To use the preview of presentations, create yourself a Google account (account) and log into it: https://accounts.google.com
Slide captions:
Peace and disarmament problems. Performed by K. Labzina 11 "A"
“There will always be devastating wars on earth ... And death will often be the lot of all the fighting parties. With boundless malice, these savages will destroy many trees in the forests of the planet, and then turn their rage on everything that is still alive around, bringing him pain and destruction, suffering and death. Nothing will remain untouched and undamaged neither on earth, nor underground, nor under water. The wind will blow the land devoid of vegetation around the world and sprinkle it on the remains of creatures that once filled different countries with life ”- this chilling prophecy belongs to the great Italian Renaissance Leonardo da Vinci. Introduction
Today you see that the brilliant painter was not so naive in his prediction. Indeed, who today will take the liberty of reproaching the author of these words, which are not very pleasant for us, for spreading some "ridiculous fables" or inciting unnecessary passions? These are unlikely to be found, because the great Leonardo turned out to be right in many ways. To our great regret, the entire history of human development is a terrible history of military operations.
Blood, torment and tears were all along the human path. However, the dead and the dead were always replaced by new generations, and the future was, as it were, guaranteed. But now there is no such guarantee anymore.
1. Wars: causes and sacrifices
In the period from 1900 to 1938, 24 wars broke out, and in 1946-1979 - 130. More and more human victims became. In the Napoleonic wars, 3.7 million people died, in the first world war - 10 million, in the second (together with the civilian population) - 55 million, and during all wars of the 20th century - 100 million people. To this we can add that the first World War captured an area in Europe of 200 thousand km 2, and the second already - 3.3 million km 2.
So, the Heidelberg Institute (FRG) in 2006 registered 278 conflicts. 35 of them are of an acutely violent nature. Both regular troops and militant detachments take part in armed clashes. But they are not the only ones who suffer human losses: there are even more casualties among the civilian population. In 83 cases, the conflicts proceeded in a less severe form, i.e. the use of force only occurred from time to time. In the remaining 160 cases, conflict situations were not accompanied by hostilities. 100 of them were in the nature of a declarative confrontation, and 60 proceeded in the form of a hidden confrontation.
However, in none of the current armed conflicts there are clashes between different countries. The struggle is taking place within disadvantaged states. The governments are confronted by various militias of insurgents, militants and separatists. And they all pursue a variety of goals.
If until the 20th century the struggle for territories rich in minerals was fought, first of all, by states, but now numerous irregular armies of separatists and simply bandits have joined the struggle.
The UN concluded that since the end of the Cold War (1991) the number of armed conflicts in the world has decreased by 40%. Moreover, wars have become much less bloody. If in 1950 the average armed conflict claimed the lives of 37 thousand people, then in 2002 - 600. The UN believes that the merit in reducing the number of wars belongs to the international community. The UN and individual countries of the world are making significant efforts, preventing new wars from flaring up and stopping old ones. In addition, the increase in the number of democratic regimes plays a positive role: it is generally accepted that modern democracies are not at war with each other.
Renowned analyst Michael Clare, author of the book "Wars for Resources" is convinced that the world has entered an era of wars over resources, and from year to year these wars will become more frequent and violent. The reason is the growing needs of mankind and the reduction of natural resources. Moreover, according to Claire, the most likely wars will be fought for control over fresh water supplies.
Throughout human history, states have fought each other for territories rich in minerals.
Resource "component, that is, the factor of the presence in the disputed territory or on the part of the ocean belonging to it, significant reserves of minerals, as a rule, complicates the settlement of interstate disputes.
However, in modern world the bloodiest wars do not take place between two states, but between the inhabitants of one country. The overwhelming majority of modern armed conflicts do not occur between states, but are ethnic, religious, class, etc. According to former financier and now researcher Ted Fishman, with rare exceptions, these wars were, first of all, wars for money. In his opinion, wars began where competing clans began fighting for control over oil, gas, gold, diamonds, etc.
Mineral resources are an excellent fuel for conflict. The reasons for this are quite prosaic: an insurgent group that does not have stable sources of funding (except for minerals, it can be income from the sale of drugs, weapons, racketeering, etc.) is not able to arm a significant number of its supporters and, moreover, to conduct a systematic and a long-term military campaign. It is also important that the war is waged for control over resources that are not only easy to sell, but also easy to obtain.
As a result, the main goal of many such groups is not the overthrow of the central government or the acquisition of civil rights, which their social, ethnic, religious, etc. group was deprived of, but the establishment and retention of control over resources.
William Reno, professor at Northwestern University, calls another "risk factor" - the ineffectiveness of the central government. War often begins where those in power are seeking, first of all, only for personal enrichment. Michael Renner, author of the study "Anatomy of Resource Wars" notes that quite often armed conflicts arose due to the existence of vicious schemes for obtaining income from exploitation natural resources(for example, Mobutu, the ruler of Zaire, had a personal fortune that exceeded the country's annual GDP). This problem is especially acute in Africa, where the ruling clans, through privatization, gain control over the main sources of raw materials and the largest enterprises. Offended clans and factions sometimes resort to military force to redistribute property in their favor.
David Keane, a professor at the London School of Economics, notes that wars like these are difficult to end. The reason is that the war enriches certain groups of people - officials, the military, businessmen, etc., who profit from the clandestine trade in resources, weapons, etc. into warlords doing business in the war.
Transnational corporations also play a negative role, periodically trying to make money on the conflict. According to the Worldwatch Institute, De Beers was buying diamonds supplied to the market by rebel groups, while oil companies Chevron and Elf sponsored and trained the armed forces of several African states in an effort to secure their control over the oil fields.
