The Ministry of Defense of Belarus and Russia

This paper is a comparative treatment of twain ministries of defence of substantial strategic importance to the valet, that of Russia and Belarus. twain countries accommodate had agonistic relationships with the United States and the western human beings and make water been functionively pursuing lay outivities with those countries strange to western imperialism such as chinawargon and Venezuela.This paper give, first, summarize the radical coordinate and relations of the deuce ministries, and then compare and contrast them. A conclusion willing attempt to bring these insights together. The Ministry of defensive measure of BelarusInterestingly, the self-abnegation Ministry of Belarus has its grow in the reaction to the Chernobyl disaster of 1986. This disaster is one of the main reasons the two body politics it affected, Ukraine and Belarus (as the city is on their border) declared independence from the USSR some(prenominal) years later. In fact, the very first p iece of legislation establishing this ministry (in 1992) was explicitly titled the answer against the Affects of Chernobyl and acted as a form of public mobilization against the tremendous health risks of the demeanorborne radiation (Legislative Basis, 2009).But in the era of 1991-1992, historic in that it was the era of the give ear of the USSR and the independence of the Warsaw Pact nations and the former Soviet countrys, saw the Belorussian state declare independence from the defunct USSR and develop its ingest institutions, school principal among them was the ministry of defense force. Several issues presented themselves first, about half of the Belarusian republican troops was of Russian descent, and second, that thousands of Belarusian troops were serving the former USSR in countries abroad.The pertly formed independent Belarusian governance then implemented programs that re-Belarussianized the arm twitchs and brought those expatriated soldiers home (Global Securit y, 2008). The structure of the defensive structure ministry is non civilian, and in fact, a major issue in Belarusian governmental culture is the means by which the purely military aspects of the Ministry and its civilian contacts could be regularized. But at the moment, the undefiled staff of the Ministry are provide officers. Currently, the pastor of refutation is Col. Gen.Leonid Maltsyev (appointed 2001), and he is support by a general staff that includes the following offices the chief of staff of the armed forces of the republic, the deputy minister, a ministry dedicated to armaments and acquisitions, then Logistics, army overleap and lastly, the air command and the air defense. As Belarus is landlocked, thither is no nautical force. The structure of the Ministry in terms of a chain of command is that the Defense Ministry is a part of the Council of Ministers, itself directly under the President of the Republic, currently the wildly popular Alexander Luksahenko.The G eneral staff serves directly under the Defense Minister, and under him bear the land, air and support staffs in a sentiment of equality. Fin eithery, under the land forces stand logistics. Hence, the doctrine here is that Logistics and strategy stand under the land army, while the air corps follows orders. Hence, the equality amid land and air forces is theoretical only. The tradition of the ministry is that land forces should predominate, and air forces act as an auxiliary to them. The mentality and culture of the Ministry follows a very specific doctrine. Its main points are the followinga) that the ministry is dedicated to a labyrinthine sensed cooperation among states. in that respect is to be strict neutrality in terms of power blocs, and cooperation will not follow and specific ideological bent, but what serves the representation of the ministry in terms of the defense of the republic. b) that this ministry will never es evidence to acquire atomic weapons. c) that it operates in accordance with a strict equity with another(prenominal) states ( military machine Doctrine, 2009). In addition, the Military Doctrine of the Republic is an important source for the basic functioning of the Ministry.The roughly interesting elements of this more or less bureaucratic document are the conditions that must prevail for the military services of the republic to respond if the republic is threatened. The document itself calls this the political-military blots that permit the usage of armed force in general, but are obviously applied to Belarus specifically. Hence it is a sort of a moral blueprint where force can be used, though it does not specify the amount of force in separately case. These are a) the lack of effective political mechanisms to solve political problems.b) frugal imperialism , that is, the desire for advanced countries to use their economic and political clout to operation minuscularer and weaker states c) the domination of a few major po wers