How is the rate determined? What are Special Drawing Rights SDR
The problem of modernization in the USSR continues to be one of current problems in domestic science. There is an opinion that Soviet period cannot be viewed through the prism of modernization theory. Soviet socialism is characterized as an anti-modernization structure, or as a false modernization. (Russian modernization: problems and prospects (Round table materials).//Questions of Philosophy. 1993, No. 7, p. 16) However, one cannot completely agree with this point of view. Modernization in the Soviet Union was carried out, but had its own specifics compared to other countries.
Indeed, industrial processes in the USSR were based on the mobilization model of the economy. This model assumed the mobilization of all material and human resources in the name of the set goal: the primary development of the means of production. Mobilization in one area came at the expense of another, which gave economic development a one-sided character and led to a violation of the natural proportions of the economy.
Most researchers are among the most characteristic features mobilization economy include: one-sided orientation towards heavy industry (mechanical engineering and the fuel complex); defensive nature; over-centralization and market-free model; command-administrative methods of economic management; negative personnel selection, statism and autarky.
At the same time, during the implementation of this economic model on the territory of the USSR, both its common features, as well as certain specifics in individual regions. In this regard, industrial processes in the Komi ACC are of interest, especially in the field of mobilization of human resources.
The territory of the Komi region in the plans of the Soviet leadership was considered as a huge undeveloped territory of economic interest. The idea of its industrial development with an emphasis on coal and oil industry was dictated by plans for accelerated industrialization of the USSR. At the same time, neither the economic nor demographic capabilities of the region, nor local traditions were taken into account.
In 1929, the Union government adopted a large-scale plan for a comprehensive study of the Pechora region and turning it into a fuel and energy base for the European North. Sufficient funds, necessary material and technical base, qualified personnel and required quantity there was no workforce to carry out the planned program. Moreover, it was a territory remote from the center, not connected to it by any transport lines.
For the development of the Pechora region, the deputy plan is perfectly suited. Chairman of the Supreme Economic Council of the USSR G.L. Pyatakov to make the settlements of prisoners cultural and industrial centers vast undeveloped territory. Although in fairness it should be noted that in the mid-1920s. the local leadership of the Komi Autonomous Region appealed to the center with a request to organize a camp on the territory of the republic, labor which can be used for the industrial development of the region.
An analysis of government acts shows that until 1930, prisoners were considered only as cheap labor, at best, counting on the fact that their labor would cover government costs for maintaining prisons. The First Five-Year Plan adopted in 1928 did not mention the products produced by prisoners at all.
Adoption in mid-1928 of the “accelerated version” of the first five-year plan and radical collectivization of 1930-1932. dramatically changed the situation in the country.
According to the resolution of the Council of People's Commissars "On the use of labor of criminal prisoners" (07/11/1929), 2 parallel structures of places of deprivation of liberty were created: under the jurisdiction of the OGPU of the USSR and under the jurisdiction of the republican NKVD.
The basis of the first structure was large forced labor camps, which were ordered to be created in remote, sparsely populated areas, and which were to become centers for the colonization of “their” areas. These camps were entrusted with production task integrated operation natural resources through the use of labor deprived of liberty. It was ordered to send there all those more or less capable of physical labor who were sentenced to a term of three years or more.
The second structure was created within the framework of the existing Main Directorates of Places of Prison (GUMP) of the republican NKVD. Here it was envisaged to keep prisoners deprived of liberty for a period of one to three years. To achieve this, agricultural and industrial colonies had to be organized.
The main task of the camp management became the rational economic use of prisoners' labor. The re-education of those kept in the camps is not mentioned in any of the documents of 1929-30. not mentioned as a camp task.
On June 28, 1929, the OGPU organized the Directorate of Northern Camps special purpose(USEVLON). Ust-Sysolsk (now Syktyvkar) was determined as the temporary location of the Directorate; in 1930 it was transferred to Kotlas. The total number of prisoners in the OGPU camps increased: from 22,848 thousand people in June 1928 to 95 thousand in January 1930.
There is no consensus in the literature about the relationship between repressive policies and camp construction. The existing point of view is that the largest camp construction projects of the 30s of the twentieth century. were undertaken in order to somehow use the huge number of prisoners and deportees seems unfounded, at least for the period under review. Alternative thesis: the authorities pursued a repressive policy, guided by the directive to imprison as many people as were necessary to carry out economic plans OGPU-NKVD.