2. The problem of arms control
One of the most important issues in the field of strategic security is arms control and disarmament in the world. This issue has been raised since the end of the 19th century, and in the 20th, after the bloody Second World War, it acquired even greater importance. In this regard, the United Nations and others international organizations Arms control and disarmament efforts have been undertaken in three areas: nuclear, conventional and biological weapons. However, unfortunately, the human community still does not have a clear program of general disarmament.
The most important of the most important international bodies dealing with arms control and general disarmament is the United Nations. This organization, whose philosophy of existence is to preserve peace and ensure world security, from the very beginning of its activity, faced problems and disagreements in the interpretation of arms control and disarmament. Examining the UN's track record in this area, we see that, despite the functioning of numerous committees and commissions, it has not managed to make significant progress in curbing the arms race.
The activities of the 10-sided disarmament committee ceased in 1960. Three years later, by agreement between the United States, the Soviet Union and Great Britain, in order to limit nuclear tests, another disarmament committee was created, this time consisting of 18 countries. With the accession of the rest of the UN members to this committee, the Conference on Disarmament was formed, which operates within the framework of the United Nations. In addition to activities aimed at controlling and limiting armaments in the world, other disarmament efforts were made at the international level. With the division of all weapons into nuclear and non-nuclear, between different countries contracts and agreements were concluded. The most important conventions in this regard are the 1963 Moscow Agreement and the Non-Proliferation Treaty. nuclear weapons from 1968
Conclusion Summing up what has been said and looking over the entire process of arms build-up in the world, it can be noted that, despite the efforts made, within the framework of arms control and global disarmament, the arms race in the world is still continuing. More than half a century after the formation of the United Nations, the contribution of this organization to world disarmament remains negligible. This circumstance in the period cold war assigned the UN a marginal, ineffective role in resolving world problems, while at the same time provoking a qualitative and quantitative build-up of weapons, both nuclear and conventional.
And as long as major military powers like the United States do not fulfill their obligations under disarmament agreements, all these conventions, having no executive guarantees, remain only beautiful drafts on paper.
Slide 1
Slide 2
Slide 3
Slide 4
Slide 5
Slide 6
Slide 7
Slide 8
Slide 9
The presentation on the topic "The Problem of Peace and Disarmament" can be downloaded absolutely free of charge on our website. Project subject: OBZH. Colorful slides and illustrations will help you engage your classmates or audience. To view the content, use the player, or if you want to download the report, click on the corresponding text under the player. The presentation contains 9 slide (s).
Presentation slides
Slide 1
Slide 2
The problem and its essence
For several decades of the Cold War, the problem of war and peace remained the No. 1 problem. Preventing War; the problem of peace and disarmament. The world is threatened with destruction nuclear war or something like that.
Slide 3
Causes of occurrence (or exacerbation)
Two world wars of the 20th century, resulting in an “arms race” Technical progress. Creation and proliferation of new types of weapons (in particular, nuclear weapons)
Slide 4
In connection with the two global wars of the 20th century, in which more than 100 million people died, and later with the confrontation between the two great powers (the USSR and the USA), the so-called "arms race" appeared. The discovery of nuclear weapons played a significant role. By the end of the twentieth century, the world had come to a tipping point, billions of lives were at stake. But the situation changed dramatically in the early 90s. And at the turn of the XX and XXI centuries. a large-scale reduction in the global arsenal of weapons began to take place, a decrease in military spending and a reduction in nuclear missile potential. Of particular importance were the treaties between the USSR and the United States (START-1), and later between the United States and Russia (START-2). However, the threat still remains.
Slide 6
The current situation
Certain aspects of the military threat still persist: Numerous regional and local conflicts / wars The proliferation of nuclear weapons The preservation of military blocs Arms trade.
Slide 7
Solutions
Establishing stricter controls over nuclear and chemical weapons. Reduction of conventional weapons and the arms trade. General reduction in military spending.
Slide 8
Results Achieved and Significant Difficulties
Signing of international treaties: on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons (1968 - 180 states), on the prohibition of nuclear tests, the convention on the prohibition of the development and production of chemical weapons (1997), etc. The arms trade decreased by 2 rubles. (from 1987 to 1994) Reduction of military spending by 1/3 (for the 1990s) Strengthened control over the nonproliferation of nuclear and other weapons by the international community (Ex: activities of the IAEA, and other international organizations)
Plan:
1. Introduction …… .... …………………………………………………………… .2
2 . Historical origins of the problem... …...…………………………….……. ..3
3. Formation of the problem and its consequences .. …………………………… .6
3.1. Problems of armament in the USSR …………… ......…. …………………… ..7
3.2. Armament Problems in the USA…. …………… ...… ... ……….…. ……… .9
4. Solving the problem of disarmament ……….…... …………………………. ..11
4.1. Problems of disarmament and conversion of production in Russia ... ... ...... 12
4.2. Problems of disarmament and conversion of production in the USA ... ... ... .... 16
5. Conclusion… .. …………………………………………… …………. …… .17
6. List of used literature ………. …………………….…. …… ... 18
2
1. Introduction
The global problem of disarmament and conversion of military production is important not only for the world economy, but for the entire world as a whole. For humanity, the solution to this problem should play a greater role than the solution of all other problems. Since war is such a phenomenon in the life of society that can decide its fate. Military actions on the territory of any country can lead to a shortage of food, a shortage of fuel, energy and raw materials, and a violation of the ecosystem of the nature of this state will occur.
That is, the problems of disarmament and conversion can be sources of other global problems. This makes its decision of particular importance.
I decided to choose this topic of the essay, because I was interested in learning about how this global problem is being solved, on which the lives of many people, including my own, depend. There have been moments in the history of mankind when his fate was on the verge of death. This was due to a large number of weapons that the states have amassed. And today many people walk the earth, only because they began to fight this problem in time. While those days of terrible conflict are over, the threat is still real. Weapons of mass destruction are still in service with some countries of the world. In order that it would never be used, many scientists, specialists, economists are trying to solve this problem. The theoretical material of this essay is based on the work of some of them. Taken together, you need to find a common point of view on how to solve this problem.
