"Rand Corporation": the most powerful shadow corporation in the United States. Who plans wars in the USA? RAND Corporation An expert method developed by the American Rand Corporation

* The Rand Corporation is a non-governmental research organization (established in 1958) working on programs in the field of national defense. The activities of the corporation are financed by the Department of Defense and the US government. "Rand" is considered the "think tank" of the American administration, the scientific and technical reports prepared by the corporation's experts are mostly highly professional research.

The events of the late 20th century took place against the backdrop of the transformation of modern society from post-industrial to informational. The speed with which modern information and telecommunication technologies burst into our lives allows us to talk about a new round of scientific and technological progress that is transforming social and economic life, that is, about the “digital revolution”. In the communication and information industry, fundamental changes are taking place - and almost at lightning speed. It took radio 38 years and television 13 years to reach 50 million people. In just four years, the same number of people began to use the Internet. In 1993, there were only a few hundred pages on the "global web", today there are more than 50 million. In 1998, 143 million people were connected to the Internet, and by 2001 the number of users reached 700 million. compared to previously invented means of communication.

Such impressive and rapid changes have led to the fact that the US leadership, striving to maintain global leadership, is forced to reconsider its approaches to conducting foreign and domestic policy. For example, a number of official documents, such as the report of the US Department of Defense "Report of the Quadrennial Defense Review" and the report of the National Defense Commission "Transforming Defense National Security in the 21st Century, Report of the National Defense Panel", emphasize: in First, “we recognized that the world continues to change rapidly. We cannot fully understand or predict the problems that may arise in a world beyond the time limits defined by traditional planning. Our strategy embraces such uncertainties and prepares the military to deal with them,” and secondly, “the accelerating pace of change is making future conditions more unpredictable and less stable, placing a wide range of demands on our forces.” This view of the modern world forces American political scientists to reconsider a number of key approaches to building a US national development strategy in the 21st century.

The results of research conducted over the past five years have allowed Rand Corporation* experts to conclude that the traditional strategy is currently undergoing significant and profound changes. Experts in the field of national security have so far predicted the potential of opposing states in a space that included three main dimensions - political, economic and military. Today they have witnessed the birth of a new field - "information strategy". Although this area has not yet been fully formed, it has already become obvious that in the future there will be a need for a significant revision of the basic concepts in traditional areas. Moreover, these changes will lead to the creation of a fourth "information" dimension, which will combine technical communications and conceptual content ("content"). In this emerging world, the key to success will lie in the skillful management of information capabilities and resources, that is, strategic planning.

Information and communications have always been important to strategy. Their role has changed from secondary and insignificant to primary - as happened today, when more questions are connected with the concept of "information" than ever, due to the emergence of a number of reasons that simply did not exist just a few decades ago. The first reason is technological innovation: the rapid growth of a vast new information infrastructure, including not only the Internet, but also cable networks, direct broadcast satellites, cell phones and others, in which the balance is far shifted from one-to-many broadcast receptions (for example, traditional radio and television) to the many-to-many type of broadcasting that is characteristic of interactive media. In many states, positive changes in the economy and the growth of national welfare are caused by the elimination of problems associated with ensuring free access to information resources for solving problems of a commercial, social, diplomatic, military and other nature. This freedom influenced the rapid increase in the intensity of international interaction. The second reason is the rapid spread of a new type of interaction: many government and non-government organizations directly exchange important information. The third reason why information and communication have become more important is that the concepts of "information" and "power" are becoming more and more intertwined and become inextricably linked. Among all areas: political, economic and military, information "soft power" today has priority over traditional, material "brute power".

At present, the information strategy remains a concept that even its authors find it difficult to define unambiguously. However, publications and open discussion of this topic have led "to the fact that the bulk of the work over the past few years has been grouped around two main poles. One pole (mainly technological): the papers discuss problems information security and protection of information in computers and computer networks; the principles underlying the complex of threats to the existing US information infrastructure that can lead to attacks various shapes, especially targeted promotions; questions about who is a sufficiently skilled adversary capable of realizing such threats through cyberspace. The authors of this research group are primarily concerned with how to defend against such attacks, which can be carried out by regimes hostile to the US, terrorists and criminals, and how to use cyberspace to counter these threats (Hundley and Anderson, 1994; Molander, Riddile and Wilson, 1996; Campen, Dearth and Goodden, 1996).

The other pole consists of works related to the political and ideological context of the ongoing processes of informatization - information strategy is seen as a way of expressing the "soft power" of American ideals in order to spread its influence on the leadership and population of foreign countries (Nye, 1990; Nye and Owens, 1996). The debate in this area is mainly about the benefits to be gained by opening up and sharing US information resources and information infrastructure with allies and other states in areas such as coalition building and intelligence. In addition, an optimistic emphasis on the role of the media and the Internet in shaping public opinion is important. Strategies that involve the media more than cyberspace are being considered to exercise "information power" to help democratize states and limit the possibility of authoritarian regimes abroad. Thus, the subject of discussion in the studies of this group is opportunities rather than threats.

