War- a conflict between political entities (states, tribes, political groups, etc.), occurring in the form of military (combat) actions between their armed forces.
In modern conditions, wars can be
by scale:
Local,
Regional,
Large-scale (worldwide);
by duration:
Transient and protracted;
by means of conducting:
- using weapons of mass destruction or conventional means of destruction.
The main form of counteraction in war is armed struggle - the organized use of armed forces to achieve certain political and military goals, a set of military actions of various scales.
The outbreak of war is usually preceded by a threatened period of varying duration, characterized by immediate preparation for it and the expansion of the scale of armed conflicts. A surprise attack by the enemy through air and missile strikes, followed by the introduction of ground forces into the territory of the Russian Federation, cannot be ruled out.
Military operations in a modern war will be conducted with high activity and extreme tension. They will cause large losses among troops and among the civilian population, destruction of potentially dangerous objects, energy centers, and the formation of vast zones of destruction, fires and flooding.
At the same time, an analysis of the wars of the last century shows that the share of casualties among the civilian population in them is growing significantly. (in the 1st World War -5%, in the 2nd - 50%, in the Korean War - 84%, in Vietnam - 90%).
14. Weapons of mass destruction, nuclear, chemical and biological weapons
WEAPONS are devices and means used in armed struggle to defeat and destroy the enemy. In most cases, it represents means of direct destruction, means of delivering them to the target, instruments and control and guidance devices.
According to the scale and nature of the action, they distinguish weapons of mass destruction(nuclear, chemical, bacteriological) and ordinary, including all types of weapons.
Nuclear weapon- a weapon of mass destruction with explosive action, based on the use of intranuclear energy released during chain reactions of fission of heavy nuclei of some isotopes of uranium and plutonium or during thermonuclear reactions of fusion of light nuclei of hydrogen isotopes into heavier ones. It includes various ammunition and their delivery systems. Saboteurs can also use portable nuclear charges (land mines).
Chemical weapon– the damaging effect of which is based on the toxic properties of chemically hazardous substances, toxins and phytotoxicants. (toxins – damage to animals and people, phytotoxicants – damage to vegetation). Binary munitions are a type of chemical weapons; when non-toxic substances are mixed as a result of an explosion, highly toxic chemical agents are formed.
Biological weapons (BW)) is based on the use of pathogenic properties of microorganisms that can cause various mass diseases of people, animals and plants.
15. Modern weapons with conventional ammunition.
Regular weapons consist of all fire and strike weapons, used artillery, anti-aircraft, aviation, small arms and engineering ammunition and missiles in conventional equipment, incendiary ammunition and mixtures.
Conventional weapons can be used independently and in combination with nuclear weapons to destroy enemy personnel and equipment, as well as to destroy and destroy various objects (chemical plants, nuclear power plants, hydraulic structures, etc.).
1). Fragmentation ammunition designed primarily to kill people. The most effective ammunition of this type are ball bombs. They are dropped from aircraft in cassettes containing from 96 to 640 bombs. Above the surface of the earth, such a cassette opens, and the bombs scatter and explode over an area of up to 250,000 m 2. The lethal force of the destructive elements (metal balls d = 2-3 mm) of each bomb is maintained within a radius of up to 15 m. You can hide from ball bombs in buildings, various types of shelters, folds of terrain, etc.
2). High explosive ammunition are intended for the destruction of industrial, residential and administrative buildings, railways and highways, destruction of equipment and people. The main damaging factor of high-explosive ammunition is the air shock wave that occurs during the explosion of the conventional explosive with which these ammunition is loaded.
Shelters and various types of shelters effectively protect against shock waves and fragments of high-explosive and fragmentation ammunition.
3). Cumulative ammunition designed to destroy armored targets. Their principle of operation is based on burning through an obstacle with a powerful jet of explosive detonation products with t 0 ≈ 6000-7000 degrees and a pressure of 5000-6000 kgf/cm 2. The formation of a cumulative jet is achieved due to a cumulative notch in the explosive charge. Focused detonation products are capable of burning holes in armored floors several tens of centimeters thick and causing fires.
4). Concrete-piercing ammunition designed to destroy high-strength reinforced concrete structures and to destroy airfield runways. Typically, two charges are placed in the ammunition body - cumulative and high-explosive and two detonators. When encountering an obstacle, an instantaneous detonator is triggered, which detonates the shaped charge. With some delay (after the ammunition passes through the ceilings), the second detonator is triggered, detonating the high-explosive charge, which causes the main destruction of the object.
5). Incendiary ammunition are intended to destroy people, destroy by fire buildings and structures of industrial facilities and populated areas, rolling stock and various warehouses.
6). Volumetric explosion ammunition. The principle of operation of such ammunition is as follows: liquid fuel (usually ultra-volatile fuel) with a high calorific value (ethylene oxide, diborane, acetic acid peroxide, propyl nitrate), placed in a special shell, during an explosion sprays out, evaporates and mixes with oxygen in the air. In this case, a spherical cloud of air-fuel mixture with a radius of about 15 m and a layer thickness of 2-3 cm is formed. The resulting mixture is detonated in several places by special detonators. In the detonation zone, a temperature of up to 2500-3000 ° C develops in a few microseconds. At the moment of explosion, a relative void is formed inside the shell from the air-fuel mixture. Something similar to an explosion of the shell of a ball with evacuated air (“vacuum bomb”) occurs.
#war #aria #future
The dominant trend in military thought at the beginning of the 21st century. becomes an understanding of the changing nature, content and essence itself. This theoretical orientation is inherent not only in academic discussions, it is reflected in the practice of training and using the leading armies of the world. Traditional ideas about war as an armed conflict in which organized military forces are used and which is subject to certain rules from the beginning to the end of hostility are losing their relevance due to the transformation of the forms of use of military force and the growing variety of armed clashes. Fundamental changes in the paradigm of warfare objectively force us to look for new ways to ensure the integrated survivability of a soldier of the 21st century.
