Categories
Quick Analysis

Pentagon Prepares for Great Power Threats

Still reeling from the effects of Obama-era cuts to the military, America’s armed forces are attempting to reconfigure themselves to meet the challenge of great power competition.

Tom C. Donnelly, writing in National Review, notes “…one effect of eight years of Obama won’t soon vanish: He’s done more damage to American military power than his successor can repair… Obama not only restrained the American habit of involving ourselves in the world’s affairs but also, by reducing our military power, constrained a future president’s ability to do so. The consistency of the Obama disarmament is reflected in defense-spending arithmetic… the Pentagon has lost more than $250 billion in purchasing power.”

One result of the Obama-era cuts was to limit the Pentagon’s ability to fight in two separate theaters.  It would be most difficult, for example, to respond to an Iranian attack in the Middle East and a North Korean aggression in Asia occurring close in time.

The Trump Administration has pumped new funds into defense, but their effect may not be seen for some time.  The White House also must contend that future conflicts would not be against relatively weak forces.  The era of Great Power competition has returned.

The National Defense Strategy (see our summary ) describes how the Defense Department plans to respond to threats from Russia and China.

According to the Final Report of The National Defense Strategy Commission, (entitled Providing for the Common Defense) which was released in November, “The security and wellbeing of the United States are at greater risk than at any time in decades. America’s military superiority—the hard-power backbone of its global influence and national security—has eroded to a dangerous degree. Rivals and adversaries are challenging the United States on many fronts and in many domains. America’s ability to defend its allies, its partners, and its own vital interests is increasingly in doubt. If the nation does not act promptly to remedy these circumstances, the consequences will be grave and lasting… The Commission argues that America confronts a grave crisis of national security and national defense, as U.S. military advantages erode and the strategic landscape becomes steadily more threatening. If the United States does not show greater urgency and seriousness in responding to this crisis and does not take decisive steps to rebuild its military advantages now, the damage to American security and influence could be devastating.”

Army chief of staff Gen. James C. McConville, speaking at the Atlantic Council in Washington, described how the military is responding.

He emphasized that the U.S. military needs to be both strong and innovative in order to deter conflict or to win if diplomacy and deterrence fail.

The Department of Defense (DOD) relies heavily on allies and partners, McConville said, noting that he has personally met with 75 chiefs of staff from nations around the world over the course of the last year. There aren’t enough U.S. soldiers to be in all places in the world at one time where they’re needed.

You have to know when to call an expert for a tune cialis doctor up. ED or icks.org cialis without prescription male impotency is caused by unwanted and psychological issues that lead one to suffer much on the penile place throughout intercourse. This is because of its outstanding results that people have varied types of opportunities to face a good blood supply to his penile region it is then when the person fails to make firm canadian viagra samples erections and this continues for the longer duration and when the person fails to satisfy his partner, but he himself is really embarrassed. But the arrival of these generic formulas with the same significant ingredient let these patients avail the drug. order levitra online

That challenge was exacerbated during the Obama Administration,

In order to have well-trained partners who can provide their own security, the Army has recently stood up security force assistance brigades, he said. They train and advise partner nations.

When they are all stood up there will be five active security force assistance brigades and one in the Army National Guard, he said.

In the area of communications, a future integrated command and control network will not only link sensor to shooters across the DoD, but will also be integrated with systems allies and partners use, McConville said. He described how a “near-peer” competitor like Russia or China could make it difficult to enter an area through their advanced standoff weaponry.

In order to overcome that obstacle, the Army is experimenting with advanced weapons that use directed energy and microwaves. In two to three years, he expects the Army to begin fielding new precision strike missiles and extended-range cannons.

Another way to penetrate an enemy’s defenses, he said, is with aircraft that have much greater range and speed than the current fleet. Some of those aircraft could even be unmanned, he said.

Unmanned ground vehicles are also being developed to take the lead in areas that are heavily mined or full of improvised explosive devices.

Also, future tanks might just have one person in the vehicle instead of four. Artificial intelligence and robotics could take the place of some of the crew.

