The Role of Russia in the 21st century
Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: General History
Forum Name: Modern Warfare
Forum Discription: Military history and miltary science from the ''Cold War'' era onward.
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=12327
Printed Date: 27-Apr-2024 at 13:54
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: The Role of Russia in the 21st century
Posted By: Illuminati
Subject: The Role of Russia in the 21st century
Date Posted: 30-May-2006 at 00:32
|
With the Eu investing more and more in military technology, the US still maintaing, and in some aspects increasing military expenditures, and the China rising up as a global power... what's russia's future role? Will they rebuild thier military to what it was in the past as their economy strengthens? Will they remain on thier own, or will they side more with China or the West? Personally, I think they'll re-emerge as a global power as they were in the past and be more fo a lone fox per se......not really allying strongly with anyone. Russia's made a habit of reminding the US that it's still a power. During the Kosovo action, Russian subs trailed US carriers off of the Coast of Washington jsut to remind the US that they are still there. |
Replies:
Posted By: Belisarius
Date Posted: 30-May-2006 at 01:02
|
Unfortunately, Russia is really a mess at this time. Their government
is not exactly a model to follow, the economy is in shambles, and the
military is a pale shadow to what it once was. I mean look at what
happened to them in Chechnya. Of course, the main problem is their economy. In terms of natural resources, Russia might be one of the world's most gifted nations. Unfortunately, most of those resources are trapped under the Siberian tundra. If they had the ability to get those resources out of there, Russia might be substantially wealthier. Russia could emerge as a superpower once more but it won't be anytime soon if ever. ------------- |
Posted By: Illuminati
Date Posted: 30-May-2006 at 01:11
|
I think russia is doing okay in Chechnya. remember, tehy want to bring Chechnya back into russia. That's different than being at war for survival. If Russia was at war with Chechnya out of defense, Chechnya would be a smoldering ruin. Even the US has problems in Afghanistan and Iraq. No matter the military, fighting an insurgent war is not easy to do if you aren't willing to jsut level the whole place. When it comes to fighting a total war....don't judge a military by their ability to deal with insurgents. The Russian military is starting to re-build. They are do to get some of new equipment this year. i'll try and find the article about it. Thier governmental model of Russia isn't to my personal likeing. But a more authoritarian leader like Putin, has a better chance at being able to build the military up. regardless, Russia's strategic worl position coupled with the rise of China is enough to force any form of government to build up the military. The Russian economy as you stated, is quite weak as of now. that's the only thing holding them back. I couldn't even estimate a time-frame on how long until they get out fo their economic slump thought |
Posted By: Belisarius
Date Posted: 30-May-2006 at 01:34
|
Chechnya isn't exactly a big countryand the Russians are have been
fighting there since 1994. The fact that fighting continues to the
present day shows how futile their efforts are. Even as far back as
1980 when the Soviets were actually fighting a true war in Afghanistan,
they were having trouble. They're worse off now, with the deterioration
of the Russian army because of the collapse of the Soviet Union. Most
of their best scientists and engineers already live elsewhere and their
technology is slowly becoming obsolete. ------------- |
Posted By: Russian
Date Posted: 30-May-2006 at 19:07
Answer to Belisarius: Unfortunately, small amount of people in the west have a CLUE of what is Russia now, it is no longer a mess. Ok, to Illuminati, Russia will most likely side itself with China, however, west is a possibility. Despite this, Russia is maintaining it's power, and increasing: New shuttle built, Europe is ordering russian rockets for space travel, Russian artillery shells, russian MLRS systems, we have yet to see the new tank T-95, military is definitely on the huge rise, S-400 are accepted, many other researches are on the way, 400 new military items are to be accepted in 2006, more in 2007, equipment is among the best, cooperation is on the way with many asian and european countries, US, especially in space travel and energy production, heard of new Tokamak, well, not new, but Tokamak? a VERY interesting way of pruducing energy. However, there are