NEW APPROACHES TO THE MODERN UNDERSTANDING OF THE CHARACTER AND ESSENCE OF WAR
Changes in the sphere of ensuring military security were updated in the 1990s. attention to the problem of modern war as a continuation of politics by violent means. Let us emphasize here an extremely important idea: war determines our lives not only when it “flares up”, but also when it “sleeps”: in preparation for its conduct or in activities to prevent it. Today, much attention is paid to the study of war, both foreign (R. Smith, F.G. Hoffman, D. Kilcullen, J. Der-Derian, E. Simpson, M. Kaldor) and domestic (A.I. Podberezkin, A. A. Bartosh), scientists. However, a unified understanding of the essence and content of modern war has not been developed in the world community, and it does not exist in Russia either. In almost all Russian studies, war is considered as a means of politics, a process, a state of society. For supporters of the classical approach, the defining feature of war remains military violence, based on the use of weapons with the aim of suppressing the enemy, subjugating him to one’s will. Opponents to this approach insist that the use of armed violence is not always the defining feature of a military conflict between states. At the beginning of the 21st century. A number of fundamentally new approaches to the modern nature and essence of war are revealed.
These innovations are evidenced by the following characteristics: - war today is not expressed in obvious confrontation, and opponents do not directly fight each other and do not interact (the concept of non-contact war], clear spatial parameters of armed struggle have been lost; - achievement of political and other goals of the state in the international arena can be achieved only with the integrated, synergistic use of all components of national power. The armed forces are only one of the elements of the system of ensuring military security; - the main participants in the war (government - army - people) in modern conditions, as a rule, are separated from each other and have various rights and responsibilities; - the state is losing its monopoly on violence. This right to use violence has been voluntarily assumed by some non-state organizations and groups. In many theaters of war, the belligerents are civilians who have taken up arms, and private armies are increasingly used . The consequence of this is a reduction in the threshold of political significance of conflicts from the level of the state to the level of organizations, groups and even individuals. This illegitimate expansion of the subjects of military violence leads to a new type of war; - the nature of the conflict is not determined by the nature of its participants: the state today can use the tactics of irregular armed struggle, and terrorist groups often use advanced military technologies and even weapons of mass destruction; - conflicts considered local, in today's conditions, absorb no less resources, and, therefore, are no less decisive in military planning than short-term wars; - the boundaries between the classical categories of war are blurring.
This process culminates in the erosion of the very concepts of war and peace. The boundaries between the exception (which is war) and the norm (which in the normal case is peace) disappear: one can be at war without being at war explicitly. The changing characteristics of the forms and methods of warfare are often presented as a fundamental change in the nature of war. Today, Clausewitz's ideas on the nature of war are often dismissed as outdated and irrelevant. Thus, Alain de Benoit concludes that Clausewitz’s formula about war as a continuation of politics by other means is turned on its head. He believes that war becomes "the destruction of politics by other means."
This radical assessment of the changed nature of war does not seem convincing. Indeed, the nature of modern war is often conceptualized in the context of the approach of Clausewitz, who characterized war as a “true chameleon.” Explaining this metaphor, he identified three elements of war (“war is a strange trinity”): violence as its initial element, the creativity of strategists and the rationality of decision-makers. The forms of each of these elements change under the influence of social changes, transformation of political relations, and technological progress. According to Clausewitz, the interdependence of initial violence, strategic ingenuity and political rationality is the factor causing the most profound and significant changes in the forms that war takes. Let us add here to Clausewitz’s “trinity” that the most obvious is still the technological aspect of the evolution of forms and methods of warfare. Only in the 20th century. means and methods of warfare switched to a new format at least five times, modifying the nature of armed struggle and placing increasingly complex demands on the quality of human material.
At the same time, the war itself turned out to be connected not with the private socio-historical characteristics of societies; it had a substantial character. The war today has not changed the core of its internal content: it was, is and will be a struggle for the change and redistribution of social roles in the course of the development of society. We admit, however, that K. Clausewitz narrowed the essence of war by not including the non-military forms of struggle used in it. So, the nature of modern wars is determined by military-political goals, means of achieving these goals, and the scale of military operations.
It is significantly influenced by the military, military-economic and moral-psychological potentials of the state, as well as social, environmental and physical-geographical conditions. The essence and content of war today is changing due to, firstly, a more complete use of global political, social, economic, cultural, ethnic and religious factors; secondly, the use of fundamentally new and more diverse types of weapons; thirdly, due to a more complete inclusion of the environment and the natural environment.
Modern warfare is undergoing qualitative transformations in the forms and methods of its conduct, and its goals are also changing. If previously wars were fought to seize territorial, human, energy, raw materials and other resources of other countries and peoples, today the goal of war is the complete annihilation of the enemy’s political power, national idea, and statehood. Since the real task of war (as an “extended” duel) is still to subjugate the enemy to the enemy’s will, this can be done “by destroying a sufficient number of brains, or the right brains, in which case the “will” will certainly die along with the body.”
NEW TYPE OF WARS
Modern war is characterized by a qualitative expansion of the possible space of conflict. Today, the war is waged at a much higher quality level, affecting, in addition to the armed forces and diplomatic channels, the information, socio-cultural, ideological, technological spheres, as well as science, psychology and the inner world of man - the area of the spirit and soul. The role of the direct use of military force is gradually degenerating into a service role, focused primarily on supporting large-scale “non-force” operations. The complexity, dynamism, arrhythmia, intricacy and multi-actor nature of modern warfare make it possible to announce the emergence of a new type of war. The concept of “new wars” put forward by the British researcher M. Kaldor states that globalization is becoming the basis for the contradictory nature of emerging conflicts. The core of these conflicts are goals related not so much to territorial disputes or ideological differences, but rather to political and symbolic claims, and problems of identity.
Hence, the main thing becomes not the mastery of the territory, but political control over it and its population. In these conflicts, the circle of people involved is expanding - these include paramilitary groups, gangs, police forces, and mercenaries. The most common concepts characterizing modern wars are the concepts of asymmetry and irregularity. Asymmetry of action means that one of the parties to the conflict “circumvents or undermines the advantages of the other by exploiting institutional weaknesses through methods that differ significantly from those expected.
