state research organization. Formed by Presidential Decree Russian Federation in 1992 in order to provide information and analytical support for the activities supreme bodies legislative and executive power in the country. RISS develops general issues of ensuring national security, conducts research on phenomena and trends in foreign countries affecting the national security and interests of Russia, problems of developing relations between Russia and foreign countries, studies the nature and direction of global and regional military-political and economic processes, analyzes and forecasting crisis situations in individual countries and regions of the world. Since 1996 RISS has been a corporate member International Institute Strategic Studies (London). Creative cooperation is carried out with the Wilton Park Conference Center at the British Foreign Office, the Royal Institute international relations(Great Britain), the Institute for International Strategic Studies (France), the Military Center for Strategic Studies (Italy). RISS maintains permanent contacts with foundations in Moscow, in particular with the Carnegie Moscow Center (USA), the John and Catherine T. Mamsarturov Foundation (USA), the Konrad Adenauer Foundation (Germany) and others. scientific centers Asia, including: China Institute of Contemporary International Relations; China Institute of International Strategic Studies; Shanghai Institute of International Studies; Academy of Social Sciences of Heilongjiang Province (PRC); Institute of Political and International Studies under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Iran; Institute for Defense Research and Analysis (India). The main consumers of RISS products are: the Presidential Administration, the Federation Council and the State Duma, their committees; Security Council, Government and its apparatus, ministries and departments. Since 1996, a branch of the RISS has been functioning - the Center for Baltic Studies in the city of Kaliningrad (Kaliningrad region).

On the northern outskirts of Moscow, under the reliable protection of the fighters of the Moscow Region, the former secret institute of the Foreign Intelligence Service lurked. Now on the pediment of the visor there are golden letters - Russian Institute for Strategic Studies. But the peaceful name of the initiates does not bother - more than two hundred employees are forging here the analytical shield of the motherland.

Will it new war in the southeast of Ukraine? Who is behind the President of the United States? Why can many of our officials be called ideological agents of influence? These and other questions, habitually weighing every word, are answered by the director of the RISS, Lieutenant General of the SVR Leonid RESHETNIKOV.

Interview from early 2015.

● Rivals on the same field ●

You had a serious "roof" - SVR. Why suddenly declassified?

Today, our founder is the President of Russia, and all government assignments for research are signed by the head of the administration, Sergei Ivanov.

How in demand is your analytics? And then we are a paper country, everyone writes, writes, but is there an impact on the final result?

Sometimes we see actions that echo our policy briefs. Sometimes it’s amazing that you come up with certain ideas, and this becomes a trend in Russian public opinion. It can be seen that many directions are simply in the air.

In the US, the think tank Stratfor and the strategic research center RAND Corporation are doing something similar. Which one of you is "cooler"?

When, after moving to the AP in April 2009, we were making a new charter for the institute, we were told as a wish that we should take an example from them. I then thought: “If you finance us, as Stratfor or RAND Corporation are financed, then we will outdo all these foreign analytical companies.” After all, Russian analysts are the strongest in the world. Especially regional specialists who have more "fresh", open-minded brains. I can speak confidently about this, after all, 33 years of analytical work, first in the First Main Directorate of the KGB of the USSR, and then in the Foreign Intelligence Service.

● NGO, NGO - where did you lead us ●

As you know, the RAND Corporation was developing a plan for the ATO in the south-east of the country for Ukraine. Did your institute provide information on Ukraine, in particular on Crimea?

Certainly. In principle, only two institutes worked in Ukraine: RISS and the Konstantin Zatulin Institute of CIS Countries. From the very beginning of our activity, we wrote analytical notes on the growth of anti-Russian sentiment in mainland Ukraine and the strengthening of pro-Russian sentiment in Crimea. Analyzed the activities of the Ukrainian authorities. But they did not give alarmist information - everything was gone, but rather increased attention to the growing problem.

They proposed to significantly strengthen the work of pro-Russian non-governmental organizations (NGOs), to increase, as they say now, the pressure of the “soft power” policy.

With an ambassador like Zurabov, no enemies are needed!

The work of any embassy and ambassador is constrained by many restrictions. Step left, step right - a scandal. Plus, the country generally has trouble with professional personnel. And not only in the diplomatic field. Somehow we were exhausted - there are very few strong people with a core left in the civil service.

The role of NGOs is difficult to overestimate. A vivid example is the color revolutions, which are warmed up by foreign, primarily American, non-governmental organizations. So it was in Ukraine. Unfortunately, no attention was actually paid to the creation and support of such organizations that would act in our interests. And if they worked, they would replace ten embassies and even ten very smart ambassadors. Now the situation has begun to change after a direct order from the President. God forbid that subordinates do not blur this development.

● If tomorrow is a war, if tomorrow is a hike ●

How, in your opinion, will events develop in Novorossiya in the spring and summer? Will there be a new military campaign?

