Future Defence: What Will Russia’s Military Budget Be After 2020

Future Defence: What Will Russia's Military Budget Be After 2020

IMAGE: Izvestia/Dmitry Korotaev

Written by Anton Lavrov; Originally appeared at Izvestia, translated  by AlexD exclusively for SouthFront

The re-equipment of the Russian Armed Forces is moving faster than planned, Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu said at the end of the week. The revision of the initial budget for the development of the military department from 1.44 trillion rubles to more than 1.5 trillion rubles allowed increasing the share of new and modernised equipment for the troops to 68%. It would seem that this is only 1% more than the plans announced at the beginning of the year. But throughout the army, this means hundreds of additional units of the latest weapons. Taking into account the indicators already achieved, there is no doubt that in 2020 the Ministry of Defence will report on the successful achievement at the 70% bar of new and modernised equipment as established for the Department in 2013.

Of course, in 2020 the process of rearmament will not stop. But its priorities will be revised, new targets will be announced. How the structure of arms supplies to the troops will change, who will receive priority in the next years, and who will remain on the outside, read the material in “Izvestia”.

Money in the air

Of all the armed forces and branches of the Armed Forces, it is in Syria that we have gained the most real experience. They better than others understood their strengths and weaknesses and clearly see the necessary path for development. It is not surprising that the scales of upcoming expenses will tilt in their favour. The extraordinary decision of the President to accelerate the serial production and increase the purchases of Su-57 fighters and the Mi-28NM helicopters was extremely revealing. Promising contracts for additional “Kamov” attack helicopters and for the modernisation of Su-34 bombers were also announced.

Experiments with the creation of airborne assault units of the “new type” and giving air mobility to units of motorised rifle units will require continuing to increase the number of transport helicopters. One of the most expensive rearmament programmes will be the procurement of S-500 complexes for the Aerospace Forces.

It will be necessary to increase funding for the serial purchase of heavy unmanned systems for the Aerospace Forces, especially reconnaissance and strike version of UAVs. There are also extensive plans to upgrade transport and auxiliary aviation. Undoubtedly, the Aerospace Forces will receive priority funding.

On the ground

The most “lagging behind” in terms of rearmament we have are the ground forces. Against the background of almost completely updated strategic missile forces and 70% of new equipment in the Armed Forces as a whole, this figured is below 60%, which looks clearly insufficient. But the huge size of the Russian ground army makes the task of updating it extremely difficult and costly. It is impossible to quickly replace all tens of thousands of units of heavy military equipment.

Even what is now considered modern in them, like the modernised T-72 and BTR-80, does not fully meet the requirements of today, and even more so tomorrow.

Starting next year, with the current modernisation of existing models, it is necessary to move to the mass purchase and equipping of troops with completely new, advanced platforms of weapons and military equipment. Contracts for efficient but expensive “Armata”, new families of wheeled and tracked armoured vehicles will require an increase in the share of funding for the Army in the distribution of the development budget for the coming years.

And on the sea

What is clearly not going to be a priority of the new modernisation programmes is the Navy. Russia formally retains ocean ambitions, but the grand old plans for its development are already firmly forgotten. There will be no several carrier strike groups or a powerful landing fleet in the foreseeable future.

Due to the rupture of the treaty on short- and medium-range missiles, the relevance of small missile ships equipped with the “Kalibr” complex will also decrease. Cheaper and more resilient mobile complexes with cruise and hypersonic land-based missiles can assume the main part of their functions.

The long-awaited arrival in the fleet of new frigates with modern complexes of collective air defence “Poliment-Redoubt” will allow, if necessary, to create a fairly effective ocean grouping away from their shores, collecting ships from several fleets. But the ability to easily resist in a direct collision with the American or Chinese Navy is no longer worth counting on.

Therefore, an asymmetric increase in the priority of submarine forces seems reasonable. In addition to the already signed contracts for a couple of additional nuclear “Ash” we can expect to expand the order and “Borei”, as well as diesel submarines with missile weapons.

Not only equipment

The calculations of new tanks and aircraft often overlook the investment in the infrastructure that provides them. Since the beginning of the modernisation of the Armed Forces, it was necessary to meet basic needs: housing, social infrastructure of military camps, reconstruction of runways at air bases and modernisation of Russian Strategic Missile Forces.

