A specialist in the field of PMCs on why Wagner cannot be called a “private army”, and Russian soldiers are “soldiers of justice”

"The US military budget is over $ 700 billion, while in Russia it is only $ 46 billion, so Russia can only give asymmetric responses to the challenges of the Americans," said Ivan Konovalov, director of the Center for Strategic Conjuncture. In an interview with BUSINESS Online, the expert told why the times we live in cannot be called peaceful, what can be credited to the ex-Defense Minister Serdyukov, and for some reason in Russia they treat private military companies badly, although they have great prospects.

Photo: kremlin.ru

"WE RISE AMERICANS FAIRLY 200 PERCENT, AND THE AMERICANS THEMSELVES UNDERSTAND IT"

- Ivan Pavlovich, can we say that we live in peacetime? Or will they write about our era in some other way in future textbooks?

- Of course, our time can hardly be called peaceful. For too long, we believed that the Cold War, which once unfolded between the Soviet bloc of states and the American bloc, is a thing of the past. And now both I and many other people in Russia have to admit that we have returned to approximately the same format of relations with the West. Moreover, it is the Americans who are doing everything to return to the Cold War era. It is clear that now there is no Warsaw Pact, which means that our forces for confrontation are no longer the same. Soviet Union was much stronger than the RF. Now Russia is virtually alone in the face of the collective West. However, there is also China, which the United States also sees as its enemy.

In general, an interesting situation is developing: neither Russia nor China officially considers the United States to be their enemy and opponent. But Washington for some reason believes that both Moscow and Beijing oppose it on the world map. And it does this for one simple reason - because the Russian Federation and the PRC do not wish to obediently follow in the American channel, unlike, say, London and all of Europe. For Europeans, this is comfortable, and, in fact, they need such a vassal dependence. But do we need it? Hardly. And for this obstinacy shown, Moscow and Beijing are declared enemies. But this only confirms the fact that the United States does not want to lose its status as the world hegemon, which it assumed in the 1990s.

China, by the way, does not have such a goal - to destroy the United States. It's just that over the past years they have gradually turned from a spoiler partner for Washington into a rival partner and may well crush the Yankees economically. Therefore, today they are trying to portray Beijing as the capital of a kind of new "evil empire."

What has always been the symbol of the Cold War? These are indirect wars, when the interests of strong rival countries are traced behind the clashes of small groups and states. We saw it in Georgia in 2008, we saw it in Donbass and more recently in Syria. All this is a product foreign policy USA, a deliberate policy going back to the Cold War. At the same time, the Americans are very fond of accusing Russia of opposing them. Although in those areas where we really confront them, we do it quite rightly. Not just fair, but 200 percent fair, and the Americans themselves understand this.

The same situation is mirrored in relation to China. This can be read from the situation with the islands in the South China Sea, where the US destroyer USS Stethem entered last summer. The Chinese consider these territorial waters their own, so they drove off the intruder with the help of warships and fighters. The Americans are doing the same in relation to the Black Sea. There are countless examples of ships sailing under the Stars and Stripes, the last one happened this February, when the destroyer Ross and the ship Carney appeared in the Black Sea waters. And how does NATO behave in the Baltic, where the North Atlantic alliance periodically conducts military maneuvers? A huge number of alien ships and planes are swarming near our borders!

- But the Americans constantly emphasize that they act within the framework of international law, and we, they say, violate it.

- They have only one law - this is the law of all Anglo-Saxon ethics. This ethic is quite simple: kill, deceive, betray, as long as it is in line with Anglo-Saxon interests. Now this is manifested in everything, up to the Olympics in Pyeongchang, where the same technologies are used against us.

- Is this a manifestation of hybrid war, which has recently become fashionable to talk about?

- The term "hybrid war" was coined by the Americans themselves. In relation to the indirect conflicts, which I spoke about above, this sounds true when there is an indirect confrontation between strong powers in different parts of the world, for different reasons and in different weight categories. In principle, it cannot be otherwise: Russia can respond to attacks against it only asymmetrically. Especially when you consider that the US military budget is over $ 700 billion, while we have only $ 46 billion ( this is the declared Russian military budget for 2018 — approx. ed.). Military spending is slightly higher, but this does not change the ratio. How can Russia act in such conditions? Only asymmetrical. Americans call this hybrid warfare. But, excuse me, $ 5 billion was invested in the same Ukraine to make a coup! This is recognized even overseas. Now about 700 million dollars have been invested in the Ukrainian war machine... At present, they are transferring lethal weapons to Kiev, that is, in fact, they are leading the conflict to a dead end. For example, recently Ukrainian Defense Minister Stepan Poltorak assured that his country would receive Javelin anti-tank systems from the United States in a timely manner.

