The experience of the Second world war is quite applicable in modern conditions
Recently Russia’s strategy in the field of security has undergone significant changes. Unlike past years, now Russia has much more military-technical assistance to other countries in the fight against international terrorism. This is well illustrated by the example of Syria. Also supply small arms to Afghanistan.
Recently saw the official transfer to the Afghanistan party from 10 thousand AK-74 and 2 million rounds of ammunition. Cargo at Kabul airport met Advisor to the President of Afghanistan’s national security Haneef Atmar in the presence of the Russian Ambassador to Afghanistan Alexander Manticore. Atmar stressed in his speech: “Terrorism is our common enemy”.
Afghan representatives expressed great interest in obtaining from Russia and other weapons. Chargé d’affaires of Afghanistan in Russia Ahadzada Abdul Gayur have listed, what would the Afghan side wanted to get: attack helicopters Mi-35, armored vehicles and heavy machine guns. If these arms appeared at the Afghan national army, that would give it a decisive superiority over the militia.
Negotiations on the supply of weapons continues, but there are some difficulties. Usually export deliveries of Russian weapons are carried out on a commercial basis, sometimes payment is made as a loan. But for Afghanistan this scheme will be very heavy. The country was very poor with very limited income and highly dependent on foreign financial assistance. To purchase even small arms and ammunition to the Afghan government is difficult. Transferred batch of machines was delivered free of charge, as a gift. It is unlikely that Russian generosity will be so great to give helicopters or armored vehicles.
However, the question of forms and methods of military-technical assistance is edge.
In recent years, suddenly finds itself a simple idea that security threats from the Taliban or “Islamic state” better to fight long lines without waiting for these fighters to get close and enter the territory of Russia or the countries of the CSTO member States.
And this requires, in turn, provide military and technical aid to third countries that, in General, are not official allies of Russia and it is unlikely they will be.
In the South this problem has already occurred. In 2015 was very high, a break of the fighters that are stuck on the Turkmen-Afghan border on the territory of Turkmenistan. Of course, it would be appropriate to provide assistance to Turkmenistan, but the country is not included in the CSTO or any other military bloc, due to its policy of neutrality. The Turkmen leadership has appreciated the concern of Russia and the offer of assistance, but during the visit of Russian foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Ashgabat at the end of January 2016. The relationship noticeably warmer, but to accept Russian aid to the Turkmen side is not in a hurry for fear of undermining its neutral status. Approximately in the same way is the case with Afghanistan.
Thus, the problem at the moment is that Russia does not have a form of rendering military-technical assistance, which would be politically neutral and did not affect the political orientation of a country.
Meanwhile this form is, and it can be implemented in an updated form. It is well known from the history of the Second world war lend-lease: assistance to a country whose defense was recognized as vital to the United States. This form of assistance to the anti-Hitler coalition played a major role in the war, in the framework of this programme the USA supplied allies with materials and weapons 50.1 billion. The USSR received under lend-lease to 22.1 thousand aircraft, thousand tanks 12,7, 375,8 thousand freight cars, more weapons, industrial equipment, food and industrial raw materials, clothing and shoes.
Under the terms of lend-lease weapons and materials consumed or destroyed in the fighting, not paid. After the war the remaining equipment could be returned to the US.
The property remaining after the war and is suitable for use for civilian needs, were paid wholly or in part by loans from the United States. USSR and Russia had paid for the lend-lease 722 million dollars in the prices of war time, the payments were repaid in 2006.
Lend-lease was carried out not only the U.S. but also other countries of the coalition. For example, Canada has provided significant support to the UK. There was reverse lend-lease, that is, the supply and provision of services in the United States. This form of aid helped to consolidate the economic potential of the countries of anti-Hitler coalition to victory over Germany and Japan.
In our days, when the fight against international terrorism has become one of the important problems, you can implement the same idea with some amendments on modern circumstances. So, Russia can provide similar military assistance to those countries that already are at war with terrorist organizations and are in dire need of supplies for their armies. How this could be done?
First, on the basis of collective decision of the CSTO with the participation of all member countries of this organization, and possibly also on the basis of the resolution and mandate of the UN Security Council. The CSTO has to offer a country to accept assistance, or to accept and consider an application for the provision of such assistance.
The motive of the decision to provide assistance here is obvious: the CSTO leadership examined the situation, determined that a certain country is not included in the CSTO is of great importance for achieving corporate objectives, and therefore it is advisable to help to a certain extent. Deliveries are made on the basis of a special agreement, which clearly defines the objectives of aid, conditions of supply and requirements for the use of transferred property, arms and equipment. This will remove most of the political problems.