In our opinion, it is preferable to talk about the presence of a complex set of interrelated circumstances that influenced the decision-making of the authorities, both in the field of camp construction and in the field of repressive policies, and each specific case requires a separate analysis.
The economic strategies of the Gulag were determined at the center and were subordinated to the goal of creating a new fuel base in the North of the country - this was explained by the need to ensure the defense capability of the state. When implementing programs from above, the interests of the local population were ignored.
However, economic strategies did not remain unchanged. At first it was the total industrialization of the Northern Territory, including Komi, in the late 1920s - early 1930s, which gave way to the comprehensive development of the Pechora region by a single multidisciplinary camp - Ukhtpechlag. And then, in the second half of the 1930s, there was a turn towards industrial specialization of smaller, relatively compact camps serving various industrial sectors(Vorkuta camp - mine construction and coal mining, Ukhto-Izhemsky - oil and radium production, Northern Railway - railway construction, Ustvymsky - logging).
As a result of camp industrialization on the territory of the Komi Republic, industrial operation minerals: coal, gas, oil, asphaltite. A repair and technical base for industrialization has been created in the camp farms. With the help of prisoners, a wide network of railway tracks, ports, and airfields was built. Founded and erected by the hands of "enemies of the people" modern cities: Ukhta, Vorkuta, Pechora, Inta. The economic activities of the camps led to the fact that the Komi Republic turned from a timber appendage into a fuel and energy base with developed industry.
The development of the territory of the republic was of a strictly regulated nature. Everything was done according to the script of the center: Stalin, the Politburo and the government. Not a single fundamental decision was made on the spot. Republican party and Soviet bodies only “approved” the decisions adopted at the top. The conductor of the will of the center was the NKVD, and the main executors were prisoners.
As a result, two economic systems emerged in the republic, largely independent of each other: traditional, local, which included traditional types farms, local industry and part of the forestry industry. And a new one, created by forces of forced labor camps, which included oil, gas, coal, radium, most of the timber industry and related industries.
At the same time, the accelerated economic development of the region damaged the traditional use of natural resources and caused social and demographic imbalances, which became especially obvious in later times. The severe environmental consequences of camp production are obvious.
The use of the Soviet model of mobilization economy after 1948 in the countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe is also not possible to evaluate unambiguously. For countries that were at a low level economic development, although in a non-civilizational form, the problems of industrialization and urbanization, unresolved before World War II, were solved. At the same time, in relation to developed Czechoslovakia, we can talk about reindustrialization, since its industry was sacrificed to the military-industrial complex.
The countries of the socialist camp also had their own analogues of the Gulag. In this regard, the example of Yugoslavia is illustrative. Camps appeared there after 1948 after the famous conflict between Tito and Stalin. The country found itself in economic and political isolation. The official authorities criticized “Soviet imperialism” and did not recognize the presence of political prisoners in the country. The names of the camps alone - Stara Gradishka, Sveti Grgur, Ugljan, Bilecha, Goli Otok - brought contemporaries into a state of horror. Primary importance here was given to the humiliation of man, “the killing of man in man.” The main criterion of political maturity and vigilance, proof of devotion to Tito and the party was writing as much as possible more denunciations. Even this form of competition was practiced - how to write false denunciations and denunciations of the dead. According to S. Brajović, there were differences in the use of labor by members of partisan detachments and commissars of the People's Liberation Army of Yugoslavia and the Ustaše, war criminals. The living conditions of the Ustashes in the camp were better, they worked in workshops for 8 hours, they were visited by relatives, they were regularly paid at least some salary, and they received rewards for working overtime and exceeding the quota.
Former officers and elders, fighters, partisan commanders and commissars lived in stinking barracks of 100 people each, and there was no talk of workshops, visits or salaries. This category of prisoners competed in carrying and crushing stones and digging trenches. And here there is an obvious similarity with the working conditions and conditions of detention of Soviet political prisoners in Stalin’s camps.
When applying the Soviet model of mobilization economy, the borrowing and introduction of new forms of production was not cultivation on ready soil, it was a mechanical transfer.
The ambiguity of industrial processes in the USSR and the countries of the socialist camp contributes to the continued relevance of this problem. Discussions continue about missed alternatives and whether the cost of industrialization is justified or exorbitant.
