Не так давно NWC проводил семирачег с кетайцами, там были такие вот слова:
If, for systemic reasons, commercial shipping is no longer threatened (piracy excluded – to be addressed later), then both the interdiction and protection of shipping cease to be reasons for deploying naval forces to the far seas.
И вот это Later:
It is common in today’s naval literature to see the justification for naval building and deployment as protection of shipping. However, we have previously established that outside of piracy, commercial shipping is not threatened and probably cannot be threatened. Piracy, even in the Gulf of Aden and other areas around Somalia does not constitute a serious threat to shipping. The chances of any particular ship being hijacked is less than one in 900, insurance rates have not seen significant increase, and shipping companies seem to view the payment of ransom as falling within the “cost of doing business.” However, piracy in that area of the world and in the mode conducted by the Somalis does create political problems for governments by virtue of hostages, which is why there are significant naval forces of many countries operating together in the area.
Кстати, сумма выкупа за команды, суда и грузы по крайней мере в США по закону списывается в затраты, то есть не облагается налогами.
И, мол, основная угроза нынешнему судоходству нынче - не проблема того, что судоходство может быть прервано в море, основная угроза состоит в том, что суда может стать нечем грузить на суше:
If shipping is not threatened, what is? Obviously, the only remaining answer is the nodes of the system. If there is nothing to put into ships, their security becomes irrelevant. Maritime missions associated with the nodes may be assigned to three principal categories; homeland security and defense, prevention of war among major powers, and stability in resource areas.
А это уже никак не чисто военно-морская проблема.
- Re: Не так... - Николай Поникаров 21.06.2012 17:17:01 (499, 1945 b)
