Создатель морского компонента ядерной триады В. Н. Перегудов: архивы открывают завесу секретности

Micro-liquid floated gyroscopes are widely used in nuclear submarines, intercontinental missiles, and strategic bombers. The machining accuracy of micro-ball sockets determined the motion accuracy of the rotor. However, it was not easily fabricated by micro-cutting because of the excellent physical and chemical properties of beryllium copper alloy. Here, we presented a linear compensation of tool electrode and a proportional variable thickness method for milling micro-ball sockets in C17200 beryllium copper alloy by micro-electrical discharge machining. The machining parameters were systematically investigated and optimized to achieve high-precision micro-ball sockets when the k value was 0.98 and the initial layer thickness was 0.024 mm. Our method provided a new way to fabricate micro-ball sockets in C17200 with high efficiency for micro-liquid floated gyroscopes.

The article examines the American lend-lease of the period of World War II as a financial instrument that ensured the national economic, geopolitical, military-strategic interests of the United States. Lend-Lease is also interpreted as a program of military-strategic supplies to the USSR on the terms of credits, loans, leases, payment with foreign exchange and gold reserves of the State return deliveries to the United States, the provision of services and information. The Lend-Lease program was used in relation to more than forty beneficiary countries, including the USSR during the Great Patriotic War. The routes for the delivery of lend-lease cargo to the territory of the USSR were studied from the point of view of logistics supply schemes; infrastructure and economic security; security; military-strategic importance; types of delivery, volumes and structure of goods. In terms of the volume and military-strategic importance of lend-lease cargo transportation in the USSR in 1942–1945, the most effective was the Far Eastern route and the ALSIB air route. A significant contribution to the provision of the rear and front was made by the Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky seaport. Based on documentary sources from the funds of the State Archive of the Kamchatka Territory, the modernization of the Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky sea fishing port, carried out under the Lend-Lease program, is being investigated. The structure of cargo transit from the USA to the Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky seaport has been identified and systematized. For the study of the unique system of the aviation chain of Kamchatka military airfields, documents of the State Archive of the Kamchatka Region, the 865th Fighter Regiment, stationed during the Great Patriotic War on the Kamchatka Peninsula and further to Kazan, from where the planes were already arriving at the front. The question of the significant role of the USSR in the post-war reconstruction and development of the countries of people’s democracy was raised, assistance was provided in the payment of their debt obligations under Lend-Lease.

Dr. Critchley's paper is available in three parts; Part 1, the "Fourth Boundary Problem," Part 2, "The Energy Shortage," and Part 3, "Military Considerations." III. Military Considerations Canadian security policy is strongly related to our participation in the NATOand NORAD alliances. NATO is seen as the defence against the Warsaw Pact threatto Western Europe. NORAD, The Canada-U.S. agreement originally formed toprovide for continental defence against the Soviet Union'sstrategic bomber threat to the United States, is now regarded as a subsidiarypart of the NATO arrangement. Several recent developments in militarytechnology, and reactions to these developments on the part of the Soviet Unionand NATO members, may cause parts of the arctic region to become a new focus ofmilitary activity and of NATO and NORAD concern. NATO-related developments willbe analyzed first. Currently, the use of the Arctic Ocean and adjacent seas by military vessels isconfined to nuclear-powered submarines. Evidence in the public domain indicatesthat such usage appears to be in the form of occasional experimental-trainingexercises(1)· The attention of strategic analysts and naval planners is concentrated not onthe Arctic, but on the North Atlantic. The reason for concentration on the North Atlantic is the build-up of the Soviet Northern Fleet, which is based in Murmansk and other ports on the Kola Peniusula. As of mid -1981, that fleetincluded approximately 82 major surface combat ships, 135 attackand cruise-missile submarines and 45 ballistic-missile-carryingsubmarines(2). Three types of nuclear-powered submarines are assigned to this and other fleetsof the Soviet navy: attack submarines and cruise-missile submarines(designated as SSNs and SSGNs respectively) have the mission ofattacking an adversary's surface shipping and submarines at sea;ballistic-missile submarines (SSBNs), armed with long-range missiles withnuclear warheads, have major military installations, industrial complexes andurban centres as probable targets in the event of a nuclear war. The veryexistence of SSBNs, along with other strategic nuclear weapons, is thought toprevent such a war from occurring. Of particular concern to NATO is the Soviet Union's assignment of a large Proportion of SSNs, SSGNs and most of their Yankee-class and Delta-class SSBNsto the Northern Fleet. More specifically, the Northern Fleet has 65% of the Soviet navy's SSBNs and 52% of all other types of Sovietsubmarines(3). The build-up of the Northern Fleet in relation to the Baltic, Black and Pacific fleets appears to relate to the existence ofchoke-points (narrow water channels or straits) which govern the exits of thelatter three fleets from their home ports and the absence of such a choke-pointfor the Northern Fleet. Submarines and surface vessels can make way from their Barents Sea ports to the Atlantic without having to pass through any narrowstraits. Although only a small portion of that fleet deploys into the North Atlantic at any given time(4), this and other evidence has led mostanalysts to conclude that the fleet's primary tasks are strategic and tactical(anti-shipping) offensive missions in the North and Central Atlantic. The NATO response to these developments and analysis has been acontinuing effort to construct a "choke-point" at the GIUK gap.