Secondly, the range of supplies need to include what is most necessary for the army of warfare: small arms and ammunition, heavy machine guns, mortars and mounted grenade launchers, artillery guns, APCS and IFVs, tanks, attack helicopters, as well as ammunition and spare parts to them. In the range of supplies should also include trucks, communications and intelligence, army and sanitary property, equipment, hospitals, medicines and dressings, clothing and footwear (especially in winter), petroleum products, food (ready-rations, canned food, flour). The countries that most need such assistance, like Afghanistan, have very numerous forces, but are experiencing severe shortages of arms, ammunition and supplies, and constrains their actions against small groups of fighters. Particularly noticeable shortage of ammunition. The needs of the operating units of the Afghan army at the month of the sweeps can be estimated at 22.5 million rounds of ammunition, that is for the year to 270 million in Munitions, transferred from Russia in February 2016, to cover these needs in very small degree.
Third, expended or destroyed in the fighting and property and equipment not paid or partially paid (for example, 10% of the cost). The materials used for civil needs, as well as weapons and equipment remaining in the country of recipient after the end of the war, are charged with the well-known installment. The recipient country must report on the expenditure of the aid received, to pass what remained unnecessary, and will pay what remains in the country after the end of hostilities.
This help format is particularly suited for Afghanistan. Because it’s a poor country with extremely limited sources of cash income, it is more expedient to introduce payment for supply of goods and products that can be produced in Afghanistan: the oil and natural gas, agricultural products, mineral raw materials.
These goods can be transmitted to a designated authority and is to be sold at auction by crediting the revenue to the state budgets of the countries-CSTO members.
However, military assistance should not turn into a profit. The need to defeat terrorist organizations should be above commercial gain.
After all, Russia, working with peaceful Afghanistan could gain more economic benefit and profit, than of any deliveries of weapons and military equipment on a commercial basis. Besides the old model of arms transfers on credit often leads to the formation of a huge and unsustainable external debt, which has no ability to repay, and it will eventually have to write off. In 2010, Russia wrote off Afghan debt to $ 12 billion for weapons and equipment, put back in the USSR.
As soon as the elimination of terrorist organizations has become an important military-political problem, it is necessary and the question of assistance to those countries that are already in the terrorists war, put seriously. The assistance should be such that the military victory was achievable and not just wishful thinking.
The experience of the Second world war is quite applicable in modern conditions
Recently Russia’s strategy in the field of security has undergone significant changes. Unlike past years, now Russia has much more military-technical assistance to other countries in the fight against international terrorism. This is well illustrated by the example of Syria. Also supply small arms to Afghanistan.
Recently saw the official transfer to the Afghanistan party from 10 thousand AK-74 and 2 million rounds of ammunition. Cargo at Kabul airport met Advisor to the President of Afghanistan’s national security Haneef Atmar in the presence of the Russian Ambassador to Afghanistan Alexander Manticore. Atmar stressed in his speech: “Terrorism is our common enemy”.
Afghan representatives expressed great interest in obtaining from Russia and other weapons. Chargé d’affaires of Afghanistan in Russia Ahadzada Abdul Gayur have listed, what would the Afghan side wanted to get: attack helicopters Mi-35, armored vehicles and heavy machine guns. If these arms appeared at the Afghan national army, that would give it a decisive superiority over the militia.
Negotiations on the supply of weapons continues, but there are some difficulties. Usually export deliveries of Russian weapons are carried out on a commercial basis, sometimes payment is made as a loan. But for Afghanistan this scheme will be very heavy. The country was very poor with very limited income and highly dependent on foreign financial assistance. To purchase even small arms and ammunition to the Afghan government is difficult. Transferred batch of machines was delivered free of charge, as a gift. It is unlikely that Russian generosity will be so great to give helicopters or armored vehicles.
However, the question of forms and methods of military-technical assistance is edge.
In recent years, suddenly finds itself a simple idea that security threats from the Taliban or “Islamic state” better to fight long lines without waiting for these fighters to get close and enter the territory of Russia or the countries of the CSTO member States.
And this requires, in turn, provide military and technical aid to third countries that, in General, are not official allies of Russia and it is unlikely they will be.
In the South this problem has already occurred. In 2015 was very high, a break of the fighters that are stuck on the Turkmen-Afghan border on the territory of Turkmenistan. Of course, it would be appropriate to provide assistance to Turkmenistan, but the country is not included in the CSTO or any other military bloc, due to its policy of neutrality. The Turkmen leadership has appreciated the concern of Russia and the offer of assistance, but during the visit of Russian foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Ashgabat at the end of January 2016. The relationship noticeably warmer, but to accept Russian aid to the Turkmen side is not in a hurry for fear of undermining its neutral status. Approximately in the same way is the case with Afghanistan.