over the resources of the testicle d) the development of new technologies that threaten the typical military balance in the world e) the use of propaganda to overthrow states (in other words, the use of a controlled media to evade public opinion over and above normal democratic channels) f) the habit of ethnic groups in order to force a volatile situation (Bases, 2009).Needless to say, this official doctrine of the defense ministry makes perfect sense given the small size and vulnerability of the republic. Belarus is a part of the non-aligned movement, which brings the Ministry of Defense, hostile Affairs and the government activity into regular co-operation. Since Belarus has regular treaties with Venezuela, Russia, Vietnam and chinaware, the indemnity here is to co-operate fully with the president and the exotic ministry in developing a non-aligned movement that seeks to alter the current uni-polar disposition of global power.Hence, the Defense Ministry is following directives flummoxd by the presidency and the extraneous Ministry in developing a place in the world for smaller, weaker powers who seek to create a power balance with the west rather than take on the west dominate them. Hence, the Defense Ministry has adopted a defense insurance policy that is all in all in line with that of the presidency, the council of ministers, the contradictory ministry and the spirit of being in charge of the defense of a small country. Lastly, since Belarus economically is one of the most dynamic countries in the world, the funding of the military forces has never been an issue (IMF, 2009).The fall of the USSR meant that many of the Russian forces in the Warsaw Pact countries were approve office into Belarus, leading to a situation where Belarus was one of the most militarized countries in the world. President Lukashenko sought to reduce the number of forces, end conscription, and hence, reduce the communication channel of the armed forces on the b udget. Today, the armed forces are a fraction of what they apostrophize in 1992, leading to a smooth relationship with the finance ministry and the presidency. Thus, in conclusion, the Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Belarus is a model for the developing world.It seeks no political power, since it already is directly represented in the council of ministers and the ministry itself is run by uniformed officers appointed by the President. It cooperates fully with the foreign ministry in developing a military doctrine in line with the non-aligned movement. It seeks a balanced co-operation with the world and a reduction in the number of two nuclear and conventional weapons systems in world politics. It has been steadily reducing its cost to the ministry of finance, leading toto say the leasta smooth working relationship. The Defense Ministry of RussiaThe structure of the Russian Ministry of Defense is largely civilian. The Minister himself is Anatoly Serdyuvkov, who, significan tly, was a former tax official under Putin. However, immediately under him is a uniformed officer, Gen. Nikolai Makarov, who was the former commanding officer of the Siberian military district. This is significant for one major reason, it is the post that places the Russian armed forces in direct connection and communication with the Asian powers, curiously china. Under the Minister and General Makarov, there is a First substitute Minister and a States Secretary for Defense.Under him is a woman, Lyubov Kudelina, who is in charge of the relationships among pay and Defense. While the Minister himself is a former tax official, Mrs. Kudelina withal worked at Finance and was deeply involved with tax collection. It would be say that at the fall of the USSR between 1990 and 1993, tax collection almost completely bottomed out. The money and institutions for collection no longer functioned, and taxes were reduced to justification money from the local criminal gangs. Vladimir Putin, financed by oil money, reversed this trend.Hence, there should be no surprise that two major figures in the defense ministry have little military experience, but were both close to the fiscal and taxing apparatus (Senior Officials, 2009). Under the Defense Ministrys Finance representative lies, not surprisingly, the chief of armaments, the chief of Logistics and another deputy minister. Since logistics and armaments procurance are costly productions, their subordination to the finance representative is no surprise. This structure seems eminently rational. It builds in inter-agency cooperation within the Defense Ministry itself especially within the important financial end.What is more important, however, is how the agency views itself, its mission and its role in the government. homogeneous in the Belarussian case, the Russian Defense Ministry, in cooperation with the presidency and the ministry of finance, has developed a comprehensive understanding of itself in the world and i n the Russian, and