To do this, it is necessary to study the history of the global problem and consider those moments when this problem became a real threat to the world. Next, you should find out the reasons why this problem was formed. After that, it is necessary to analyze the measures that were taken to solve this problem, identify their advantages and disadvantages, and further consider the prospects expected from solving or not solving this problem.
Throughout the course of this work, it is necessary to monitor the economies of those countries that were involved in this problem.
This is necessary in order to reflect all the negative consequences for the economy caused by the presence of this problem or its wrong solution. The correct solution to the problem has a beneficial effect on the economy of the state. In addition, solving the problem of disarmament and conversion of military production has a beneficial effect on the world economy, since the absence of wars reduces the likelihood of possible crises.
3
2. Historical origins of the problem
At the dawn of the formation of civilization, the first primitive economy appeared. From her point of view, all states were divided into those who had enough resources (able to live on self-sufficiency) and those who had a shortage of some resources or their complete absence. To overcome this deficit and the state had two options:
1. Purchase the necessary resource or ensure its exchange for any product.
2. Forceful method for solving the problem. The violent seizure of a given resource or the territory of its production.
In those days, trade was poorly developed. It was limited to land and waterways, but even their use was dangerous for the merchants themselves (climatic and geographical factors, robberies, etc.). In addition, very few countries were involved in international trade relations, which proved the ineffectiveness of the first method in solving the problems of lack of resources. The use of the second method was more beneficial for some states. Firstly, it was possible, without unnecessary economic costs, to provide oneself with the necessary amount of resources by capturing the territory on which it is mined, and secondly, as a result of campaigns of conquest, the armies managed to plunder a large amount of wealth, which was also included in the state treasury, and thirdly , the conquered territories were usually taxed (tribute, indemnity, etc.), which also enriched the state treasury.
Thus, the formation of a unified development doctrine began - the economic development of the state can only take place in cases of the seizure of additional territory with the further use of its resources. In order to implement this doctrine, one main factor is required - a strong army.
For centuries, states have pinned high hopes on their troops. History shows that the presence of a strong and well-equipped army allows a small country to grow into a large empire.
A large amount of financial resources and human resources were spent on the supply of the armed forces. With the development of advances in science, new weapons began to appear, which made it possible to increase the effectiveness of warfare. These scientific developments helped not only to improve the quality of the campaigns of conquest, but in some cases contributed to a radical turning point in the course of the war. As a result, over the centuries, scientists have developed the latest types of weapons, which gradually became more powerful, more effective and more deadly.
4
This continued until the middle of the 19th century, when another war swept over the world. In 1853 Russian empire once again launched military operations against the Ottoman Empire, the goal of the company was to gain dominance in the Black Sea and over some territories of the Middle East. At first, the war unfolded in favor of Russia, but after England, France and the Kingdom of Sardinia entered the hostilities, the situation changed. The British landing in the Crimea forced the Russian military command to take decisive ones on the defense of the main Black Sea port - Sevastopol. Until the end of the war, the allied forces tried to seize this port and for this they used various means of destruction, which at that time were known to military science. Russian sailors and soldiers sitting in the bastions were fired upon with numerous explosive and fragmentation shells, hoping to inflict maximum casualties. The terrible and bloody defense of Sevastopol, which proved the backwardness of Russia's military technologies, forced it to sign the Paris Peace in 1856. However, the results of the war horrified not only the Russian Empire, but all the participating countries. The huge number of killed, wounded, crippled and disabled people made the governments of all civilized countries of the world think about a radical revision of the doctrine of warfare. For the first time, an international conference was created, the main task of which was to establish the rules for waging war, rules for the treatment of prisoners of war, a ban on the further use of certain types of weapons, and more. Of course, the problems that were solved at that conference were not global in nature, but the main thing is that the world finally saw all the terrible consequences of the war and decided to fight them in agreement with all countries.
Several decades have passed since the end of the Crimean War, during which time several military conflicts have passed, which had little resonance in the world community. But the first world war came. It was a war with the most used human resources in the entire history of mankind (at that time in history). To suppress numerous armies, it was necessary to use the latest models of weapons, which were supposed to destroy the enemy in large quantities and at the same time must conclude the norms of international agreement, and such weapons were created and successfully used. Their effectiveness is evidenced by huge human losses (10-12 million people killed, 20 million wounded) and economic losses.
This war has proved to humanity that it will certainly slide towards self-destruction.
5
In order to prevent similar catastrophes in the future, an international organization was created - the League of Nations (1919). Its main function was to maintain peace and order in Europe, based on joint discussion of problems between the countries belonging to the League of Nations. In the same year, the Versailles Conference was held, as a result of which it was possible to establish the fate of the countries that lost the war, the further world order in Europe, the distribution of the roles assigned to the developed capitalist countries to maintain further order, the limitation of the armed forces (in the countries that lost the war), as well as the prohibition on the use of certain types of weapons.
These include flamethrowers, chemical weapons, some types of mines, heavy artillery, and more. It seems that at last peace and order should come, because now a separate organization (the League of Nations) is guarding the world, which was supposed to prevent bloodshed, solving problems exclusively in a legal way, but this did not happen.