Thus, the problem at the moment is that Russia does not have a form of rendering military-technical assistance, which would be politically neutral and did not affect the political orientation of a country.
Meanwhile this form is, and it can be implemented in an updated form. It is well known from the history of the Second world war lend-lease: assistance to a country whose defense was recognized as vital to the United States. This form of assistance to the anti-Hitler coalition played a major role in the war, in the framework of this programme the USA supplied allies with materials and weapons 50.1 billion. The USSR received under lend-lease to 22.1 thousand aircraft, thousand tanks 12,7, 375,8 thousand freight cars, more weapons, industrial equipment, food and industrial raw materials, clothing and shoes.
Under the terms of lend-lease weapons and materials consumed or destroyed in the fighting, not paid. After the war the remaining equipment could be returned to the US.
The property remaining after the war and is suitable for use for civilian needs, were paid wholly or in part by loans from the United States. USSR and Russia had paid for the lend-lease 722 million dollars in the prices of war time, the payments were repaid in 2006.
Lend-lease was carried out not only the U.S. but also other countries of the coalition. For example, Canada has provided significant support to the UK. There was reverse lend-lease, that is, the supply and provision of services in the United States. This form of aid helped to consolidate the economic potential of the countries of anti-Hitler coalition to victory over Germany and Japan.
In our days, when the fight against international terrorism has become one of the important problems, you can implement the same idea with some amendments on modern circumstances. So, Russia can provide similar military assistance to those countries that already are at war with terrorist organizations and are in dire need of supplies for their armies. How this could be done?
First, on the basis of collective decision of the CSTO with the participation of all member countries of this organization, and possibly also on the basis of the resolution and mandate of the UN Security Council. The CSTO has to offer a country to accept assistance, or to accept and consider an application for the provision of such assistance.
The motive of the decision to provide assistance here is obvious: the CSTO leadership examined the situation, determined that a certain country is not included in the CSTO is of great importance for achieving corporate objectives, and therefore it is advisable to help to a certain extent. Deliveries are made on the basis of a special agreement, which clearly defines the objectives of aid, conditions of supply and requirements for the use of transferred property, arms and equipment. This will remove most of the political problems.
Secondly, the range of supplies need to include what is most necessary for the army of warfare: small arms and ammunition, heavy machine guns, mortars and mounted grenade launchers, artillery guns, APCS and IFVs, tanks, attack helicopters, as well as ammunition and spare parts to them. In the range of supplies should also include trucks, communications and intelligence, army and sanitary property, equipment, hospitals, medicines and dressings, clothing and footwear (especially in winter), petroleum products, food (ready-rations, canned food, flour). The countries that most need such assistance, like Afghanistan, have very numerous forces, but are experiencing severe shortages of arms, ammunition and supplies, and constrains their actions against small groups of fighters. Particularly noticeable shortage of ammunition. The needs of the operating units of the Afghan army at the month of the sweeps can be estimated at 22.5 million rounds of ammunition, that is for the year to 270 million in Munitions, transferred from Russia in February 2016, to cover these needs in very small degree.
Third, expended or destroyed in the fighting and property and equipment not paid or partially paid (for example, 10% of the cost). The materials used for civil needs, as well as weapons and equipment remaining in the country of recipient after the end of the war, are charged with the well-known installment. The recipient country must report on the expenditure of the aid received, to pass what remained unnecessary, and will pay what remains in the country after the end of hostilities.
This help format is particularly suited for Afghanistan. Because it’s a poor country with extremely limited sources of cash income, it is more expedient to introduce payment for supply of goods and products that can be produced in Afghanistan: the oil and natural gas, agricultural products, mineral raw materials.
These goods can be transmitted to a designated authority and is to be sold at auction by crediting the revenue to the state budgets of the countries-CSTO members.
However, military assistance should not turn into a profit. The need to defeat terrorist organizations should be above commercial gain.
After all, Russia, working with peaceful Afghanistan could gain more economic benefit and profit, than of any deliveries of weapons and military equipment on a commercial basis. Besides the old model of arms transfers on credit often leads to the formation of a huge and unsustainable external debt, which has no ability to repay, and it will eventually have to write off. In 2010, Russia wrote off Afghan debt to $ 12 billion for weapons and equipment, put back in the USSR.
As soon as the elimination of terrorist organizations has become an important military-political problem, it is necessary and the question of assistance to those countries that are already in the terrorists war, put seriously. The assistance should be such that the military victory was achievable and not just wishful thinking.