Of these two poles, technology has received much more attention to date, according to the authors of the study. Numerous conferences and exercises are held on the issue of "information warfare". A growing body of research methods - think tank studies, congressional hearings and presidential commissions - are designed to identify key technology risks and vulnerabilities. A number of structures have been created to identify threats and organize interaction between national agencies (for example, national center infrastructure protection) to enhance the defense capability and protect the national and global information infrastructure of the United States. Rand experts believe that this is currently leading to a certain instability that hinders the creation of an American information strategy.

The activity that engulfed the researchers of the technological pole is characteristic of its time and characterizes the awareness of the role and place of information and information systems in the life of modern society. The work carried out allowed us to gain some experience. Now, the authors of the report believe, it is necessary to focus on the development of research projects related to the second - the ideological pole. In this case, both poles must be closely connected. strategic analysis, which will bridge the gap between them.

Despite significant progress, an analysis of the results of the debate that develops around technical problems shows that the technological pole cannot serve as the only basis for the formation of an information strategy. The debate, which is predominantly about vulnerabilities from cyberspace, the formulation of concepts and scenarios, tends to rehash the old nuclear and terrorist paradigms that place the main emphasis on potential threats with the most dire consequences (for example, "electronic Pearl Harbor").

As the authors note, all this is really necessary, namely: infrastructure protection should be a priority for the American public and private sectors in the next decade, but it cannot be considered as the basis for creating an information strategy. It is argued that analysts dealing with this problem today must see all the threats in cyberspace, and not just technological vulnerabilities. In addition, enthusiasm for the spread of American ideas may cause the United States to miss the possibility that adversaries may exploit the media, the Internet, and other communications technologies for their own interests.

Considering the development of the technological and ideological dimensions of information technology together is more likely to give a greater result than the opportunity to let them develop in separate directions. It is a mistake to think that these two poles represent a fundamental dichotomy (successive division of the whole into two more or less equal parts), and not two parts of one whole. What is needed today are viable ideas and options to bring them together to create a broad, comprehensive vision of what America's information strategy should be in the coming century.

The authors of the study propose to start work on the formation of an information strategy with a rethinking of the concept of "information space". Concepts such as "cyberspace" and "infosphere" (cyberspace plus mass media) should be combined as parts of the broader concept of "noosphere", and in the authors' terminology: "all-encompassing space of consciousness". Introduced by the French scientist and clergyman Teilhard de Chardin at the beginning of the 20th century, this concept, Rand experts believe, attracts attention with its illusory nature and can be useful to information strategists. In addition to recommending the adoption of the noosphere concept, it is also proposed to move from the current emphasis on "information processing" to an analysis of the concept of "information structuring". The authors further make the following assumption: at the highest levels of political leadership, the development of an information strategy can contribute to the emergence of a new paradigm based on ideas, spiritual values, moral norms, laws and ethics transmitted through soft power - as opposed to power politics and its emphasis on resources and abilities associated with traditional, material "brute force". Thus, realpolitik, that is, politics based on practical and material coefficients, to which the authors refer the activities of, for example, Henry Kissinger, will create the basis for what is called "noopolitics" (politics based on ethics and ideas, which the authors associate with name of George Kennan). These two approaches to the exercise of political power have coexisted for the last two decades. Sometimes they complement each other, but more often they lead to ambiguous and partly contradictory conclusions.

Similarly, at the initial stage, the information strategy may serve in the secondary roles of traditional politics, but this will happen less and less. Statesmen always have the opportunity to turn to traditional forms of power for help, but each time they will see more and more benefits in the use of strategies that first take advantage of the information method, and traditional power acts only as an additional tool.

The authors believe that a new paradigm is needed today - "noopolitics". This is a form of political leadership that interacts with the noosphere - the widest information space of consciousness in which cyberspace is united. Noopolitics is a method of implementing foreign policy in the information age, emphasizing the primacy of ideas, spiritual values, moral norms, laws and ethics, based on the use of "soft" rather than "brute" power. It is especially emphasized that the guiding motive of noopolitics cannot be national interests defined in terms of statehood. national interests will still play an important role, but they must be defined more on a human scale than on a state scale and be integrated with broader, even global, interests into an expanding transnational network "structure" into which participants in international relations are embedded.

While realpolitik tends to put states at the forefront, noopolitics will put networks of states, state and non-state organizations in their place. Real politics pits one state against another, but politics encourages interstate cooperation in coalitions and other joint structures.

At the same time, the authors believe that noopolitics is unlikely to completely replace the existing paradigm of "real politics" based on solid power in the near future. Most likely, the two approaches will coexist, maintaining a certain balance, different for different regions of the planet, since each of them has a certain originality. Today, some regions of the world are already fully immersed in the dynamics of the information age, while others are far behind in this sense.

Thus, noopolitics is not yet a universal remedy. It will be a more appropriate management methodology for some parts of the world than for others. Noopolitics is most suitable where highly developed societies dominate: for example, Western Europe and North America. But it will be less effective where conditions remain traditionally state-oriented rather than coalition-oriented, and thus based on the application of traditional policy methods (for example, many regions of Asia). In addition, noopolitics will be most effective where all means of disseminating information are present, where non-governmental organizations have priority in drawing attention to problems, and where the problems themselves are complex, and not homogeneous (strictly economic, political or military), and also where where the process of interaction between state and non-state structures is well established.