This article exposes many of the flawed assumptions about the submarine leg of the nuclear triad implicit in traditional strategic stability theory. It argues that the US strategic studies literature has put too much emphasis on traditional stability theory and that stability, whether defined traditionally or in modern terms, is more threatened by submarine-based nuclear weapons than is generally realized. The article notes that, although the possibility of a major nuclear surprise attack is becoming increasingly remote, insofar as there currently exist military incentives to launch such attacks it is due in large part to submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) which facilitate command and control decapitation strikes and threaten to negate options such as Launch on Warning. It moreover suggests that SLBMs are the strategic weapons most likely to endanger efforts to prevent loss of control in crises because: (1) US SLBMs do not contain Permissive Action Links (PALs); (2) in contrast to ICBMs, SLBMs regularrrl come into direct and potentially violent contact with enemy military forces in peacetime and are significantly more likely to come under direct attack in conventional war; and (3) SLBMs could make it particularly difficult for decision-makers to determine the source of a nuclear attack. The article concludes with several recommendations for enhancing strategic stability.

The article is devoted to the analysis of differences in educational and career trajectories of representatives of different generations. The generational division is based on the theory of N. Howe and W. Strauss, V.V. Radaev. The educational and career trajectory is understood as a sequence of motivated life choices of an individual within the framework of educational and professional institutions that affect the social and labor status of an individual, mediated by the use of their capabilities and abilities. The article analyzes the discourses of modern sociology, which are reflected in the state of the current labor market due to the high rates of technologization and automation. The approaches of J. Rifkin, A. Touren and O. Toffler are analyzed. Thus, the labor market is becoming more dynamic and flexible, and the opportunities for professional growth and self-realization are expanding. This actualizes the study of new strategies for accumulating professional capital of a personality, the motives of educational choices of the younger generation and their attitude to a career. Based on the author's research by the method of in-depth semi-formalized biographical interview, the factors of educational and career trajectories of representatives of three age groups have been identified: born before 2003 (generation Z), born in 1989-1998 (generation Y), born in 1969-1979 (generation X). It has been revealed that the younger generation is prone to frequent employer changes, combining several activities at the same time, choosing educational courses and internships in order to accumulate professional skills and a low career planning horizon. While the older generation is focused on more stable forms of career trajectory, the choice of higher education as the dominant one. The factors common to all the studied generations that influence the change in the vector of the educational and career trajectory include: the propensity of a student at school to study subjects of interest, parental family support, satisfaction with the education received, the establishment of weak connections in the learning process, the presence of goals and motives for professional activity, financial status, gender. The practical significance of the work lies in the possibility of using the data obtained in the field of educational program design, HR, consulting, and career counseling.