also problems, mainly in command and with troops, technlogy is among the best countries, along with US, but troops are not that good, corruption in goverment, inflation, and so on, but it seems as Putin found a way to tackle inflation, he pours money in to military. Russia will bocome one of the main energy supplier before we all switch to something else, we might switch to TOKAMAKs by the way. Russia's economy is on a fast rise, and Putin, who is a great leader, is pouring money in to social services and military, both research and reequiping army. Russian people LOVE Putin, he is a good president. On his first day as a president, on 1 January, when everyboyd generally celebrate with Shampaign and everything, guess where he was? In Chechnya, meeting new year with troops on the front lines near Grozny, handing medals and awards, and presents. Concerning politics, Putin said: "We will never return to times of Cold war, we will steadily, slowly build relations with West based on our common interests". He also did a little remark about US, he said: Ok, if you want to find out more about Russia, see some quotes from Putin, some reports concerning new technology and military, as well as social stuff, foreign politics, here is a good site, if you want to know what is happening in Russia, just go there: http://en.rian.ru/ the developers of things like Topol M are posting stuff on this site. Russia will be democratic, Putin said it, that's the final regime, most stable, and it will not be millitaristic, Defence Minister said it himself, he said we will not do this mistake twice, he said Russia is capable of finding solutions to expensive proiblems with cheap desicions. Completely agree with Illuminati, insurgents are a big stoppage for a big country, like Russia, USSR, USA, the armies are not suited for this in general. Then again, USA, like Britain was, is a great Naval superpower, while USSR was continental superpower, well, it was inherited by Russia, who is not that powerful as USSR was, but still quite powerful. There are two countries that are likely to be competing for world economics, military, some other stuff, and cooperating together as well, and not letting anyone to come to their level, these two countries are Russia and USA, judge for yourself, who has 97% of world's weapons of mass destruction, and who "ACTIVELY" tries to limit them? US and Russia are "trying", but in reality they understand that it is favourable for them only to be up there and deal with everything by themselves, not involving anyone else, they of course want to keep weapons of mass destruction situation at the level at which it is now. |
Posted By: Russian
Date Posted: 30-May-2006 at 19:22
Russia was superpower twice, remember 1700s, Katherine the Great, the saying was, in St. Peterburg Tsar sneezes, Europe caughs. Your info is quite outdated Belisarius, Russia is getting resources from Siberia, especialy gas, military receives new equipment, economy rises, people start living better, but of course there are problems, but they are not as much or as serious as you stated. Chechnya is getting better, Chechenization of war almost over, Chechens are fighting with Chechen rebels, not Russia, well, Chechens are russians as well. And rebels are in the mountains, and the organized command over them has been destroyed, that's by the way the most recent news from Chechnya, you can read about it on hte site I posted, Ria Novosti, I highly reccomend it. Russia definitely posesses resources to become a world power, but there are problems, the problem of demographics, russian population is reducing, and Putin tackles the problem, and I think successfully, also, the problem of leader. However, in this case, it might not be a problem, I would vote for Sergey Ivanov, Defence minister, he and the otehr guy, I do not remember how are the main candidates. When I asked my dad, who is gonna be the next president, he said: "On who will Putin point his finger." And Putin will do it, when he will be coming away from the presidency, he said it. This is what I call the Problem of new leader. 70% of people would vote for Putin's third term if he would try to run for president, but he doesn't want to. |
Posted By: Belisarius
Date Posted: 30-May-2006 at 20:20
|
If my information is outdated, I'm sorry. In my defense, it is a little
difficult to keep track of the development of every country in the
world. If Russia is on an upward climb while maintaining democracy, I'm
glad to hear it. However, am I correct in saying that corruption in the government is still rampant? What is Putin doing about this problem? ------------- |
Posted By: Russian
Date Posted: 30-May-2006 at 21:58