Based on the above, Rand specialists give recommendations in the form of a list of activities that contribute to the transition to noopolitics. They should contribute to the creation of a global noosphere that will unite all spheres of modern society, as well as the integration of actions with the aim, on the one hand, to maintain openness, and on the other, to ensure security. In this respect, they reflect the essence of the main strategy of the United States for the coming decade - "guarded openness":

• it is necessary to continue to support worldwide access to cyberspace by non-governmental organizations, public and private individuals, even in case of conflict with the preferences of authoritarian regimes;
• move away from real-policy-oriented WAN encryption management projects and move towards the establishment of encryption systems based on public key infrastructure;
• to guarantee security and protection in cyberspace at the international level, it is necessary to develop hierarchical information systems to share information on a contractual basis, creating an accessible but well-protected infosphere;
• it is also necessary to promote freedom of information and communication as a right (and responsibility) throughout the world;
• it is recommended to encourage the creation of "special forces of information" on the model of special forces, but armed with information and means of bringing it to the masses. These teams can be deployed to conflict zones to help resolve disputes by communicating open and accurate information;
• it is necessary to raise the level of diplomatic relations between state and non-state actors, realizing a "revolution in diplomatic affairs", which corresponds to a revolution in approaches to doing business and in the military sphere.

In conclusion, it is emphasized that in addition to the creation of a global noosphere, it is necessary to start work on organizing a military noosphere, which, on the principle of commonality and security, will unite American resources with the resources of allies and other US-friendly forces around the world. However, the balance between openness and security in the military noosphere must be somewhat different. The authors cite the thesis that in the near future, in order to deal with a world in which noopolitics is being established, but traditional elements are still strong, it is necessary to prepare for the emergence of conflicts of a new era, creating a Strategic Information Doctrine (SID) for policy implementation during crises and conflicts. . Combining defense in depth (i.e., multi-layered electronic defense against hackers) as well as preventive elements (electronic measures to avert a threat and subsequently renew a counteroffensive), the IJD should emphasize the leadership of the moral realm of noopolitics. This emphasis implies the implementation of a policy of "never use first" information weapons, which would allow the United States not only to maintain a positive image, but also reduce its own vulnerability to attacks in cyberspace, where today they have a much larger number of targets than any other. state.

Thus, we can state the fact of the beginning of changes in the field of foreign and domestic policy of the United States in the information age. The main conceptual document should be the information strategy, and one of its components will be the Strategic Information Doctrine, as the main conceptual document for the implementation of the principles of information confrontation on the battlefield in the conflicts of the new era.

At the same time, the reviewed work of Rand specialists showed for the first time that the point of view of many experts on the problem of using information weapons may change in the near future. The world has already realized the potential of this "weapon of mass destruction of a new type", and the rejection of the efforts of the international community aimed at organizing control over work in the field of creation and proliferation of information weapons can seriously undermine US national security.

S. GRINYAEV,
candidate of technical sciences

"Foreign Military Review" No. 10 2001

Direction of activity - promotion of scientific, educational and charitable activities in the interests of the public welfare and national security of the United States. Development and identification of new methods for analyzing strategic problems and new strategic concepts.

History

See also

Write a review on the article "RAND (corporation)"

Notes

Literature

• Bogush D. A.
• RAND Corporation // Foreign Policy Research Centers of the USA and Canada: A Handbook / USSR Academy of Sciences, Institute of USA and Canada; Comp. L. B. Berezin. - 3rd ed. - M .:, 1989. - S. 109-111. - 193 p.
• Gavrilova N.V. Corporation "Rand" in the service of US militarism // Legal aspects of the implementation of foreign economic relations: a collection of scientific. Proceedings / MGIMO USSR Ministry of Foreign Affairs, department. intl. and private law; ed. S. N. Lebedeva , V. A. Kabatova , R. L. Naryshkina . - M., 1985. - S. 140-147. - 171 p.
• RAND Corporation (RAND Corporation) // US Sovietological Centers: A Handbook / ed. k. philol. n. Ya. A. Blinkina. - 2nd ed., corrected. add. - M .: INION, 1989. - S. 72-80. - 353 p. - 500 copies.
• Filatov V.P."Russian centers" in the USA // USA - economy, politics, ideology. - 1970. - No. 4. - pp. 110-114.

