The main reason behind Russian President Vladimir Putin’s decision last week to remove Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov has become clearer in recent days with the subsequent firing of Chief of Staff Gen. Nikolai Makarov and other senior defense officials and military officers in Russia’s Ministry of Defense. Taken together, the dismissals suggest that the shakeup was not due primarily to sex scandals, corrupt practices or alienation of the officer corps, as has been claimed by various observers. Rather, the purge was the result of a power struggle over who should control the distribution of the $700 billion that Putin pledged in February to spend on new weapons purchases by 2020.
The Russian military-industrial complex, which includes the country’s major defense firms, armed force commanders and their key political supporters inside the government, wants the funds without impediment. Throughout his years in office, however, Serdyukov along with other Defense Ministry officials constantly castigated the defense-industrial sector for producing outdated and overpriced weapons. He also refused to sign defense contracts without guarantees of higher quality and cheaper prices from the defense industry, and declined to buy weapons systems that had not been fully tested or for which no identified military requirement existed. ...
To read the rest, sign up to try World Politics Review
Sign up for two weeks of free access with your credit card. Cancel any time during the free trial and you will be charged nothing.
Request a free trial for your office or school. Everyone at a given site can get access through our institutional subscriptions.
- Diplomatic Fallout: Greek Financial Crisis Forces EU to Play for Time on Ukraine, Migrants
- Russia Becomes the Middle East’s Preferred but Flawed Nuclear Partner
- World Citizen: In New Rivalry, Great Powers Come Calling on India and Pakistan
- The Realist Prism: Crises in Ukraine, Mediterranean Put NATO Solidarity to the Test
- The Realist Prism: U.S. Outreach to Iran, Cuba Still Lacks Broader Strategic Framework