The League of Nations showed its inconsistency in solving international problems during the development of fascist Germany. After the Nazis came to power (January 30, 1933), Hitler proclaimed the course of preparing the country for a new war. However, Germany had a number of restrictions that prevented her from implementing these plans, but from 1933 to 1935 all these restrictions were lifted. The restrictions on the number of troops, restrictions on the production of heavy weapons were abolished, conscription was introduced, and the invasion of the Rhine demilitarized zone was carried out. The League of Nations made no serious effort to stop these violations of the restrictions imposed by the Treaty of Versailles. Further, the world situation deteriorated even more. From 1936 to 1939, Austria was forcibly annexed to Germany (March, 1938), the Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia was annexed (September, 1938), the support (financial and military) of the Spanish Civil War (1936-1939) was carried out. ). It has long been clear to the world community that the seizure of the industrial regions of Europe and the acquisition of new allies is part of the preparations for a new world war, but the necessary measures that could stop this process were not taken anyway. As a result of such inaction, the Second World War began. It was the war with the most fatalities in history. And all these sacrifices could have been avoided. The League of Nations ceased to exist during the Second World War. Instead, after the war, the UN was created (October 24, 1945 - the entry into force of the UN charter). However, a new stage in international relations had already begun.
6
3. Formation of the problem and its consequences
A few years after the end of World War II, the likelihood of a new armed conflict on the part of the United States and the USSR arose. The contradiction between the socio-political structures of both states resulted in the Cold War. The USSR and the USA understood that the growing confrontation would necessarily develop into military operations, and therefore they sought to build up their weapons in order to provide a worthy rebuff in the event of an enemy attack. It was planned to use the latest weapons, including nuclear weapons, as weapons. The presence of atomic and hydrogen bombs was supposed to play the role of a method of psychological influence on the enemy ("atomic diplomacy"), the use of weapons of mass destruction was envisaged only in the most extreme case. Therefore, during the Korean War (1950-1953), the USSR, which supported the socialist north and the USA, which supported the democratic south, did not seek to use nuclear weapons to change the course of the war, although both countries had such an opportunity. However, a few years later the moment came when the nuclear potential of both superpowers was raised to full combat readiness. In April 1961, an American landing party with the support of the fleet and aviation tried to overthrow the socialist regime of F. Castro in Cuba, but the attempt failed. Then Cuba asked for help from the USSR, and such assistance was provided. In 1962, the USSR deployed nuclear weapons on Liberty Island. Before the United States appeared real threat attacks from an ideological adversary. In this regard, the United States presented an ultimatum to the USSR, aiming at it all its nuclear potential. The USSR did the same. Within a few days, the fate of the whole world was being decided. Precisely Mira, since if in the first world war 10-12 million people died, in the second about 55 million people, then in the third world war all of humanity should have perished. According to researchers, if both superpowers used their entire nuclear arsenal, then the consequence of this would be an ecological catastrophe and the subsequent "nuclear winter", which would last on Earth for many years. This outcome did not suit the leaders of the United States and the USSR, so the crisis that had begun (the "Caribbean Crisis") ended happily. Over the next years, the threat of a new world war began to gradually subside, but it was still real, just as the death of mankind was real. The presence of a huge amount of weapons in the superpowers has become a global problem for humanity. Moreover, this global problem has gradually developed into internal economic problems of the owners of the weapons themselves.
7
3.1. Armament problems in the USSR
The USSR had a double task of arming, firstly, it needed to arm itself, and, secondly, it needed to arm its allies, since most of them did not have the ability to produce weapons. Such were the majority of the countries of Eastern Europe belonging to the Warsaw Pact Organization (created in May 1955), as well as the countries of Asia and Africa. In addition, the USSR was a participant in the arms race, and it had to respond to every new military-technical innovation of the United States with its own. Thus, huge amounts of money had to be spent on armaments and research in this area.
From a military point of view, all these means were justified. For each new type of weapon created in the USA, the USSR responded with its own analogue and other development. At the same time, in terms of quality and efficiency, they were not inferior to American ones and even surpassed them in most cases. In the USSR, types of military equipment were created that were many years ahead of their time.
But from an economic point of view, it was not profitable. The fact is that most of the types of weapons created by Soviet scientists remained in the drawings and projects, many of which are still stored in the archives of the domestic military-industrial complex. Funds were spent on research of unrealized projects. Even with the weapons already built, there were a lot of costs. Additional funds had to be allocated for the maintenance, storage and maintenance of each additional unit of military equipment. And there were many such additional units, since they were produced with the expectation of a future war. In addition, the produced weapons were distributed practically free of charge to our friendly countries, without bringing any economic profit, apart from the weapons that were exported.
In social terms, the increase in armament has had a favorable result. The construction of new military facilities (ports, airfields, etc.), work at military facilities and enterprises of the defense complex provided jobs for a large number of people. In addition, many military enterprises were engaged in the production of civilian products. But all this brought benefits to a greater extent to the citizens themselves and to a lesser extent to the state. Since he had to spend money on the construction of facilities that in themselves did not bring economic profit, with the exception of military-industrial enterprises.
In the scientific field, the growth of armaments is controversial. On the one hand, the demand for the latest types of weapons is a stimulus for science. In this case, speech
8
is about science as applied to the military sphere of production. It has already been said about the merits of Soviet military technologies and their superiority over American ones, and the main merit in this is the design engineers of the Soviet military-industrial complex. But on the other hand, there is no connection between the number of armed forces and the state of science in a given country as such. It all depends on the funding of scientific and educational activities in the country. In the 50s, when, after the XX Congress of the CPSU with the subsequent debunking of the personality cult of Stalin, the USSR began to take the initiative to regulate foreign policy, the army was reduced by 2 million people, reforms began in the country, it was proposed to organize a meeting of the heads of both superpowers.