it is ok, don't worry, however, Russia is not really maintaiing democracy while climbing, as many accuse it. |
Posted By: Constantine XI
Date Posted: 31-May-2006 at 00:28
|
I think the problem with Westerners assessing Russia is that they are
always inclined to be biased thanks to half a century of Cold War
propaganda. Westerners WANT to believe that Russia is corrupt and weak,
Westerners are TAUGHT to believe so. This is what makes it difficult
for them to assess Russia and they often underestimate her. Let's look at her economy to begin with. We have all heard the horror stories about how Russia is going down the toilet. Yet the last financial report I read about Russia, their economy was growing at a rate of 7.7% for that financial quarter. For those not familiar with economics, as a commerce student I can tell you that is bloody excellant. We are talking about a nation which is well above places like China and India in infrastructure, yet investment is still making such massive returns. Also on the Russian economy, they DO have a very good pool of qualified professionals to draw upon, unlike China and India. A big problem with this is that some of them leave for overseas, however, the country still is home to a strong force of technicians and professionals. Combine this with a strategically useful position and the abundance of natural resources already mentioned and it is well worth noting. A declining population may not be a good thing, but in the modern world a large population is no longer required to be a powerful or important country. Australia has only 20 million people, yet the 10th largest military budget in the world, for example. It is tempting to see Russia as a nation regressing into her despotic past, but I see Putin and his strategy differently. I think he realised Russia was a country which needed stability and strong government to usher in democracy, the lack of these things is why she had so many difficulties in the early 90s. I think Putin is taking a firmer hold of the country in order to get it back onto a solid political footing, to counter balance the anarchic forces of the 1990s such as the Russian mafia and separatist groups. At the moment I see Russia as quietly working her way out of a low point and I think she will play a much greater role militarily and politically in the future. I think it a little unfair to cite Chechnya as a demonstration of an inadequate military, fighting against a grass roots nation in arms and guerilla warfare is the greatest challenge for today's superpowers. The real test for a nation in fighting insurgents is how willing the home population of the large power is willing to continue supporting their troops to get the job done. In this respect, comparing Russia's military tenacity to that of some other countries who are fighting insurgents provides some interesting insights. ------------- |
Posted By: pikeshot1600
Date Posted: 31-May-2006 at 10:16
|
With Russia reasserting herself in areas that were formally parts of the Russian state, and particularly on her periphery, I don't see Russia aquiescing in a NATO Ukraine as is being discussed. The old Warsaw Pact cordon that buffered Russia from Europe is gone now, and that alone makes them nervous.
Eventually Russia will reassert not only former imperial interests in independent states, but also her geostrategic interests as well. Those have always been the same, for the Czar, for the Reds and for Russia now.
|
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 31-May-2006 at 11:57
|
Aswell as the Tokomak, a scientist in Russia has also created a new form of Energy. Gets power from the Sun during the day and power from the stars during the night, stellar energy.
------------- |
Posted By: rider
Date Posted: 31-May-2006 at 12:26
|
Stars... I wonder how large is the extraction per cent... I might think of it below 1%. The stars aren't so radiant, I believe, especially for light.
But we have in our Army services a talk that Russia lacks oil for their fleets... interesting.
But, yes, Russia is a major gas exporter, there I must agree. ------------- |
Posted By: Russian
Date Posted: 31-May-2006 at 13:09
I would not believe these talks, Russia is also a major oil exporter, has among the biggest amounts of oil in a country, especially not developed sites. |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 31-May-2006 at 20:47
|
Yes but isnt Russian oil poor in quality. ------------- |
Posted By: steven
Date Posted: 01-Jun-2006 at 01:21
|
Well, Russia will not reassert it's role in the region any time soon, maybe in Central Asia and Belarus may join it, but it won't be able to counter the EU expansion. Russia has good natural resources but it needs to be able to turn these into an actual economy.