The work was supported by the Russian Humanitarian Fund (No. 04-01-41-101 a/s)
Bibliographic link
Maksimova L.A., Lyamtseva L.V. SOVIET MODEL OF MOBILIZATION ECONOMY // Basic Research. – 2005. – No. 1. – P. 77-79;URL: http://fundamental-research.ru/ru/article/view?id=5647 (date of access: 09/18/2019). We bring to your attention magazines published by the publishing house "Academy of Natural Sciences"
The modern mobilization training system was created during the Truman administration. From 1947 to 1953, the Resource Council was responsible for mobilization readiness national security. From 1950 to 1958, the Directorate of Defense Mobilization existed. In 1958, it was renamed the Office of Civil and Defense Mobilization and placed under the authority of Federal agency civil defense (now FEMA).
The Defense Production Act of 1950 provided for the creation of a system of defense priorities and resource allocation (Defense Priority and Allocation System). According to title 15 CFR, section 700, there are three gradations of orders: with DX priority, DO, and without priority. All orders with the same priority must be processed in the order they are received.
Powers of departments in emergency situations provided executive order President of March 16, 2012. This decree approved the Committee on the Law on Defense Production, consisting of the Secretary of State, the Ministers of Finance, Defense, Justice, Internal Affairs, Agriculture, Commerce, Labor, Health Care, Transportation, Energy, Homeland Security, the Director of National Intelligence, the Director of the CIA, the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, the heads of NASA and the General Services Administration, with the mandatory participation in an advisory capacity of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and the Director of the Office of Science technical policy.
The heads of the “resource” ministries have the right to demand fulfillment of priorities in orders: agriculture - for food, elevators and warehouses, livestock, veterinary and plant protection products, as well as agricultural machinery and fertilizers; energy - for all forms of energy and energy carriers; healthcare - by resources in the healthcare sector; transport - for all types of civil transport; defense - by water resources; trade - for all other materials, services and facilities, including construction materials.
The President of the United States has the right to establish restrictions on the sale and use of resources at the disposal of “resource” ministries through the National Security Advisor or the Counter-Terrorism Advisor. The power to assign priority to specific programs rests with the US President and the Secretaries of Defense, Energy and Homeland Security.
The priority system is administered by the Bureau of Industry and Security of the Department of Commerce. Since 2008, a rule was introduced according to which the Ministry of Energy became involved in determining the right to establish priority on orders for equipment and materials in the fuel and energy complex. As of 2010, Department of Homeland Security programs may be given priority. Information on industry in the United States is collected by the Defense Contract Management Agency of the Department of Defense and the Air Force to facilitate mobilization. In addition, there are extensive databases at US Northern Command and the Department of Homeland Security.
Since 1987, the North American Technology and Industrial Base Organization (NAT1BO) has been operating between the USA and Canada, coordinating joint projects and trying to also deal with issues of maintaining mobilization readiness at the interdepartmental level (but without the resources and authority for this).
Another tool carried over from the emergency of World War II to daily work The Department of Defense and other US executive authorities are public investments. Under Title III of the Defense Production Act of 1950, 1 the government may make loans, guarantee loans, and purchase or commit to future purchases of materials and equipment for use by private enterprises. Compared to the status of a publicly owned facility (a government arsenal), Title III equipment does not involve the risk of the management contract ending and the contract being transferred to another firm. However, there are four criteria that Title III government assistance must meet:
- the industrial resources or critical technology produced are necessary for national defense;
- without state assistance under Title III, the industry cannot independently ensure timely satisfaction of the state's needs;
- actions taken pursuant to title III are the most effective and practical method of all alternatives available to meet the State's need;
- production capacity in this market (including capacities created with state support) must be less than or equal to the sum of government demand and predicted non-government demand for products (in order to avoid wasted funds).
In 1979, the Strategic and Critical Materials Stockpile Act was passed, which created the National Defense Reserve under the Department of Defense. For purchases and sales from the reserve, the manager must provide information to the Market Impact Committee, which includes representatives from the Departments of State, Commerce, Agriculture, Energy, Defense, Homeland Security, Interior, and Finance. The scope for abuse was created by the provision introduced in 2003 that the Committee must consult with representatives of industries that produce, process or use materials from the reserve
Regulation of issues related to the formation and procedure for using the state reserve and mobilization reserve Russian Federation, regulated Federal law dated February 26, 1997
No. 31-FZ “On mobilization preparation and mobilization in the Russian Federation” and Federal Law of December 29, 1994 No. 79-FZ “On the state material reserve”.
