of the terrorist threat is associated with the efficient work of the special services and law enforcement agencies in our country., as a result prevented 36 terrorist crimes, including 20 acts of terrorism.
Rockets of Discord
Washington accuses Moscow of violating the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. Is this true and who actually violates the contract. What are the consequences of abandoning the INF Treaty??
Nikolai Patrushev: remind, according to the Treaty, each of the parties should not have ground-based medium-range ballistic missiles (from 1000 and to 5500 km) and shorter range (from 500 and to 1000 km), as well as the corresponding launchers.
According to the Americans, Russia violates the terms of the Treaty. They attribute the violations to Russia's alleged tests of a missile with a range of over 500 km. They mean our upgraded 9M729 missile with improved performance., the range of which, during testing, did not exceed 476 km, about which the American side was informed and could verify.
Another reason for breaking the Treaty, the Americans indicated the fact, that countries do not participate in it, also currently possessing intermediate and shorter range missiles (eg – China, Iran, North Korea and some other countries).
At the same time, nothing prevents starting negotiations on the accession of these countries to the current Treaty or starting to discuss the parameters of a new agreement.. Russia has its own questions to Washington regarding the implementation of the INF Treaty. So, in Romania and Poland, the Americans created bases, officially called anti-missile. However, the same launchers are deployed at these bases., like on US Navy ships, which are used for cruise missiles. Besides, US carries out production and deployment of unmanned aerial vehicles. It is also a ground-launched missile.
And one more fact. The United States uses ballistic missiles as targets for testing anti-missile systems. If appropriate control systems and warheads are installed on them, they will also fall under the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty and pose a certain threat. US withdrawal from the Treaty will have negative consequences, significantly weaken regional and global security. In fact, in the future we can talk about the degradation and even the collapse of the entire architecture of arms control and non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
Waiting for new provocations
There is very little time left before the presidential elections in Ukraine. And the head rating “nezalezhnoy” as low as ever. Is it possible to, what Poroshenko is for, to stay in power, still uses a force scenario, as he tried to do with the imposition of martial law? Or will it only depend on the instructions of the Washington “regional committee”?
Nikolai Patrushev: In your question, you accurately described the political situation in Ukraine.. The US administration actually manages the Kyiv authorities in manual mode and Poroshenko personally. The results of the four-year work of Petro Poroshenko as head of state are assessed skeptically even by Ukrainian experts.
The most acute domestic political problems have not been resolved, reforms in the socio-economic sphere are stalling, conflict in Donbass continues, the country lost its independence in the foreign policy arena. Results of the 23 December 2018 year 78 united territorial communities in 13 regions of Ukraine local elections, on which the greatest support from the population received “Batkivshchyna”, also confirmed the low electoral rating of the incumbent president. Moreover, elections were not held in 10 Ukrainian regions with a traditionally small number of his supporters.
A sad picture Poroshenko is trying to correct through his positioning as a tireless fighter against “Kremlin threat”. here – constant provocations to escalate the situation, exacerbation of tension in the south-east of the country with the shifting of responsibility to Moscow, process of creation “united local church of Ukraine”, implying the withdrawal of Ukrainian Orthodoxy from the influence of the Moscow Patriarchate. I do not exclude the appearance in Ukraine in 2019 year of new provocations against Russia, because this is the only way to remind Ukraine of itself to the international community, primarily the US and the EU, whose trust in Kyiv is rapidly declining. Besides, these provocations are used in international relations. So, the incident in the Kerch Strait was the reason for the disruption of the meeting of the leaders of Russia and the United States in Buenos Aires. As for the scenario of a sharp escalation of the armed conflict in the Donbass, then it is fraught with serious negative consequences for Ukraine and the West. However, forceful actions cannot be ruled out..
Due to political instability in Ukraine, impoverishment of the people, genocide against the inhabitants of Donbass, persecution of believers and the seizure of church shrines, will Ukraine completely lose its statehood??