post-Soviet world. First and foremost, earlier any other consideration, the Ministry of Defense makes it clear that its number one priory in the defense of Russia is to maintain a high level of deterrence. It seeks to defend Russia by making any attack on it of painfully high cost.After this, assail readiness is the next priority, and within this priority is the fantasy of high mobility. revive and the efficient use of resources is a major part of the Russian defense strategy. It is cheaper and more efficient to maintain small numbers of infantry, but backed by the highest in technology in terms of missile defense, the air corps and intelligence (Development, 2009). After this, trey elements come into play first, the nature of high-technology weapons, the war on terror and the protection of the environment.This latter even has its avow office, under a General trained in economy, General Alevtin Yuruk in a rater unique arrangement where his office interfaces with the rest of the Russian government to loosen up funds and manpower to repair any environmental damage caused by the action of the armed forces, and most importantly, the safe memory of the nuclear stockpile. After Chernobyl, the environment is more than just a sweet slogan, it is a matter of life and death (Environmental Protection, 2009). But by from the above strategic considerations, there is another, moral, sense of Russias defense ministry and its place in the world.The fall of the USSR do it clear that the Russian Federation was to represent its mission, its identity and its interaction with the outside world. Hence, the ministry has, in communication with the past three presidents of the post USSR world, created a moral sense of itself, one based on the following ideas a) the creation of a democratic planetary order where a few major powers do not control the worlds resources b) force can be used only with the express liberty of the UN c) forces worldwide should b e decreased to a minimum and used simply for defense d) to create the infrastructure for Russias new mission as a major powere) external cooperation necessary for the war on terror, drugs and mafia activities f) co-operation, not confrontation wit the USA g) Asia is the future, and hence, building strong ties with China and Vietnam become of paramount importance (Global Cooperation, 2009). Several conclusions can be drawn from this. First, Russia clearly sees its defense role as a vast power, not as a second tier force. Second, it seeks to create an international order based on equity, around the security council of the UN and its decisions where Russia has a veto. It sees China as central to its future security.And, lastly, it sees China, or more specifically the Russia-China impress Cooperation Organization (SCO) as a means of equilibrise its relations with the US, NATO and the EU. Hence, balance and cooperation over confrontation seems to be the theoretical grounding (Global Cooperation 2009). The mission of the Defense Department in Russia is mirrored by the two other agencies (other than finance, which are intertwined deliberately), the brass and the Foreign Ministry. In a speech go out January 18, 2009, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov laid out the foreign policy goals of Russia, and these contain in the following ideasa) the rebuilding of the financial system fo the dry land on a more democratic basis. The Russian government has made clear that it is the asymmetry of the system that caused the meltdown,. Too more than mon3y in too few workforce, both in terms of stats and individuals is the cause of the meltdown. The post-World War II system needs to be dismantled and rebuilt on an equitable basis. b) The coloured recognition of the independence of Kosovo and the US/Israeli support of Georgian intrusion against the Ossetians prove the need for a real democratic world order, not one controlled by the US and its few allies.Russian intervention to repel the Georgian invasion of Ossetia (who voted for independence and union with Russia) was meant to help create the infrastructure for a new international order, since Georgia would not have invaded had the US guaranteed diplomatical support. c) Lavrov states the era of national egoism is over. d) he seeks what he calls a polycentric world order. e) and, as seen above, cooperation with the EU is as important as cooperation with China. China is not mentioned in Lavrovs speech, which is significant (Lavarov, 2008).On the other hand, the foreign policy concept of the Russian Presidency stresses China far more than the EU. Medvedev makes the claim that China is a major, if not the major, priority of Russian foreign policy. Polycentrism is again stressed, and again, that the imbalance of the world financial systemtoo much money in too few handsis the cause of the recent meltdown. Lastly, the foreign policy ideas of the new president seek to establish strong environmental standard s, dynamism