It was this period that was marked by an increase in funding for Soviet science. During the 50-60s in the USSR, government spending on science increased 12 times, the number of scientific workers increased 6 times and amounted to a quarter of all scientists in the world. In the 60s, Norbert Wiener (the founder of cybernetics) came to the Soviet Union, he got acquainted with the achievements of Soviet scientists in the field of creating electronic computers. Returning to the United States, he said that if the government did not take serious measures, then by the 70s the USSR would overtake the United States in the field of information technology. But as it turned out later, no special measures had to be taken. By the 70s, Soviet research institutes stopped researching their own developments, and simply began to copy American technologies. This was followed by a complete backwardness of the USSR in this area of science. This lag affected the development of military science. To understand what exactly happened, you need to consider a few examples:
Example 1. In the late 70s and early 80s, the latest American fighters faced a problem. They could not fly at extreme altitudes for long. And this was due to the fact that the on-board computer was completely based on microcircuits that froze from low temperatures at high altitudes. The Americans began to install heating, but as a result, perspiration began to appear on the microcircuits and, as a result, moisture began to accumulate, which also negatively affected the operation of the microcircuits. The most interesting thing is that the Soviet pilots did not have such problems, and they could fly at high altitudes for a long time. After a few years alone Soviet designers clarified the situation. It turns out that the newest Soviet fighters of the time were equipped with on-board computers that operated on a tube principle. The tube principle was used at the heart of the first computers in the early 60s. Soviet science had not yet developed to microcircuits, so old technologies were used everywhere, which, paradoxically, improved the superiority of Soviet fighters over the latest technologies of the West.
9
Example 2. In October 1972, a new Arab-Israeli war ("two-week war") began. Several countries in the Middle East have formed an anti-Israeli coalition, the purpose of which was to capture Israel and the subsequent transfer of part of its territory to Palestine. The USSR was interested in the victory of the coalition, so it provided the countries with the latest Soviet tanks at that time.
By the way, the number of tanks used in that war was practically equal to the same number of tanks used in the Kursk Bulge.
The first week of the war was successful for the Arab states, the Israeli troops were defeated and retreated. But at the beginning of the second week, the situation changed radically. Israel had new anti-tank missiles that themselves flew to the target, turning it into a heap of metal. With superiority in tank forces, the Arab military could do nothing against the shells fired from the hand grenade launcher. Soviet tanks were helpless, they could not answer the science of that time.
As already mentioned, science does not depend on the size of the armed forces, but it is directly related to their quality.
3.2. Armament problems in the United States
The US had the same armament problems as the USSR, but there were significant differences that should be mentioned.
For example, they had no problem funding their allies in the North Atlantic Alliance (NATO, formed in 1949). The allies were the developed countries Western Europe, whose defense complex was sufficiently developed, and they could independently produce and use weapons and military equipment without the help of the United States.
Problems also existed in the acquisition of their own weapons. In the United States, several firms were engaged in the country's defense order, they assumed the costs of design, construction and research, and in the future they tried to win the competitive selection of the US government for serial deliveries of weapons. From here comes a number of technical lags in American military equipment. The fact is that arms supplying firms did not strive to create high-quality military equipment, the main thing for them was that it could win the competition and at the same time be expensive. Hence, weapons appeared with low efficiency.
10
There are many examples here. This is the F-15 fighter, which lags behind the Su and MiGs in many respects, and the M-16 rifle, which is more difficult to handle, in contrast to the AKA-47. American helicopters in Vietnam had good speed and maneuverability, but at the same time they did not carry weapons with them and therefore could not help the soldiers in local battles, unlike him, the Soviet Mi were armed with a machine gun and direct-fire missiles. There are many other examples that show that the better economic position of the United States in comparison with the USSR did not contribute to an increase in the effectiveness of the armed forces, and therefore the enormous financial resources of the United States were spent without bringing the desired results.
11
4. Solving the problem of disarmament
On the this moment the solution of all global problems is dealt with by the UN. This organization was originally created to solve the problems of preserving peace, therefore the problem of disarmament is one of the paramount.
The UN has been trying to find a solution to this problem for decades, trying to negotiate with the United States and the USSR on mutual reduction of armaments, which by October 1986 in the USSR amounted to 10,000 nuclear charges, and in the USA 14,800 charges. Various laws and resolutions were developed that had the goal of ending the bloody confrontation between the two ideological systems in the third world countries through peaceful and legislative means, as well as reducing the risk of new military conflicts (both local and global). Thus, in December 1984, the UN opposed the transfer of the arms race to outer space, adopting a resolution on the use of outer space exclusively for peaceful purposes. Although these attempts in different years had different results, but on the whole the disarmament problem remained open, and there were no fundamental changes in its solution until the end of the 1980s.
With the beginning of perestroika in the Soviet Union (1985), a process of rapprochement between the two superpowers began in matters of peace and cooperation. In November 1987, a meeting of the Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee M.S. Gorbachev and US President R. Reagan, during which an agreement was signed between the USSR and the United States on the elimination of intermediate and shorter-range missiles, as well as related protocols on procedures for the elimination of missile weapons and on inspections. In March 1989, in Vienna, negotiations were held between the countries belonging to the ATS and NATO, these negotiations provided for the reduction of armaments from the Atlantic to the Urals. In July 1991, a new meeting of the leaders of the USSR and the United States took place in Moscow, during which an agreement was signed on the reduction by about one third of the strategic offensive arms of both countries. And finally, in 1992, Russia and the United States signed a declaration to end the Cold War.
The threat of a third world war has ceased to be real. And this is justly the merit of the UN. But even after the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union, the likelihood that undestroyed nuclear warheads could again target cities around the world has not disappeared. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has pledged to help Russia cope with the dangerous legacy of the USSR. The IMF, like the UN, is a body dealing with global problems. He provides financial assistance to solve these problems. Mainly, financial assistance is provided to the country in the form of loans, which must be repaid within a predetermined period. Thus, any
12
countries no longer need to search for financial resources to solve their problems. These funds can be provided by the IMF at any time. Russia was also provided loans from the IMF to solve internal economic problems, including disarmament problems, but this will be discussed later.
At the beginning of the XXI century, new methods of solving global problems.
These methods include the creation of "Global Custodians". It is a global electronic exchange that allows you to attract unlimited resources from abroad for any period. Trading on this exchange is carried out via the Internet, which is also a method for solving global problems. With the help of Global Custodians, countries can purchase any amount of the required resource without resorting to military methods of seizing the same resource. And therefore, unnecessary weapons become unnecessary.
