ACADEMIC JOURNAL
|
ISSN 2542-1077 (Print) ISSN 1994-5973 (Online) |
Russian history |
Repukhova O. Yu. | Petrozavodsk State University |
Keywords: USSR western borderline military and civil mobilization training border regime state security agencies |
Summary: Using a set of documents from the central and regional archives of the Russian Federation, the author for the first time
analyzed in the context of the mobilization training in the USSR the security restrictions which applied to the facilities
protected by the units of the state security agencies troops during the 1930s. The relevance of the approach proposed in
the article is that it makes it possible to characterize the mobilization policies in general and the effectiveness of mobilization
training as the means of this policy implementation in particular. At the same time, in open access publications
there is no analysis of security restrictions at the facilities and other objects of military significance in connection with
spatial-territorial, military-civil and evacuation mobilization training. The aim of the work is to study the dynamics of
security restrictions at the facilities in connection with mobilization training at the USSR western borderline. The article
justifies the conclusion that at the facilities covered by the mobilization measures and transferred under the protection
of the state security agencies troops the adjustment of the security restrictions related to their protection and the access
control system was carried out according to the changes made to the mobilization plans. In this regard, the research
identified the directions for the improvement of protection and access control at the facilities covered by mobilization
measures and transferred under the protection of the state security agencies troops. It has been revealed that the restrictions
applied to the territories of the sensitive facilities as forbidden zones overlapped with the restrictions of the border
regime along the USSR western borderline, which resulted in establishing a multilevel system of security restrictions. It is shown that no less than 41 % of the facilities located at the western borderline and covered by mobilization activities in 1934 and up to 60 % of such facilities in 1939 were under the protection of state security agencies. |
Displays: 506; |