In the NATO Defense College, they named the reasons that prevent the West from effectively combating hybrid threats. The document was prepared by Michael Rühle, Head of the Hybrid Problems and Energy Security Division of the NATO New Security Challenges Office.
According to the report, which RT familiarized with, a new era of “hybrid war” began after Russia allegedly “annexed Crimea” in 2014 and supported the separatists in the Donbas.
“Russia's seamless and effective use of a complex of political, diplomatic, economic, electronic and military tools to annex the Crimea and support the separatists in the Donbas seems to have marked a new era of hybrid operations. The revisionist power used both old and new means to undermine and ultimately break the world order that emerged after the Cold War and which it considered unfair and unprofitable, ”the North Atlantic Alliance college believes.
Recall that the Crimea became part of the Russian Federation after the referendum, in which residents of the peninsula spoke in favor of reunification with Russia. In addition, Moscow is not a party to the internal conflict in the south-east of Ukraine, as Russian officials have repeatedly stated.
Nevertheless, since 2014, the West has been trying to develop an effective concept for containing hybrid calls. However, this is hampered, first of all, by the lack of clear terminology and excessive generalization of the cases of a modern hybrid war, explain to NATO.
Thus, NATO noted that in the West, undesirable actions on the part of opponents often call the “hybrid war”. In addition, due to the limited number of vivid examples of hybrid operations, studying them, the researchers make too general conclusions, which often ignore the more extensive geopolitical context.
As an example, the report cites the often occurring view that Russia allegedly can annex the territories of the Baltic countries, as it has already “done” with the Crimea.
“Ukraine in 2014 — with its many ties to Russia, a pro-Russian majority in the east, and weak and corrupt leadership — was a completely different case than, say, the Baltic countries. The latter are not only members of NATO and the European Union, but historically are not as strongly associated with Russia as Ukraine, ”the document says.
- Fans of Russia and Ukraine during the cross-country skiing competition at the X Paralympic Winter Games
- RIA News
- © Ilya Pitalev
In addition, according to a report by the NATO Defense College, the deterrence of hybrid threats is hampered by the indefinite role of military means — how important they are in deterring hybrid threats. In addition, it is not clear where that line is when military action should be responded to non-military actions, especially if the enemy himself has a strong army, the author of the document speculates.
The document also states that one of the problems is a distorted image of an opponent, which often appears as a kind of "villain" who seeks to harm the West by all available methods, without provoking a military response. The author notes that in this case it is impossible to contain the enemy and the concept of deterrence itself loses all meaning.
Finally, the last problem indicated in the report is the depoliticization of research. Western strategists are studying the means of the opponent, not taking into account his interests and the tasks that he intends to achieve, resorting to a hybrid war.
Expectations do not coincide with reality
According to Alexei Mukhin, General Director of the Center for Political Information, it was the West that unleashed a hybrid war. In a conversation with RT, the specialist explained that by their actions Western countries could not achieve the desired results, and now they are trying to understand the reasons.
“A series of coup d'etat in the post-Soviet space, the intention to isolate Russia, to tear its economy to shreds - all these are attempts to revive the cold war. However, the reality does not correlate with the picture that our “Western partners” painted for themselves. Russia can not be broken. Therefore, they are concerned about why their training guides do not work, why the goals are not achieved, ”he added.
Blaming the opponent for doing it yourself is the first rule of hybrid warfare. This is what Western countries are doing, considers, in turn, HSE professor political analyst Oleg Matveychev.
“The report was made to once again declare the threat posed by Russia. The West, they say, is confused, is not coping and must be mobilized, ”he said.
The expert also stressed that replay on the issue of “Russian aggression” is the main mistake of NATO. And if the “cold” confrontation moves into the “hot” phase, such tactics will play against the alliance, because no one wants to enter into an armed confrontation with such a strong power as Russia ..
In the meantime, the Euro-Atlantic community continues to regard Russia as the main source of “hybrid threats”. Thus, the European Foreign Relations Council was advised to put more effort into proving Russia's intervention in the affairs of European countries. And the European Parliament argues that Moscow, following the USSR, uses various “active measures” against the EU. The Kremlin’s renewed arsenal allegedly contains “new cybertechnologies” and tried and tested methods — disinformation, propaganda, falsification, and agents of influence.
The United States is also fueling anti-Russian sentiment. For example, in February, US senators proposed the creation of a single “national center to respond to hybrid threats” from Russia.
Moscow has repeatedly stated that the Russian Federation does not conduct hybrid wars. And the actions of Western countries in relation to Russia just remind of this kind of techniques, said earlier the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry Sergey Lavrov.
“What is happening in the West, how the policy towards Russia is shaped, is absolutely suitable for raising the“ hybrid war ”. There are direct military actions when, at our borders, contrary to all assurances given, the presence of NATO military infrastructure is growing, new combat units, strike weapons are deployed, ”the minister said.
According to political analyst Alexei Mukhin, Washington and Brussels deliberately escalate the situation, talking about Russian “hybrid threats”, in order to justify the existence of the North Atlantic alliance.
“NATO needs justification. And today it is Russia, supposedly aggressive, violating international law. Although the situation is exactly the opposite. Moscow is on guard of international law and proves it time after time, ”said the expert.
- Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov
- RIA News
- © Maxim Blinov
Elements of effective containment
According to the NATO Defense College, five elements should be highlighted that the West should work to curb the hybrid threat. So, indicates Michael Rühle, to begin with, the alliance needs to determine the essence of the term “hybrid threats”.
“While any unpleasant actions are called“ hybrid ”, while ordinary risks are designated as“ threats ”, and the word“ war ”is even applied to non-military actions, a sensible discussion about deterring hybrid threats is almost impossible,” the document notes.
In addition, the NATO Defense College recommends that the West explore the interests of a potential adversary, as well as look at themselves from the outside. According to the author of the report, the debate about the hybrid war as a whole looks like a "manifestation of the crisis of the West's insecurity in itself."
“The ongoing discussion about the hybrid war can tell about the West no less than about its opponents. It looks like another manifestation of the crisis of the West’s insecurity in itself, its doubts in its own political-economic model and fears of a split in its own ranks. Speaking harshly, today's discussion of a hybrid war may be yet another expression of the fact that the West is losing illusions about its further domination in the international system, ”the report stresses.
The material also proposes to consider whether the methods already applied, in particular the sanctions, help restrain the “aggressor”, and whether the West is prepared to pay the price for punishment, which will affect its own welfare.
Many European politicians are aware of the damage that their countries are subject to anti-Russian sanctions. For the abolition of restrictions and the normalization of relations with the Russian Federation stand in Italy, Hungary, Slovakia. However, the new leadership of the European Union plans to keep the existing line and talk to Moscow “from a position of strength”.
At the same time, as Oleg Matveychev noted, the findings of the NATO Defense College once again demonstrate the futility of the measures taken earlier.
“They are worried that all the efforts and the money that is being invested yield few results. They feel that they are not going there, and that they need to improve their tools of action, ”he concluded.