4.1. Disarmament and production conversion problems in Russia
After the collapse of the USSR (December 1991), Russia became its successor. She inherited all problems and debts Soviet Union, having lost a third of the territory, more than 40% of the population, more than 30% of production assets. one
At the same time, the economy was on the verge of collapse, and this trend was outlined in previous years.
The share of the main subsystems of the economy in the world total GDP,% 2.
| Subsystem | 1970 | 1980 | 1985 | 1987 | 1992 |
| Prom. the developed countries | 67,8 | 68 | 70,1 | 72,3 | 74 |
| Eastern European countries | 16,5 | 10,5 | 9,7 | 9,5 | 8 |
| Developing countries | 15,5 | 21,5 | 20,2 | 18,2 | 18 |
On the positive side, it should be noted that Russia inherited 70% of the volume of foreign economic relations of the USSR 3.
With all these positive and negative sides, Russia had to solve the problems of its own economic recovery, social problems, problems of science, problems of the army, etc. The world community, represented by the IMF, provided funds for this, which theoretically should have been enough for disarmament Russian army and for the conversion of military production.
4 credits:
13
1992 - a reserve loan in the amount of $ 4.1 billion to stabilize the ruble.
1993 - loan for systemic transformations, $ 3 billion
1996 - a loan for qualitative transformations, $ 10.4 billion.
etc.................
International cooperation for peace, solution of global security problems, disarmament and conflict resolution
All global problems are permeated with the idea of the geographical unity of mankind and require broad international cooperation for their solution. Particularly acute is the problem of maintaining peace on Earth
From the point of view of new political thinking, the achievement of a lasting peace on Earth is possible only under the conditions of the establishment of a new type of relations between all states - relations of all-round cooperation.
The program "International Cooperation for Peace, Solution of Global Security Problems, Disarmament and Conflict Resolution" is designed to support and develop relations between international non-governmental organizations, between the authorities and society in the field of improving international security. This program will deal with issues such as the reduction of weapons of mass destruction and conventional weapons.
The goal of the program is to timely respond to the development of the political process, both in the CIS countries and around the world. Also, within the framework of the program, an analysis will be carried out contemporary problems peace and security.
The program includes the following projects:
· The structure of international security and cooperation with international institutions and non-governmental international organizations;
· Problems of disarmament and non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction;
· Assistance in improving the legislation in the field of military-civil relations;
Scientists, politicians, and non-governmental organizations are engaged in security issues related to armed conflicts and solving global problems. In the course of work, international and regional conferences, seminars and meetings are held, reports and collections of articles are published.
At the moment, not everyone has an idea about the existing danger, about the possibility and size of a catastrophe with the use of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Humanity does not pay due attention to this problem due to ignorance and unawareness of the entire depth of the problem. In no case should we forget that, unfortunately, the threat of using WMD is present. Everyday life through active propaganda of violence. This phenomenon is happening all over the world. Russian President Vladimir Putin said approximately the following: We must realize that the nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction has become one of the most important contemporary problems, if not the most important. The fact is that with the onset of a new century, qualitatively new challenges have appeared before mankind - new types of weapons of mass destruction, the phenomenon of international terrorism, which has complicated the problem of its nonproliferation. Nonproliferation is the prevention and non-admission of the emergence of new states with weapons of mass destruction. This can be understood as follows: Russia cannot allow the emergence of new nuclear powers.
Preventing the threat of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction is recognized by Russia, the United States and other countries as one of the main tasks of ensuring their national security.
First time global community thought about the nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction in the 60s of the last century, when such nuclear powers as the USSR, the USA, Great Britain, France had already appeared; and China was ready to join them. At this time, countries such as Israel, Sweden, Italy, and others began to seriously think about nuclear weapons and even started developing them.
In the same 60s, Ireland initiated the creation of an international legal document, which laid the foundations for the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. The USSR, the USA and England began to develop the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). They became the first parties to this agreement. It was signed on 07/01/1968, but entered into force in March 1970. France and China entered into this treaty several decades later.
Its main goals are to prevent the further proliferation of nuclear weapons, to stimulate cooperation in the field of the use of the atom for peaceful purposes with guarantees from the participating parties, to facilitate negotiations to end rivalry in the development of nuclear weapons with the ultimate goal of its complete elimination.
Under the terms of this Treaty, nuclear-weapon states undertake not to provide assistance to non-nuclear-weapon states in acquiring nuclear explosive devices. Nuclear-free states undertake not to manufacture or purchase such devices. One of the provisions of the Treaty instructs the IAEA to implement safeguards measures, including the inspection of nuclear materials used in peaceful projects by nuclear-free states parties to the Treaty. The NPT (Article 10, paragraph 2) states that 25 years after the Treaty enters into force, a conference is called to decide whether it should remain in force or not. The reports of the conference were carried out according to the terms of the Treaty every five years, and in 1995, when it came to an end 25- summer period actions, the parties - participants unanimously supported its indefinite extension. They also adopted three binding Declarations of Principles:
· Confirmation of previously assumed obligations in relation to nuclear weapons and termination of all nuclear tests;
· Strengthening disarmament control procedures;
· Creation of a nuclear-free zone in the Middle East and strict observance of the terms of the Non-Proliferation Treaty by all countries without exception.
There are 178 states parties to the treaty, including the existing nuclear powers (with the exception of North Korea) that have advocated a missile technology control regime. There are also four countries conducting nuclear activities that have not entered into the Treaty: Israel, India, Pakistan, Cuba.
