The situation around Iran in the last days of holding in suspense the whole world. Will there be a war than it portends for the huge state of the world, including Russia, what to expect from another naikrupneyshgo confrontation? The answers to all these questions by most analysts are disappointing. All this in an interview with news agency "Weapons of Russia" and recognized expert replied, deputy director of the Institute of Political and Military Analysis, Alexander Hramchihin.
— Alexander, do you think that is really whether the situation around Iran so unsafe that it could trigger a global military conflict?
— What, in your opinion, is a "global military conflict"?
— Global war. Previously, you do not just states that it is completely unlikely.
— At the moment, the concept of "world war" — is, in fact, the totality of several wars, not just one "huge" war, what were the first two world wars. That there is, is a chain of conflicts that can occur even once. Naturally, the Iranian war — this is one of those wars.
— Do you think it really so unsafe for stability in the world, as they write about it at the moment virtually all of the media?
— Just recently, in any case will be re-division of the world. He has, in fact, occur, because the center of the world has already moved to Asia, at least — the economic center, and along with it is to move and political. And just now, in addition, Asians are needed resources even more than the west. And for all this complicated and redistribution will be carried out here, this series of wars that I formulate a world war.
— What kind of war will still be, in your opinion, except for Iran?
— Maybe just even with the Iranian happen war for Syria. In other words, it will be a difficult war in the Middle East. Well, in the other direction, to the east — is the Afghan conflict. Although he is, in fact, is permanent, and the trends he does not to the damping, but rather to the widening. The case of the United States with Pakistan deteriorate very rapidly. Pakistani-Indian conflict is always there. And further to the East is China, whose ambition — this is the main generator of future wars.
— Do you think the United States, roughly speaking, the "losers" in these wars? What they will do, what will come in the end?
— What does "lose"? What count "Defeat"?
— The defeat — this means that they do not have gained their own interests, have gained not what we want.
— Here specifically, the question here is, what their interests are and how they define them in this case. And by the way I can not answer for the Yankees — as they are now, at this moment, define their interests. That is why it is difficult to read, in what situation they "win" and in which "losers."
— And as for the Russian Federation? Do you think whether our homeland embroiled in these conflicts, and how it threatens to her?
— Our homeland has to do everything in order not to "get involved" in any of these conflicts. I think that our homeland should not be under any circumstances in their retracted, except, of course, the situation if it is attacked by someone directly.
— But all have the same opportunity?
— Opportunity there is, because I do not vouch for the adequacy of our control.
— Yes? How do you assess the position of the Russian Foreign Ministry? In your opinion, if the right policies are in general our diplomats?
— And I do not know what position at Russian Foreign Ministry. Ministry of Foreign Affairs — is, in my opinion, the worst of its own archaic and inadequate structure around the Russian leadership in general.
— Before the New Year at a press conference in RIA Announcements dedicated to the military and political results of 2011, you talk about the fact that the previously heavily criticized the reform of the army, but at the moment acknowledge that indeed there were some positive results. You also said they could not understand how and commented those who believe that the 20 trillion rubles. the army — a lot. In your eyes — it's hard enough, and is serious about this issue. Can you expand on this idea?
— In 1-x, as not so long ago said S.Fridinsky — stealing the army is seeking gallakticheskih scale, and I'm afraid he's right. Although, of course, I do not have access to the appropriate data, but there is a feeling that the way it is. So now it is a significant part of the allocated funds will just disappear. And in-2, Russian armed forces should complete re, therefore that instrument, made in Russian period, the physical layer produces resource. This will inevitably, and in no way on the other can not be. Because he needs a replacement. In numbers — not single and not in the framework of 10, and in tyschah. Because, really, can be fully coming global war. I repeat: yes, we better not get involved in it, but, in fact, stronger than we have an army, the greater the possibility that we will not retract, and vice versa.
— Well, what do you forecast, all this "mess" with Iran could end lately?
— At the moment, the possibility of war is very high, as the Yankees it will be some "dembelsky chord" because they have already inevitably just the military budget. It is not only, as they say, "Obama's whim", and impartial fact, since such a large military expenditures to carry unrealistic. Accordingly, before that they need to solve some key issues — namely, to remove some basic enemies. And, in fact, currently there is such a comfortable situation for the destruction of Iran. And the more so, apparently, on the side of the Yankees will make war the Arabs, which is very profitable politically Yankees. In other words, now they are not the "aggressors" against the Islamic world, but on the contrary — sometimes even his "defenders".
— You have mentioned China as a major generator of ambition Asia. Tell me, what kind of things, in your opinion, expect Russia and China in the coming years?
— Our homeland is fairly basic direction of Chinese expansion, as soon as we have the necessary resources to China and areas in sufficient quantity. Because the growth of Chinese power, we will all be stronger for it to feel for yourself. Especially since it has at the moment is the so-called "strategic partnership" is quite obviously run out of steam, as officials are no longer able to come up with what it is still directly. This is more than a saying. It is exhaled from all points of view. And then impartially will increase the contradictions that a lot of what can go.
— And if our homeland even rearm, can it be, in principle, to oppose them?
— This is dependent on us. Even if we will buy a lot of guns, the question is whether you need a tool we buy and whether we have it where necessary. While I do not say any thing nor the other.
— Thank you for so much for your point of view expressed on the issues.