Links

• (English)

Excerpt characterizing RAND (corporation)

The next day after the show, Boris, dressed in the best uniform and instructed by the wishes of success from his comrade Berg, went to Olmutz to Bolkonsky, wanting to take advantage of his affection and arrange for himself the best position, especially the position of adjutant with an important person, which seemed to him especially tempting in the army . “It’s good for Rostov, to whom his father sends 10 thousand each, to talk about how he doesn’t want to bow to anyone and won’t become a lackey to anyone; but I, who have nothing but my head, have to make my career and not miss opportunities, but use them.
In Olmutz, he did not find Prince Andrei that day. But the sight of Olmutz, where the main apartment stood, the diplomatic corps and both emperors lived with their retinues - courtiers, close associates, only strengthened his desire to belong to this supreme world.
He did not know anyone, and, despite his dandy guards uniform, all these top people, scurrying through the streets, in dandy carriages, plumes, ribbons and orders, courtiers and military men, seemed to stand so immeasurably higher than he, a guards officer, that they could not only did not want, but also could not recognize its existence. In the premises of Commander-in-Chief Kutuzov, where he asked Bolkonsky, all these adjutants and even batmen looked at him as if they wanted to convince him that there were a lot of officers like him hanging around here and that they were all very tired. Despite this, or rather because of this, the next day, on the 15th, after dinner he again went to Olmutz and, entering the house occupied by Kutuzov, asked Bolkonsky. Prince Andrei was at home, and Boris was led into a large hall, in which, probably, they used to dance, but now there were five beds, heterogeneous furniture: a table, chairs and clavichords. One adjutant, closer to the door, in a Persian robe, sat at the table and wrote. The other, red, fat Nesvitsky, lay on the bed with his hands under his head, and laughed with the officer who sat down beside him. The third played the Viennese waltz on the clavichords, the fourth lay on these clavichords and sang along with him. Bolkonsky was not there. None of these gentlemen, noticing Boris, did not change his position. The one who wrote, and to whom Boris turned, annoyedly turned around and told him that Bolkonsky was on duty, and that he should go to the left through the door, to the reception room, if he needed to see him. Boris thanked and went to the reception. There were about ten officers and generals in the waiting room.

Does the US really want to attack China? Now rumors are actively circulating about the close political relationship between the authorities of Turkey, Russia and China. But can China thus realize its own geostrategic interests?

Until recently, things have not gone too badly between the two great powers the US and China, especially in light of shared concerns about nuclear issues on the Korean Peninsula. Of course, the political forces of the United States and China pursued similar goals on this issue, but there were also obvious problems in the relations of the powers: China placed on the United States part of the responsibility for the increase in tension in Korea, and also criticized the too obvious increase in the military potential of the Americans in region.

Now it could be that Donald Trump, with his declared power politics and "America First" message, may resort to disastrous solutions. What can I say, even if the "democratic" Obama administration more than once aggressively suppressed further efforts of the Chinese leadership to expand territories in the South China Sea. As always, it all comes down to the sharing of power. More specifically, in the South China Sea we are talking about economic and military potential. The point here is not only the safety of the water area, but also the fact that the South China Sea is also very rich in fish and provides about 12% of the world's fish catch. And it's not worth talking about potential deposits of oil and gas.

Briefly about RAND Corporation
RAND Corporation (short for Research and Development - research and development) became the world's first "thought factory" (in English - think-tank).

It was created in stages. In late 1945, in Santa Monica, US Army Generals Arnold, Bowles, Norstad, and Douglas set up a unique experimental facility called Project RAND as part of the Douglas Aircraft Company to support the national security of the country. The abbreviation RAND was made up of the first letters of the English words Research and Development (research and development). In May 1948, RAND began its own existence when it separated from the Douglas Company and became an independent, private, non-profit, non-partisan organization. Since then, RAND's mission has been to facilitate policy setting and decision making. One of the main tasks of RAND remains to ensure the national security of the United States by conducting research and analysis of the most pressing problems facing the US government. The corporation works closely with the Pentagon, and also conducts research on social and international issues.

During the first decades, RAND focused on solving technical problems - designing aircraft, rocketry and satellites. In the early 60s, RAND specialists were actively involved in computer technology and programming. But already from the beginning of the 50s, RAND began to work on orders from other American government organizations, conducting research on national security issues. First, exclusively on military-technical, and then on strategic aspects. At the same time, RAND remained a non-profit organization, its entire budget went and goes to current projects.

Over time, social scientists appeared in the research center - political science, economics, sociology, psychology, etc., and RAND began to fulfill orders from the US government on an increasing range of problems. Today, RAND publishes reports on topics ranging from health care and drug control to labor market research, regional integration, the environment, foreign affairs, and security issues in the US and other countries.

The corporate headquarters is still located in Santa Monica (Santa Monica, California (corporate headquarters)), but over time, RAND opened its offices in New York (New York (Council for Aid to Education)), Washington (Arlington, Virginia (just outside Washington, DC)), Pittsburgh (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania), and from the beginning of the 90s outside the United States - in the Netherlands (Leiden, The Netherlands (RAND Europe headquarters)), Great Britain (Cambridge, United Kingdom), Germany (Berlin, Germany) and Qatar (Doha, Qatar). In addition to branches, RAND also has three "field offices" (field sites) - in Langley (where the headquarters of the CIA is located), in Boulder (Colorado) and, more recently, in Moscow.

The RAND Corporation has 11 research departments - the Washington Department of Defense Problems, the departments of management problems, resource analysis, engineering, environmental sciences, social sciences, physics, systems studies, mathematics, electronic computing and economics (i.e. departments rather correspond to academic disciplines, and not to the nomenclature of research, the division is professional, not functional).