Alas, the likelihood is very high. A year ago, the idea of ​​federalization of Ukraine worked. But now Kyiv only needs war. Only unitary state. For several reasons. The main thing is that ideologically anti-Russian people have stood at the head of the country, who are not just subordinate to Washington, but are literally supported by those forces that are hiding behind the US government.

And what does this notorious "world government" need?

It’s easier to say what they don’t need: they don’t need a federal Ukraine, it will be a poorly controlled territory. It is impossible to place our military bases, a new echelon of missile defense on it. And there are such plans. From Lugansk or Kharkov, tactical cruise missiles reach the Trans-Urals, where our main nuclear deterrence forces are located. And with a 100% probability they will be able to hit silo and mobile-based ballistic missiles on a take-off trajectory. Now this region is not accessible to them either from Poland, or from Turkey, or from Southeast Asia. Here is the main goal. Therefore, the United States will fight for the Donbass to the last Ukrainian.

That is, it's not about the shale gas deposits that were found in this territory?

The main strategic task is a unitary Ukraine under their full control to fight against Russia. And shale gas or arable land is just a nice bonus. Associated gain. Plus, a serious blow to our defense industry due to the rupture of ties between the defense industry of Ukraine and Russia. It's already been done.

We were outplayed: “son of a bitch” Yanukovych had to be evacuated with the help of special forces, and Washington put in its “sons of bitches”?

From a military-strategic point of view, of course, they outplayed it. Russia has "compensation" - Crimea. There is "compensation" - the resistance of the inhabitants of the south-east of Ukraine. But the enemy has already vast territory, which was included Soviet Union and the Russian Empire.

What will we see in Ukraine this year?

The process of half-life or even complete decay. Many have so far simply calmed down in the face of real Nazism. But people who understand that Ukraine and Russia are firmly connected have not yet said their word. Neither in Odessa, nor in Kharkov, nor in Zaporozhye, nor in Chernigov. Silence is not forever. And the lid of the boiler will inevitably break.

And how will relations between Novorossia and the rest of Ukraine develop?

There is an unlikely scenario for Transnistria. But I do not believe in him - the territory of the DPR and LPR is much larger, millions of people have already become involved in this war. So far, Russia can still persuade the leaders of the militia to a temporary respite and a truce. But it is on the "temporary". There is no talk of any entry of Novorossia into Ukraine. The people of the southeast do not want to be Ukrainians.

If our country has already fallen into global isolation due to the annexation of Crimea, then why not go for broke in the southeast? How hypocritical can you be?

All-in, in my opinion, go early. We underestimate the awareness of our president, who knows that some processes are going on in Europe that are closed from prying eyes. They give hope that for the time being we can defend our interests by other methods and means.

● Front without front line ●

In the information flow related to Ukraine, we forget about the explosive growth of religious extremism in Central Asia…

This is an extremely dangerous trend for our country. Very a difficult situation in Tajikistan. The situation in Kyrgyzstan is unstable. But the direction of the first strike could be Turkmenistan, as AN wrote. We somehow forget about it a little, due to the fact that Ashgabat keeps to itself. But this "mansion" may collapse first. Are they strong enough to fight back on their own? Or we will have to intervene in a country that keeps a fairly distant distance from us. So the direction is hard.

And not only in connection with the penetration of the Islamic State militants into the region. According to the latest data, the US and NATO are not going to leave Afghanistan, but keep their bases there. From a military point of view, the five or ten thousand soldiers that remain can be deployed in a 50-100 thousand group within a month.

This is part of an overall plan to encircle and pressure Russia, which is carried out by the US to overthrow President Vladimir Putin and split the country. The average layman may, of course, not believe this, but people who have a large amount of information know this very well.

What are the boundaries of the split?

At first, it is planned to simply chip off what is “badly lying”. It doesn't matter what breaks away: Kaliningrad, North Caucasus or Far East. This will be the detonator of the process, which can go on increasing. This idea is not propaganda, but real. Such pressure from the west (Ukraine) and the south (Central Asia) will only increase. They are trying to seep through the western gate, but they are also trying out the strength of the southern one.

Where is the most dangerous strategic direction for us?

The south direction is very dangerous. But there are still buffer states - the former Central Asian Soviet republics. And in the west, the war is already on the border. In fact, on our territory.

Now there is a slaughter not of Ukrainians and Russians, but a war of world systems. Some believe that they are "tse Europe", while others - Russia. After all, our country is not just a territory, it is a separate huge civilization that has brought its own view of the world order to the whole world. First of all, of course, Russian empire as an example of Eastern Orthodox civilization. The Bolsheviks destroyed it, but gave out a new civilizational idea. Now we are close to the third one. And within 5-6 years we will see it.