The conflict in Donbass is also commonly called a manifestation of hybrid war. But does it not seem to the American gentlemen that with this term they are justifying their own political failure? It was not a hybrid war that happened in Donbass, but an uprising of people who do not agree with the nationalists and scum who came to power in Kiev, and there are many such people. And the whole Crimea does not agree with the coup in Kiev, and Odessa. Well, are they all fighters on an invisible "hybrid" front? No, it's just that the Americans did not go according to their scenario. It seems that they successfully carried out a coup, but several Ukrainian regions revolted against this at once. How can this be explained? In Washington, they decided to hide behind a coined term here: hybrid war.

Think of the 1986 Irangate. The American firm Enterprise, headed by retired US Air Force Major General Richard Secord, secretly supplied weapons to Iran and supported rebels in Latin America - Nicaragua and other countries with the proceeds. So who has the right to talk about hybrid warfare? Americans do this all the time.

“ALL WHO FOR RUSSIA, NOW TOGETHER. AND WHITE AND RED SIT IN THE SAME OKOP "

- And yet the war has now taken on new forms: it is no longer only hot and not even only cold. It involves not only people in uniform who have sworn allegiance to the Motherland, but also those who seemingly don’t wear epaulets: from experts and analysts to journalists and so-called Russian hackers. In this regard, the question is: who should be considered the defenders of the fatherland today?

- Speaking on this topic, one can go far. I will say one thing: today, in the face of an obvious enemy and obvious pressure on our country, both whites and reds in Russia have united. Everyone is now in the same trench, we all understand that we have no other choice. All who are for Russia are now together. It is clear that there is a fifth column, but these people, as a rule, do not hide their beliefs.

- The fact that the Whites and the Reds have united was evident even in the Donbass: Strelkov with his white ideas here for some time peacefully coexisted with the National Bolsheviks and anarchists.

- Igor Strelkov never hid his views, close to the monarchist, White Guard, etc. And the people who were with him could adhere to the Bolshevik and other red views, but this did not prevent them from fighting together. As for the journalists ... I myself am a journalist, I am embarrassed to discuss this topic. All the same, the hero is, first of all, the one who goes on the attack or fights back in the trench.

“For the Americans, everything did not go according to their scenario. It seems that they successfully carried out a coup, but several Ukrainian regions revolted against this at once. How to explain this? "
Photo: archive "BUSINESS Online"

- Nevertheless, you are a former military reporter for Channel One. You have been to Chechnya, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Serbia and Kosovo. You saw the war with your own eyes. Was it hard then to return to a peaceful life?

- It is obvious that people in war see the injustice of the existing world order - this is true. And they often see an opportunity to solve complex problems by simple means. When you return to an ordinary peaceful life, where there is a system of housing and communal services, law enforcement agencies and in general the routine of life, it is difficult to perceive at first. I know many friends for whom it was really difficult. But, on the other hand, I have observed many times that people who have returned from the war are becoming more just. They become the best arbiters because they know the value of life, death and the value of a given word.

They talk about a "difficult military past" ... But not everyone considers their life in the war hard. I talked with former "Afghans" and "Chechens" - and so, for many of them this is the best part of life. Then they felt most needed, and their life was such, for which it was worth living. These people then retain their volitional qualities for a long time - they turn to them for advice, they count on them, because they know that they are strong, they will not betray.

By the way, the great American director Oliver Stone, who made one of the best films about the war, Platoon, is just such a person. Although he always behaved like a person who did not seem to be at war. But I remember: when Stone interviewed Fidel Castro, he immediately asked him: "Did you fight?" He: "Yes." "Awarded?" "Yes". And then Castro shook Stone's hand. It doesn't matter that during the war they could sit in different trenches, and it doesn't matter that the director of "Platoon" by that time had long been a Hollywood man. Another thing is important: it became easier for them to understand each other. Although, in fact, people who went through the war are the same as everyone else. War is one thing, but your big life is quite another.