The main organizational principle of RAND is a high degree of decentralization. The department has considerable discretion not only in the selection of staff, but also in determining the research program. It is an independent unit in financial terms - each department has its own budget, annually approved by the management of the corporation; from these funds, the work of any employee of the department is paid, regardless of whether he performs work within the department or participates in an interdisciplinary project.

The work of the RAND corporation is carried out either within the framework of a department or in an interdisciplinary group specially created for the implementation of a particular project. Work on the project begins with the appointment of a team leader. For some time, the leader works alone, trying to formulate a clear statement of the problem, the purpose of the study and the means to achieve it. Having completed the preparatory work, he proceeds to the selection of the group, and this selection is mainly on a voluntary basis. The size of the group can be different - from one or two people to several dozen. Quite typical is the case when the group includes three or four specialists in different fields of knowledge.

The result of work on any task is a report. Initially, the group develops a draft report exclusively for internal use (sometimes at this stage it may be decided that further work on the topic is inappropriate and that the group should be dissolved). Then the material is finalized and submitted to the customer in the form of a final report, and each report is traditionally considered an expression of the personal opinion of its authors, and not of the entire corporation as a whole (the corporation is only responsible for the general professional level and deadlines). Only in especially important cases - when it comes to either a vital problem for the country or an extremely controversial issue - the RAND management can make an official recommendation to the customer on behalf of the entire corporation.

Goals and objectives

Officially, the RAND Corporation is "a non-profit institution dedicated to improving the politics of [American] society through research and analysis."

The goals of the organization are defined succinctly but broadly - to promote and promote scientific, educational, and charitable activities in the interests of the public welfare and national security of the United States.

RAND also sets the task of developing and identifying new methods for analyzing strategic problems and new strategic concepts.

To achieve its goals, the corporation organizes conferences (international and national), symposiums and seminars, briefings; issues press releases; participates in the creation of radio and television programs; organizes briefings and presentations for members of the government, opposition political forces, political and industrial organizations, and conducts educational and training programs.

Rand also has a "fully accredited" graduate school that is authorized to award a doctorate (Ph.D.) in social sciences.

History of development

During the war in the United States, a significant group civilians- predominantly scientists and engineers - was mobilized to wage war on the "technological front". In a relatively short time, this group created such innovations as the atomic bomb, radar, and proximity fuse. A new analytical method, operations research, has also been developed and improved and has been successfully applied to improve the effectiveness of air defense, bombing and naval operations.

At the end of the war, when this team began to disintegrate, the War Department decided to retain some of the most talented employees so that they would develop military technology in subsequent years, and in particular also continue work in the field of operations research. It was for this purpose that General X. X. Arnold, commander of the Army Aviation, submitted to higher authorities a proposal for an agreement between the Air Force and the Douglas aircraft manufacturing company. The proposal was approved, and in accordance with it, a unique pilot institution was created, which received the name "Project RAND". The abbreviation RAND (RAND) was made up of the first letters of the English words Research and Development. Project RAND was created as a division of Douglas under a $10 million contract.

The organization began its activities in 1946 with the official goal of carrying out "a research program on a broad subject, devoted to intercontinental warfare in all aspects, with the exception of land warfare." The task also included providing advice to the air force on "preferred methods and means." Project RAND personnel were immediately tasked with looking at new and unexplored opportunities that might be of interest to the military.

His first major work was a study entitled "Preliminary Design for an Experimental Spacecraft Orbiting the Earth". Despite the fact that artificial satellites were considered mostly science fiction at the time, this 1946 paper provided a detailed assessment of the prospects for the use of scientific satellites and space exploration, prepared by 50 scientists. Because this research turned out to be remarkably prescient, it went on to greatly enhance the prestige of RAND. ( space research RAND proved to be prophetic not only in this case. So, when in the middle of 1957 the estimated date of the launch of the first satellite was named, then, as it turned out later, the error was only two weeks.).

Other early RAND research covered entirely new areas such as the use of rocket propulsion for strategic weapons (missiles), nuclear propulsion, game theory as applied to the military, new air defense concepts, new types of aircraft design, metal fatigue, and high energy radiation. .

Already in the first year of its existence, RAND began to replenish its staff with political specialists, economists and psychologists, so that theoretical research was not limited to the exact sciences.

As the RAND corporation grew, it became clear to its founders that the experiment had been successful. The point was not only that it was partially possible to preserve the talented scientific team created during the war, but, in addition, the military department received at its disposal a creative apparatus of such a scale and capabilities that it would have been impossible to create otherwise for any money. The RAND Corporation provided long-term theoretical research in a wide variety of fields, and these recommendations cannot be developed in the offices of official government agencies, whose employees have adapted their thinking to everyday needs and solving narrow problems.

It has also become apparent that an organization like the RAND Corporation is more agile and more manageable than any university center, where there are too many problems due to the need to ensure security and overcome departmental boundaries between departments when recruiting large scientific teams to study problems affecting various scientific disciplines.