Last time I was there this past summer, visiting family, I think Moscow is slowly becoming a city that resembles something like a Western Europe...but it's just not there yet. The rest of th country is not much to speak of.
|
Posted By: Dampier
Date Posted: 01-Jun-2006 at 10:11
|
Russias problem is dealing with its Oligarchs, getting the PBI better (Poor Bloody Infantry) and sorting out the corruption in certain areas. Putin is not democratic but his methods do seem to really be working. There are some interesting parallels with Russia post Cold War and Germany post Versailles. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Russian
Date Posted: 01-Jun-2006 at 16:14
Oligarhcs work on Putin now, and this is really good news, the largest Steel producing company now is russian Severstal' combined with Arcelor, before Mordashev, who is a director, started talks with Arcelor, he asked Putin advice, should he do that or not, many oligarchs do that now, an Putin is really happy, and greets them for this, for helping rise the economy. Oficially, Mordashev and Putin were talking about steel tubes of big diameters, LOL, thats freaking laughable, everybody understand what they were talking about, but NO, they had to cover it up with this laughable thing, it seems funny for me, especially that President of RF would talk to someone about pipes of big diameters. In Russia on average the amount of good or money for person or I don't know how you call it increased 4 times. You are right Dampier, Putin's methods work great, although West sometimes accuses it of not being democratic, well, West greeted Eltsin for being democratic, and he was so democratic and has given so much liberties that almost ruined the country 
Sometimes I think that democracy is not that good, in terms of complete democracy, you have so many opponents who fight for power that they almost don't care about the country, pretty much the situation in Ukraine, where goverment can't stop working. |
Posted By: the Bulgarian
Date Posted: 02-Jun-2006 at 15:02
Democracy is a good thing, Russian.  It may not be that obvious in the beggining, but you'll like it in time. Russians are pretty unfamiliar with the ways of democracy following centuries of absolutism and decades of Communism. Most of the country's current problems stem from the Russians'...hmm... instinct, if you will, to be comanded. Democracy confuses and scares them, because they're not used to thinking for them selves. However, Russians are very bright people, they'll figure it out eventually.
I hope Russia gets back on its feet soon. The Russian people deserve to finally live like deceant, free, civilized people.
|
Posted By: Russian
Date Posted: 02-Jun-2006 at 20:37
Thank you. 
A little thing, it is not just that we like to be commanded, it is just that we like having a good leader, which Putin is. |
Posted By: the Bulgarian
Date Posted: 03-Jun-2006 at 07:33
За ничто, дружок.
|
Posted By: Kalevipoeg
Date Posted: 03-Jun-2006 at 08:18
|
Russia is economically and militarily progressing, but when that
reaches high enough level i wonder, what then? Personally i am keeping
my fingers crossed that she (Russia) will become a tolerable neighbour
to live next to and give up her nostalgic plans of regaining the old
areas that used to be under the czars and commies, either through
economical control or direct rule. It seems the best case scenario
would be a strengthening Russia who will get a truly democratic ruler
afterwards who will set normal diplomatic relations with its neighbours
and keep Russia stable. Im tired of having Russia meddling in our business, it could just stop, let's hope it will happen in the future after Russia has escaped its past. ------------- There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible than a man in the depths of an ether binge... |
Posted By: the Bulgarian
Date Posted: 03-Jun-2006 at 09:40
|
Yes, I too hope Russia allies herself with the West. |
Posted By: Russian
Date Posted: 03-Jun-2006 at 17:20
LOL, or languages are a bit similar, although you have advantage, I can not really understand Bulgarian, you can a little understand Russian,
Putin said that Russia will not do same mistake again, to have military budget, intervening in to affairs of other countries and so on, he said we will steadily build good relations with the west, without any Cold War stuff. |
Posted By: the Bulgarian
Date Posted: 03-Jun-2006 at 17:34
I understand everything in Russian and am able to speak it, although my grammar and accent are sizable.
I was talking about the budget of NATO members, but limiting her military budget would do Russia some good as well. It would be a great idea if these money are redirected into the Russian space program, also healthcare, education, stuff like that.
|
Posted By: Russian
Date Posted: 03-Jun-2006 at 21:10
|
You speak russian, that's cool, lol.
|
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 08-Jun-2006 at 12:33
|
It will be interesting to see who becomes President after Putin's final
term is up in 2008. Who seems to be likely to succeed Putin? |
Posted By: Kalevipoeg
Date Posted: 08-Jun-2006 at 12:49
Whoever Vladimir elects.