Mobilization preparation is understood as a set of measures carried out in peacetime for the advance preparation of the economy of the Russian Federation, the economy of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and the economy of municipalities, the preparation of organs state power, local governments and organizations, training of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, other troops, military formations, organs and created on war time in accordance with the Federal Law of May 31, 1996 No. 61-FZ “On the Defense” of special formations to ensure the protection of the state from armed attack and meet the needs of the state and the needs of the population in wartime.
Mobilization is understood as a set of measures to transfer the economy of the Russian Federation, the economy of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and the economy of municipalities, the transfer of government bodies, local governments and organizations to work in war conditions
time, the transfer of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, other troops, military formations, bodies and special forces to the organization and composition of wartime.
The basic principles of mobilization preparation and mobilization include, in particular, the following:
Development of mobilization plans for the economy of the Russian Federation, the economy of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and the economy of municipalities, mobilization plans for the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, other troops, military formations, bodies and special forces (hereinafter referred to as mobilization plans);
Preparing the economy of the Russian Federation, the economy of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and the economy of municipalities, preparing organizations for work during the period of mobilization and in wartime;
Carrying out measures to transfer the economy of the Russian Federation, the economy of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and the economy of municipalities, transfer of organizations to work in wartime conditions;
Creation, development and preservation of mobilization capacities and facilities for the production of products necessary to meet the needs of the state, the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, other troops, military formations, bodies and special forces and the needs of the population in wartime;
Creation, accumulation, preservation and updating of stocks material assets mobilization and state reserves, irreducible reserves of food products and petroleum products;
Creation and preservation of an insurance fund for documentation for weapons and military equipment, the most important civilian products, high-risk objects, life support systems and objects that are national treasures, etc.
During the period of mobilization preparation and mobilization, the Government of the Russian Federation is vested with a number of additional functions, in particular:
Determines the procedure for concluding agreements (contracts) on the implementation by organizations of mobilization tasks (orders) and on providing the specified tasks (orders) with material and technical resources;
Determines the procedure and sources of financing for mobilization preparation and mobilization activities;
Resolves, within the limits of its powers, issues of allocations for mobilization preparation and mobilization from the federal budget and the provision of benefits to organizations that have mobilization tasks (orders);
Determines the procedure for the creation, accumulation, preservation, renewal and use of mobilization reserves, material assets of mobilization and state reserves, irreducible reserves of food products and petroleum products;
Determines the procedure for creating, maintaining and using the insurance fund of documentation for weapons and military equipment, the most important civilian products, high-risk objects, life support systems for the population and objects that are national treasures, etc.
Federal bodies and executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and local governments during the period of mobilization preparation and mobilization, within the limits of their powers, enter into agreements (contracts) on the implementation of mobilization tasks (orders) with enterprises whose activities are related to the activities of these bodies or which are in the sphere of their management.
In case of insolvency (bankruptcy) of enterprises that have mobilization tasks (orders), federal authorities and the executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and local self-government bodies, within the limits of their powers, take measures to transfer these tasks (orders) to other enterprises whose activities are related to the activities of these bodies or which are within the scope of their jurisdiction.
During the period of mobilization preparation and mobilization, enterprises do not have the right to refuse to conclude agreements (contracts) on the implementation of mobilization tasks (orders) in order to ensure the defense of the country and the security of the state, if, taking into account the mobilization deployment of production, their capabilities allow them to complete these mobilization tasks (orders). Compensation by the state for losses incurred by enterprises in connection with their implementation of mobilization tasks (orders) is carried out in the manner determined by the Government of the Russian Federation.
Financing of mobilization preparation is carried out from the federal budget, funds from the budgets of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, funds from local budgets and funds from organizations.
Mobilization economy: who, how and for what do we mobilize?
Here and there you hear the expression “mobilization economy” - not in a derogatory or historical sense, but in the most relevant sense. As a completely possible and almost desirable future. In general, we respond to the threat with the threat of a mobilization economy. This is “our answer to Chamberlain.”
