Washington politicians were convinced that after the collapse of the Russian bloc in the world it is time to dominance only «superpower» — the United States of America. But in fact it turned out that indescribably difficult to dictate their will on other nations to ensure its security. Practice has shown that the presence of a single dominant center aggravated contradictions between medium and small countries. This occurs subsequent reasons:
— in the world to form a stable democratization of international relations, which led to the fact that each government is doing in its sole discretion;
— in almost all regions of the world are no favorites, which can stabilize the situation: for example, in Africa or the Arab world;
— on the world map, many new countries, who can not live together and the adjacent countries;
— exacerbated border territorial and ethnic-religious conflicts: for example, between the Arabs and Israel, Greeks and Turks, Indians and Pakistanis, Serbs and Albanians, Armenians and Azeris;
— struggle for energy resources is gaining more speed;
— before each state were the most difficult tasks in the field of ecology, movement, the fight against drugs, terrorism, also attempt to take a leading position in its own region.
Increased levels of conflict in the world and the lack of awareness of who is the enemy and who is an ally of the U.S. forces to find the latest military concept that aims to increment the role of military force component in American politics.
Brand new concept, voiced in the report of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey, the company assumes joint built-in operations (concept of joint action: The combined forces and means in 2020 («Capstone Concept for Joint Operations: Joint Force 2020»), CCJO). Senior military offers a new approach to the formation of the armed forces and resources as they become threats and conflicts.
The global economic crisis has significantly reduced military budgets of virtually all states, because the proposal M. Dempsey, partly solves the problem cheaper to perform the functions of the U.S. global military power center.
The developers of the concept believe that the proposed method in the formation of the armed forces when a threat of a fighting reclaims organizational, managerial, and other configurations in most of the U.S. Army, that she was ready to fulfill the role of unifying and directing a center for global security.
The concept takes into account that not counting standing armies to future conflicts can take an active role non-state actors: Adventure, private military companies, corporate armed groups, terrorists, criminal clans, guerrillas, etc. Since access to modern weaponry and technology simply opens the flow of currency, it is possible that all these illegal military formations will own ultramodern combat capability.
In the proposed concept M. Dempsey is not considered that the strategy gangs opposing permanent troops endured substantial transformation. Now, together with classical methods, it contains a wide-scale action to seize fundamental strategic objects and their company successful defense. Bandits have the possibility to make the terrorist attacks, and be pioneers in open conflict with the role of groups of up to 500 people. The strategy is based on gangs surprise, rudeness, determination and the short duration of action, but often produce long bandits and stubborn resistance. Their periodic raids they force constants troops constantly run across a defensive strategy, in other words to lose the initiative in the operation. And increased level of bandits weapon. Worked through and the strategy of fighting. Usually, the bandits know the terrain perfectly, effortlessly get information about the location of the standing army, the security system, an existing weapons, techniques and quantities of ammunition, travel routes.
Armed corporate divisions, although created by agreement with the municipal law enforcement agencies, but restrictions on their numbers and no, they perform tasks, are corporate secrets, and how to control their actions and existing in-service equipment and supplies, limited and outcome is not predictable.
Organizational criminal clans are cohesive groups of well-armed and trained in all the actions of extreme situations. Their main goal — multiplication laundering and increase impact on municipal structures.
Developers novel concept joint action at the risk of conflict and do not account for the fact that private military companies will fight for contracts both on the side of the combined forces, and on the side of the enemy — the whole thing just about who pays and how much.
The report M. Dempsey is not considered «balance of power» in the sphere of such probable hostilities as space and cyberspace. M. Dempsey confidence that the combined forces will preserve secrecy in conducting special operations and offensive operations, during the existence of a global network of technology and the transmission and reception of data sets of all kinds, is unconvincing.
Rapporteur believes that the units within the combined forces will hold regional expertise and knowledge that will allow them to operate in the cultural environment at least some areas. That for a long time South American military contingent deployed in the Middle East, failed to gain this same experience and develop tolerance to the Muslim population, says an incorrect assertion chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
So what is still more silent M Dempsey?
Speaking about the need for operations to curb the spread of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), the commander does not specify how the army units will act upon the application of enemy nuclear, chemical weapons, what measures they will use to protect the civilian population in the conflict region and ensure its functioning.
It should be noted that at the moment no country prepares troops considering actions in the area of implementation of WMD, there are only special teams, able to work in contaminated areas.
M. Dempsey does not reflect our own concept of the fact that the enemy may be superior to the combined forces of some principled positions. Starting from the 50s South American military operations spetsy develop plans based on the postulate of a high quality and technical superiority of the United States over the enemy. Pentagon did not lag behind and NATO staff officers, believing that Alliance forces surpass, if not quantity, quality, power armies of the Warsaw Pact. M. Dempsey error that is related to the enemy’s army, the U.S. remained the same. But almost all changed the balance of forces: get modern weapons, the latest technology available to those who will be able to pay for this product innovatorsky. Not because the situation when the South American army encounter on the battlefield with more on the technical level, prepared by the adversary.
Here’s a fascinating fact. In 1994, during the armed conflict between North and South Yemen, both sides used against each other the most modern weapon, including tactical missiles «Point» and multiple launch rocket systems «Grad» Russian production. But severe gun in unskilful hands became quite useless — there was a big roar, but there is no sense.
But in the Indo-Pakistani conflict (Kargala 1999) are the same missile systems and artillery became harsh instrument, as they are operated by qualified experts at.
Incidentally, in the personal sector are active in the development of such advanced fields as robotics, nanotechnology, biotechnics, the search for new energy sources, etc. It is possible that this work will lead to new forms of combat, against which nothing will be available weapons and equipment.
Entertaining after the fact. When NATO bombarded Yugoslavia, Yugoslav objects protected by modern air defenses, including the MiG-29, but air strikes were not well reflected. And the reason was that the Yugoslavs had no new anti-aircraft missile systems, such as the Russian «Tunguska», S-300P, «Thor», C-300B, «Carapace,» C-400. But their presence in Syria, According to experts, does not repeat the Libyan NATO option.
Another drawback of the concept CCJO — it is not even mentioned on the ability of large-scale wars between states. Most likely, this tactical error stems from the fact that military experts have long believed that the majestic powers always fail to agree among themselves, without bringing the conflict to an open military confrontation.
But they are wrong. Recall on some of them. Plainclothes war in Somalia (90 years) called a large-scale conflict, as it actually led to the complete destruction of the country, killing an unlimited number of inhabitants, including hunger.
In the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988) were involved in a large human resources, which led to a significant in a human victims. In the course of this military conflict naikrupneyshgo intensively applied chemical weapon.
Naturally, the report prepared by qualified military analysts and many accents and delivered right on time. But a significant number of issues that must be addressed in the concept, not even marked.
Unequivocally that it takes time and finalize proposals for concept CCJO for a final decision on the formation of the Joint Staff, in which the puzzle will come together to ensure security in any region of the world.