The main goal is to deliver a decisive psychological blow that suppresses the will, ability to initiative, or freedom of action of the enemy. . Asymmetric warfare is characterized by unconventional military tactics, including information warfare, proxy wars, the use of unofficial participants, provocateurs, “fifth columns,” etc. If the strategy of the strong is aimed at destroying or limiting the actions of the weak, then the weak seeks to prolong the confrontation, inflict damage on the enemy in the sphere of morality or public opinion, demoralize him, and make the continuation of the conflict unbearable. The term “irregular war” refers to “armed struggle between state and non-state actors for legitimization and influence over the relevant population.”
The specificity of such a war is the use of both indirect and asymmetric approaches, and the use of the full range of military and other resources in order to undermine the power, influence and capabilities of the enemy. Since 2010, the term “hybrid warfare” has been frequently used in public discourse. From the many approaches to describing its essence: M. van Creveld, talking about the participants in this war, “united by fanaticism and ideology,” F. Hoffman, analyzing various modes of warfare, including standard weapons, irregular tactics and formations, terrorist acts and criminal disorder , the means used are not limited by ethical, moral, legal or religious norms, constructivist theoretical analysis, we can conclude that “hybrid war” is a conflict between political associations over symbols (hypotheses, language, identity, interests, etc.), in its inner essence, “it consists of social constructs, beliefs, convictions - i.e. from what is most difficult to reconcile."
Such a war draws the entire population into its orbit, fills the entire information space, neglecting all norms of morality and morality. The emergence of new types of wars does not exclude the continued possibility of contact wars using conventional weapons and non-contact wars using high-precision weapons. The types of possible symmetrical contact wars with the participation of different countries, according to V. Slipchenko, will be varied, from small-scale armed conflicts to wars of a regional scale. Internal wars and armed conflicts will continue, and civil wars are also possible due to the aggravation of social contradictions in society. All of them will be conducted in both contact and non-contact ways and, regardless of their scale, will inevitably be associated with large losses of troops (forces) and the population of the warring parties.
CONSEQUENCES OF THE CHANGING NATURE OF WARS
Firstly, if in the wars of the first generation (the first three and a half thousand years of the existence of civilization) the confrontation was carried out exclusively by contact, and its outcome was determined by the amount of manpower and the physical capabilities of the warriors to fight hand-to-hand and with cold steel, then in all subsequent generations of wars the methods contact confrontation was determined, first of all, by the quantity and quality of weapons and military equipment, their technical characteristics: range, rate of fire and accuracy, and the professional level of military skill of military personnel.
In sixth-generation wars - the so-called "non-contact wars", massive strikes can be carried out with high-precision weapons without combat contacts or combat operations on land. Secondly, with changes in the means of armed warfare and methods of conducting combat operations, the complication of military equipment, an increase in the weight of combat equipment, a significant increase in the volume of information and limited time for understanding it, the requirements for the military personnel have increased significantly - their level of military-professional competence, physical and intellectual opportunities. Let us give only two examples that confirm this conclusion. If before the 18th century. soldiers carried about 15 kg of equipment on their bodies, and most of it was transported in convoys, then after the 18th century. Due to the sharp increase in mobility requirements, the weight of a warrior’s combat equipment began to increase rapidly.
The weight of everything carried by an infantry soldier of Russian soldiers already during the Crimean (Eastern) War reached 77 pounds, and taking into account the weight of the cleaver and entrenching tool, up to 87 pounds. Conducted in the middle of the 19th century, after the Crimean War, by the British, and after them by the Germans, the first studies of physical stress on military personnel developed a recommendation that the load on soldiers should not exceed 21-22 kg. With such a load, the soldier was able to walk 24 km per day in cold weather. For comparison, let's say that the equipment worn by Soviet soldiers in Afghanistan weighed 40-60 kilograms, which significantly limited their actions. Combat practice shows that a modern soldier cannot act effectively if the weight of his combat equipment is more than 12 kg, and in special conditions (mountains, jungle, winter, rain) - no more than 8-9 kg. Exceeding this load inevitably leads to a sharp decrease in the potential speed of the attack, movement of the soldier, dulling of his attention and rapid fatigue.
Military equipment today places new demands on human physical capabilities. The levels of flight loads on the pilot have especially increased; their body today requires adaptive capabilities that go far beyond the physiological parameters. 4th generation combat aircraft (1975-2010) require dynamic overloads of up to 9 units with an impact duration of 20-30 seconds. The pilot can tolerate such overloads, but not more than 1-5 seconds. The technical characteristics of 5th generation aircraft have increased even more significantly, while the psychophysiological characteristics of humans have remained practically at the same level. To understand the extreme loads, we present some indicators. When a conventional airliner takes off, passengers in the cabin experience an overload of 1.5 G. According to international standards, the maximum permissible overload value for civil aircraft is 2.5 G. If it reaches 5 G, then an unprepared person may lose consciousness.
Thirdly, the changing nature of modern wars requires extreme mental stress and puts forward special demands on the moral and psychological training of military personnel. Fourthly, the increasingly complex nature of modern warfare, the manifold increase in dangers, threats and risks for the subjects of military operations, the limits of their physical and intellectual capabilities, the use of fundamentally new information technologies in armed struggle, the expansion of the possibilities of influence of modern weapons not only on the armed forces, but also on others. troops and military facilities, but also on the civilian population, indicate fundamental changes in the very paradigm of warfare and objectively force us to look for new ways to ensure the integrated survivability of a soldier of the 21st century. The main trend of the first quarter of the 21st century, aimed at minimizing losses in manpower, is the transition from the previous principle of “soldier shooting” to the principle of “soldier managing.”
MAIN DIRECTIONS FOR FORMING A SOLDIER OF THE XXI century.