What it is– mobilization economy?
Apparently, the economy of friendly labor for the common good in order to create a self-sufficient National economy in the face of external threats. But what all this will look like is not clear. What is this: the second series of socialism? Many have already dreamed of nationalizing the extractive industries... This would be quite logical. But what about the ongoing privatization - what about it? A mobilization economy is unimaginable without a national economic plan - and who will plan? And How? What place will the small and medium ones take in this picture? Will the state act directly in the first person? Is a mobilization economy possible today and what might it look like? First of all, what is it?
Necessary, but not sufficient
They say this is the economy of war or preparation for it. This is a common, but still a special case. Mobilization economy is economics of goal achievement. And accordingly, the concentration of resources on this goal. Often this goal is to prepare for big war, rapid technological breakthrough. This is how it was in our country in the 1930s, when the task of accelerated industrialization was set. If we have a task today new industrialization– we cannot do without a mobilization economy. Market means, monetarist devices, such as a subsidized loan for the development of this and that, as well as the course of things, the participation of foreign investors - what else do we usually rely on? - so with all these measures there is nothing new industrialization cannot be achieved.
The course of things and the invisible hand of the market only cause destruction and the transformation of the country into a raw materials appendage of advanced economies. A hundred years ago I walked exactly along this road - along the road of the raw materials appendage. Actually, socialism was once built precisely as a way to avoid the role of the capitalist periphery and take the path of independent development. This should be fully understood: the Soviet political and economic system was tailored, as they say, “to the task,” and it fulfilled its task. Another thing is that they did not bother to modernize the system in a timely manner and configure it for new tasks - that’s why it collapsed. Mobilization economics is always an economics of task.
What is our task today?? Today, as well as yesterday, the day before yesterday, tomorrow and the day after tomorrow, Russia has one task - to withstand the global, geopolitical, and therefore eternal confrontation with the West. The current stage of the confrontation is a struggle for the dwindling resources of our balloon. Well, for our capacious market, which during the “restructuring and acceleration” we gave over to global competitors.
Confrontation, of course, there is peaceful and non-peaceful. The non-peaceful - here it is, already on our borders. So - in the broadest sense of the word - it is very opportune today. Moreover, it is inevitable if we want to survive as an independent people. Because the global tasks we have a traditional - stand- and the means of achieving it are known: the construction of independent industry, military in the first place, independent agriculture - for feeding the people. What is needed for this is being widely discussed today.
First of all, you need to create the necessary conditions. What are they? Actually, everyone knows them, but they are incredibly difficult to do. Everything is difficult: return large enterprises to the homeland from offshores, restore the monopoly foreign trade and stop the free flow of money across the border. Make the rich pay more than the poor, and at the same time not shirk what our citizens are skilled at. Shift the emphasis in taxation to visible objects that are difficult to hide - real estate in the first place, and various types of luxury.
All these measures in themselves are difficult. But something else is worse: they are only a necessary, but not sufficient condition for a mobilization economy. It is impossible to do without these measures, but this is far from being a mobilization economy itself. And not new industrialization. All this still needs to be built.
Where to get the money?
A couple of years ago in the magazine "However" it was published most valuable material, passed unnoticed - interview Grigory Khanin about the current economic situation. Once upon a time, infinitely long ago, in 1987, during Perestroika, Khanin became wildly popular overnight, thanks to a joint article with journalist Selyunin "Evil figure", published in Novy Mir: it examined the Soviet economy not in value terms, but in physical terms: tons of grain, coal, meters of fabric, kilowatts of energy, units of tractors and combines. More than twenty years have passed, and the old economist is doing exactly the same thing: he exposes the evil figures and studies Russian economy, as it is. I have always been fascinated by people who have honestly performed their duty for decades, without fussing or squirming in the spirit of the times. This, it seems to me, is the economist Khanin.
The conclusions (from two years ago) are as follows.
P. Dorokhin called on the President of the Russian Federation to switch to mobilization forms of economic development
More details and a variety of information about events taking place in Russia, Ukraine and other countries of our beautiful planet can be obtained at Internet Conferences, constantly held on the website “Keys of Knowledge”. All Conferences are open and completely free. We invite everyone who is interested. All Conferences are broadcast on Internet Radio “Vozrozhdenie”...