Photo: Tank crew on maneuvers (DoD)

Categories
Quick Analysis

Russia’s Heightened Military Threat, Part 2

Russia has been violating the Intermediate Nuclear Forces treaty for a decade. The Obama Administration was deeply reluctant to respond to Moscow’s misdeeds. Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-TX), Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee reported in February: “Congress repeatedly urged, and even required in law, the Obama Administration to confront Russia on violations of the INF Treaty.  The Obama Administration did very little.  As a consequence, the only arms control treaty to ever successfully eliminate an entire class of nuclear weapons lies in tatters.  Our military has warned publicly that such a violation poses a military risk to the United States, our allies, and our deployed forces.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

Timeline of Russian Violation of the INF Treaty

2012: HASC Chairman and HPSCI Chairman write to President Obama warning him of a violation of a major arms control treaty by Russia.

2013: Chairmen write again, twice, warning him action must be taken.  No action is taken.

2014: Obama Administration finally declares that Russia has violated the INF treaty by illegally flight-testing a prohibited ground-launched cruise missile.

2015: The National Defense Authorization Act for FY16 required President Obama to report to Congress and our Allies on violations of the INF Treaty and develop military options to counter Russia’s new capability.  Administration did not comply.
The nerves in the penis need to store order viagra online more blood than it could previously, helping to produce a strong erection. People stretch at work and take sex as a love and intimate part of a life where discount viagra cialis visit for source you enjoy with your partner. You can undergo a test get viagra overnight just by consulting your physician prior to taking the oral medication. Moreover, find out over here sildenafil wholesale works best when taken on an empty stomach.
2016: Chairman Thornberry and Chairman Nunes wrote to President Obama again urging him to confront Russia over INF violations based on new information about Russian activities.


2016: The National Defense Authorization Act for FY17 withheld funds for the Executive Office of the President until the Department of Defense develops military options to confront the new Russian capability.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

The Defense Intelligence Agency’s latest analysis of Russian military power notes that: “The resurgence of Russia on the world stage—seizing the Crimean Peninsula, destabilizing eastern Ukraine, intervening on behalf of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, and shaping the information environment to suit its interests—poses a major challenge to the United States. Moscow will continue to aggressively pursue its foreign policy and security objectives by employing the full spectrum of the state’s capabilities. Its powerful military, coupled with the actual or perceived threat of intervention, allows its whole-of-government efforts to resonate widely. Russia continues to modernize its extensive nuclear forces and is developing long range precision-guided conventional weapons systems. It is manipulating the global information environment, employing tools of indirect action against countries on its periphery and using its military for power projection and expeditionary force deployments far outside its borders. Its ultimate deterrent is a robust nuclear force capable of conducting a massed nuclear strike on targets in the United States within minutes. Within the next decade, an even more confident and capable Russia could emerge. The United States needs to anticipate, rather than react, to Russian actions and pursue a greater awareness of Russian goals and capabilities to prevent potential conflicts. “Moscow’s ambitious rearmament program has driven the increase in defense spending. The Strategic Armament Program (SAP) called for spending 19.4 trillion rubles (equivalent to $285 billion) to rearm Ministry of Defense forces from 2011 through 2020.

Moscow’s long-term goal is building a military prepared to conduct the range of conflicts from local war through regional conflict to a strategic conflict that could result in massive nuclear exchange. … Russia is rapidly fielding a modern force that can challenge adversaries and support its “great power” aspirations. Russia’s commitment to building its military is demonstrated by its retention of the draft. All Russian males are required to register for the draft at 17 years of age and all men between the ages of 18 and 27 are obligated by law to perform one year of military service.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Russia’s Heightened Military Threat

The Trump Administration is levying sanctions on Russia for violating a nuclear arms pact. It’s a response the Obama Administration failed to make.

The White House move is part of its attitude of realism in dealing with international threats.