Here is my little daughter growing up, whom I love very much. For me, she is the main meaning of life. But when she was born, Donbass happened, and I went there. I could not do otherwise. And yet the most important thing is not there, but here. The most important thing is our children. Moreover, the most important thing in war is peace.

- A world that is somewhere far ahead?

- No, the world in which you need to live here and now. Believe me, the war will always be forgotten. No one will talk about the horrors of war forever. I remember mostly funny episodes, what was fun. But even these episodes are difficult to retell, because they are almost all indecent.

"Anatoly Serdyukov simply confronted the military with a fact, and generally behaved abusively towards people in uniform."Photo: kremlin.ru

"HALF OF AFRICA, LATIN AMERICA AND SOUTH-EAST ASIA WOULD LIKE TO SEE OUR PMCs"

- Former Defense Minister Serdyukov is usually scolded in the military environment. Meanwhile, there is a version that it was he who did all the dirty work of turning the fragments of the old Soviet army into the professional Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. Is it so?

- With Anatoly Serdyukov, everything is quite simple. They say a lot about him, but we must remember that the reform of the army that has begun is still the reform of Serdyukov - Makarov (meaning the ex-chief of the General Staff of the RF Armed ForcesNikolay Makarov — approx. ed.). At the same time, much was done wrong, starting with the fact that Serdyukov threw in many of his reform initiatives instantly. He simply confronted the military with a fact, and generally behaved insultingly towards people in uniform. Sergei Shoigu corrected this situation. On the one hand, he continued the Serdyukov-Makarov reform, but, on the other hand, as a person who had gone through two Chechen wars, who had been at the helm of the Emergencies Ministry, he strongly corrected this wave of changes that began in the army.

Nevertheless, no one denies the role of Serdyukov: a lot began just under him. But how did he do it? He never discussed anything with anyone. Sergei Kuzhugetovich radically changed the situation - he returned self-respect to the military. Our military success in Syria is largely due to Shoigu. But we will not deny that Messrs. Serdyukov and Makarov also did something. The same financial reform of the army, an increase in the salaries of servicemen, the solution of problems with housing - all this began then. But such things were also undertaken, which later had to be changed. For example, the transfer of the entire army to a "brigade contract", as they joke in the military environment, that is, they liquidated divisions and regiments, leaving only brigades. Shoigu changed all this. They also returned the air divisions instead of the Serdyukov air bases. We can say that the Serdyukov-Makarov reform was quite formal and tended to Western standards, which is far from always acceptable to us.

- In addition to the professional army, some defend the right of our country and to private military companies (PMCs), which have recently become fashionable in our country. You have devoted several monographs to the topic of PMCs and are rightfully considered one of the largest experts in this field. So does Russia need PMCs?

- Unfortunately, it is customary for us to treat private military companies critically, because PMCs are perceived in the popular mind as a mercenary office. But practically everyone in the family had someone who fought, died, or was simply in the war. Therefore, the conviction prevails in Russia: if you take up arms, you do it to defend the Motherland. And PMCs in this context are seen as exclusively a mercenary office that works in a combat zone, that is, it takes up arms not for the sake of the Motherland, but for money. In fact, the real picture of the PMC looks somewhat different.

There are PMCs in Russia, but they operate in a gray zone, because there is no federal law regulating the activities of such companies. Those that act in accordance with the license are called private security companies (private security companies) in our country. To put an end to discussions about PMCs, it is necessary either to officially abandon them, or to adopt an appropriate law, which, it seems, is inclined towards. Think about it: private military companies operate in all leading countries. The total number of their employees in the world is about 1 million people. That's not a lot, but most employees are hired out of state for specific assignments. And in Russia there is a huge potential for development for PMCs.

"Sergei Shoigu, on the one hand, continued the reform of Serdyukov-Makarov, but, on the other hand, as a person who had gone through two Chechen wars, who was at the helm of the Emergencies Ministry, he strongly corrected the wave of changes that began in the army."
Photo: kremlin.ru

- What is this potential? That retired military men or people engaged in professional security activities in private security companies will be able to realize themselves in the field of private military companies?

- No, I'm talking about something else: our PMCs would be immediately in demand in the world. A huge number of world countries would like to see our PMCs at home: as consulting, security, training, etc. structures.

- Which countries are these?

- Half of Africa, a huge part of Latin America, Southeast Asia - they all want to see our military specialists. But the Russian army, for obvious reasons, cannot do this on the territory of other sovereign states.