The Cold War was accompanied by the development and proliferation of nuclear weapons, both by the main opponents and by various non-aligned countries. The end of the Cold War made it possible for the countries of the world community to reduce and then eliminate nuclear weapons. Otherwise, countries will inevitably be drawn into the proliferation of nuclear weapons, as each religious "superpower" seeks to either strengthen its hegemony or equalize its nuclear power with that of an adversary or aggressor. The threat of proliferation of nuclear weapons and, to no lesser extent, nuclear technology and know-how has grown significantly since the collapse of the Soviet Union. For the first time there was a disintegration of a state possessing nuclear weapons, a state - a permanent member of the UN. As a result, more countries emerged with nuclear weapons... This problem was taken very seriously, and after a while Russia received all the rights and obligations of the USSR related to the NPT. She also received the internationally recognized right to the eternal possession of nuclear weapons. Together with the UN, the NPT fixes for Russia the status of a great power at the level of countries such as the United States, China, England, France.
Western assistance in this area has become an important element in strengthening the nonproliferation regime. This assistance shows that the West does not want to see the CIS countries as a source of spreading threats. At the G-8 summit in Canada in July 2002, important decisions were made on international terrorism and the proliferation of nuclear weapons.
The most important components of the regimes for the non-proliferation of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction are:
Export control system, including a streamlined national system accounting, control and physical protection of weapons-grade materials. This also includes preventing the uncontrolled export of intangible technologies, including in electronic form.
· Brain drain prevention system.
· Security of storage, warehousing, transportation of weapons of mass destruction and materials suitable for its production.
· A system for preventing illicit trafficking in nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction and materials.
With regard to chemical and biological weapons (CW), then the main problem consists in the following: during its manufacture, it does not require a special technological base, therefore, it is impossible to create a reliable mechanism for controlling CW. But no matter how international legal documents have been created, conferences are being held.
Biological weapons is an effective remedy achieving the goals of terrorists: it is capable of hitting large masses civilian population, and this is very attractive to terrorists, can easily provoke panic and chaos.
Terrorism is a very big problem in our time. Modern terrorism takes the form of terrorist acts on an international scale. Terrorism appears when a society is going through a deep crisis, first of all, a crisis of ideology and the state-legal system. In such a society, various opposition groups appear - political, social, national, religious. For them, the legality of the existing government becomes questionable. Terrorism as a mass and politically significant phenomenon is the result of a general "de-ideologization", when certain groups in society easily question the legality and rights of the state, and thus self-justify their transition to terror in order to achieve their own goals.
The main strategic conditions for the fight against terrorism:
· Re-creation of a stable bloc world;
· Blocking terrorism at the initial stage and preventing its formation and development of structures;
· Prevention of ideological justification of terror under the banner of "protecting the rights of the nation", "protecting the faith", etc .; debunking terrorism by all means of the media;
· Transfer of all control over anti-terrorist activities to the most reliable special services with non-interference in their work by any other control bodies;
· The use of an agreement with terrorists only by these special services and only to cover up the preparation of an action for the complete destruction of terrorists;
· No concessions to terrorists, not a single terrorist act with impunity, even if it costs the blood of hostages and random people, because practice shows that any success of terrorists provokes a further increase in terror and the number of victims.
Only the process of globalization has finally begun to convey to people one simple truth: we have one planet. If you destroy it, then there will be simply nowhere to live. Everyone will die. That is why the problem of peace and disarmament is so acute. It would seem that it is much easier: to get together and agree. Meetings are constantly held at the UN, responsible and wise people are trying to reduce the level of tension on the planet, and new hotbeds of it arise like mushrooms after rain. And each time we have to discuss together how the problem of peace and disarmament and the prevention of a nuclear war can be solved. Let's take a look at the root and try to see the forest behind the trees.
Global problems
To begin with, humanity has created enough difficulties for itself. This refers to those complex tasks, the failure of which will lead to the disappearance of the human race along with the shining blue planet. And among them the problem of peace and disarmament is in the first place. Various specialists number up to four dozen. Some are extremely acute, while others do not yet have such a strong influence on our life. For simplicity, they are summarized in several categories. Namely:
- ecological,
- demographic,
- energy,
- preserving the world,
- food,
- exploration of the ocean and space.
Agree, each of the above groups of tasks concerns the entire population of the planet. Without food or water, clean air or energy, few will survive. Although, of course, the split groups will remain, if only the planet is not scattered to pieces. Therefore, the problem of peace and disarmament is brought to the forefront by politicians and scientists. Why?
The globality of humanity
We have already said that the problem of peace and disarmament concerns every inhabitant of the Earth. The fact is that such a number of weapons, as now, never existed. Even at the end of the last century, when the two superpowers decided to reduce the level of tension and agree on the destruction of a certain part of their arsenals. The most formidable weapon is considered to be nuclear. But now seven countries officially possess it. In fact, eight or more. It is clear that not every nuclear state is capable of destroying the planet. Yes, this is not required in modern conditions. You see, there are so many "hot spots" on the planet that if it breaks out in one place, then a fire breaks out instantly. That is, launching a combat missile will lead to pressing red buttons in all nuclear states. Let's talk about this in more detail to make it clear.
Geopolitics in a nutshell
You and I will not delve into the difference between marine and mainland civilizations. It is not necessary to understand what the problem of peace and disarmament, the prevention of nuclear war, is. And we should consider the states of the planet from the point of view of sovereignty. Let's say every power has it in its entirety. Consequently, countries are trying to solve their own problems, develop, and so on. Other people's interests are secondary for them. But mankind has a history. It does not consist only of peaceful ages and the complete prosperity of peoples. Everything is accurate to the opposite. In our common history many bloody events, territorial disputes, genocide and other troubles. All this leads to the fact that so-called stress points arise. Countries argue over borders or resources, cannot forget old grievances or long-standing wars. You see, any people can be quickly pushed into war. That is why the problem of peace and disarmament is so acute.