Leftist legislators and think tanks, as well as their allies in numerous media outlets have objected to efforts by foreign policy realists to raise defense spending to levels capable of meeting the growing threats from Russia, China, North Korea, Iran and terrorists. Their argument generally centers round complaints that dollars spent on military needs should have been spent on programs such as education, entitlements, and the like.

Many of those efforts are actually the responsibility of the states (social security and Medicare are not entitlements, they have been paid for by their recipients through payroll deductions.) The severity and immediacy of the massive arms buildups by America’s opponents and the aggressive nature of their actions are being ignored by those critics.

The willingness to ignore the rapidly gathering storm clouds flies in the face of very overt evidence. Todd South, writing in Military Times, notes that “Between 2007 and 2016, Russia increased military spending by 87 percent, according to a June policy brief by the European Leadership Network…”
Such disorders should be treated on time then wholesale viagra 100mg it is definitely curable. cialis pill online I’m guessing Pioli came to a different conclusion. This drug does not protect men from sexually transmitted diseases purchase viagra from canada (STDs) such as, HIV. On the other hand, kamagara jelly is a simpler and improved version of kamagra tabletsthe major ingredient samples of generic viagra still being the same.
Moscow’s dramatic escalation comes at a time when the U.S. had reduced its military spending and its presence in Europe.  South notes: “There are fewer than 65,000 soldiers stationed or forward-deployed in Europe, as compared to more than 270,000 at the height of the Cold War…. In 1987, the Army had 17 brigades and 666 combat aircraft in Europe. That fell to two brigades and 121 combat aircraft earlier this year, according to the Carnegie Foundation for International Peace….’I wish to be as clear and direct as our findings allow me to be: NATO is not postured or prepared to defend its most exposed and vulnerable member states … against a Russian attack,’said David Shlapak, co-author of a 2016 RAND study on deterring Russia in eastern Europe, in a recent Army Times article.”

Russian media has not been shy about its advancing military presence. Moscow’s RT news has proudly noted that “Russian President Vladimir Putin has submitted to the lower house of Russia’s parliament an agreement to transform the Tartus navy refueling facility in Syria into a fully-fledged navy base, capable of harboring nuclear-powered ships…Former chief of staff of the Russian Navy, Admiral Viktor Kravchenko, told Interfax that the expanded base would contribute to the navy’s “operative capabilities” in the Mediterranean Sea and Middle East as a whole. He also said that the developed navy base would be much larger than the current facility, which is used for refueling and technical support of ships.”

In addition to its enhanced conventional capabilities, Moscow has made major upgrades to its strategic nuclear forces,

Bill Gertz, writing in the Free Beacon reports: “Russia is aggressively building up its nuclear forces and is expected to deploy a total force of 8,000 warheads by 2026 along with modernizing deep underground bunkers, according to Pentagon officials. The 8,000 warheads will include both large strategic warheads and thousands of new low-yield and very low-yield warheads to circumvent arms treaty limits and support Moscow’s new doctrine of using nuclear arms early in any conflict. In addition to expanding its warheads, Russia also is fortifying underground facilities for command and control during a nuclear conflict. One official said the alarming expansion indicates Russia is preparing to break out of current nuclear forces constraints under arms treaties, including the 2010 New START and 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaties. Russia violated the INF accord by testing an illegal ground-launched cruise missile. The new assessment also suggests Russia is planning to blend its conventional forces with nuclear forces in future conflicts.”

The Report Concludes Tomorrow

Categories
Quick Analysis

U.S. Reviews Russian Military Power, Part 2

The Defense Intelligence Agency has just issued its report on Russian military Power.  The New York Analysis of Policy & Government has examined the report, and concludes its summary in this article.

The U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency has released its 2017 report on Russian military power The New York Analysis of Policy & Government has reviewed the document.  Today’s summary of key points looks at advanced weaponry and tactics.