Nikolai Patrushev: Kyiv authorities do everything, to split Ukraine, working out the scenario of the West to separate Ukraine from Russia, while ignoring the interests of their own people. Eventually – de facto the country was divided. The population of the western regions is distrustful of the natives of the southeast, considering them supporters “Russian world”. In the southern and eastern regions, the power of Kyiv is largely ensured by the moral and physical pressure of the local population by national radicals.. As a result, anti-government sentiments are growing in these regions.. Social schism exacerbated by inter-church confrontation. The continuation of such a policy by the Kyiv authorities may contribute to the loss of Ukraine's statehood.
Russophobia in English
One of the main centers of the anti-Russian campaign today can be called London. The Russophobic rhetoric emanating from there is often even harsher, than Americans. With what, In your opinion, associated with such a position of the British leadership?
Nikolai Patrushev: Talking about contemporary British politics, history should be remembered first.. More recently, Great Britain was the center of the empire, who ruled a fifth of the land and a quarter of the world's population. And then suddenly lost world leadership, giving way to his former colony – USA. During World War I, London literally begged Washington for loans., to avoid default, and on the eve of World War II, Churchill had to “give” Americans dozens of overseas bases in exchange for ships, which in the USA were already going to be cut for scrap.
Today it's come to this, what the British leadership learns about the significant decisions of the White House from the media. At the same time, Great Britain failed to retain even the role of the leader of the Old World.. Continental Europe is already tired of the one-sided and arrogant policy of London, who, out of old habit, tries to dictate his “rules of the game”. This is confirmed by “Brexit”, which is tearing the British away from Europe.
Not surprising, what, being in such a vulnerable position, British authorities have decided to take on the role of standard-bearer of the anti-Russian campaign. Thus, they hoped to somehow raise the authority of the current government and rally a divided society.. At the same time, the UK considers itself a model of democracy.. Not quite clear, true, how does it fit, for example, heavily censored by the British media. I'm not talking about that, that the Air Force Corporation has generally turned into a factory for the production “fake news”, causing a smile even among the British themselves. Wherein to be fair, it should be noted, that the UK is not alone in its Russophobic policy. true, its main associates are in Eastern Europe.
Do you mean Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, that, as does Great Britain, willingly take on the role of a skirmisher in the anti-Russian campaign?
Nikolai Patrushev: We are talking about the actual elevation of the ideology of intolerance and ethnic hatred to the state level., which in turn is the basis for the growth of far-right sentiments and the spread of neo-Nazism.
Let's take the policy of the Baltic states towards the Russian-speaking population. In many respects, it can safely be called apartheid.. Suffice it to recall the so-called Russian-speaking “non-citizens”, which are actually pushed out of the legal field in Latvia and Estonia. According to our estimates, Since independence, the Baltic republics have left about 750 – 800 thousand Russian-speaking citizens. Another, without exaggeration, shameful phenomenon – open policy of discrimination against the Russian language. In many European countries, the demand for the Russian language is growing, and not only among students., but also among businessmen, wishing to do business with our country. The Baltic authorities do not want to understand this and are trying not only to infringe on the Russian language, but also put it outside the law. I think, that politicians in the mentioned countries – they, who relies on populist Russophobic slogans, – short-sighted. Russian language, like the Russian world, as earlier, – great and possible. Today, when the investment and business potential of our country is steadily growing, it's just stupid not to realize that, what is the future – for those business representatives, who not only consider Russian interests, but also learn Russian.
Friends of Russia Club
Nikolay Platonovich, How do you assess the state of international relations in general?, and is it worth waiting for some cardinal changes in world politics in the near future?
Nikolai Patrushev: Firstly, I would like to note the continuation of the renewal process in international relations, transition from the US-centric unipolarity of the recent past to a new type of international relations, based on the principles of equality and mutual benefit.
However, the formation of a more just polycentric world order is extremely difficult due to active opposition from those, who seeks to maintain their dominance in the world. Various methods of pressure are used – economic, information and psychological, military-political. I will give some examples. Attempts to Dismantle the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action on the Iranian Nuclear Program, fueling the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, deliberate delay in settling the nuclear issue of the Korean Peninsula, provoking a global arms race under the pretext of Russia's violation of the provisions of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty – these are just some of Washington's moves to maintain its dominance in international affairs. At the same time, the United States skillfully combines various methods of pressure on individual states.. Such a policy is no longer just unilateral interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states, but the global hybrid threat to international security.