The RAND Corporation has carried out significant work on the study of the problems of nuclear proliferation, during which the analysis of the economic, political and technical aspects of the creation of nuclear potential in various countries was carried out.

The corporation has also carried out a number of secret programs to develop technical equipment for military needs, including a rotating scanning camera for aerial reconnaissance, an over-the-horizon radar installation, a "silent" aircraft for night aerial reconnaissance, as well as new methods of bombing.

The Corporation has done a lot of work for the Atomic Energy Commission in the field of designing nuclear weapons and studying their operation. At least one of the new, higher-yield nuclear bombs now in the US arsenal was inspired by ideas generated by research conducted by the RAND Corporation.

The RAND Corporation has also developed another method based on the use of a computer. This is an electronic simulation, or the creation by a computer of a system that simulates the operation of another system, which can be anything from a model of a human heart to a designed weapon system.

The RAND Corporation has developed a range of highly complex and subtle mathematical methods, in particular linear programming, dynamic programming, problem sequencing, non-linear programming, Monte Carlo method, game theory, etc. The RAND corporation is also the developer of the concept of "flexible response", "counterforce", etc. RAND is also developing new approaches in the field of futurology and technical forecasting methods. The most famous method is known as Delphi.

Indeed, it is this organization that can be identified as a phenomenon among all specialized research centers. It stands out in terms of the intellectual abilities of its employees, providing long-term theoretical research in a variety of fields, and these recommendations cannot be developed in the offices of official government agencies, since the unique methodology of the RAND Corporation allows you to find non-standard and most effective solutions to various problems in a short time. . So, we can give a fairly simple example: RAND received a request from a certain administrative office solve the problem, which was the lack of elevators in the building. Consequently, employees constantly complained that they had to wait for an elevator for a long time. Increasing the number of elevators involved high costs. Therefore, the RAND specialists came to the following decision. They suggested hanging mirrors on each floor. Thus, women could look at themselves while waiting for the elevator, and men, in turn, had the opportunity to look at women in mirrors. Such is the non-standard way out. Thus, the problem was solved by changing the goal, which was not to reduce the waiting time, but to create the impression that it had become less. With regard to more serious problems, it is also possible that completely new means are developed that achieve by no means new goals. So, for example, the data of one of the war games, which was conducted to study the military capabilities of the United States, served to take a number of measures to delimit powers between law enforcement and national security agencies, which, in turn, ensured a better defense of the country in the future.

The military and political signs of a escalating US-China conflict are evident, and the arguments for the impossibility of such a conflict are untenable. The reasons for the confrontation between the two countries are classical, and are familiar from the days of the struggle of the European imperialist powers.

For example, modern China in terms of per capita GDP, taking into account purchasing power parity, is almost twice as inferior to Russia. At the same time, the PRC is already the largest importer of energy resources and the most important importer of many other types of raw materials. China's capacity to develop as an assembly site for global brands has been exhausted: its population is aging, its workforce is shrinking, and wage demands are rising. The PRC's path is to become the world's largest exporter of relatively high-tech products of its own design, manufactured by Chinese corporations under their own brands.

By now, such expectations are a thing of the past. Modern China in many ways resembles the powers of Europe during the times of industrialization and urbanization - nationalism, fueled by growing power, aggravation of internal contradictions, the popularity of radical views, the spike of big capital, bureaucracy and the military, active economic expansion outward. All this is combined with a thousand-year-old imperial heritage and an acute thirst for revenge for the defeats and humiliations experienced in the 19th-20th centuries.

The PRC is clearly not now a country capable of recognizing US dominance and intending to rebuild its political and economic system along the American lines, even if such views are popular among part of the elite. China is reminiscent of Germany at the end of the 19th century: the struggle for a "worthy place" in the world has become a national idea, and Western liberalism is not popular in society.

The article “The Coming Collapse of China” by the most prominent American sinologist David Shambeau, in which he argued that the political system of the PRC began to move in the wrong direction, leading it away from the main path of history, can be considered indicative, and, therefore, is doomed to collapse, and with a high probability accompanied by violence and chaos.

The inevitability of the collapse of any regime that does not develop in the direction of Western-style liberal democracy is a dogma for Americans. At the same time, they believe that until the collapse has occurred, such a regime should be restrained, if necessary, harshly, as was done in relation to the USSR.

The military aspects of such deterrence are visible and well distinguishable, along with this, a wide range of political and economic measures are being implemented. Barack Obama explicitly stated that the purpose of the accelerated conclusion of the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement was "to prevent China from writing the rules of world trade." The United States plays a key role in organizing international pressure on China over the South China Sea and the situation on the Korean Peninsula. Periodically, new sanctions are imposed against high-tech Chinese companies.

After January 20, it will become clear why the very first international call of Donald Trump, as the elected President of the United States, which was publicized to the whole world, was made precisely to Taiwan - China's main political opponent.

Based on materials taken from various sources on the Internet.

Dove Yu.

While everyone is trying to understand how this world works, the United States of America is changing this world. The most striking example, illustrating a completely new, non-standard thinking that contributes to the transformation of American politics, is the famous American strategic center RAND Corporation, which marked the emergence of the second wave of think tanks.