In many countries with large armies, theoretical developments have been underway for quite a long time, with the goal of transforming a serviceman from an ordinary fighter into a multifunctional super-soldier, capable of enduring extreme physical loads, quickly understanding the situation, making decisions that are adequate to it, preempting the enemy, and, without hesitation, act for their immediate implementation. The main areas of research are remote computer detection and identification of targets, provision of operational control and communications, target designation, assessment of the soldier’s location and reference to the terrain, as well as medical monitoring of the functional state of military personnel.
According to some reports, more than 60% of all military purchases in the armies of NATO countries have been directed in recent years to the individual protection of those who directly take part in hostilities. The most famous project for creating new promising models of weapons and military equipment capable of meeting the requirements put forward by the concept of network-centric warfare was the American state target program Future Combat System, implemented since the mid-90s. XX century Within its framework, the most important place is occupied by the Future Force Warrior program, which includes a series of R&D for the design and development of combat kits for “soldiers of the future” as an integral part of the automated combat system of a unit, unit, or formation. It is expected that the soldier will be provided with all the reconnaissance, control, destruction, protection and life support equipment necessary for effective combat, integrated into a single combat information and technical complex. This makes it an almost autonomous combat unit, included in a single command network.
In this regard, the development of equipment and weapons by the Institute of Soldier Nanotechnologies based at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology is known. The created combat vest, called “dynamic armor” by the researchers, is only a few millimeters thick and fits the soldier like a diving suit. The complex molecular components embedded in its thin layer make it simultaneously a body armor, a universal medical diagnostic tool, and an exoskeleton. Sensors built into the suit constantly measure all the soldier’s vital parameters (pulse, blood pressure, brain activity, temperature, etc.) and display the data on a projector in the helmet and on a medical computer, which, regardless of the soldier, instantly makes decisions about transforming the suit into an exoskeleton or armor. Based on a computer signal, the polymer actuators (actuators) that make up the suit make certain areas of it harder or softer. For example, if a leg is broken, the exoskeleton will allow it to be captured in artificial splints formed by the fabric of the suit.
In the Russian army of the last century, there was virtually no such combat equipment, and only in the last decades have decisive measures been taken to equip military personnel with a wide range of equipment and equipment. The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, within the framework of the Federal Target Program “Fighter-XXI”, taking into account the existing experience in the development of combat sets of individual equipment “Barmitsa” and “Permyachka”, began to supply the troops with a fundamentally new type of equipment - “Warrior”.
The kit includes a GLONASS system navigator, advanced electronic equipment that provides information transmission both by voice and in digital format, and displays the tactical situation on a sleeve or helmet-mounted display. The Russian Army also received a wearable reconnaissance, control and communications complex, which is an element of automated control equipment for tactical commanders and includes a multifunctional information complex, a commander’s personal computer, a company radio modem, and a universal transport vest. Unified wearable equipment allows you to transmit messages about the injury of a serviceman, ensures information exchange with higher levels of management and subordinate units. In order to reduce the excess load on a soldier, an anthropomorphic hydraulic exoskeleton has been used in recent years. This device duplicates the human musculoskeletal system and significantly expands its physical capabilities. Its developer, Lockheed Martin, calls this model a “universal soldier” - HULC
(Human Universal Load Carrier). One of these models is equipped with a mechanical “arm” that can rotate and be used to hang a weapon. With its help, even one fighter can easily control, for example, a 12.7 mm machine gun, which weighs at least 25 kg. The device allows you to lift loads weighing up to 70 kilometers, and carry up to 90 kilograms over rough terrain for 8 hours. In an hour, such a “universal soldier” is capable of walking an average of 4.8 km and even performing a forced march, accelerating up to 18 km/h. Note that the adaptation of a soldier in an exoskeleton takes about 90 minutes. The first such project in Russia was called ExoAtlet. It is based on innovative developments of Russian scientists in the field of expanding human physical capabilities. A working example of the Exoatlet P-1 exoskeleton of a passive modification, adapted for carrying a special forces assault shield, was demonstrated at the 6th International Integrated Security Salon in 2013. To minimize losses in manpower, robotic combat vehicles are being developed in many countries today. These robots are capable of conducting contact combat with the enemy; they are controlled remotely, which guarantees minimal losses. For example, according to some reports, back in 2006, a “robot sentry” was created in South Korea, intended to guard the borders with North Korea.
A mobile robotic complex for protecting the base sites of strategic ballistic nuclear missiles, capable of independently opening fire on targets, was also created in Russia. This unmanned all-terrain combat unit, controlled by radio at a distance of up to 5 km, can perform missions to detect and destroy stationary and moving targets, fire support and military reconnaissance. Let us note here that a similar system created in the United States, known as SWORDS, during tests in Iraq, could not identify targets and repeatedly fired at its own. Currently, most electromechanical, pneumatic, hydraulic or combination combat robots are controlled by operators, and only a few can perform some tasks autonomously. One of the methods used today to transform an ordinary soldier into a super soldier, capable of enduring extreme physical exertion and suppressing the natural feeling of fear, is the use of stimulant drugs. The combat effectiveness of a soldier, especially the accuracy of fire damage, depends on the ability to control a naturally occurring reaction to an imaginary or real danger, which generates a feeling of fear. Researchers point out that because of fear, the effectiveness of fire in battle is simply negligible.
If in the First World War 2.5-5 thousand rounds of ammunition were spent on defeating one enemy soldier, then in the Second World War it was already 10 thousand, and in local military conflicts of the 20th century - 50 thousand. During World War II, American troops lost 504,000 men to mental illness on the battlefield. This number of military personnel is quite enough to form 50 divisions. In the 1973 Arab-Israeli War, almost one-third of Israeli casualties were due to psychological reasons. During the Vietnam War, psychogenic losses already amounted to 30% of the number of combatants. Among the means of suppressing this fear are specially designed psychostimulants. Already during World War II, amphetamine and methamphetamine were used to improve the performance and endurance of soldiers in active armies. Currently, to relieve fatigue and stress, instead of these drugs, other means are used, for example, the technology of stimulating the cerebral hemispheres through electromagnetic impulses. However, pharmacological stimulants are still in the arsenal of the modern soldier.
