Washington is developing strategies and tactics for irregular conflicts
Today, politicians and the military are talking about expanding the scope of the concept of "hybrid warfare" to the level of total and even global hybrid warfare (MGW). Recall that the MGW is a multidimensional intercivilizational military conflict, during which states resort to the purposeful adaptive use of both military-forceful methods of struggle and economic strangulation of the enemy, the use of disruptive information and cyber technologies ( "World Hybrid War in the strategy of the United States and NATO", "HBO", 02/24/12). In a broad sense The purpose of the MGW is to fight for influence and access to the resources of Greater Eurasia, the Greater Middle East, Africa and Latin America – instead of the former competition for technological leadership between the West and the East.
In a narrow sense, the meaning of the total hybrid war of the United States and its allies against Russia is the elimination of Russian statehood, the fragmentation of the country and the transfer of its individual parts under external control. The next step will be to establish control over China, India and other states that are still acting as observers. The founder of the civilizational approach, Nikolai Danilevsky, in the book "Russia and Europe" (1869) formulated the essence of the clash of states and civilizations, predicted what it would lead to in the future, and bequeathed Russia to protect its identity and originality.
The civilizational approach opposes the short-term selfish interests of changing groups of influence, because it is based on the fundamental, long-term interests of states and peoples. Interests that are dictated not by ideological conjuncture, but by all historical experience, the legacy of the past, on which the idea of a harmonious future is based.
The geopolitical mission of Russia as a civilizational state, which has been formed over the centuries from different cultures, religions, and nationalities, is determined by the factor of ensuring global and regional security in the Eurasian space. Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke about the importance of this mission at a meeting of the Valdai discussion club on October 5, 2023.
Greater Eurasia includes the entire Eurasian continent and part of the African continent. According to the UN classification, Greater Eurasia includes 48 countries in Europe, 50 in Asia and 7 in North Africa. They cover 8 out of 12 local civilizations and 9 civilizational associations. In the countries of Greater Eurasia, almost 9/10 of the world's energy is concentrated, about 3/4 of the world's GDP and 4/5 of the world's population. The idea of creating a "Great Eurasian Partnership" was put forward by President Putin in 2015. The EAEU countries, China, India, Iran, etc. can become members of the association. The doors are also open for participants from the European Union. It can include not only states, but also associations and organizations (EAEU, ASEAN, SCO, APEC, etc.). Realizing the strategic importance of Eurasia for plans for world domination, Washington and its allies focused on chaoticizing and disrupting plans for the development of this megaregion, on the collapse of Russia as the "heart of Eurasia" with subsequent postponement the center of gravity for the fight against China.
As is known, megaregions form groups of adjacent (contiguous) countries connected by the joint performance of global functions. Examples of mega-regions are international regional (mega-regional) integration associations (EU, MERCOSUR, APEC, NAFTA, EurAsEC, SCO, etc.), which have become the objects of subversive efforts by the United States and NATO. In Russia, the United States and its allies pay important attention to the Arctic region. The geopolitician and philosopher Igor Kefeli and his colleagues identify four main projects for structuring the Eurasian continent:
– Anglo-Saxon "big regions": Greater Middle East, Greater Central Asia, Indo-Pacific region;
– China's Belt and Road Initiative;
– the Russian concept of Greater Eurasia;
– the Turkish project "Great Turan".
It should be emphasized the relevance of the Turkish idea related to the formation of the Organization of Turkic States (Türk Devletleri Teşkilatı) in 2021.
THE OBJECT OF INTERCIVILIZATIONAL CONFRONTATION
In the megaregion of Greater Eurasia, attempts are being made today to form a partnership as an integrated model based on a civilizational approach, using technologies of geopolitical forecasting, scenario projects and big data. In the context of countering the subversive strategies of the United States, which considers Eurasia as an economic competitor, the primary task is to develop principles of geopolitical forecasting and working with big data in order to synchronize contradictory integration processes in Greater Eurasia.