The discussion on this issue has already dragged on for too long, although I say the obvious things. The State Duma has already twice tried to start considering the law on PMCs, I myself participated in one of such attempts. The last time in the spring of 2016, the deputies from Fair Russia tried to initiate consideration of the draft law "On private military security activities." And what? Now, most likely, after the well-known events in Syria, the Duma will make another attempt.

- Are you talking about the tragic events in Syria associated with the so-called PMC "Wagner"?

- You can interpret that, but I do not want to discuss the incident itself. They must fulfill the tasks assigned to the military professionals, but there is still no law in accordance with which they should act. How so?

- They say that PMC employees taking part in the Syrian conflict sign in advance a waiver of all possible state awards, and in general they sign a lot of things.

- I do not know about such facts. In any case, they know what they are signing up to and what their rights and obligations are. For example, the American company Kellog, Brown & Root (KBR) is logistic in nature, it supplies the American army - from toilet paper to light bulbs. Nevertheless, over the two years of the Iraqi war, where KBR was engaged in escorting convoys, the company lost more than 300 people, and lost in battles, although it seemed to be engaged in logistics, moving its convoys from Kuwait and being subjected to constant shelling from rebels and Islamists. And these losses are only for two years, and the total is much more.

“RUSSIAN SOLDIERS ARE SOLDIERS OF JUSTICE. THEY ARE ALWAYS FIGHTING AGAINST GLOBAL EVIL "

- How many PMCs are there in Russia now? Are there any statistics on this?

- I emphasize: there is no formal PMC in Russia, there is no law yet. If we talk about companies similar to PMCs, there are about a couple of dozen of them. These are "RSB-Group", Moran Security Group, "Antiterror-Orel" and some others. But in order to work within the legal framework, they have to conclude sub-contracts with licensed Western PMCs. This allows them to operate abroad, where, by the way, they buy weapons.

As for Wagner, it is inappropriate to call this unit a private military company. It's just a journalistic cliché. Now everyone around us is called PMCs, but Wagner is more of a volunteer unit. It can be said that it acts in the interests of the general concept of eliminating terrorists in the framework of ground operations in Syria.

- Russia does not have its own military companies, but, as far as we know, British PMCs operate on our territory. What are they doing here?

- British and American PMCs are diversifying their businesses. They don't have to work in a war zone. For example, the Danish-British PMC G4S (G4 Securicor) is the largest military company in the world; in my opinion, they have up to 3 million full-time employees. In Russia, they deal with security issues for a particular company, and in Iraq and Afghanistan, they guard dangerous zones and practically participate in hostilities. In the Russian Federation, it is mainly the British, yes. It so happened that they came to our market, but the Americans were not allowed here. Here they operate mainly as private security companies.

PMC business can be very different. Take, for example, the famous South African company Executive Outcomes, which has won two wars - in Angola and Sierra Leone. But at the same time they had their own TV studio and travel agency. And we see everything in a very narrow way: if this is a PMC, then people with machine guns are sure to work there, who kill someone. But this is far from the case. And I hope that Russia will finally understand this.

- Who in Russia can afford to hire foreign PMCs?

- Many people can afford it. Aren't there enough well-to-do enterprises that, for example, need to arrange video cameras in their offices? Russian entrepreneurs hire foreign specialists not as PMCs, but as security specialists, as "security". Lukoil employs foreign PMCs to protect fields and personnel in Iraq.

- There is an opinion that Russian PMCs have begun to truly form in the Donbass.

- No, it is not so, volunteer units fought in the DPR and LPR. These are patriots of the country who are fighting not for money, but for their homeland. Another thing is that many of those who fought as volunteers in Donbass later ended up in Syria, so they are tied into a kind of single chain. But isn't it logical that they ended up there? Aren't these people fighting like patriots in Syria? After all, they defend the same ideals in the SAR that they defended in Ukraine. In Syria, Russian citizens are fighting global terrorism, and in Donbas, they opposed nationalism and fascism. A Russian soldier, like a Russian in general, always fights against world evil, for truth and freedom. Our warriors are not "soldiers of fortune", but soldiers of justice.

Ivan Pavlovich Konovalovwas born on December 25, 1967 in the city of Osinniki Kemerovo region... Russian military journalist, military expert, candidate of historical sciences. Director of the Center for Strategic Business. From 1992 to 2003, he worked on Russian television channels, mainly as a war correspondent. Then he was a military observer for the Kommersant Publishing House and the RIA Novosti news agency. He is the author of a number of works on armed conflicts in modern history, as well as on the problems of building the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.