Fear is overcome with the help of anxiolytics, which help increase brain activity, and actoprotectors, which increase the soldier’s strength. Let us note here that the use of these drugs, due to individual susceptibility, can lead to other consequences: cause inhibition, hallucinations and psychosis, inappropriate behavior of a serviceman, increase his aggressiveness and cruelty. The experience of the US Army shows that the use of psychotropic drugs contributes to an increase in suicide. Even according to official data, every sixth US military personnel takes at least one psychotropic drug. From 2005 to 2011 In the US Department of Defense, the number of prescriptions for psychiatric drugs has increased almost 7 times. Their number increased 30 times faster than in the civilian sector. Non-amphetamine-type psychostimulants are currently being developed. For example, the initiative of the British Ministry of Defense to create the Haldane Spearman consortium to create means of increasing endurance is known. The drug developed here, Provigil (modafinil), allows a “zombie” fighter to survive without sleep for several days without reducing mental and physical abilities.
1. Despite the fact that modern, “new” wars for propaganda purposes are trying to be presented as a “war without losses”, as a “safe” war, non-contact armed struggle with the latest military technologies and high-precision weapons of the sixth generation, excluding the defeat of civilians, the war remains one of the main global problems of our time.
2. The last two decades have confirmed the main trend in the use of military force to achieve political results: striking the enemy and his military targets without combat contacts, without conducting military operations on land, which is expressed in the term “non-contact war.”
3. The idea of completely ousting the soldier from the battlefield and replacing him with automatic robots currently seems fantastic and hardly achievable. The outcome of the war and the effectiveness of the means used still depend on the person.
4. Changes in equipment and weapons over the past two or three decades have led to the fact that the soldier of the 21st century. turns into a combat system - a “soldier manager”. The rapid development of robotics and neuroprosthetics has allowed modern states to move to the practice of combining humans and various mechanical devices, thanks to which modern warriors have superpowers.
5. Further introduction of artificial elements with given parameters into the human body creates conditions for the gradual transformation of a person into a cyborg or an avatar. Such a post-human may be a creation based entirely on artificial intelligence or the result of multiple changes and improvements in its biotechnology.
The political history of mankind is often called the history of wars. In the 4 thousand years of history known to us, only 300 years were absolutely peaceful. In total, about 15 thousand wars died down on Earth in which 3.5 billion people died, and material damage amounted to more than 500 billion dollars.
During the 20th century. In wars, armed conflicts and other armed actions, approximately 150 million people died, and only direct losses in the third world war were expected to be in the region of a million people. According to American experts, in the event of a massive nuclear strike on US territory, about 200 million people would immediately die, and another 10 million would receive severe injuries, wounds and burns.
An important role in ensuring the defense of the country and the security of the state is played by the Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation, approved by the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of April 21, 2000. Military Doctrine is a state normative act, which is a set of official views (attitudes) defining military-political, military-strategic and military-economic foundations for ensuring the military security of the Russian Federation.
The military doctrine identifies the following main external threats: territorial claims against the Russian Federation; interference in the internal affairs of the Russian Federation; international terrorism; the presence of hotbeds of armed conflict, primarily near the state border of the Russian Federation and the borders of its allies; the creation (buildup) of groupings of troops (forces), leading to a disruption of the existing balance of power, near the state border of the Russian Federation and the borders of its allies, as well as in the seas adjacent to their territories, the expansion of military blocs and alliances to the detriment of the military security of the Russian Federation; creation, equipment and training on the territories of other states of armed formations and groups for the purpose of their transfer for operations in the territories of the Russian Federation and its allies.
This superiority is based on constantly evolving communication and control systems. The day is not far when all US armed forces, including the smallest tactical units, will be connected by a single command and control system that allows them to respond in real time to changes in the operational environment on the battlefield.
Characteristics of the US Armed Forces as of Regular Armed Forces - 1.434 million people Minuteman-3 ICBM - 500 units Peacekeeper ICBM - 50 units Total 1,550 warheads with a total capacity of 470 Mt
SSBN "Ohio" - 14 units A total of 336 SLBM "Trident-2" carrying warheads with a total capacity of Mt
B-2 bombers – 21 units B-1B bombers – 89 units B-52 bombers – 93 units Range: 4, 12 and 8 thousand km Total bomb load – tons
In such conditions, the Russian Federation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in the following cases: -use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it and (or) its allies; - large-scale aggression using conventional weapons in situations critical to the national security of the Russian Federation.
In a possible military conflict, China is unlikely to use its own nuclear weapons. The war will most likely take the form of World War II, but with a greater range and the likelihood of hitting targets. On the Japanese side, military operations will be reduced to a series of landing and counter-landing operations in the Kuril Islands, Sakhalin, possibly in Primorye and Kamchatka.
Characteristics of China's armed forces as of Regular armed forces - 2.255 million people Mobilization resources - 208 million people Combat aircraft - 4 thousand units J-8 fighter-bomber
Characteristics of the Japanese armed forces as of Regular armed forces - 239.9 thousand people Mobilization resources - 29.2 million people Combat aircraft - 270 units
In military-technical terms, Islamic fundamentalists are still very weak; open military confrontation with the armies of the leading states of the world leads to a natural result, which we observed twice in Iraq: in 1991 and 2003. Hence the transfer of war into asymmetrical, indirect forms, into terrorist and guerrilla warfare.
A modern war (armed conflict) can be: For military-political purposes: For military-political purposes: fair (not contrary to the UN Charter, fundamental norms and principles of international law, conducted in self-defense by the party subjected to aggression); fair (not contradicting the UN Charter, fundamental norms and principles of international law, carried out in self-defense by the party subjected to aggression); unfair (contrary to the UN Charter, fundamental norms and principles of international law, falling within the definition of aggression and led by the party that launched an armed attack). unfair (contrary to the UN Charter, fundamental norms and principles of international law, falling within the definition of aggression and led by the party that launched an armed attack).