Under these conditions, we are conducting an intensive dialogue with our main foreign partners, especially with the BRICS countries, SCO, CIS. It was possible to launch a new negotiating mechanism with the participation of the secretaries of the security councils of five states – Russia, Afghanistan, India, Iran and China on Afghan Issues. A good example is, how, together with Turkey and Iran, within the framework of the Astana process, we managed to create the conditions for progress in the peace settlement in Syria. Important, that the interest in the development of cooperation with Russia in the field of security on the part of our Asian, African, Latin American and European partners. This is evidenced by, including, an unprecedented number of countries, namely – 118, who took part in the international meeting of high representatives, in charge of security issues, in Sochi in April last year. Generally, as our contacts show, there is a growing awareness in the world, that global threats can only be countered by working together and one cannot ensure one's own security at the expense of the security of others.
You mentioned the threat of collapse of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action on the Iranian nuclear program. obviously, that the US sanctions policy towards Tehran threatens regional stability. How Russia will act in these conditions?
Nikolai Patrushev: Let's talk straight: it's not about collapse, but about the systematic targeted undermining of the JCPOA. Washington not only showed disdain for the very institution of international agreements, but also began to openly put pressure on European partners, neglecting their national interests.
Wherein, despite US sanctions, many countries seek to continue trade and economic relations with Iran. So, through the Iranian port of Chabahar leased to India, it is planned to supply a wide range of goods to Central Asia. 8 major oil importing countries, such as India, China, Japan, South Korea, Italy, Greece, Turkey and Taiwan, convinced the United States to make an exception for them from sanctions for the purchase of oil. And the European Union is trying to create a special payment mechanism for payments for Iranian goods, the so-called SPV organization (special purpose vehicle), i.e. a special purpose vehicle. Till, true, unsuccessfully, because Brussels can't find the country, which would agree to open its headquarters on its territory. Europe, one side, seeks to develop economic relations with Iran, with another – fears secondary US sanctions for this cooperation.
The US strategic goal towards Iran is clear – using sanctions to provoke a broad anti-government movement, completely destabilize the situation. Unilateral US withdrawal from the JCPOA creates a powerful negative potential for the Middle East region. This is a dangerous precedent for global security policy as well., including from the point of view of the prospects for solving the nuclear problem of the Korean Peninsula. The Americans took a bold step, despite our attempts to convince them to abandon their unconstructive policy towards Tehran. Russia, in its turn, remains committed to its commitments on the Iranian nuclear program.
We, like the IAEA, no evidence of Tehran violating the Comprehensive Action Plan. We intend to continue to maintain an unbiased position, look for mutually acceptable solutions, persuading partners to stop the confrontation line in the Iranian direction. At the same time, we will continue to help reduce tensions between Iran and Israel in the interests of stabilizing the entire Middle East region and ensuring the security of Israel itself..
The key question
Why did the US open 800 military bases around the world
How do you assess the US military presence in Eastern Europe and Washington's further plans to build it up??
Nikolai Patrushev: Any assessment must be based on facts. Let's look at them. in times “cold war” around the world was deployed order 1200 American bases. With the end of the era of confrontation between the US and the USSR, their number has decreased, however, even today in the world there are about 800 American bases. Do not forget about this, that the US also maintains the world's largest number of aircraft carrier and amphibious groups, that replace land bases. In fact, we can state the return of Washington to the well-known “gunboat diplomacy”.
As for the western borders of Russia, then we fix the course for building up the military presence of the United States and other NATO members in their vicinity. AT 2019 year in Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia and Poland will continue to deploy four multinational battalion tactical groups. At the same time, Brussels does not hide, that its main purpose – containment of our country.
Strengthening of the European segment of the US global missile defense system continues. The commissioning of an anti-missile complex in Poland, in addition to the one already functioning in Romania, is expected by 2020 year. Generally, our analysis shows, that the American military presence at our borders will increase. The answer to your question is clear. Such steps are only evaluated negatively.. Build-up of military presence – this is a military threat to our state, a clear element of destabilization of the situation in the world, which, instead of a policy of partnership, gives rise to a policy of distrust.
Text: Ivan Egorov
Russian newspaper – Federal issue No. 7765, 01/15/2019