In 1986-1988 he served in the Soviet army in Mongolia. In 1989 he entered the full-time department of the Faculty of Journalism of the Moscow state university them. Lomonosov, who graduated in 1994.

Since 1992, he worked on Channel One Ostankino, was an editor and anchor of international news in the Morning program, and led his own film section From Mosfilm to Hollywood.

From 1994 to 2003, he was a war correspondent in the news programs ORT (1996-2000), RTR (2000-2001) and TV-6 (since 2002 - TVS) (2001-2003). He worked for the programs "Novosti", "Vremya", "Author's program of Sergei Dorenko", "Vesti", "Now", "Itogi", "Grani", aired on these TV channels.

Held several issues of the Vremya news and analysis program instead of Sergei Dorenko in February - March 1999.

He worked in hot spots, including Chechnya (both military campaigns), Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Serbia and Kosovo. He became especially famous for his reports from Baghdad during the 2003 war in Iraq (Operation Shock and Awe).

2003–2006 - Deputy Director of the Center for Strategy and Technology Analysis.

In 2006 he hosted the Military Council radio program on Mayak radio.

In 2006-2008, he was first deputy editor-in-chief and head of the military department of the Smysl magazine.

From February 2007 to June 2013 - editor-in-chief of the Socio-Political THOUGHT publishing house.

In 2011-2012, he was a military observer for the RIA Novosti agency.

Since October 2012 - Director of the Center for Strategic Business. It is a research organization that deals with issues of international security, the development of the armed forces, the defense industry and military-technical cooperation.

In 2014, he was a consultant on Somalia for the Russian fighter "22 Minutes".

2016–2017 - Head of the Military Policy and Economy Sector at the Russian Institute for Strategic Studies.

From March to June 2017 - a military columnist and expert on the Tsargrad TV channel.

Ivan Pavlovich Konovalov (December 25, 1967, Osinniki) - Russian military journalist, military expert, director of the Center for Strategic Conjuncture. From 1992 to 2003, he worked on Russian television channels, mainly as a war correspondent. Then he was a military columnist for the Kommersant Publishing House and the RIA Novosti news agency. Author of a number of works on armed conflicts in modern history, as well as on the problems of building the Armed Forces of Russia.

Biography

Ivan Konovalov was born on December 25, 1967. Candidate of Historical Sciences. He defended his dissertation "The collapse of the state and the civil war in Somalia" in 2010 at the Institute for African Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

He got into journalism after graduating from school in the city of Novokuznetsk (Kemerovo region), worked as a correspondent for the large-circulation newspaper "On Construction".

In 1986-1988 he served in the Soviet army in Mongolia. Returning home, he worked for another year in the large circulation "Metallurg" of the famous Kuznetsk Metallurgical Plant (KMK).

In 1989 he entered the full-time department of the Faculty of Journalism of the Moscow State University. MV Lomonosov, who graduated in 1994.

Professional activity

Since 1992, he worked on Channel 1 Ostankino, was an editor and presenter of international news in the "Morning" program, led his own film section "From Mosfilm to Hollywood".

From 1994 to 2003 he was a war correspondent in the information programs ORT (1996-2000), RTR (2000-2001) and TV-6 (since 2002 - TVS) (2001-2003). He worked for the programs "Novosti", "Vremya", "Author's program of Sergei Dorenko", "Vesti", "Now", "Itogi", "Grani", aired on these TV channels.

Conducted several issues of the information and analytical program "Vremya" instead of Sergei Dorenko in February-March 1999.

He worked in hot spots, including Chechnya (both military campaigns), Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Serbia and Kosovo. He became especially famous for his reports from Baghdad during the 2003 war in Iraq (Operation Shock and Awe).

2003-2006 - Deputy Director of the Center for Strategy and Technology Analysis.

In 2006 he hosted the Military Council radio program on the Mayak radio.

In 2006-2008, he was first deputy editor-in-chief and head of the military department of the Smysl magazine.

From February 2007 to June 2013 - editor-in-chief of the Socio-Political THOUGHT publishing house.

In 2011-2012 he was a military observer for the RIA Novosti agency.

Since October 2012 - Director of the Center for Strategic Conjuncture. It is a research organization that deals with issues of international security, the development of the armed forces, the defense industry and military-technical cooperation.