What will she be like?

I think it will be a good symbiosis of the previous ones. And our “sworn colleagues” understand this very well. Therefore, the attack began from all sides.

That is, the joint Russian-American fight against terrorism, in particular, against ISIS, is a fiction?

Certainly. America creates, feeds, trains terrorists, then commands the whole pack: “face”. Maybe one "mad dog" from this pack will be helped to shoot, but the rest will be set on even more actively.

● Satan rules the ball there ●

Leonid Petrovich, you think that the United States and American presidents are just a tool. Who makes the policy then?

There are communities of some people practically unknown to society who do not just put American presidents, but define the rules for the entire "Great Game". These are, in particular, transnational financial corporations. But not only them.

Now we are reformatting the financial and economic system peace. There is an attempt to rethink the entire structure of capitalism without abandoning it. Foreign policy is changing rapidly. The United States suddenly abandoned Israel, its main ally in the Middle East, in order to improve relations with Iran. Why is Tehran more needed and more important than Tel Aviv? Because it is included in the encirclement belt of Russia. These secret forces set the task of eliminating our country as a serious player on the world stage. After all, Russia is a civilizational alternative to the entire united West.

Moreover, there is an explosive growth of anti-American sentiments in the world. Hungary, where the conservative right-wing forces are in power, and the leftists of Greece - diametrically opposed forces - actually united and "bucked up" against the US dictates on the Old Continent. There is someone to “buck up” in Italy, Austria, France and so on. If Russia now endures, then processes will begin in Europe that are unfavorable to the forces claiming world domination. And they understand this very well.

Some European leaders are already crying that the US has literally imposed sanctions on them. Europe can escape from the "friendly" American embrace?

Never. America keeps it firmly on several chains: the Fed's printing press, the threat of color revolutions and the physical removal of objectionable politicians.

As for the physical elimination of the stick do not go too far?

Not at all. The US Central Intelligence Agency is not intelligence even in terms of the level of tasks facing it. PGU KGB or SVR RF - classic intelligence: collecting information and reporting to the country's leadership. At the CIA, these traditional signs of intelligence are at the bottom of the list of tasks. The main ones are elimination, including physical, politicians and organizing coups. And they do it in real time.

After the sinking of the Kursk submarine, CIA director George Tenet flew to us from Romania. I was instructed to meet him at the airport. Tenet did not leave the plane for a long time, but the ramp was open, and it was possible to look inside his Hercules. It was a flying command post, a computer operations center full of hardware and communications systems that could monitor and simulate the situation around the world. Accompanying delegation - twenty people. We have flown and fly on regular flights with 2-5 people. As they say, feel the difference.

By the way, about intelligence. They again began to talk about the idea of ​​restoring a single Russian intelligence service by merging the SVR and the FSB. Your attitude?

Extremely negative. If we unite two special services - foreign intelligence and counterintelligence, then we will create one of the two sources of information for the country's top leadership. Then the person who sits on this "spring of information" becomes a monopolist. And she can be manipulated to achieve some goal. In the KGB of the USSR, such manipulations with information were noticeable even to Captain Reshetnikov. It is beneficial for a president, tsar, or prime minister - whatever you call the highest official - to have several independent intelligence sources. Otherwise, he becomes a hostage to a specific head of the structure or the structure itself. It is very dangerous.

● Where are the landings? ●

Let's move on from the global conspiracy "to our sheep." How to distinguish an official who does not know what he is doing, from an agent of influence who does it consciously?

There are not so many real agents of influence of a serious level in the world as it is commonly believed. The adoption or non-adoption of serious strategic decisions not in the interests of one's country is mainly initiated by, let's say, ideological agents. These are our officials who ended up in a domestic high-ranking chair, but their souls are in the West. They do not need to be recruited or ordered. For these people, everything that is done “there” is the highest achievements of civilization. And what is here is “unwashed Russia”. They do not associate the future of their children with the country, who are sent to study abroad. And this is a more serious indicator than accounts in Western banks. Such "comrades" do not like Russia from the bottom of their hearts, the "development" of which they direct.

How exactly did you paint a portrait of some of our ministers. How will we get through 2015?

The year, with or without them, will be hard. Most likely, the next one will not be easier. But then the confident march of the new Russia will begin.

Story

Formed by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation in 1992.

Owners and management

In accordance with the Charter of the Institute, approved by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of April 29, 2009 No. 478, the founder of the federal state scientific budget institution“Russian Institute for Strategic Studies” is the President of the Russian Federation.

Activity

RISI is engaged in:

• research work;
• preparation of information and analytical materials,

• informing political, scientific circles and the public about problems relating to Russia's national security and strategic interests;
• organization and holding of scientific and practical conferences, seminars, situational analyzes

on priority issues;

• provision of information and consulting services.