A local war can be waged by groups of troops (forces) deployed in the conflict area, with their reinforcement, if necessary, through the transfer of troops, forces and equipment from other directions and the partial strategic deployment of armed forces.
A regional war can be the result of an escalation of a local war or armed conflict and can be waged with the participation of two or more states (groups of states) of one region, by national or coalition armed forces using both conventional and nuclear weapons.
A large-scale war can result from the escalation of an armed conflict, a local or regional war, involving a significant number of states from different regions of the world. A large-scale war using only conventional weapons will be characterized by a high probability of escalating into a nuclear war with catastrophic consequences for civilization, the foundations of life and the existence of mankind.
The development of scientific and technological progress, forms and methods of warfare have led to the creation of a wide range of weapons. Their range of action constantly increased throughout the twentieth century, and already during the 2nd World War it made it possible to strike deep behind enemy lines, which led to losses among the civilian population.
Modern armed conflict is characterized by: high involvement and vulnerability of the local population; high involvement and vulnerability of the local population; the use of irregular armed forces; the use of irregular armed forces; widespread use of sabotage and terrorist methods; widespread use of sabotage and terrorist methods; the complexity of the moral and psychological environment in which troops operate; the complexity of the moral and psychological environment in which troops operate; forced diversion of significant forces and resources to ensure the security of movement routes, areas and locations of troops (forces); forced diversion of significant forces and resources to ensure the security of movement routes, areas and locations of troops (forces); the danger of transformation into a local (international armed conflict) or civil (internal armed conflict) war. the danger of transformation into a local (international armed conflict) or civil (internal armed conflict) war.
With the participation of the US Navy in the strike, the number of missiles increases by 4 thousand. With an average rate of two cruise missiles per target, already in the first strike on Russian territory 2,400 military and civilian targets could be destroyed. With the participation of the US Navy in the strike, the number of missiles increases by 4 thousand. With an average rate of two cruise missiles per target, already in the first strike on Russian territory 2,400 military and civilian targets could be destroyed.
Currently, we can observe four types of damaging effects of modern weapons: Physical impact; Physical impact; Chemical exposure; Chemical exposure; Biological effects; Biological effects; Information impact. Information impact.
Physical defeat consists of the impact on objects of all known forms of physical energy. Based on this, the following subtypes of damaging effects are distinguished: mechanical, i.e. the impact on objects of carriers of kinetic energy - moving objects and other material objects, pressure of water, air, soil and gases; mechanical, i.e. the impact on objects of kinetic energy carriers - moving objects and other material objects, pressure of water, air, soil and gases; acoustic, i.e. impact on objects of the energy of acoustic waves; acoustic, i.e. exposure of objects to the energy of acoustic waves; electromagnetic, i.e. impact on objects of energy of electromagnetic radiation; electromagnetic, i.e. impact on energy objects of electromagnetic radiation; radiation, i.e. impact on objects of energy of elementary particles and hard radiation; radiation, i.e. impact on objects of energy of elementary particles and hard radiation; thermal, i.e. impact on objects of thermal energy. thermal, i.e. impact of thermal energy on objects.
Chemical damage involves the impact of specially selected substances on objects through transformations of the substance at the molecular level. Biological damage is the effect of living objects on living objects through changes at the cellular level.
Information defeat consists of influencing objects either by changing a person’s consciousness and subconscious, or by changing the software level of electronic computing systems. In modern conditions, a combined damaging effect is most often observed, when an object is exposed to several types of energy at once. Modern weapons are initially built on the use of several types of destruction.
Military dangers and military threats to the Russian Federation
Definition, structure and content of Military Doctrine
Basic provisions of the Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation on ways to ensure the military security of the state
The new Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation was approved by the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of February 5, 2010. No. 146. It takes into account the main provisions of the previous Military Doctrine (2000), the Concept of long-term socio-economic development of the Russian Federation for the period until 2020, the National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation until 2020, as well as the corresponding provisions of the Concept of Foreign Policy of the Russian Federation of 2008 and the Maritime Doctrine of the Russian Federation for the period until 2020.
The legal basis of the new Military Doctrine is:
Constitution of the Russian Federation;
Generally recognized principles and norms of international law;
International treaties of the Russian Federation in the field of defense, arms control and disarmament;
Federal constitutional laws and federal laws of the Russian Federation;
Regulatory legal acts of the President of the Russian Federation and the Government of Russia.
In accordance with the definition given in paragraph 1 of the doctrine itself, the Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation is one of the main documents of strategic planning in the Russian Federation and represents a system of views officially adopted in the state on preparation for armed defense and armed defense of the Russian Federation.
For reference:
Compared to the classic definition given in Section 2 of this tutorial, this definition is simpler and more specific. Apparently, the phrase “main directions of military development” mentioned in the classic definition was included in the “system of views on preparation for armed defense” of the Russian Federation.
The previous military doctrine gave a different definition: “The military doctrine of the Russian Federation is a set of official views (attitudes) that define the military-political, military-strategic and military-economic foundations for ensuring the military security of the Russian Federation.”
Since military doctrine is based on the provisions of military theory and is aimed at its further development, we will accept official definition of Military Doctrine given above.
Structurally, the Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation consists of 4 sections:
1. General Provisions.
2. Military dangers and military threats to the Russian Federation.
3. Military policy of the Russian Federation.
4. Military-economic support for defense.
The Military Doctrine defines modern military dangers and military threats to the Russian Federation, outlines the main directions of military policy aimed at neutralizing or countering these threats, and defines the tasks and procedure for military-economic cooperation with foreign states.
The military doctrine reflects the commitment of the Russian Federation to the use of political, diplomatic, legal, economic, information, military and other instruments to protect the national interests of the Russian Federation and the interests of its allies. This once again emphasizes the priority for Russia of non-military means and methods of resolving conflict situations and protecting national interests.