------------- There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible than a man in the depths of an ether binge... |
Posted By: Russian
Date Posted: 09-Jun-2006 at 07:13
that's RIGHT, he basically said it, lol. And guess what, I will vote for Minister of Defence, Sergey Ivanov, he is considered among the most popular people, and I like him as a minister of defence. Also, Putin I think will stay in politics, I would want him to stay. The votes are called not votes "for president" but votes for successor, what does it look like? That's right, TZAR, lol. That's how Russia works, CENTRALIZED POWER, not democracy, it is simply impossible to control such a huge country with democracy, too much corruption will occur, and democracy is the best regime possible for corruption. |
Posted By: Kalevipoeg
Date Posted: 09-Jun-2006 at 08:12
Bah, Ivanov is such a propagandist, spewing lies about Estonia and the Baltics to brainwash Russians, i personally dislike him tremendously. He just doesn't want to have peace with us.
------------- There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible than a man in the depths of an ether binge... |
Posted By: Russian
Date Posted: 09-Jun-2006 at 20:41
I have NEVER heard him saying anything about baltics, any source about him doing that? |
Posted By: Kalevipoeg
Date Posted: 10-Jun-2006 at 12:06
|
Now that i think of it, i might be mistaken. I was thinking of Sergei Lavrov i guess. My bad.
------------- There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible than a man in the depths of an ether binge... |
Posted By: Russian
Date Posted: 10-Jun-2006 at 19:01
it's all good
|
Posted By: Majkes
Date Posted: 02-Jul-2006 at 12:49
| I think Russia will be developing, people will be getting richer and finally it will become a typical western style Democracy for sure with some Russians traditions. |
Posted By: Roberts
Date Posted: 04-Jul-2006 at 22:13
It will be Sergei Ivanov or Dmitri Medvedev or maybe third person which is currently unknown even in Russia, just like V.Putin was. But I would love to see Putin changing constitution and granting himself unknown amount of terms.  Guess what could be reaction in the west?  ------------- |
Posted By: Constantine XI
Date Posted: 04-Jul-2006 at 22:47
Noisy impotence ------------- |
Posted By: Gundamor
Date Posted: 05-Jul-2006 at 01:11
|
If it suits the wests interest i'm sure they wouldnt care if Putin changed it. Obviously the west would make a negative statement to please the public. Isnt Sergei Ivonov an ex KGB thug? ------------- "An eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind" |
Posted By: Kalevipoeg
Date Posted: 05-Jul-2006 at 13:41
|
"Isnt Sergei Ivonov an ex KGB thug?" Aren't they all? ------------- There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible than a man in the depths of an ether binge... |
Posted By: Spartakus
Date Posted: 18-Jul-2006 at 06:46
|
I think the problem with Westerners assessing Russia is that they are always inclined to be biased thanks to half a century of Cold War propaganda. Westerners WANT to believe that Russia is corrupt and weak, Westerners are TAUGHT to believe so. This is what makes it difficult for them to assess Russia and they often underestimate her.
Yeah,i remember a low-budget Hollywood movie about the Apocalypse.Americans were in the side of God and corrupted Russians with Satan.....
Well,the truth is that Russia has been in worse situations and survived.For example ,after WWI and the Bolshevik Revolution,Russia was ruined to the ground.Yet it managed to stay alive ,defeat Hitler and become a hyper-power.All that in 70 years.Russia will come back to the "game".
|
Posted By: Roberts
Date Posted: 18-Jul-2006 at 12:37
Well I am no westerner but Russia actually is corrupt and weak (in ecominic terms, not military of course).
