#4 - RW 278
RIA Novosti
October 16, 2003
ATTACK ON "THE IVANOV DOCTRINE"
Viktor Litovkin, RIA Novosti military analyst

Replying to the appearance of "the Ivanov doctrine," the Russian Council on Foreign and Defence Policy has drafted an alternative concept called Russia's Defence Policy. Russian military experts, State Duma deputies, military leaders and journalists met at a round table to discuss the two documents.

Alexei Arbatov, deputy head of the Duma defence committee, believes that the military reform which Defence Minister Ivanov proclaimed to be over has not even begun in earnest. It would be unfair to describe changes in the armed forces as the reform. A genuine reform must embrace not only the army and navy but the whole of Russian society, the other power departments, the defence industries, and military science and education. Only in this case will we have the right to say that the military reform was launched and carried out.

Arbatov also criticised the parts of "the Ivanov doctrine" that deal with Russia's relations with NATO and the USA. "Confrontation in aerospace, which Ivanov has outlined as a goal, is possible only with NATO countries and the USA," said Arbatov, "as no other states have a practical possibility of operating in this area. What partnership with NATO can we speak about if the Russian army will be trained to confront its member countries?"

The deputy also spotlighted the fact that, if the armaments of the armed forces are to be renewed by 2020, they should annually buy at least 800 tanks, 150 aircraft and 30 ships (hardly anything of these numbers are purchased now). This calls for increasing the military budget not by 8-10%, as is done every year, but several times. But the national economy will not survive this even if its GDP is tripled rather than doubled.

The same is true of the monetary remuneration of contract servicemen, which is to be quadrupled by 2010. In this case the military budget should be not 411 billion roubles, as now, but 1,670 billion roubles. Russia does not have this kind of money now and will hardly have it in the future, says Arbatov.

Other participants in the round table also pointed to the economic weakness of "the Ivanov doctrine." Prof. Nikolai Mikhailov, former first deputy defence minister (1997-1999), though he criticised Ivanov, also noted many encouraging elements in Ivanov's report. It is encouraging that the military are talking about their problems openly, he said, are trying to gear the development of Russia's armed forces to the global trend and comparing them to the armies of industrialised countries. But the main thing is that the other power departments of the country will have to march by the way which the defence ministry has already covered, because no reform has been initiated there to this day, said Mikhailov.

Irina Khakamada, a leader of the SPS faction in the State Duma, and Mikhail Delyagin, research director of the Institute of Globalisation Problems, spoke about the financial element of the development of a new army. The attempt to establish civilian control of the army, which was spoken about at such length in Ivanov's report, is failing so far, they said. The Duma deputies do not know to this day how defence allocations are disposed of and how effectively the money is used in the defence department.

Major-General Pavel Zolotarev (Rtd.), president of the inter-regional public Fund of Assistance to the Military Reform, said: "The armed forces should be prepared to repel any of the range of threats [facing Russia] and not only terrorism and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their delivery vehicles. In fact, the latter should not be the main task of the army and navy; rather it should be the task of special agencies. However, if the troops are set this task, it should be economically substantiated and technically ensured. I do not see such substantiation."

Besides, Gen. Zolotarev pointed out that Russia does not have an agency that would be responsible for and guide the military reform, both in the armed forces and in other power departments and defence industries. Until a guiding agency - for example a Defence Council under the president or any other state committee - is created, it would be useless to speak about changes in the military sphere, he said.