The section “General Provisions” provides definitions for those categories that are used in the Military Doctrine: military security of the Russian Federation, military danger, military threat, military conflict, armed conflict, local war, regional war, large-scale war, military policy, military organization of the state, military planning. These definitions are provided and used for the purposes of this military doctrine. They may differ from classical definitions, but must be understood exactly as defined in the text of the Military Doctrine (see Appendix).
Of particular interest is the definition of “Military conflicts”, which provides a modern, new classification of types of armed struggle. In Article 6, paragraph. G) noted: “Military conflict is a form of resolving interstate or intrastate contradictions using military force (the concept covers all types of armed confrontation, including large-scale, regional, local wars and armed conflicts).”
Paragraph d): “An armed conflict is an armed conflict of a limited scale between states (international armed conflict) or opposing parties within the territory of one state (internal armed conflict).”
Paragraphs f, g, h provide the definition of local, regional and large-scale war.
Section 2 of the Military Doctrine draws attention to the unresolved nature of many regional conflicts and the continuing trends towards their forceful resolution. The existing international security architecture does not ensure equal security for all states. Despite the reduced likelihood of a large-scale war against the Russian Federation, Russia’s military dangers are intensifying in a number of areas.
Among the dangers of war First of all, there is a desire to endow NATO's power potential with global functions, implemented in violation of international law, to bring the military infrastructure of NATO member countries closer to the borders of Russia, including by expanding the bloc. One of the most important dangers is the creation and deployment of strategic missile defense systems that undermine stability and disrupt the existing balance of forces in the nuclear missile sphere, as well as the militarization of outer space and the deployment of non-nuclear precision weapon systems.
These dangers, formulated in the Military Doctrine, have already caused serious international resonance, especially from the US administration and the NATO Secretary General. We are accused of bias and aggressiveness, since NATO's goals are exclusively “charitable”.
Military dangers are divided into external and internal. Total formulated 11 external military dangers, which under certain conditions can develop into threats to the Russian Federation:
1. The desire to endow NATO's military potential with global functions, implemented in violation of international law, to bring the military infrastructure of NATO member countries closer to the borders of the Russian Federation, incl. by expanding the block.
2. Attempts to destabilize the situation in individual states and regions and undermine strategic stability.
3. Deployment of military contingents of foreign states in territories adjacent to the Russian Federation.
4. The creation and deployment of missile defense systems that undermine global stability and disrupt the existing balance of forces in the nuclear missile sphere, the militarization of space.
5. Territorial claims against the Russian Federation and its allies, interference in their internal affairs.
6. The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, missiles and missile technologies, an increase in the number of states possessing nuclear weapons.
7. Violation of international agreements by individual states, non-compliance with concluded treaties.
8. The use of military force in the territories of states adjacent to the Russian Federation in violation of the UN Charter.
9. The presence of hotbeds and escalation of armed conflicts in the territories adjacent to the Russian Federation and its allies.
10. Spread of international terrorism.
11. The emergence of hotbeds of interethnic (interfaith) tension, the activities of international armed radical groups, as well as the presence of territorial contradictions, the growth of separatism and violent extremism in certain regions of the world.
Paragraph 9 provides internal military dangers:
Attempts at forced change constitutional system of the Russian Federation;
Undermining the sovereignty, violating the unity and territorial integrity of the country;
Disorganization of the functioning of government bodies, important government facilities and information infrastructure in Russia.
The doctrine formulates 5 military threats:
1. A sharp aggravation of the military-political situation and the creation of conditions for the use of military force.
2. Obstruction of the operation of state and military control systems of the Russian Federation, disruption of the functioning of strategic nuclear forces, missile attack warning systems, space control, and potentially dangerous objects.
3. Creation and training of illegal armed groups, their activities on the territory of the Russian Federation or its allies.
4. Demonstration of military force during exercises in adjacent territories with provocative purposes.
5. Intensification of the activities of the armed forces of individual states with mobilization and transfer of control bodies to work in wartime conditions.
As we can see, the Military Doctrine lists the military dangers of the Russian Federation (external and internal) and military threats. The previous Military Doctrine (2000) indicated only external and internal threats.
For reference:
Danger- this is an opportunity, a threat of something dangerous, the ability to cause or cause some harm, misfortune / 4, p. 388 /.
Threat- this is intimidation, a promise to harm someone / 4, p. 716 /.
As you can see, both of these concepts, described in the Russian language dictionary, are interconnected. If we compare them through the prism of national security, then threats are understood as a set of conditions and factors that create a danger to the vital interests of citizens, society and the state, as well as national values and the national way of life.
In other words, a threat is a real, immediate possibility of harm to vital interests. Any threat is characterized by at least four essential features:
It is the highest degree of transformation of possible damage into reality;
A threat is understood as the intention of some subjects to cause harm to others;
It is a demonstration of a willingness to commit violence to cause harm;
This is a dynamically increased danger.
Danger– this is a fully realized, but not fatal, possibility of causing damage to national interests. Sometimes the concepts of danger and threat are identified, considering the differences between them insignificant. But it is still more correct to interpret danger as a certain probability of causing damage; as this probability approaches one, the danger develops into a threat. This means that a danger may exist, but there will be no threat, or in certain actions the danger may reach the nature of a threat.
In the modern sense / 10, p. 433/ military danger– this is a potential or real opportunity to cause harm, damage certain vital interests of an individual, society, or state using military means, through deliberate actions on the part of destructive forces within the country (criminal communities, extremist, nationalist, political and other groups) , as well as other states and their alliances that claim hegemony in the region and in the world as a whole. Military threat– the highest degree of military danger, the identified real, targeted and purposeful intention of any forces to cause damage to the national interests of a particular country, in our case, Russia, by military means.
The Military Doctrine presents the characteristic features and peculiarities of military conflicts, and their classification is given. Military conflicts, as is customary in the doctrine, cover all types of armed confrontation: wars (large-scale, regional, local) and armed conflicts (international and internal).
Military conflicts are characterized by:
Ways and means of achieving these goals;
The scale and timing of military operations;
Forms and methods of armed struggle;
The weapons and military equipment used.