The Soviet theater: a documentary history, edited by Laurence Senelick and Sergei Ostrovsky, New Haven CT and London, Yale University Press, 2014, xxiii + 754 pp., US$125.00 (hbk), ISBN 978-0-300-19476-0Laurence Senelick and Sergei Ostrovsky have produced an essential, welcome, and muchneeded sourcebook for all scholars - young or grizzled - studying Soviet, especially Russian, theatre. In a task that has taken 20 years, Senelick and Ostrovsky have followed an extensive paper trail. Happily, they have chosen to mimic their subject and, like the Soviet government, interpreted the concept of document in the widest possible sense; thus, they include not only official records, decrees, and other pronouncements, but also protocols, minutes of meetings, excerpts from memoirs, diaries, letters, reviews (occasionally foreign, as well as Soviet), and criticism, in addition to the occasionally quoted passages from plays and satires. This widely cast net has brought home great riches culled from the libraries and archives of the Russian Federation, the United States, and Israel. History comes alive with a multiplicity of voices and opinions: enthusiastic, admonitory, anxious, fearful, officious, declamatory, satiric. Together, these documents are witnesses to the constantly shifting, volatile, and often dangerous, commingled terrain of art and politics in the Soviet period.Indeed, the authors forcefully and necessarily emphasize the complete interconnections of art and politics throughout the whole Soviet period, from the heady days of experimentation through repression to the descent into stagnation. This tome thus provides a necessary corrective to the many English-language books and articles that focus on individuals and fail to recognize the inescapable embeddedness of culture in the politics of the period. As the authors insist in their preface:We are not dealing with independent artists creating in a vacuum, nor even with theater folk responding to the tastes of an audience. Art for art's sake plays no role here. In the USSR, almost from the first, the theater is, in one way or another, a reflection of the government's mood. How theater is to serve society is dictated from above: one may oppose that diktat or find idiosyncratic ways to serve it, but it cannot be avoided, (xi)In the introduction, they reiterate the fact that between 1917 and 1992 politics infused all theatres, traditional or experimental, Party dictated or dissenting, amateur or professional; yet, astonishingly, many extraordinary accomplishments saw the light of day (6).Written with verve and wit, the introduction lays out in a clear, lucid, and concise manner the histoiy of theatre in Russia, beginning with its late arrival in the nineteenth century, its hierarchical structure, and - most significantly - its ardent embrace of moral-ethical imperatives. More than just an entertainment, theatre was to offer moral and spiritual sustenance. This tradition of theatre as a service industry was adopted in the Soviet period, when its arsenal was, above all, to be deployed in serving the ends of socialism and communism. Other carryovers from the tsarist period were the systems of control and censorship, honed and perfected into efficiency by the Bolsheviks. Not simply prohibiting what was harmful, as did their tsarist forebears, the Bolsheviks also went further by prescribing what was wholesome for the community (7).The book is logically divided into 11 chapters corresponding to the generally accepted periodization of Soviet history, each prefaced by a succinct and incisive mini introduction: The Revolution, 1917-1919; The Civil War, 1919-1921; The New Economic Policy, 1921-1926; Stalin Consolidates Power, 1926-1927; The First Five-Year Plan, 1928-1932; The Second Five-Year Plan and the Great Terror, 1933-1938; The Great Patriotic War, 1939-1945; The Cold War Begins, 1946-1953; The So-called Thaw and the Refrigeration, 1954-1963; Innovation within Stagnation, 1964-1984; Glasnost' and Perestroika, 1985-1992. …

On January 17, 1969, right after the landing of Soyuz-4, when the cosmonaut Vladimir Shatalov began climbing out of his spacecraft, someone suddenly shouted, “Where are you going?! Get back!” It turned out that a camera-man did not have time to point his camera at the scene.1 Shatalov obediently squeezed back into his capsule, and then re-emerged, properly smiling and waving. The historic moment was captured on film and preserved for posterity. By climbing out of his spacecraft Shatalov left the realm of history and entered a myth. Myth-making was part of a venerable tradition of Soviet propaganda. Soviet leaders sought legitimacy of their power and validation of current policies in the construction of historical breaks and continuities, in the overthrow of former idols, and in the creation of new ones. The promotion of state-sponsored myths of the October Revolution and the Great Patriotic War was accompanied by a systematic suppression of contradictory private memories, which often gave rise to counter-myths, such as the Great Terror and the Thaw. The term “myth” is used here without implying the truth or falsity of any particular historical claim, but merely to stress the foundational, identity-shaping character of such claims. Recent scholarship has moved beyond the examination of state policies and has increasingly focused on the interplay of official discourse and private memories and on the active role of multiple actors in political and cultural appropriations of memory.2