The essence of the problem
But so far we have considered only one nuance of the task facing humanity. In fact, everything is much more complicated here. Yes, national interests have to be taken into account. But their historical, so to speak, roots are weighed down by economic difficulties. If earlier countries could live more or less acceptably, using their own resources, now it is becoming more and more difficult. And there are examples. North Korea, isolated from the world, lives extremely poor. She gets only crumbs from the general achievements of civilization. The population suffers from this. The problem of disarmament and world peace is not about settling disputes or removing obstacles to the development of individual countries. The essence of the issue is to build such a system in which an independent mechanism for neutralizing the causes of conflicts will work. That is, the creation of a new society where weapons are simply not required. Agree, the task is gigantic. Unfortunately, we, like a century ago, are still at the beginning of the road.
Why is our global society arranged this way?
To understand whether peace and disarmament has, the causes of its occurrence must be investigated carefully and comprehensively. It is believed to have been created by two superpowers: the USSR and the USA. In the last century, after the invention of the nuclear bomb, they arranged that is, they tried to crush each other with the number of missiles and charges, the perfection of the carriers, meaning that it is not necessary to use them. Believe me, there are few crazy people who are convinced that a permanent nuclear war is possible in politics. However, the situation developed rapidly, ending with the creation of a completely unnecessary amount of weapons of mass destruction. It will hopefully never be used. However, to overturn humanity into the abyss of regression and its presence is enough.
Economic aspect
Weapons are expensive. It must be produced, tested (we are not talking about the invention), and also serviced. And this means huge spending on specialized scientific institutions, military units, factories, mining and processing enterprises. All this costs more than just money. The sums for the maintenance of nuclear arsenals are huge. Of course, some argue that the work of a military-industrial complex is jobs. That is, people get a job and a salary. But does such an activity benefit humanity? In the world, many countries make and buy weapons. In fact, they spend invaluable resources not on development, but on death. Let's say frankly: this is not progress in the civilizational sense, this is madness. However, the system does not change. There are many conflicts, therefore, the demand on the arms market is not falling. Well, that's what manufacturers need. They earn money. And few people think or calculate how much bread or other useful and necessary things could be produced instead of weapons. How much happier the planet would be.
Let's digress on conspiracy theories
Analyzing how the problem of disarmament and the preservation of peace can be solved, we will certainly stumble upon a simple question: who needs it? Exploring it, you will understand that only ordinary people are interested in this. The owners of the military-industrial complex or banks have a different opinion on this matter. Conspiracy theorists have united these people with the term "global predictor". It is believed that there is a certain "world elite", conceptually influencing the processes on the planet. Here war will not interfere with her. The fact is that there are too many people. And the trouble is not even that there is nothing to feed them, as the media sometimes write. The question is different. Scientists believe that just over two billion people can be controlled normally. If society becomes larger (and this has already happened), then its collective unconscious will break free from the influence of manipulators. It will be impossible to control it. It will begin to develop independently, giving birth to and realizing ideas. Unpredictability is extremely dangerous - the "rulers" are trying to inspire us through the media. Conspiracy theorists are sure that they do not need a solution to the problem of peace and disarmament. What for? It is better to thin out humanity slightly so that it becomes more obedient.
Environmental aspect
The global problem of peace and disarmament, as already noted, affects the entire planet. It is not hard to see this after following the news feed for a while. Now at one point, now at another point the globe armed clashes break out. They, of course, take away not only lives. The surrounding landscape is also crumbling, becoming a lifeless desert. People leave their lands, stop cultivating and developing them. And while we are talking only about conventional weapons. Imagine what happens when nuclear bombs are used. In addition, resources have to be extracted at an ever faster pace, destroying the subsoil, changing the environment. But they are finite. Future generations may get a lifeless planet dug up and down. But that's not all.
Generation of new conflict situations
There is a theatrical wisdom that says that if a gun hangs on the wall, then it will definitely fire. In our case, it is quite applicable. The number of weapons circulating around the planet is such that hotheads are just waiting for an opportunity to use them. New grievances are superimposed on old problems. For example, if you consider the situation in the Middle East, everything will become clearer. After the destruction of Libya and Iraq, there is an ongoing war. Not a day goes by in this region without casualties. People flee to Europe, creating and there. In addition, they organize demonstration actions with severed heads and destroyed shrines. The peoples are simply pitting against each other on purpose. Muslims with Christians, Shiites with Sunnis, Arabs with Jews. And there is no way out. The same thing is happening in Africa. And last year, a bleeding wound appeared in the center of Europe. There is a war in Ukraine.
The problem of peace and disarmament: solutions
It is unlikely that the entire complexity of the situation can be conveyed to the reader in one small article. Its roots are deep, there are many players, each of them is trying to insist on their own righteousness. What to do? Close your eyes and wait for Armageddon? Of course not. In any case, the politicians who have taken responsibility for their peoples do not sit idly by. long ago I came to the idea that the problem can only be solved together. It is necessary to conduct an incessant conversation about all the components of this global threat. One country cannot save the planet. But it is possible and necessary to find a diplomatic solution in relation to each existing one if all countries support. That is, the paths are known. It is necessary to break the problem into components, not forgetting about main goal, and systematically move forward. At the same time, all states, recognized or not, must participate in the process. No one has the right to ignore the common human activities to preserve their home planet.
Conclusion
Let's summarize. The problem of preserving peace is global. It touches every inhabitant of the Earth. Its aspects are versatile. It affects the economic, social aspects of human existence. This problem has no boundaries. Nobody will be able to hide. However, it is quite solvable. But all countries and peoples must participate in the process. Although not worth talking about theory. In practice, this is what happens. We see this on the news. In Minsk, the members of the Normandy Four agree, in Vienna the six sign an agreement with Iran, and so on. All these are events of the same series. Namely, the efforts of world players for the peaceful resolution of conflict situations. Let's hope that the situation will continue to develop in this vein.
Loading ...