In 2014 - a consultant on Somalia for the Russian fighter "22 Minutes".

Since October 2016 - Head of the Military Policy and Economics Sector at the Russian Institute for Strategic Studies.

Publications

Novels:

• Konovalov Ivan. "Zhurfakovsky Dvorik" (novel). - M .: Publisher Vorobiev A.V., 2016.- 136 p. ISBN 978-5-93883-314-2
• Konovalov Ivan. Sergeant and Captain (novel). - M .: Publisher Vorobyov A.V., 2014.- 340 p. ISBN 978-5-93883-237-4

Monographs:

• Konovalov I.P. Soldiers of Fortune and Warriors of Corporations... History of modern mercenarism. - Pushkino: Center for Strategic Conjuncture, 2015 .-- 216 p .: with ill .. ISBN 978-5-9906069-7-5
• Konovalov I.P. Military operations of France in Africa. Pushkino: Center for Strategic Conjuncture, 2014 .-- 148 p.: With ill. ISBN 978-5-906233-73-8
• Konovalov I.P. Horn of Africa Wars. Pushkino: Center for Strategic Conjuncture, 2014 .-- 192 p. ISBN 978-5-906233-77-6
• Konovalov I.P. SOMALIA: infinity of war. Pushkino: Center for Strategic Conjuncture, 2013 .-- 238 p. ISBN 978-5-906233-30-1
• Konovalov I.P. Defense elements... Pushkino: Center for Strategic Conjuncture, 2013 .-- 160 p. ISBN 978-5-906233-25-7
• Konovalov I.P., Shubin G.V. Modern Africa: Wars and Weapons. 2nd ed. Moscow: Center for Strategic Conjuncture, 2013.476 p .: with ill. ISBN 978-5-906233-29-5
• Konovalov I.P., Valetsky O.V. The evolution of private military companies... Pushkino: Center for Strategic Conjuncture, 2013.138 p. ISBN 978-5-906233-20-2
• Konovalov I.P. Elements of Defense: Notes on Russian Weapons... Pushkino: Center for Strategic Conjuncture, 2013.176 p. ISBN 978-5-906233-10-3
• Konovalov I.P. Wars of Ethiopia and Eritrea... Pushkino: Center for Strategic Conjuncture, 2013.68 p. ISBN 978-5-906233-67-7
• Konovalov I.P. Modern African wars... Pushkino: Center for Strategic Conjuncture, 2012.98 p. ISBN 978-5-906233-01-1
• Konovalov I.P., Shubin G.V. Modern Africa: wars and weapons... M .: Socio-political THOUGHT, 2012.476 p .: with ill. ISBN 978-5-91579-078-9
• Barabanov M.S., Konovalov I.P., Kudelev V.V., Tseluiko V.A. Alien Wars / Ed. R.N. Pukhova. Moscow: Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, 2012.271 p. ISBN 978-5-9902620-4-1 :: More: http://www.cast.ru/news/?id\u003d448 [Collection of articles is devoted to describing the course of hostilities and the main results of the most significant local armed conflicts abroad during after 1991]
• Konovalov I.P. State collapse and civil war in Somalia / Ed. V.G.Shubin. Moscow: Socio-political thought, 2010.176 p. ISBN 978-5-91579-086-4
• Konovalov I.P. Military TV journalism: features of the genre // Contemporary Russian military journalism: experience, problems, prospects / Ed. comp. M. Pogorely and I. Safranchuk. - M .: Gandalf, 2002.S. 40-59. ISBN 5-88004-148-2

To the galaxy of patriotic experts who abundantly littered the benches of television studios with political and analytical programs, another significant unit was added in the person of a courageous and charming person. Ivan Pavlovich Konovalov is a real professional of military journalism, a correspondent who has visited many hot spots of the planet, more than once risked his life in order to obtain truthful information about this or that event.

At the moment, he heads the Center for Strategic Conjuncture and is a candidate of historical sciences.

Curriculum Vitae

Vanya Konovalov was born in the city of Osinniki, Kemerovo region at the very end of 1967. Subsequently, the Konovalov family moved to another Kuzbass settlement - Novokuznetsk. Like all Soviet children of that time, he regularly attended kindergarten, and later - a comprehensive school. He studied, in general, well in all subjects, but excelled best in the humanities. After graduation, Ivan decided to devote himself to journalism. True, it was not part of the plans of an ambitious young man to immediately enter the Faculty of Journalism. To gain experience, he got a job at the editorial office of the large-circulation local newspaper "On Construction".