Isn't they already playing the "game". They are in G8. Hide and seak "democracy" with Westerners and blackmailing neighbouring countries. Lets wait for 2008 and see what happens. ------------- |
Posted By: Spartakus
Date Posted: 18-Jul-2006 at 14:24
| The first quote you quoted is Constantine XI's word's .I just quoted them using black letters.Yeah,Russia is playing the game,but not as it was playing it when it was the USSR. |
Posted By: Ponce de Leon
Date Posted: 18-Jul-2006 at 21:50
| Here is a role that Russia can play. They can actually help put the pressure on the Lebonanese to give up the captured Israelis, and they can stop giving the North Korean economic deals so that N. Korea will be unable to keep producing bombs. (China too should stop helping N. Korea) |
Posted By: TheDiplomat
Date Posted: 07-Aug-2006 at 20:57
|
A dying out nation can not assert herself as a superpower on the world stage.
Demoghraphy has always played a major role in the course of events throught history and will continue so...
If the Russian Federation wants to gain the status the USSR had had back in post-WWII, she should start to motivate her women to produce more babies once and for all.
But it seems unlikely for now, as the Russian women tend to resemble their counterparts in Western Europe.
It is also worth note down the fact that average life expectancy for a Russian guy is only 60 years of age!!!!! ------------- ARDA:The best Turkish diplomat ever! |
Posted By: ataman
Date Posted: 23-Aug-2006 at 13:42
|
I agree with TheDiplomat.
Russia in the past had one huge adventage - it had a huge population. But it is changing very fast. In 1926 USSR had 147 mln people while Turkey in 1927 had only 13,6 mln people (11:1 for Russia). Today Russia has about 146 mln people, while Turkey has about 70 mln (2:1 for Russia). In 2050 Russia will have about 80-100 mln people, while Turkey will have over 120 mln people (1.2:1 for Turkey).
This comparison is just an example which shows what was, is and will be position of Russia. You can make comparison to India, China or even Iran.
|
Posted By: Kalevipoeg
Date Posted: 23-Aug-2006 at 14:25
|
So as Russia mostly ruled with quantity while quality has always been the loser in Russia it only shows dark clouds for good old Rodina? But still quantity enough to bully his European and Caucasus neighbours, so still no good news for us, the little guys.
------------- There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible than a man in the depths of an ether binge... |
Posted By: erkut
Date Posted: 23-Aug-2006 at 14:38
There is an old saying '' Umom Rasiyu ne paniat, arshinom ploshat ne izmerit'' means you cant understand Russia with logic, you cant measure her with measurement.
She is still a great power in ewerything. ------------- |
Posted By: Desperado
Date Posted: 23-Aug-2006 at 14:40
|
Russia has lost some of her most populated territories in the XXth century:
-1920's Poland, Finland, Baltics. -1990's Ukraine, Baltics again, Belorussia, Central Asian Republics and South Caucasus. So now it's not the same country like The Imperial Russia before 1917 neither the USSR in 1945-with the lost territories the population is diminished too. The other factor is the low reproduction rate of the population- but it's a problem for the whole Europe. The rapid population growth is a characteristic for the not developed third world countries and has nothing to do with the international position of any country. Other factor is the huge immigration which is also characteristic for all of the East European countries. |
Posted By: ataman
Date Posted: 23-Aug-2006 at 14:49
It was before 1926, not after this year. I have given data for population of Russia in 1926.
Really? So what will you say about India? Do you think that this country means nothing?
And remember that a country might develop its economy very fast (10% per year), while it can't increase its population as fast as economy (2-3% is max and there is no any 'western' country which has such big growth of population). On the other hand, we have a lot of examples that poor countries promoted to 'the 1st league' in a short time (30 years or so).
Russia might develop its economy 7% per year, but it is nothing special if we compare this achievement to the economical growth of India, China or even Turkey and Iran. But opposite to Russia, these 4 countries don't have a problem with a growth of their population (well, China might have some problem in a future too, but by now, it is still a country of young people)
|
Posted By: erkut
Date Posted: 23-Aug-2006 at 14:53
------------- |
Posted By: ataman
Date Posted: 23-Aug-2006 at 15:09
Yes, she is. But the bigest wealth of every country is its people not its territory.
|
Posted By: Desperado
Date Posted: 23-Aug-2006 at 15:30
|
"...Really? So what will you say about India? Do you think that this country means nothing?"-I'll repeat it once again: the influence and the economic power of a country in the XXIth century are not proportional or directly linked neither to it's population numbers or the population growth. The countries with fast growing population are not the most developed countries, but just the opposite. In China and India (which are developing countries) the governments are trying to diminish the population growth with a vast campaigns of family planning and even forcefull sterilisation-so it's a not the factor that leads them to progress.