Now comes the stage of wider development of the home infrastructure. Military equipment is becoming more complex, more expensive and more demanding in service. Of course, if necessary, it must withstand extreme operating conditions. Its storage in peacetime in modern hangars and shelters makes it possible to extend the service life, reduce repair costs and increase the percentage of serviceability.

The rearmament of missile brigades with “Point-U” on the “Iskander” has already required a complete overhaul of their basing infrastructure, primarily in the construction of new hangars for launchers. The deployment of additional medium-range ground-based missile systems will require more expenditure. We will have to deal with large-scale construction and to put into operation the most modern weapons systems, which the Russian Federation announced last year.

On Russian soil, the experience of Syrian Khmeimim will be very useful, where modern hangars-shelters have finally been built for the aircraft. The natural conditions of our country are no less severe than in the Middle East, so such designs will benefit military equipment and its personnel at home.

There are signs that in the coming years, the creation of a modern home-based infrastructure will be carried out in parallel with the supply of the latest weapons to the army. The cost of it will become increasingly prominent in the overall cost of re-equipping troops.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
24 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Toronto Tonto

Likely wont have to worry about that .

Mike

Again solomon kupek you lost Syria get over it you Israeli rat.

Mike

Oh and its time solomon to change your avatar, since your pretending to be canuck is getting more pathetic.

Mike

Can’t say nothing you Israeli rat monkey.

Dick Von Dast'Ard

Russia not wasting their time and resources on the super carrier projects shows shrewd thinking.

Be interesting to see if they modernize two Typhoon super-heavy nuclear subs to partner the two Kirov-class heavy battle cruisers, as arsenal submarines. (i.e carrying 200+ TLAM’s)

Zarathustra

China still plans on having six aircraft carriers and Russia is still going to replace their existing aircraft carrier.

Dick Von Dast'Ard

Well I would suggest China has a completely different military doctrine than the Russians.
China has the need to defend it’s own shipping supply lines and trade routes, Russia (being resource self-sufficient) doesn’t have quite the same problem. Therefore the Russian military spends it’s weapon research and development funds upon carrier killing platforms rather than carriers themselves.

RichardD

I got my .30-06 back from the gunsmiths after the upgrades for ET/ED/non conventional lifeform contact security work. It should be a considerable improvement from the stock configuration.

https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/117a7036540b73c3802682a5ab82449139bcb3453c1f57e6808d0fc89ad32055.jpg

Harry Smith

Just curious, what does upgrades for nonconventional lifeforms means? Optics, laser, collimator and torch has every gun nut like me.

RichardD

To be able to hit stuff at night when the action usually occurs. Which is tough to do in the dark without the upgrades. Including multiple fast moving hostilities.

RichardD

This is from a company that does a lot of drone work for law enforcement and the military. It gives you an idea of what a large non conventional lifeform moving through the forest a speed looks like. It gives you an idea of what the government and some private elements are withholding from disclosure. I have material like this.

Harry Smith

Well, I would use 12ga semiautomatic shotgun like Saiga with thermal sight and laser dot. This is the optimal solution at my point of view. But everyone uses the tool which is more convenient for him. If you think this gun is capable to do the job – why not?

RichardD

A 12 gauge loaded with 600 grain 3,500 fpe Breneke hard cast slugs with 3 feet of penetration has more knock down power at close range. I have a 12 guage pump in the shop being upgraded. A detachable magazine semi auto 12 guage from Turkey is half the price of a Saiga with comparable quality. A head shot on any bigfoot with an 06 in the cranial ocular cavity is a one shot show stopper. Even if it’s 12 feet tall and weighs 2,000 pounds. Center of mass chest shots with Breneke hard cast lead slugs out of a 12 guage out to about 50 yards are superior to an 06. Soft lead foster slugs only have about 18 inches of penetration. Hard cast have double that.

The Remington 7400 that the build is based on is a tack driver. The dry lake bed LZ that I’ve located that is high ground clearance 4×4 accessible measures 100 yards by 200 yards and is surrounded by forest. A 12 guage isn’t going to secure that end to end. An 06 will. I’m planning to bring both in my Bronco II. A 5 shot short 12 gauge is an option for hiking. The Charles Daly Honcho starts at a little over $200.00. I’d be comfortable hiking with a 10mm and a short 12 gauge.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=36&v=zyhpdp3w05U

RichardD

These are some vehicle accessible LZ shots 26 miles into the forest. Using my 1,000 lumen tactical light out to 200 yards. Which gives you an idea of the strength of the light.

