MILITARY POLICY OF THE POST-SOVIET STATES: ESSENCE’S ANTINOMY

A military policy was and remains important direction of activity of political subject. There are two gnosiological platforms of understanding of essence sources and rich in content parameters of military policy. Part of researchers considers this variety of policy a constituent above all things public policy, directed on application of facilities of the armed violence for the sake of realization of national aims. Other research workers diffuse a military policy for limits actually the states, providing with military-political thought political parties, public associations, other structures of civil society and even anti-gov- ernment forces. The amount of presidential republics on post-soviet political space arrives at nine (Azerbaijan, Byelorussia, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kirghizia, Russia, Tadjikistan, Turk- menistan, Uzbekistan), mixed (parlamentary-presidential, presidential-parlamentary, especially parliamentary) – to six (Georgia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Ukraine). To the unpresidential republics of the CIS the peculiar combined method of forming of military policy which combines it state and non-state constituents. Presidential («super- presidential») republics saved tradition of state (presidential) determination of military policy with the minimum account of non-state sources of its producing and even them complete ignoring. The presidential republics of the CIS, as a rule, chosen military orga- nization as instituter basis of power protection of political process. Creation the sector of safety and defensive removes western (democratic) approaches on questions making and practical realization of military policy. The unpresidential republics of the CIS are inclined to consider this sector institutionally basis armed power to influence on social realities. The military policy of Russian Federation both independent nation-state has as inte- gration and individual lines which considerably differ from its collective initiatives. By the collective organ of countries of the CIS, to initiator RF and built in accordance with the Kremlin understanding of questions of safety and defensive on post-soviet space, there is Organization of agreement about collective security or Tashkent pact, created in 15.05.1992. Parallel from strengthens the own (state selfish) variant of military policy, independent of post-soviet allies these RF. The evolution of conceptual principles of military-political thought of RF, reflected in the Russian military doctrines certifies about it. The evolution of military doctrines of Russia in essence forms the picture of it imperial expansions in a post-soviet period. In 1991 Ukraine took advantage of possibility of reorganization the fragment of So- viet Army in Military Powers of Ukraine, giving here up a soviet nuclear inheritance. The years of independence were witnessed by an inconsistence and even utopia of separate military-political sketches, executed different political commands. Beginning from 2014, Ukraine appeared pulled in in the armed opposition with the Russian army and reparative groupmates which are actively supported Kremlin. The armed answer of Ukraine to ad- dress the Russian troops, which allowed to stop their advancement to Ukrainian territory, became possible due to the total actions of the state armed forming and armed structures of civil society. Decisive resistance of the state armed forming and volunteer tactical units was stopped Russian expansion, however created the mechanisms of returning of the lost territories, proceeding in tangible assets, social resources, and also reliable guaranteeing of strategic prospects of Ukraine, deprived Russian interference. Ukraine appeared before the neces- sity of creation on principle of new model of military policy, the key signs of which must become euro Atlantic integration, creation modern the sector of safety and defensive, complete disclaimer of soviet inheritance. Thus have a situation of transformation of military policy of countries of the CIS after the followings scenarios: collective providing of military safety by entering into NATO (countries of Baltic); situation adaptation to Rus- sian influences (countries of ODKB); complete or partial ignoring of Russian interests in an attempt to protect an own geostrategic choice (Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, Azerbaijan); proclamation of neutrality (Turkmenistan). Dispersion military and political trajectories of former Soviet republics does not hope for their reintegration into coherent military- security structure