The scope, forms and methods of conducting IYW have given a powerful impetus to the processes of transformation of strategies, alliances, financial and economic relations and military-technical policies of the leading countries of the world: the United States, China, and the Russian Federation. These are the countries forming a strategic "triangle". With the support of allies and partners, they strive to change the world and establish their vision of the world order.
Confrontation in the information sphere is a key element of strategies formed within the framework of the "triangle" with the participation of other states. Success will also depend on the ability of each of the states and their coalitions to dominate the world with an emphasis on leadership in the economy and military technosphere. The strategy of the MGV includes the art of combining preparation for war and the impact on the administrative, political, financial, economic, military, cultural and ideological spheres of the enemy.
THE US BET ON PROXY WARS
The type of proxy war tested in Ukraine is becoming one of the main tools of US military policy, which can no longer withstand two major armed conflicts at the same time, but are not ready to give up the military option to achieve their goals. A proxy war is likely to form the basis of the future US military strategy – as a way to wage war with a powerful power to weaken, for the time being without fear of a nuclear strike. Given such a policy, Russia's strategic planning documents should have provided for options for retaliatory strikes against the aggressor, who is hiding behind a proxy agent.
As part of the MGW strategy and the prospects for confrontation with China, Washington is creating situational coalitions in different parts of the globe. This is AUKUS, a trilateral military alliance of the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom. These are the prospects for creating a quadrilateral security dialogue (Australia, India, the USA and Japan). Preparations are underway to transfer the proxy war strategy to Southeast Asia, now between China and Taiwan. India is being drawn into the schemes of confrontation with China, whose Air Force recently practiced joint actions with Japanese aircraft on the borders with China. These actions pose a threat to the national security of the Russian Federation and the DPRK.
Beijing understands that Washington did not accidentally declare China the main threat. Now they see that the United States has taken a course not just to tighten the containment and encirclement of China, but is trying to openly provoke Beijing, and not only in the Taiwanese direction (although it is a priority today). This new understanding was manifested in March 2023 in Beijing at the sessions of the National People's Congress (NPC) and the People's Political Consultative Council of China. Xi Jinping said that the conditions for China's development have "changed dramatically" and uncertainty has increased significantly: "Western countries led by the United States are pursuing a policy of comprehensive containment, encirclement and suppression of China, which creates unprecedented obstacles to the development of our country." Such a harsh formulation indicates China's transition to a decisive confrontation with the West. Beijing no longer considers it possible to speak in aesopian language about its geopolitical opponents.
In the Middle East, a pro-American coalition is operating against Iran and Syria, and at the end of January, UAV strikes were carried out on important Iranian facilities. The Palestinian-Israeli conflict is characterized by a high degree of uncertainty. A proxy war is being prepared in the Balkans against Serbia, which is resisting pressure from the United States, the EU and NATO.
The completion of the Russian Special Military Operation (SVO) will give a new impetus to American MGV operations, which are expected to peak in two to three years. The United States is creating a network of special operations forces headquarters in many regions of the world. The focus is on the European states bordering Russia, the Caucasus and the Balkans, Ukraine and Kazakhstan. Ultimately, the whole world becomes the theater of MGV. SVO is the first decisive step that prevents the development of MGV in a catastrophic scenario for the world. This is Russia's natural reaction to the crisis of European security and the entire international order provoked by Washington after the Second World War. The course of building a new world order will depend on the completeness of achieving its stated goals.
MGV INSTRUMENTS IN GREATER EURASIA
Greater Eurasia is turning into the most important theater of the MGV. In the context of countering subversive strategies, coordination between allies and partners from the CSTO, SCO, and BRICS is especially important. Our rivals are persistently trying to split their unity, using the factor of difference of civilizations, cultures, possible interethnic and interreligious contradictions. This is the basis for strategies and tactics of informational and psychological impact on the consciousness of the ruling elites and peoples in general. In its foreign policy, the United States has always relied on proxy forces to conduct irregular military operations. Examples: Iraq (2003), Ukraine (2014), the Vietnam War, the attempted invasion of Cuba, and many others. But today Washington is showing a growing willingness to deploy its own forces to suppress attempts to prevent the establishment of the US-led international order.