It was created in stages. In late 1945, in Santa Monica, US Army Generals Arnold, Bowles, Norstad, and Douglas set up a unique experimental facility called Project RAND as part of the Douglas Aircraft Company to support the national security of the country. The abbreviation RAND was made up of the first letters of the English words Research and Development (research and development). In May 1948, RAND began its own existence when it separated from the Douglas Company and became an independent, private, non-profit, non-partisan organization. Since then, RAND's mission has been to facilitate policy setting and decision making. One of the main tasks of RAND remains to ensure the national security of the United States by conducting research and analysis of the most pressing problems facing the US government. The corporation works closely with the Pentagon, and also conducts research on social and international issues.

Indeed, it is this organization that can be identified as a phenomenon among all specialized research centers. It stands out in terms of the intellectual abilities of its employees, providing long-term theoretical research in a variety of fields, and these recommendations cannot be developed in the offices of official government agencies, since the unique methodology of the RAND Corporation allows you to find non-standard and most effective solutions to various problems in a short time. . So, we can give a fairly simple example: RAND received a request from a certain administrative agency to solve the problem, which consisted in an insufficient number of elevators in the building. Consequently, employees constantly complained that they had to wait for an elevator for a long time. Increasing the number of elevators involved high costs. Therefore, the RAND specialists came to the following decision. They suggested hanging mirrors on each floor. Thus, women could look at themselves while waiting for the elevator, and men, in turn, had the opportunity to look at women in mirrors. Such is the non-standard way out. Thus, the problem was solved by changing the goal, which was not to reduce the waiting time, but to create the impression that it had become less. With regard to more serious problems, it is also possible that completely new means are developed that achieve by no means new goals. So, for example, the data of one of the war games, which was conducted to study the military capabilities of the United States, served to take a number of measures to delimit powers between law enforcement and national security agencies, which, in turn, ensured a better defense of the country in the future.

It must be admitted that an atmosphere of lively thought reigns in the corporation, which is not characteristic of an institution put at the service of military affairs. The brigade method used by RAND in solving various kinds of problems provides a kind of dynamism for the corporation. Moreover, contacts between representatives of various disciplines are established quickly, which is difficult to detect in an ordinary scientific institution, where, as a rule, academic formalism dominates. RAND Corporation also managed to create a highly intellectual and thought-provoking atmosphere for its employees.

In a general sense, R & D is a set of methods for obtaining, rechecking, processing, changing the state and bringing an information product to readiness for consumption. As a rule, at the initial stage of work, any information that exists on this problem is collected. The received information is checked, then the received information is analyzed and various data models are created (in most cases in the form of logical matrices). The constructed data models allow you to develop alternative scenarios, as well as determine the necessary resources to solve a particular problem. Further, on the basis of the created scenarios, the most appropriate system for achieving the set goal is modeled, it is tested and adjusted accordingly. In the event that all previous operations were performed correctly, it becomes possible to make a forecast for the future. To do this, all information that does not meet the three requirements: "limitedness - accuracy - locality" is removed from the created system. As a result, the artistically designed "product" of the RAND corporation is transferred to its client. This is the generalized picture of how the RAND Corporation works.

Thus, the RAND corporation is:

Independent and non-profit institution.

A research center focused on improving management and decision-making processes through research and analysis.

A unique team dedicated to the public welfare and security of the United States

From this it is obvious that the RAND Corporation is an independent organization that performs work for both the public and private sectors, which provides an individual systematic approach to solving various problems. Moreover, this mechanism of operation, developed by the RAND Corporation, illustrates a high level of thinking that guides cognitive process to a comprehensive and deeper study of facts and phenomena. That is why the RAND Corporation plays a significant role in American politics.

The scenario for the liquidation of the Soviet Union was developed by a private American company

The scenario for the liquidation of the Soviet Union was developed by a private American company

Recently, in business publications, curious information has slipped through, from which one can understand that the Cold War has not yet finished off Russia completely. Otherwise, why is an organization created in our country similar to the American Rand Corporation, a private company, which, according to historians, was ordered by the United States to develop a program for the liquidation of the USSR.

The American strategic research center "Rand Corporation" became the world's first "thought factory". The company differed from our research institutes and various academies in that it was private, did not have dozens of buildings and thousands of staff members.

But the main difference is that it set itself only those tasks that the official world science considered unsolvable at the moment. "Rand ..." recruited a temporary team for each project, attracting "eccentrics" from various sciences, whose flight of thought bordered on science fiction, as well as engineers, innovators and inventors who were ready to design at least a "time machine", even a "perpetual motion machine". For example, the atomic bomb was created. After the war, since 1948, under the auspices of the US Air Force, the corporation has been designing aircraft, satellites and rockets, with the main emphasis on new computer technology and programming. But already in the 1950s, when cybernetics and sociology were considered pseudosciences in our country, and political science was considered a capitalist fad, the Randites, on their theoretical basis, were already developing top-secret technologies to introduce into the minds of the idea of ​​a global unified world order that would suit not only the rulers of the United States, but also the entire clique of those in power in the West and East. The main obstacle on this path was the USSR.