In 1986, the guy was drafted into the ranks of the Soviet army. He did two-year military service in Mongolia. After demobilization in 88, he immediately decided to work in the editorial office of the large circulation "Metallurg" of the Kuznetsk Metallurgical Combine.

A year after successfully passing the entrance exams, he entered the full-time department of the Faculty of Journalism of Moscow State University. He graduated from the university in 94. While still studying at the university, since 1992 he worked on Channel One as an editor and an anchor of international news. At the same time he was a military commander in the information programs ORT, RTR and TV-6 (TVS) until 2003. In his arsenal, participation in the programs "News", "Time", "Vesti", "Now", "Results", "Grani".

He worked during both Chechen campaigns, risking his life collecting materials for publications in such dangerous places as Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia. He reported directly from Baghdad during the 2003 war.

After returning to his homeland, he held the position of deputy head of the Center for Analysis of Strategy and Technologies for 3 years.

In 2006 he was invited to radio Mayak to host the Military Council program.

Later he held leading positions in such publications as "Smysl", "Kommersant".

Until 2012, he served as a military observer for RIA Novosti, and in the fall he was appointed head of the Center for Strategic Conjuncture, where he dealt with issues in the field of international security and the defense industry.

From the age of 14 he was in the thick of events in the Donbass.

• Zhurfakovskiy Dvorik;
• "Sergeant and Captain";
• "Wars of the Black Continent";
• Soldiers of Fortune and Warriors of Corporations;
• "Elements of Defense";
• "Military TV journalism: features of the genre."

Practical thoughts of Ivan Pavlovich

• If our news channels strive for objectivity, then ABC is dominated by jingoistic patriotic plots. If you watch American news and Russian news at the same time, they are very different! ..
• It is the Americans, not us, who are doing everything to return to the Cold War era. The only difference is that NATO survived, but the Warsaw Pact is no longer there, and the USSR was stronger than the current one. Russian Federation... Today Russia is virtually alone in opposing the collective West. Among our main allies in this confrontation, only China should be seriously considered.
• The law of Anglo-Saxon ethics is the same: kill, deceive, betray - if only it is in their interests.
• In the face of a single external enemy, both the government and the opposition in Russia have united - and this is good for the country. All are now in one trench.
• People who have returned from the war become more just because they realize the value of life and death, the value of a given word.

• For many "Afghans" and "Chechens", war is the best part of their life, because then they felt most needed, and in peacetime they seem to be fenced off from them by a wall.
• Serdyukov behaved insultingly towards people in uniform. Sergei Shoigu, who replaced him as Defense Minister, corrected this situation. On the one hand, he continued the reforms that began under Serdyukov in the army, on the other hand, he corrected most of the changes being made. Shoigu restored self-respect to the military.
• Russian soldiers are always fighting against world evil. Our warriors are not soldiers of fortune, but soldiers of justice.
• We had a Soviet backlog (if we are talking about design ideas, about the creation of various types of weapons), much was conceived and developed even under socialism. But much of what was planned was not realized, given that the Soviet Union collapsed, and the Russian army and defense industry did not experience better times... I had to overcome many obstacles in order to regain the former greatness at least to some extent.
• Even in the United States, there was an understanding that “color revolutions” and the change of existing regimes to new, more democratic ones, only lead to chaos.
• A breakthrough in relations between Russia and NATO can hardly be expected. At the same time, we can and should gradually move towards mutual understanding.

candidate of Historical Sciences

Moscow State University Lomonosov

In 1994 he graduated from the Faculty of Journalism of the Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov.

1994 - 2003 - War correspondent for TV channels ORT, RTR, TV-6-TVS.

2003 - 2006 - Deputy Director of the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies.

2006 - 2008 - First Deputy Editor-in-Chief and Head of the Military Department of the Smysl magazine. In 2008 - 2015 - military observer for the publishing house "Kommersant", news agencies RIA Novosti and ITAR-TASS.

In 2010 he defended his thesis for the degree of candidate of historical sciences.

In 2012-2016. - Director of the Center for Strategic Business.

Sphere of scientific interests: armed conflicts of our time, problems of international security, arms markets, military-technical cooperation, military-industrial complexes.

Latest publications