Makhmut Akhmetovich Gareev

This book was written in the very specific time period - it is 1995 - period where Afghanistan is still fresh in Russian military mind, Balkan (ex-YU) wars have just ended, Chechen wars did not yet start in full and generally optimism in international relations was the name of the day (1999 and intervention in Kosovo and political precedents and mess it caused was still 4 years away, not to mention bloody 2001 and all the conflicts it will cause in decades to come).

This is also period of all time low for new (post Soviet) Russian armed forces that has lost substantial infrastructure and personnel due to USSR and Warsaw Pact dissolution and found itself treated as a third world country by the NATO and West, which started to cause friction even then.

Entire book is basically a how-to-proceed from here (1995) when it comes to Russian military and security apparatus. It is a changed world, two blocs are no more (or to be honest one bloc is there no more, the second one is thriving) and world enters the multi-polar future, with prospects of greater number of inter-state conflicts (even if probability of huge two side conflict became very improbable).

In a very honest approach to the subject author shows quite an ability to point to the critical points of new situation in world politics at the time.

(a) Effect of the arrangements between NATO/US and Russia/CIS when it comes to weapons (conventional and nuclear) control and reduction - author stresses some weird mathematics in the background that were rather, lets say, against the Russian/CIS side. I have to admit my knowledge if these events is non-existent but it seems that there are parallels with WW1 end and end of Cold War in many ways (and with equally dangerous consequences). This left Russia in a bad situation, with huge territory and very low numbers allowed for its armed forces.
(b) Basically unchanged NATO/US stance towards the Russia, especially in realm of not allowing any opposition to rise up from the USSR territory to challenge them after end of Cold War (which was interestingly put on paper as part of the security policy - which again makes me ask why are other books related to interaction with Russia so condescending with Russia's perception of NATO/US when this stand by the latter was clearly stated?)
(c) Role of nuclear weaponry as a deterrent but with high probability of use when it comes to conflict between states that both have nuclear weapons. In general author is of opinion that actual nuclear war will not be executed (which I truly hope will be the case) but presence of these weapons and the counter measures might at some point trigger the escalation in case obsessive and uncontrollable political forces decide to use it because they think they can handle the aftermath.
(d) While conflict between more and less advanced force can be very short and fought at the advantage of more advanced belligerent (be it in stand off manner or just using single force (i.e. air)) conflict between two equal forces would be as bloody and long as war ever was. I liked author's constant comments that when it comes to propaganda it is important to recognize it and avoid it and remain objective about the situation at hand.

Rest of the book are author's thoughts that are primarily oriented towards the future of Russian/CIS military forces. He manages to cover everything from weapon development and production (with very interesting thoughts on silver-bullet approach to weapons [that sucks in all of the funding that could be used for actual practical weapon systems] which is something general world media is crazy about and also something that unfortunately does not exist), army organization, application and development of military science and art, letting military do its job without any political interference, officer, NCO and general soldier training and the need to strike the middle ground between professional army core and conscription (with all economical and social related elements).

As is case with majority of Russian military work, military thought is never considered apart from the politics and society. While only nuclear war would void all of the effort (since that would be the end), any conventional conflict does not exist in vacuum and all elements (political forces, society) play the role in the overall struggle, armed struggle being the bloodiest and direst struggle of them all.

Author is experienced senior staff office and it shows. Having survived WW2 and later built his career all the way to and after Afghanistan war, author's experience and very keen eye for the detail shows. While being the proponent of peace (as professional military usually is), he was very much aware that war is to stay for a very simple reason - sometimes national interests just cannot be defended using non-violent means and this situation (even if all participants in the crisis might be trying to avoid the armed conflict) always leads to direct actions and war. And following this line of thinking (that unfortunately proved itself as correct from time immemorial) author is right by saying that it is required for every state that wants to be safe to have a well constructed and trained military that is capable to identify the trends in political and military arena and always be on the lookout and ready to engage with opposition.

Only reason for the four stars is because the book is very short. I think author had much more to say on many of subjects but he kept it short - I guess because the book was meant to be a brief overview of what is required to create a functional and respectable military.

Highly recommended.… (mais)