Book Excerpt: “Russia and the Changing Character of Conflict” by Tracey German

Below is an excerpt from Russia and the Changing Character of Conflict by Tracey German:

Russia’s actions in and around Ukraine in 2014, as well as its activities in Syria and farther afield, sparked renewed debate about the character of war and armed conflict and whether it was undergoing a fundamental shift. Since 2014 there has been wide-ranging discussion about Russia’s “new way of war,” with labels such as hybrid warfare, grey-zone operations, and the Gerasimov Doctrine dominating Western analyses. However, there has been scant analysis of Russian perspectives on the changing character of conflict and what future wars may look like. Western attempts to understand how and why Russia uses force have tended to rely upon mirror-imaging and an expectation of similar strategic behaviors. This book explores Russian views of the changing character of conflict and the debates that have emerged about how future wars might evolve. It seeks to encourage a greater understanding of Russian military thought, the range of perspectives a peer competitor holds, and the particular analytical processes that take place. It sets out the trends and debates in Russian military thought, outlining the implications of Russian conclusions regarding the characteristics of contemporary and future conflict. One of the enduring features of conflict over the centuries has been its state of flux. This perpetual state of evolution requires states to regularly monitor how military force is being wielded, either by allies or adversaries, in order to be able to plan and prepare for future war. The experiences of individual states foster different visions of future conflict and how states envisage military force being used, either by themselves or potential adversaries. It is vital to understand the process of observation and assessment that other states are engaged in. For states such as Russia, the lessons from the Western interventions of the twenty-first century have been instructive, shaping its perceptions of the changing character of conflict and the implications for its military.

It is important to differentiate between the character and nature of war and conflict. The nature of war refers to its enduring essence, what differentiates it from other activities. War’s nature is unchanging: it is a violent human activity undertaken for political purpose; Carl von Clausewitz’s act of violence intended to compel an adversary to submit to one’s will. In contrast, the character of war and conflict continually evolves, reflecting the specific societal, technological, political, and historical context. Thus, warfare, and the means by which war is fought, is also continually changing, influenced by factors such as technology and operational innovation. The character of conflict is a principal topic of debate among Russian military theorists, and there is a long tradition of rigorous military strategic debate in Russia, as well as an emphasis on the systematic, scientific study of the theoretical foundations of war and conflict. The issue of foresight and forecasting the future character of war is an enduring concern, reflected in the writings of serving or retired military officers in open-source publications, many of which focus on the characteristics of conflict and the security threats facing Russia, particularly those believed to derive from the US. Common themes in these publications include a focus on the lessons that Russia could draw from Western interventions in places such as Serbia, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, as well as Russia’s own military experiences since 1991, and the perceived threat to Russian national security from internal instability, subversion, and regime change initiated by external actors, including “color revolutions” (tsvetnaya revolyutsiya).

The belief that Russia has been constantly threatened throughout its history constitutes an enduring element of the country’s military thought, shaping its worldview and self-image. Throughout history, Russian strategic thinking and threat perceptions have been shaped by a persistent fear of external aggression, hostile encirclement, and deliberate interference in the country’s internal affairs. The worldview of the political and security elites is also shaped by the sheer size of territory, which has endured a number of invasions over the centuries, from the thirteenth-century Mongol invasion to that of Napoleon’s Grand Armée at the beginning of the nineteenth century and the attack from Germany in June 1941, all of which prompt a sense of strategic vulnerability and fear of being taking by surprise. This sense of vulnerability has been exacerbated by an enduring preoccupation with technological inferiority compared to adversaries. There was a prevailing anxiety evident in both Russian and Soviet strategic thought that enemies would take advantage of any weakness, creating an expectation of surprise attacks and a fear of encirclement and deception. This contributes to the notion of Russia as a “besieged fortress” that is surrounded by enemies and needs to be prepared for an attack at any time. The German invasion of 1941 is frequently cited as an example that should never be repeated. Russian military science, particularly its emphasis on foresight and forecasting the future character of war, is a deliberate countermeasure to this fear of surprise. Reflecting this pattern, Igor M. Popov and Musa M. Khamzatov contend that the military needs to be prepared for any eventuality, writing that the Russian leadership needs to be prepared for “multiple scenarios…and for any military conflict with a variety of adversaries in a range of conditions.”  They reason that it is naive to believe that there will always be intelligence warnings of an opponent’s preparations for war, arguing that the last time Russia believed this was in 1941, when Germany invaded. Russia’s history and experience of unexpected regime collapses (the Russian Revolution in 1917, the fall of the Berlin Wall and collapse of the outer Soviet empire in 1989, and the collapse of the USSR in 1991) has fostered a belief that strategic decision makers should expect the unexpected.

As a result, there is considerable effort devoted to the systematic analysis of war and conflict, with a particular focus on the character of conflict, as well as the forms and methods that are used in them, in order to mitigate the element of surprise. Uncertainty and risk have always been an integral part of conflict; however, the transformation of contemporary conflict has increased their prevalence and efficacy. The increasing complexity of the global security environment in the twenty-first century has heightened the tension between the unpredictability of future war and the need for predictability to aid planning at the state level.

Russia and the Changing Character of Conflict by Tracey German is available in print and digital formats.

This book is in the Rapid Communications in Conflict and Security (RCCS) Series (General Editor: Thomas G. Mahnken; Founding Editor: Geoffrey R.H. Burn).

Tracey German is Professor of Conflict and Security in the Defence Studies Department at King’s College London. Her previous publications include Russia’s Chechen War, Georgia’s Foreign Policy: Diplomacy, Strategy and Regional Power in the Caucasus, Good Neighbours or Distant Relatives? Regional Cooperation in the South Caucasus, and Securing Europe: Western Interventions in search of a New Security Community. She has published in a range of journals, including International Affairs, Contemporary Security Policy, Europe-Asia Studies, and Comparative Strategy.