REVIEWS 775 the book’s title suggests, many were motivated by the opportunity to help build a socialist utopia and workers’ paradise. Their idealism and hope drew them to invest themselves and often everything they owned to travel to the unknown. Unfortunately for them, as Golubev and Takala document, this new land was not as welcoming as had been promised. In general, these Finnish speakers found that weak infrastructure, poor living and working conditions, and limited food (in both quantity and quality) challenged their commitment to a socialist utopia. Most North American Finns did have access to special stores and better food than the local Karelian and Russian people, but nevertheless suffered substantially for the first few years. Despite these challenges, North American Finns made notable contributions to education, literature, theatre, music, dance and even sports in their region. Golubev and Takala describe in great detail the debates about language policy, with Finnish being given higher status than Karelian for several years. They also devote a chapter to the challenges of cross-cultural communication before describing the tragic end of many American and Canadian Finns in the Great Terror and World War Two. At least 739 North American Finns perished between 1937 and 1938, according to these authors, who provide significant detail on several victims and a timeline of arrests and deaths. They also assess World War Two and its impact on Finnish speakers in Karelia, including mass deportations from the Soviet border as well as executions of those accused of spying on both the Soviet and the Finnish sides. They conclude by assessing the experience of North American Finns in the region after 1945. In all, this volume provides a detailed and well-written account of a region in turmoil and transition. Many will benefit from this carefully-researched study, including those studying nationalities policies in all their complexity, as well as those interested in new perspectives on the hopes and tragedies of people in the Soviet Union in the 1920s and 1930s. Center for Global Programs and Studies Steven T. Duke and Department of History, Wake Forest University Maddox, Steven. Saving Stalin’s Imperial City: Historic Preservation in Leningrad, 1930–1950. Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, IN, 2015. xi + 284 pp. Illustrations. Notes. Bibliography. Index. £33.00: $50.00. How was it that Leningraders, on the frontlines and within the blockaded city, waged war to ensure the survival of Soviet socialism, but after it found themselves rebuilding the most glittering symbols of the tsarist imperial past? The answer to this paradox is revealed in Steven Maddox’s brilliant study of SEER, 93, 4, OCTOBER 2015 776 the conservation and restoration of historic monuments in Leningrad and its suburbs during and after the Great Patriotic War. In a meticulously researched and fluently written book Maddox succeeds in explaining how and why a warravaged city suffering acute shortages invested its scant resources in protecting and reconstructing monuments. Maddox reveals a fascinating history of the successes and failures in preserving Leningrad’s historic built environment during the ‘cataclysmic upheaval and hardship’ (p. 2) of the blockade and its aftermath. Basedonaricharrayofpublishedandarchivalsources,Maddoxexplainshow historic preservation became a powerful mobilizational tool, which bolstered Soviet patriotism and was increasingly understood as a commemorative act. ‘Through restoration of historic monuments in the city’s centre, Leningraders were rescuing the country’s “glorious history” and writing the narrative of the blockade into the city’s urban fabric’ (p. 96). Restoration of the tsarist architectural heritage allowed the Soviet party-state to project an image of power and strength, but also to ‘imprint the memory of the war onto Leningrad’s historic cityscape’ (p. 197). The development of a new Soviet patriotism in the 1930s, based on the glorious Russian past, combined with the destruction wrought by fascist invaders and the heroic efforts of Leningraders to preserve and restore monuments, transformed them from symbols of the old tsarist order into Soviet monuments invested with new meanings and symbolism, which served as a repository for local war memories. Saving Stalin’s Imperial City begins with a survey of the long tradition of activism amongst Leningrad’s preservationist from the late-nineteenth century until the eve of the Second...

