Mathematics is relentless. Why Russia will not be able to win a war with Europe

Russia will in no way be able to win the Great War with the EU, says economist Andrew Liliko in the column for The Telegraph. It relies on the estimation of the economic potential of the Russian Federation and simple mathematical formulas . . . Now we talk about how we need to prepare for war with Russia. How the call can be made. The press has appeared articles on how in the event of the war, part of our industrial base can be converted into military production.

For an observer who is unfamiliar with atavistic fears of the West, ascending to the Soviet threat during the Cold War, which has only an understanding of the mathematics and economy of military power, this concern may seem amazing. Russia's economy is quite small, only about 85 percent of the size of Italy's economy. Its population is about 140 million, which is less than in Germany and France combined.

She failed to win Ukraine-a country that at the time of Russia's invasion was 53 in the world's economy after New Zealand and Peru. Even if in the future the United States will lose any interest in the protection of Europe, is we really afraid that Russia can defeat the United EU forces and get to Britain? The relationship between military strength and economic growth is complex and bilateral. Earlier, I have already written about how a stronger army could stimulate long -term economic growth.

Here I want to focus on a different direction: to what extent higher GDP means or does not mean more military power and what it means in the light of the Russian threat to the Russian economy. The classic starting point for analyzing the relations between military and economic strength was usually that military power, other things being equal, is a reflection of resources available to the Armed Forces.

Obviously, other things, such as geography, alliances, technologies, military skills and experience or moral spirit, are usually not equal, and we will soon return to them. But now let's focus on the main dimension. The resources available to the Armed Forces consist of those that have already been mobilized as the armed forces and those that can be mobilized quickly and within the time limits necessary for them to be relevant if they were needed.

Let's still imagine that the armed forces consist of two components: the number of personnel and equipment. (Other factors such as the balance of forces - air/sea/land - obviously also potentially meaning. But let's simplify the conditions of the task). Consider two opposing countries. One has more population; The other is higher GDP.

In order to create appropriate armed forces from the point of view of personnel and equipment, a country with a larger population only needs to give a smaller percentage of its population to the armed forces, but it must allocate a higher share of its GDP. Suppose, instead, two countries have allocated equal parts of personnel and GDP, and thus a more densely populated country received more personnel, but it is worse equipped, so each soldier is less effective.

In this case, we can get an idea of ​​the brilliant part of the military mathematics developed during the First World War: "The Law of Squares. " He shows that in terms of pure exhaustion, if one military force is numerous than the other but less effective, then to win the benefits of the performance of the smaller armed forces should be greater than the square of the ratio of their number.

For example, this means that if you have 10 percent fewer troops, your troops should be more than 21 percent more effective to win a war -based war. The proportion of the population that different countries can mobilize to fight may vary. The authoritarian state can be able to mobilize more of its population to participate in hostilities.

But an authoritarian state may also have what we could call a "moral" disadvantage - its forces may be more incapable of fighting than those who are at war for what they consider a noble business. On the other hand, there are those who claim that some democratic liberal countries have become so hated or decadent that they do not consider their own business noble enough to fight for it. Let's apply some of these ideas to the consideration of Russia's medium -term threat to the EU.

The Russian economy is about 10 percent of the EU economy. The EU spends about 1. 3 percent of GDP on its army, and Russia has recently increased its costs by about 6 percent. Thus, the EU's military expenditures will be about twice as high as in Russia.

If we assume that an increase in costs leads to greater efficiency of troops, then by quadratic law, to compensate for more than a lower cost, Russia will need to mobilize more than 40 percent more troops than the EU could send to battle - if Russian troops are able to fight With the same percentage of losses as the EU troops. The United EU Armed Forces have about 1. 4 million servicemen. Thus, Russia will need about 2 million servicemen for the war for exhaustion.

Assuming that Russia will attack and apply a classic empirical rule that an attack of 1. 5: 1 at the Theater of Military Action requires an attack, about three million people will be required. Currently, there are about 1. 2 million servicemen in Russia, but theoretically about 2 million reservists.

If the above analysis is correct, then in the medium term (even if left aside any "moral" differences), then to have a chance against the united EU (and thus be able to threaten Britain), Russia will need or need to double, or triple their current armed forces, or approximately double or triple their military expenses for GDP.

The doubling of Russian military expenditures would increase it to 12-15 percent, as in the late Soviet Union-the level that led the Soviet economy to collapse in the 1980s. The three -time increase will be even more destructive. The Russian economy continues to experience Western sanctions. The oil embargo costs the country of hundreds of billion dollars. Re -doubling or tripling military expenditures will lead to bankruptcy in a few years.

Russia can position itself and threaten its little, poor neighbors, or even invade their territory. But mathematics says that when it comes to threats to the EU, not to mention Britain, if we continue to believe in our business in the West to fight, if it comes to it, then Russia simply will not be sufficient economic resources in order to to create a serious medium term. The author expresses a personal opinion that may not coincide with the editorial position.