"..It was before 1926, not after this year. I have given data for population of Russia in 1926."- I see, but nevertheless you're comparing USSR with the Russian Federation, which is almost the same as to compare the UK with the British Empire: a different territories, even in the geographical meaning. The population diminishing in Russia was because the overall economic regress of the country compared to USSR, but not the population diminishing was the reason of Russia's decline. |
Posted By: ataman
Date Posted: 23-Aug-2006 at 16:04
So, I will explain my opinion in other way - every country which wants to be a superpower (like Russia wants to be) must be economicaly developed AND must have huge population. Russia (or USSR) was a superpower in the past because had huge population and was enough developed (although its developing per capita was always lower than western countries). Today Russia is developing its economy quite fast (the newest data from Niezawisimaja Gazieta/23.08.2006 - the growth of economy in Russia in the first half of 2006 is 6%), but population of Russia is decreasing very fast (about 700 - 800 000 per year). Therefore, if we talk about a future of Russia, my opinion is that Russia will be an important country, but it won't be a superpower any more. In the period 1708 - 1990 Russia and later USSR were in the 1st world league. Today Russia is in the 2nd league. In the future Russia might lose even this position which it has today.
I know, but I think that this kind of simplification is admissible in this case.
well, as you can see, Russia is developing its economy quite fast (thanks to its oil), but population of Russia is decreasing. The best scenario for a future of Russia is that Russia will be highly developed, but middle populated country. Even in this - the best for Russia - case, it won't be a superpower.
Worse scenario for a future of Russia - it will be a source of raw materials for more developed neighbours. With its 80-100 mln people, Russia will have a position in the 3rd league.
Therefore, IMHO whole Europe is loseing its position. In the begining of 20th c. European countries (GB, France, Russia) were in the '1st league'. Today there is no European country in the 1st league. Only EU might be classified to the 1st league, but IMO EU is not a country but only a federation of countries.
European countries had rapid growth of population in 19th and in the begining of 20th c. And they were in the '1st league' in that time. So, if you sugest that a country which has a rapid growth of population can't be highly developed, I can't agree with you.
Single, but a very good example that a rapid growth of population not only doesn't disturb but it helps to create a superpower is USA. USA in 1800 had about 4 mln people. In that time USA had position in the 4th or 5th world league. But after 100 years, I mean in 1900, USA had 76mln people. In that time USA already was in the 2nd world league. 38 years later, USA with its 138mln people was by no means in the 1st world league. And it keeps this position till now. BTW, today USA has about 300 mln people. |
Posted By: Desperado
Date Posted: 24-Aug-2006 at 05:35
| Then which are the current "1st league" countries if there are no European and more interesting why? |
Posted By: ataman
Date Posted: 24-Aug-2006 at 06:52
IMHO today only USA is in the 1st league. Close to this league is China and Japan. But opposite to China which is on a good way to promote to the 1st league in a close future, Japan will lose its to-day's position. There is also India which has a big chance to promote to the 1st league, but India needs more time than China.
Why?