Against the background of dramatic circumstances in early 1948, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was constituted to institutionalize a defence arrangement. In view of East-West tensions eventually turning into a serious confrontation between the Western powers and the Soviet Union, France, Great Britain, and the US realized that their existing collective and bilateral arrangements (above all the Marshall Plan and US bilateral military aid) were insufficient and had to be sustained by a politico-strategic institution (Schmidt 2003: 87, 233–240). West Europeans therefore called upon the US, hitherto hostile to alliances, to negotiate what would eventually become the North Atlantic Treaty of 4 April 1949 (NAT), NATO’s founding document. That treaty constitutes a primarily political arrangement which largely relied on the deterrence effect of both a unity of purposes and principles among the allies (policy of strength) and on the overwhelming US military might, including nuclear weapons and strategic bombers.

only one strategic mistake, but it is a major one. It concerns the greatest security threat to the United States, other free nations, and world peace—nuclear arms in the hands of terrorists, as well as rogue and failing regimes. President Obama’s strategy calls for leading by example in dealing with these weapons of mass destruction (WMD). It assumes that after the United States and Russia re-commit themselves to nuclear disarmament, other nations will be inspired either to give up their nuclear arms or refrain from acquiring them. This goal, referred to in short as the “zero strategy” (for zero nuclear weapons), is dangerous if implemented, distracts the international community from more certain and pressing goals, and is extremely unlikely to move those who do need to be inspired, cajoled, or otherwise made to forgo nuclear arms. How did this usually sure-footed president slip on such a vital issue? The strategy that calls for the United States and Russia to lead the parade to nuclear disarmament was formed and then run up the flagpole by four highly regarded statesmen: two Republicans, Henry Kissinger and George Shultz, and two Democrats, Sam Nunn and William Perry. In January 2007, they issued a collective proclamation, subsequently endorsed by a number of leading American specialists in nuclear weapons policy, calling for a world free of nuclear arms. The Quad, as the four authors of the zero strategy are often called, are all senior veterans of the Cold War. But perhaps this anachronistic experience is a hindrance. (Indeed, one critic called them “dinosaurs.”) To move their strategy forward, the Quad outlined their view in a position paper endorsed by 36 experts in the nuclear weapons field. The Quad focused largely on Russia and the United States, and mainly on their strategic nuclear weapons, calling for reductions in the number of warheads arming the two powers’ strategic bombers and missiles. Such a move would effectively extend the principal U.S.-Russian treaty that covers these weapons and that is about to expire. The Quad also favors an increase in the warning and decision time before either country could launch their nuclear warheads. Currently, American and Russian missiles remain on alert at levels equaling the Cold War. This means that large parts of their nuclear arsenals are armed and pre-targeted, and that either country could launch their nuclear weapons within minutes of detecting an attack. The foundations of the Quad’s position date back to a much earlier period in the Amitai Etzioni is university professor and professor of international relations at The George Washington University and the author of Security First: For a Muscular, Moral Foreign Policy (Yale University Press, 2007).

West Africa is an area of oral civilization or oral tradition and has a sociocultural peculiarity concerning conservation and collective memory. There is a social institution to conserve and transmit the oral tradition: the griots, constituting the first and main oral source. The second one is the oral literature. The oral archives are an indispensable supplement of traditional sources. For a long time, this type of source was neglected. To ignore them creates an injustice against the human heritage. This chapter tries to demonstrate how something oral can be considered as an archival document and be seen within the field of action of the Memory of the World (MoW) Programme. For that, we use the provisions of the MoW General Guidelines to safeguard documentary heritage and the 2015 UNESCO Recommendation. MoW is still in its infancy in the sub-region of Western Africa. Indeed, the current situation of MoW in the sub-region is very weak, in terms of the national committees’ network and the number of documentary heritage assets inscribed into the MoW International Register. So, it is urgent to improve this programme in West Africa. To contribute to the improvement of the oral archives and the necessary application of MoW in the Western African sub-region, the department Metiers du Patrimoine (Heritage Professions) of the University Gaston Berger of Senegal, introduced, in the field of archival studies, modules on “the management of oral sources”, on the “ethics and professional standards applied on the documentary heritage” and on the MoW Programme.