security and a price structure that is fair and steady and that all economic growth be environmentally sustainable (Medvedev, 2008).Several things derive from this par there may be a coalition of defense and Presidency against the foreign ministry over the issue of China. While it remains that President Medvedev and the Defense Ministry treat China as the number one priority (and several recent summits between Peking and Moscow over military matters reflects this), Lavarov seems to intend that the EU should have this role. However, these agencies seem to have more in parking lot than anything else, and these commonalities should be taken as basic ministerial policy Russia as a spectacular power, polycentricity, economic democracy and basic international equality.Conclusion par of Belarus and Russia in Defense Policy It does not take a sense datum to figure out that both Belarus and Russia are responding to American pressure and military adventurism. Both countries are threatened by American expansionism in both the economic and military spheres. Hence, their defense ministries reflect this. And of course, since Russia and Belarus are politically and ethnically connected, as well as unguarded to American pressure, their defense policies will overlap in several areas.However, the size differences of Russia and Belarus will also be the cause of some differences in policy, especially since Belarus makes no claim to vast power status, but in fact, would like to see the concept of great powers disappear. The main similarities of the two defense departments are their stress on international equity and polycentricity. The world order should reflect diversity in nations and interests, not the domination of the US and its allies in world politics and finance. Both ministries would like to see drastic reductions in the arms of the world, and arms to be used solely for defense, not for offense.Both ministries see a balanced foreign policy as central t hat Asia should be used to balance atomic number 63 and Europe to balance the US. Both Belarus and Russian military brass are visiting China and Venezuela on a regular basis, and both countries have signed arms deals with Peking and Caracas. Needless to say, this is a means of balancing US hegemony and the US involvement in Iraq, Africa and the Balkans. It might be surmised that the Belarusian ministry is purely military because Belarus is small and very vulnerable. Hence, the military forces must have direct access to state power in order to act quickly.This was made especially important when threats of invasion came from the McCain presidential camp. The Russians, less vulnerable to assault and attack, can afford some space between civilian and military personnel, though the second in command of the ministry in Russia is the chief of staff. It is curious that the Minister of Defense for Russia has little military experience, but much financial experience. This suggests that the mi nistry really is designed to interface with the rest of the government to create an integral policy, while actual military decisions are in the hands of the second in command, General Makarov.This sort of interfacing is certainly a good enough beginning for further research in this field. References This paper used loosely primary sources in its construction. The most important were On Belarus (www. mod. mil. by) Ministry of Defense. Administrative Board. Belarusian Defense Ministry Portal. 2009 Ministry of Defense. Legislative Basis. Belarusian Defense Ministry Portal. 2009 Ministry of Defense. Military Doctrine of the Republic of Belarus. Belarusian Defense Ministry Portal. 2009 Ministry of Defense. The Bases of the Military Policy of the Republic of Belarus. Belarusian Defense Ministry Portal.2009 International Monetary Fund. The Republic of Belarus and the IMF. Executive Board Consultation, 2009 One collateral Source Global Security. Ministry of Defense of Belarus. In D efense Policy and Programs, 2008. (Globalsecurity. org) On Russia Ministry of Defense. Development. In Military Insight. Published by the Russian Ministry of Defense, 2009 Ministry of Defense. War on Terrorism. In Military Insight. Published by the Russian Ministry of Defense, 2009 Ministry of Defense. Global Cooperation In Military Insight. Published by the Russian Ministry of Defense, 2009 Ministry of Defense.Environmental Protection In Military Insight. Published by the Russian Ministry of Defense, 2009 Medvedev, Dimitri. Strengthening Dynamic confederation with the Asia-Pacific Region. In Articles of the President of Russia. (Kremlin. ru), 2008 Lavarov, Sergei. Transcript of Remarks and Response to Questions by Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergey Lavrov at Press Conference on 2008 Foreign Policy Outcomes. MFA, January 16, 2009 Ministry of Defense. Deputy Minister of Defense for Financial and economic Issues In Senior Officials. Published by the Russian Ministry of De fense, 2009