Scientific Special Forces Forecast

Recently, a book was published in America about a number of secret Rand Corporation developments in the middle of the last century. Reviewing it, the French researcher Jean Marabini I was amazed that at the beginning of the Cold War, a corporation of American scientists planned for many years ahead a world without the USSR. And described what it would be like and how to achieve it.

So, it will be a world of abundance of material goods. But by no means communism with its main slogans: "He who does not work, he does not eat", "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs." In a world of abundance, everyone is a consumer from birth. And he must have the main ability - "the recognition of things as they are." On the other hand, it can eat and have fun without working (and some, by the way, do not even grow old, since Western and Russian science, according to Randov’s forecast, will have full control over the aging process by 2025). Individuals and peoples that cannot be standardized will get acquainted with “absolutely convincing psychological weapons” that do not kill a person, but work flawlessly on his psyche so that in pursuit of “little happiness” he makes decisions imposed on him in full confidence that he makes his own.

Midway meeting

Two revelations from the Randites especially amazed Marabini.

First: the atomic revolution, which humanity cannot avoid, no matter how much it opposes it, "will put an end to the democratic myth forever and will free its leaders both in the West and in the East from the need to obtain the consent of the crowd." And you and I, the dark ones, have been hearing talk about the advantages of democracy for more than 25 years and are amazed at how its apologists allow themselves to bomb Yugoslavia, Iraq, Vietnam, Libya.

Second. The Russians will help make America's dream of ruling the world a reality. I quote:

“The only possibility for establishing peace in the near future is a meeting between us and the Russians halfway. In that industrial society, where human labor will no longer play a useful role in the enrichment of the state, as it used to be, and where the artificially high value of labor, which is now accepted, will seem anachronistic. Wealth will become the property of the general population, and the middle class will dominate. ... When work loses value, the values ​​of leisure will come to the fore. The cornerstone of the new morality will be the search for individual happiness. The means of mass communication and the possibility of contact between individuals will expand on a gigantic scale. Travel and travel will be available to everyone. The values ​​and norms established by the family will lose their former meaning. Increasing freedom, accompanied by increasing uncertainty, will determine the behavior of each person.

For many, feelings of anxiety and longing will become a permanent state. The behavior of each will be more and more shaped by the wide, varied, and changing circle of persons whom he aspires to be like. But this "era of Panurge" will still give the cripple an electronic prosthesis, and the blind - a small radar that will replace his sight! .. Automatic translation will provide contacts that were not foreseen by the authors of the Bible when they described Babylon. ... "Women's virtues" (the search for happiness) will take the place of the former masculine virtues (belligerence, courage, etc.). In political life, the decline of "moralizers" will come, which will be replaced by "information collectors".

So, the half-century-old forecast and the phased plan for creating the necessary equipment and weapons have been declassified, since they have mostly come true. Through the efforts Khrushchev, Andropov, Gorbachev, Yeltsin and part of the Soviet intellectual elite "halfway meeting" took place.

We completely lost the Cold War. The country is split into parts, its wealth is at the mercy of representatives of the "widest sections of the population" like the half-educated Roman Abramovich and other oligarchs who have come out of the shadows, who replenish the Forbes lists with unprecedented speed and, as a rule, spit on Russia. The national property of the former Soviet republics, with the exception of Belarus, has either already been plundered and exported abroad, or is at the stage of being plundered. Everything is at the mercy of the West. The Yalta Peace, which determined the map of the world, the borders and the role of the victorious countries, obtained at the cost of the incredible efforts of our fathers and grandfathers, has been destroyed. A victory for which millions of lives have been paid has been discredited. Youth idols are forged in "House-2". Behavior is set by social networks. The sunset of the "moralizers" has already come, there is only one left Alexander Prokhanov. The rulers collect information from electronic social networks and report their decisions on Twitter. Illiterate young people who want to have fun and eat without laboring have already been taught that the USSR is a criminal state that should crawl on its knees before the West and at the same time repent and pay, pay and repent. The middle class is addicted to the “civilized leisure” needle. The culture was captured by cinema and books. Around hipsters, clubbers and other fruits of Western consumer subcultures. Children, as promised, live in a virtual world.

A stranger among your own?

In June, news flashed that went almost unnoticed: an expert-political "think tank" was created in Russia, an analogue of the "Rand Corporation" - the Foundation for the Development of Civil Society. He promises to focus on "research and activities in the field of regional elections, civil society and the media." Its head is 41 years old Konstantin Kostin, the USSR master of sports in judo and a journalist by education, became a well-known political strategist after several years of working as the head of the PR services of such monsters as the Menatep bank, the Yukos oil company, the ROSPROM management company, and also a member of the board directors of the ORT TV channel. Doros to the head of the internal policy department of the Presidential Administration of the Russian Federation.

And he outlined his current credo as follows: "I want to study the history and sociology of protest moods - no one has done this on a full scale and in depth yet." So guess: either the gauntlet has been thrown down to the Randians, or they have got another ally. But in any case, the creation of the organization suggests that the Cold War is still going on.