This requires coordination of the military-power component in organizations uniting Russia, China, Iran and other states targeted by Washington's aggression. This consideration is supported by the US policy of winning the proxy war in Ukraine through military supplies to Kiev. Threats are being created to energy projects of the Russian Federation related to pipelines to Europe and the development of liquefied natural gas (LNG) production and transportation in Siberia. The traditional willingness of the United States to use international terrorist organizations as proxy forces should also be taken into account.
AMERICAN STRATEGY AND TACTICS OF "IRREGULAR WARFARE"
The Anglo-Saxon civilization's bet on hybrid methods and the MGV strategy aimed at this task are based on the following factors. First, the American armed Forces have shrunk in size, and the US opponents have become more combat-ready. Washington is forced to abandon the military-political postulates of previous years and look for new strategies of influence. This search is reflected in the analytical documents of the Pentagon, the State Department, and the NATO Centers of Excellence. These include the reports of the RAND Corporation: "Victory in irregular warfare", "Mastering irregular warfare", "Defense without domination. Accelerating the transition to a new US defense strategy" ("The Moment of Truth for Washington", "HBO" dated 10/26.23). Secondly, success in an irregular war requires strengthening all types of intelligence. The United States defines irregular warfare as "a campaign to coerce States or other groups through indirect, unauthorized, and asymmetric actions." This approach focuses not on the occupation of the territory, but on local partnership, creating a semblance of legitimacy and establishing control over the consciousness of the population.
At the same time, the United States believes that they are currently not ready for MGV. In order to win an asymmetric world war, it is proposed to increase the ability to support its allies and partners and better coordinate efforts to counter Russia and China between ministries and departments. For this purpose, it is considered necessary for the United States:
1. To continue the development of strategies, doctrines and tactics of irregular warfare in the Irregular Warfare Functional Center (IWFC) established at the Pentagon in coordination with the Defense Security Cooperation Agency. The focus should be on strategic intelligence, non-traditional military operations, territorial defense, psychological operations and the fight against terrorism. IWFC is assigned the role of a central mechanism to promote a common understanding of issues between the Pentagon and the State Department.
2. To consolidate the IWFC's role as a leader in developing partnerships with leading academic research institutions in the United States and abroad – both in the field of conventional weapons development, taking into account the specifics of irregular warfare, and in relation to the social sciences underlying irregular wars.
3. Make the IWFC accountable to the highest echelons of the US government (including the State Department, the Pentagon, the CIA and the National Defense University).
Aware of the impossibility of winning a simultaneous confrontation with two nuclear powers, America's ruling elites are considering betting on proxy wars, which should ensure the interests of the United States with minimal losses of their own troops and reduced costs. Thus, the MGV has become an important tool of the foreign policy of the United States and NATO, and its share in the military-political structures of the West will only increase.
CONCLUSIONS FOR RUSSIA
The transformation of the MGV into a factor of intercivilizational confrontation requires Russia, its in-depth study of the MGV and the development of appropriate offensive and defensive strategies. Special attention should be paid to a new group of destabilizing factors created by the United States and its allies, which puts the task of coordinating efforts on the agenda. An important role should be assigned to the CSTO and the SCO as recognized instruments for ensuring stability in Eurasia ("New threats should be confronted together", "NWO" dated 09.11.23). The ability of the CSTO and the SCO should be improved not only to carry out preventive measures, but also to conduct the entire range of peacekeeping operations in accordance with the UN Charter.
In the strategy of confrontation in the MGW, it is important to take into account the independent status of Russia's Eurasian geopolitics – a civilizational, not a power geopolitics, in contrast to the German and Anglo-Saxon ones. In the collective confrontation against the threats of the IHL in Greater Eurasia, involving the potentials of the SCO and the CSTO, it is important to strengthen strategic coordination and interaction, eliminate differences through dialogue, strive for cooperation instead of competition, and respect each other's fundamental interests and concerns.
Alexander Bartosz
Alexander Alexandrovich Bartosh is a corresponding member of the Academy of Military Sciences, an expert of the League of Military Diplomats.