As has happened more than once in history, today education again needs a clear direction for its development. The whirlwinds of change calmed down, and it became obvious that a lot of good things had been lost: education is essentially conservative, and this is its great advantage. Education shows a path to eternal truths, to understanding the laws of evolution and the world of the mind. The university in this sense is not a place of services, bargain, purchase or sale, it is a temple of science and truth, which by definition cannot be widespread. The university lives its own life but in connection with the state, its history, national traditions and values. The article considers the problems of the transformation of sociological education and institutionalization of sociology in Belarus. The teaching of sociological disciplines began with the opening of the Belarusian State University (BSU) in 1921. Professor S.Z. Katzenbogen became the first teacher of sociological disciplines and the head of the department of sociology and primitive culture. This was followed by a more than a thirty-year forced break due to the removal of sociology from the curriculum, repressions of the 1930s, the Great Patriotic War and post-war reconstruction. The revival of sociology began in the 1960s with the efforts of G.P. Davidyuk and E.M. Babosov. Sociological departments were opened at the Academy of Sciences and leading universities; sociology became one of the main sources of knowledge about the contemporary society and social well-being. Despite all difficulties and obstacles, sociology has become in demand under the current uncertainty, global instability and social turbulence. However, the ignorance of national experience and educational traditions and mechanical borrowing of foreign practices is unacceptable and leads to stagnation.

This article is Part II of a survey of Russia's position as one of the great powers and how it has evolved from 1815 to the present day. Part 1 ended on the eve of the Great Patriotic War (1941‒1945), and Part II begins where Part 1 left off, with some data on the Great Patriotic War and its influence on the USSR's position as a great power. It deals with post-war reconstruction and then considers the Cold War and post-Soviet Russia (1992‒2022). Attention is paid to Soviet economic policies, the reasons for the long-run decline in Soviet economic growth, and the state collapse of 1991. Explanatory theories used include List's economic recommendations for medium-developed countries, Wintrobe's political economy of dictatorship, and Tilly's analysis of the war–state relationship. It is concluded that a relatively poor country can become a great power and maintain that position for long periods if it has institutions that enable it to squeeze its population for military purposes.

This article explores the divisions created by the Great Patriotic War, its aftermath and the reconstruction of Russian cities in the late 1940s and early 1950s. It examines the conflicts created by rebuilding housing, infrastructure, restoring communities and allocating resources in cities where war's painful legacy continued to be felt. The war's impact varied enormously between cities on the frontlines and in the rear. Contrary to official propaganda rebuilding was a protracted process, which created divisions rather than unity.

The article examines the origins and philosophy of the development of sociology at the Belarusian State University (BSU), which has accumulated the wisdom and socio-political thought of Belarusian thinkers of the past, absorbed the research experience of previous generations. Since the beginning of the work of BSU in 1921, the Department of Sociology and Primitive Culture was created (S.Z. Katzenbogen). The course in genetic sociology, which was taught by Professor S.Z. Katzenbogen, to a greater extent resembled a kind of fusion of philosophical and sociological thought and primitive history, was unlike modern ideas about sociological science. This period did not last long. Soon repressions broke out, the Great Patriotic War, and the post-war reconstruction took place, which significantly delayed the development of sociology as an independent science. All this time, sociology functioned in the bosom of philosophical knowledge, where the convergence of meanings and meaningful mutual enrichment took place, the difficult process of accumulating theoretical, methodological and practical experience was going on. The rticle highlights the key role of BSU in institutionalization, development of sociological science and education in Belarus. The leader of the revival of sociology at BSU was Professor G.P. Davidyuk (1923–2020). Following the example of the Belarusian State University, in the 1960s–1970s, sociological structures were created in all the leading universities of the republic; the work of the applied sociology sector of BSU contributed to the development of factory sociology. In 1989, a sociological department and a department of sociology were opened, at the end of 1996, the Center for Sociological and Political Research was established. Since 1997, the scientific and theoretical Journal of BSU. Sociology, and in 2000 the Belarusian Sociological Society began to function, a branch of the Department of Sociology of the Belarusian State University was opened at the Institute of Sociology of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus. The traditions of previous generations, laid down by the leaders of the Belarusian sociological school, are gradually being transformed, taking into account the development of scientific, technological and informational and communicative progress, revising curricula and training programs for modern sociologists.