The bigfoots are probably going to stay in the treeline until you retire to your tent or camper. So thermal would be great for that. I have it for my smartphone, but not for my guns or drones yet.

In some jurisdictions if you kill a bigfoot and the autopsy shows that it’s an ape and not self defense you’re charged with killing an endangered species. If it’s determined to be human and not self defense you’re charged with murder. Assuming that the feds don’t confiscate the evidence. Which there’s a good chance that they would.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/df101e6390dcec9519250cd8c03af0199f5d3d5a8ad9e4e9b523180e441cbd55.jpg https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b9114eec9d25c31b760fce7ad61c483e2b293e7f28e289400362b37c4b7c5f23.jpg https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/d5d77f8f4056b45f23cf7c5dfa6386ef266e0619676b4d7b73f77ce64026a20f.jpg

RichardD

The center recording in this video from 22 seconds to 55 seconds is almost identical to what was screaming at me at the caldera entrance at my 12:00 facing the entrance, probably a female or adolescent. The “owl” hooting at my 8:00 before the screaming started was probably a mimic and a heads up to the others. The one at my 2:00 I’m not sure. They were all just outside my headlamp range at 150 to 250 feet from the sounds of it.

Once the commotion started and I realized that I was in a life threatening non conventional confrontation. I left the 9mm in my pocket and turned around and descended the head wall back to the truck and they thankfully didn’t pursue me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ov4CUo_XeWY

AM Hants

1,500,000,000,000 roubles, when converted, would that not be $23,511,116,738.14? The current Russian defence budget is around $47 billion, compared to the $750 billion, US defence budget. Now what does Russia get for her money, compared to what does the US so not get for her money?

Ralph London

Actually AM, the ruble was deliberately artificially devalued by the shits in the City & ny on the 2 respective govt orders. 10 yrs ago, it was about 50 to £1, then in 2014 it was crashed by the West (at 1 time since it was 120 to £1).
Nevertheless, Russia gets much better return on its money for its armanents.
P.S. I haven’t read the article, but shouldn’t it have ‘000’ less?

AM Hants

Must admit, I got confused, when looking at 1.5 trillion roubles, and used some converter, which came up with the $23 billion. Never was much good with decimals haha or getting my head around a trillion, so it might be an error on my part.

cechas vodobenikov

this is why nominal GDP is irrelevant—PPP measures purchasing power. currency comparisons measure nothing important. if a coffee in the USA is 3 USD and 50 kroner in Danmark, it matters little that the ratio is 7/1— what matters is the salary of the purchaser 40,000 -50 USD per year in the USA vs 500,000 (hypothetically) kroner in DK

AM Hants

I use the old fashion method, income and outgoing expenses. Do believe Russia uses the same system. According to the world bank, Russia GDP Debt is around 20% and the US GDP Debt is around 115% (last time I looked). Meaning for every $100 Russia earns, $20 goes on paying her bills and the other $80 is to spend as she pleases. Like free healthcare, infrastructure projects and free University education. Whilst the US for every $100 they earn, they still need another $15 to pay there bills. There is no free healthcare, no provision for free Uni education and the infrastructure, gets seriously ignored. Not forgetting they cannot afford to clean up the human faeces, over in San Francisco. What a difference the GDP debt makes, when you remember the bills still need paying, once you get paid haha.

cechas vodobenikov

I believe that all European nations provide paid mandatory parental and maternity leave—the USA provides neither

Toronto Tonto

HA HA HA Don’t worry the space cadets wont be here , but we will have too find a new stripper supply line , The yanks south of here have higher class skanks anyway , problem solved

cechas vodobenikov

the US spends itself into poverty, oligarchy and dictatorship—a nation of shallow, illiterate obese automatons disintegrating (Putnam) under the weight of sexual repression, anxiety, censorship…amerikans consume more hallucinogens, marijuana, cocaine, meth, heroin per capita than all peoples; they have consumed 80+% of the legal psychotropics in the past decade…expected in an empire near collapse