RISS explores general issues of ensuring national security, analyzes phenomena and trends in the economy and politics of foreign countries that affect the national security and interests of Russia. He studies the problems of developing relations between Russia and foreign countries, the nature and direction of global and regional military-political and economic processes, analyzes and predicts crisis situations in individual countries and regions of the world.

External Relations

At RISS constructive relations have developed with a number of state structures, political and public organizations, research centers of Russia. Employees of the Institute are present at hearings in committees of the Federation Council and the State Duma, participate in the work of interdepartmental working groups, public organizations, conduct research on orders from ministries and departments. RISS cooperates in scientific terms with similar institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, other domestic research centers and educational institutions. Within the framework of this cooperation, joint research is carried out and monographs are published. Close cooperation has been established with the institutes of strategic and international research, other scientific centers of the countries of the near abroad. RISS has stable ties with a number of government agencies, political organizations and research centers Western Europe, USA and Asia.

Publishing

RISS a number of publications have been issued: a series of analytical almanacs “New Eurasia: Russia and neighboring countries”, “Russia and the global economy”, “Politics in the 21st century: challenges and realities”; newsletters “Russian Vector” and “ Analytical reviews RISI"; monographs on key issues of our time and leading countries of the world: “The nuclear factor in modern world”, “Islam and Islamism”, “Creation of missile defense systems abroad and security of Russia”, “Shanghai Cooperation Organization: formation new reality”, “USA in the New World: Limits of Power”, “China: Economics and Politics”, “Iran in the Modern World”, “Improving the Economic Efficiency of Military Construction in the USA”, “Russia in Asia: Problems of Interaction” and etc. For a number of years, the staff of the Institute have been working on a research project dedicated to the states that emerged on the territory of the USSR. Based on the results of the research, the monographs “Ukraine: the vector of changes” (1994), “Kazakhstan: realities and prospects for independent development” (1995), “Belarus: the path to new horizons” (1996), “Armenia: problems of independent development” and “Uzbekistan: acquiring a new look” (1998), “Independent Azerbaijan: new guidelines” (2000), “Georgia: problems and development prospects” in two volumes (2001- 2002), “Moldova: modern tendencies development” (2004). Since 2010, the Institute has been publishing the quarterly scientific journal “Problems of National Strategy”, which presents articles on a wide range of defense and security issues, international politics and economics, as well as controversial issues of history. The publication of information bulletins “Russian Vector” and “RISI Analytical Reviews” continued.

PhD

Currently in RISS work is underway to open postgraduate studies in two specialties scientists: specialty 07.00.15 - History of international relations and foreign policy. The content of the specialty "History of International Relations and Foreign Policy" is the study of the history of relations between countries and peoples, diplomacy, law, economics, ideology, culture, military affairs; the history of individual states to ensure their own national-state interests and its diplomatic component; problems of conflictology; specialty 23.00.04 - Political problems of international relations, global and regional development. The content of the specialty "Political Problems of International Relations, Global and Regional Development" is the study of the essence, content and direction of the processes of international relations, the main areas of activity of subjects and objects of world politics on a global and regional scale, individual states and their unions.

Story

The Institute was transformed in accordance with the Decree of President Boris Yeltsin dated February 29, 1992 No. 202 "On the formation of the Russian Institute for Strategic Studies" from the former Research Institute of Intelligence Problems of the First Main Directorate of the KGB of the USSR as an analytical center of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service. In 2009, the institute was reorganized and reassigned to the Administration of the President of Russia. Work at the Institute is state civil service. 11 doctors of sciences and 45 candidates of sciences work at the Institute.

Activity

Management

Directors:

The problem of HIV/AIDS

Employees of the institute Oksana Petrovskaya and Igor Beloborodov in a report to the Moscow City Duma in May 2016 called statements about the AIDS epidemic in Russia (which, in particular, was stated by the head of the Federal AIDS Center Vadim Pokrovsky) part of the information war of the West against Russia. They pointed to the existence of two models of the fight against HIV: Western (includes “neoliberal ideological content, insensitivity to national characteristics and absolutization of the rights of risk groups - drug addicts, LGBT”) and Moscow (“takes into account the cultural, historical and psychological characteristics of the Russian population, relies on on conservative ideology and traditional values”). It was noted that Russia is offered to apply the first approach in the fight against the disease and thereby turn the topic of the epidemic "into a political problem of confronting Russia as a country that allows itself to pursue an independent foreign and domestic policy" .

RISS and the 2016 US presidential election

The BBC Russian service noted that the journalists of the news agency Reuters Ned Parker, Jonathan Landy, and John Valcott, "quoting four former US administration officials," reported that RISS, on behalf of Russian President Vladimir Putin, was developing a plan for "Russian intervention (English) Russian in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election”, whose goal was to make an impact “with the support of the giants of international broadcasting