Characteristic features of modern military conflicts:
1. Complex use of military force and non-military forces and means.
2. Massive use of weapon systems based on new physical principles and comparable in effectiveness to nuclear weapons.
3. Expanding the scope of the use of troops and assets operating in aerospace.
4. Strengthening the role of information warfare.
5. Reducing the time parameters for preparing for combat operations.
6. Increased management efficiency as a result of the transition from a strictly vertical management system to global network automated systems for troop and weapons control.
7. Creation of a permanent military action zone on the territories of the warring parties.
Features of modern military conflicts:
1. The unpredictability of their occurrence.
2. The presence of a wide range of military-political, economic, strategic and other goals.
3. The increasing role of modern highly effective weapons systems, as well as the redistribution of the role of various spheres of armed struggle.
4. Conducting information warfare activities in advance to achieve political goals without the use of military force, and subsequently in the interests of forming a favorable reaction from the world community to the use of military force.
The Military Doctrine emphasizes that modern military conflicts will be different:
Transience;
Selectivity and high degree of damage to objects;
Speed of maneuver of troops and fire;
The use of various mobile groups of troops.
Decisive factors achieving the set goals in modern military conflicts will be:
Mastering strategic initiative;
Maintaining stable state and military governance;
Ensuring superiority on land, sea and in aerospace.
During hostilities the role and importance will increase:
High-precision, electromagnetic, laser, infrasonic weapons;
Information and management systems;
Unmanned aerial and marine autonomous vehicles;
Controlled robotic weapons and military equipment.
Thus, in the new Military Doctrine, the concept of “military conflicts” covers three types of wars (large-scale, regional, local) and two types of armed conflicts (international and internal). Unlike the previous Military Doctrine, there is no division of wars into just and unjust, with the use of nuclear weapons or only conventional weapons. A special form – a border armed conflict – is also not considered.
Introduction
1. Definition and classification of wars and armed conflicts
2. Means of armed struggle
3. Damaging factors of modern types of weapons
Conclusion
Introduction
As evidenced by the historical analysis of the development of society, the resolution of a complex of contradictions between states or groups of states, in most cases, occurred with the use of force. Over five and a half thousand years, about 15 thousand wars and armed conflicts have occurred on Earth. This means that for each past century there is not even one peaceful week on the planet.
Over the past decades, the views of military theorists on the conduct of military conflicts and methods of armed struggle have radically changed. This is largely due to the development of qualitatively new types of weapons created on the basis of the latest technologies, including high-precision weapons and weapons based on new physical principles, as well as ways to protect troops from their damaging factors.
In modern wars, multimillion-dollar armies can be used, equipped with a large number of a wide variety of military equipment and weapons. The types and scale of use of various weapons, the nature and degree of protection against them will affect the magnitude and structure of troop losses in equipment and personnel.
The study of weapons and their damaging properties makes it possible to understand the nature of combat pathology in general and individual organs and systems in particular, to obtain quantitative and qualitative characteristics of injuries to personnel at military facilities and in military equipment, as well as to determine treatment and evacuation measures for the wounded and sick.
1. Definition and classification of wars and armed conflicts
One of the most brutal forms used by society to resolve interstate or intrastate contradictions is military conflict . Its mandatory characteristic is the use of military force, all types of armed confrontation, including large-scale, regional, local wars and armed conflicts.
Armed conflict – an armed conflict of a limited scale between states (international armed conflict) or opposing parties within the territory of one state (internal armed conflict).
Local war – a war between two or more states, pursuing limited military-political goals, in which military operations are carried out within the borders of opposing states, and which primarily affects the interests of only these states (territorial, economic, political and others).
Regional war – a war involving two or more states of the same region, waged by national or coalition armed forces using both conventional and nuclear weapons, on the territory of the region with adjacent waters and in the air (space) space above it, during which the parties will pursue important military-political goals.
Large scale war – a war between coalitions of states or the largest states of the world community, in which the parties will pursue radical military-political goals. A large-scale war can result from the escalation of an armed conflict, a local or regional war involving a significant number of states from different regions of the world. It will require the mobilization of all available material resources and spiritual forces of the participating states.
The characteristic features of modern military conflicts are:
a) integrated use of military force and non-military forces and means;
b) massive use of weapons systems and military equipment based on new physical principles and comparable in effectiveness to nuclear weapons;
c) expanding the scope of the use of troops (forces) and means operating in aerospace;
d) strengthening the role of information warfare;
e) reduction of time parameters for preparation for military operations;
f) increasing the efficiency of command and control as a result of the transition from a strictly vertical command and control system to global network automated systems for command and control of troops (forces) and weapons;
g) creation of a permanent military action zone in the territories of the warring parties.
Among the features of modern military conflicts are:
a) the unpredictability of their occurrence;
b) the presence of a wide range of military-political, economic, strategic and other goals;
c) the increasing role of modern highly effective weapons systems, as well as the redistribution of the role of various spheres of armed struggle;
d) carrying out information warfare activities in advance to achieve political goals without the use of military force, and subsequently in the interests of forming a favorable reaction from the world community to the use of military force.
Modern military conflicts will be characterized by transience, selectivity and a high degree of destruction of targets, speed of maneuver by troops (forces) and fire, and the use of various mobile groupings of troops (forces). Mastering strategic initiative, maintaining stable state and military control, ensuring superiority on land, sea and in aerospace will be decisive factors in achieving the goals.
Military operations will be characterized by the increasing importance of high-precision, electromagnetic, laser, infrasonic weapons, information and control systems, unmanned aerial vehicles and autonomous marine vehicles, controlled robotic weapons and military equipment.
Nuclear weapons will remain an important factor in preventing the emergence of nuclear military conflicts and military conflicts using conventional weapons (large-scale war, regional war).
In the event of a military conflict using conventional weapons (large-scale war, regional war), threatening the very existence of the state, the possession of nuclear weapons can lead to the escalation of such a military conflict into a nuclear military conflict.