I take into account: an economy and a demography. These 2 factors are the most important for me. Follow them is a military power (depended also on an economy and a demography), resources and something what is difficult to define - a will of society (and its leaders) to pay costs of playing in the 1st league. I think that it will be the best to write some example. Japan (or Germany) for example has still powerful economy, but Japaneses (and Germans) are pacifists and don't want to involve in any war or even only conflict. Therefore they won't play in the 1st league. Their societies don't want to pay a costs (here I think about killed people, but also monay) of wars.
|
Posted By: Desperado
Date Posted: 24-Aug-2006 at 09:42
|
My classification:
1st class "Global factors": USA, Russia, China 2nd class: UK, Germany, France 3rd class: India, Japan, Italy, Spain Local "Great powers": Iran, N. and S. Koreas, Brazil, Pakistan, Turkey, and Israel To be a first class World power, the country must have self-sufficient military industry, big territory, to control a lots of natural resources and posses advanced technology. The China doesn't answer on some of this requirments but possess a huge army and industrial might, which are big factors. I'll not agree with you about Japan : it's only advantage is the economy, but with its slowing growth in the the last decade it's not sufficient enough to promote her as a first class power. Also it doesn's possess any nuclear weapons and has weak military industry. For the military power in the Modern world the demography isn't a big factor-Israel is a good example for that. Even without weapons of mass destruction to be in use, Israel managed to beat the many times more numerous by population Arab countries. |
Posted By: ataman
Date Posted: 24-Aug-2006 at 10:30
Japanese economy is far above Russian one, its technology is still among the best in the world and Japan has population almost as big as Russia.
Therefore I have already written that Japan is losing its very high position.
Do you know what is Japanese military budget? The second in the world (after the American one). Japan doesn't have big army, but it has industry and technology which permits to create one of the the most modern army in a very short time.
I see other factors which don't permit me to promote Japan to the 1st league.
- pacifism of society
- demogarphical stagnation
- economical stagnation
I don't agree with you that demography isn't an importan factor. It might be less important if a conflict is local one or short one. But if any war involves full potentail of a country and lasts for a long time, demography is one of the most important factor.
As far as Israel is concerned. Israel didn't fight for years with enemies, but led only short campaigns with poor quality armies. And remember that Israel had and has constant support of USA.
|
Posted By: Desimir
Date Posted: 13-Sep-2006 at 12:29
| Russia really has problems with population but things can change in the next years.Predictions that their population will be only 100-120 millions in 2050 are only predictions.The fact that russia is the greatest nuclear power shows that it still remain a great military power.With the time russian economy will grow very fast and may become the europe biggest.Dont forget that Russia has the biggest natural resources in the world and one day it may become a member of european union, it is an option.In fact this is the only wat to make europe the most important factor in the world. |
Posted By: Kalevipoeg
Date Posted: 14-Sep-2006 at 03:33
|
Russian policy is too different from EU's. It is much more power oriented in the sense that it wants to gain either some political or economical control over irs bordering areas while EU just wants to strengthen intself from the inside. Russia is still a type of an empire or yurns to be one with its medieval political moves and arrogance, the EU looks much like a little boy with no aggressive tendencies, just has a lot of money. And anyway, Russia couldn't tolerate all the restrictions of EU bureaucracy and "orders" and so forth. Russia would be in control of EU or not at all is what i suppose. Maybe blackmailing Europe with gas or oil would be an option aswell. ------------- There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible than a man in the depths of an ether binge... |
Posted By: John Lenon
Date Posted: 14-Sep-2006 at 04:32
I think in case of joining Russia to EU, EU will became a part of Russia  And we will got EUR (European Union of Russia)
|
Posted By: Desimir
Date Posted: 14-Sep-2006 at 16:18
| EUR(European Uniion of Russia)-that is very good idea. |
Posted By: Kalevipoeg
Date Posted: 15-Sep-2006 at 09:11
|
Looking at the arrogance of proud of nations like Russia, we would all be speaking Russian on a daily basis in a union with such dominant Russian influence. No thank you!!! ------------- There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible than a man in the depths of an ether binge... |
Posted By: J.M.Finegold
Date Posted: 15-Sep-2006 at 16:19
Especially with Russian irritation after the EU played around in its own backyard [the Ukrainian elections]. AFAIK, the Russians consider the prime players in the world to be the United States and the European Union [economically], and 2nd rate economies to be that of China, India and Brazil. According to an article published in the August issue of Foreign Affairs Journal the Russians want to return to position No. 1. 
------------- |