Space/Counterspace

The Russian General Staff postulates that modern warfare is increasingly reliant on information, particularly from space, because of the expansion of the geographic scope of military action and the information needs of high-precision weapons. Russia has a significant constellation of satellites in orbit. According to Colonel Sergey Marchuk, chief of the Main Test Space Center, Russia has more than 130 spacecraft, civilian and military, performing communications, navigation, geodetic survey support, meteorological, reconnaissance, and intelligence gathering missions. Russia’s space program is both formidable and in a state of rebuilding. Moscow seeks to maintain the health of its current constellations while deploying a next-generation architecture on par with Western space systems. Over the next several years, Russia will prioritize the modernization of its existing communications, navigation, and earth observation systems, while continuing to rebuild its electronic intelligence and early warning system constellations.

Russia’s current systems provide an array of capability including high-resolution imagery, terrestrial and space weather, communications, navigation, missile warning, electronic intelligence, and scientific observations. With a long-standing heritage in space, Russia gains a sense of national pride from its space program, which has included manned missions and leading the world in space launches. Russia has concluded that gaining and maintaining supremacy in space has a decisive impact on the outcome of future conflicts.

The Russian General Staff argues for pursuing in wartime such strategies as disrupting foreign military C2 or information support because they are so critical to the fast-paced, high-technology conflicts characteristic of modern warfare. Military capabilities for space deterrence include strikes against satellites or ground-based infrastructure supporting space operations.

In 2015, Russia created the Russian Federation Aerospace Forces by merging the former Air Force and Aerospace Defense Troops.

Cyber

Russia views the information sphere as a key domain for modern military conflict. Moscow perceives the information domain as strategically decisive and critically important to control its domestic populace and influence adversary states. Information warfare is a key means of achieving its ambitions of becoming a dominant player on the world stage.

Since at least 2010, the Russian military has prioritized the development of forces and means for what it terms “information confrontation,” which is a holistic concept for ensuring information superiority, during peacetime and wartime. This concept includes control of the information content as well as the technical means for disseminating that content. Cyber operations are part of Russia’s attempts to control the information environment.

The weaponization of information is a key aspect of Russia’s strategy and is employed in time of peace, crisis, and war. In practice, information battles draw upon psychological warfare tactics and techniques from the Soviet Era for influencing Western societies. Moscow views information and psychological warfare as a measure to neutralize adversary actions in peace to prevent escalation to crisis or war.

Chief of the General Staff Gerasimov announced that “information operations troops” were involved for the first time in the Kavkaz-2016 strategic command staff exercise in September 2016, demonstrating Russian military commitment to controlling the information domain.

Cyber-Enabled Psychological Operations

One of the newest tools in Russia’s information toolkit is the use of cyber-enabled psychological operations that support its strategic and tactical information warfare objectives. These new techniques involve compromising networks for intelligence information that could be used to embarrass, discredit, or falsify information. Compromised material can then be leaked to the media at inopportune times.

  • Hacktivists. Russian intelligence services have been known to co-opt or masquerade as other hacktivist groups. These groups appeal to Russia due to the difficulty of attribution and the level of anonymity pro – vided. It is widely accepted that Russia, via patriotic hackers, conducted a cyber attack on Estonia in 2007. Under the guise of hacktivism, a group called “CyberCaliph – ate,” seemingly ISIS associated, conducted a hack against French station TV5 Monde in January 2015. The CyberCaliphate group was later linked to Russian military hackers. The same group hijacked the Twitter feed of the U.S. Central Command.

On supplementing the buy tadalafil online body with these necessary vitamins, the condition will significantly improve. The bulk viagra medicine is now famous for all over the world suffering from poor blood circulation, which can eventually help supply enough blood to the penile organ during sexual stimulation, causing a hard and long-lasting erection. If this unhealthy environment is not clipped early, professional order viagra online help may be required in order to restore balance and order in the family. Example – Fare – Fair There -Their It’s – Its Weak-Week Cite – Sight Then – Than Take a Look – Go to the traffic light, and then take left. (Here, Then works as an adverb) Komal viagra properien is smarter than Mr.
. CyberBerkut – A False Persona. Russian hackers also use false personas. CyberBerkut is a front organization for Russian state-sponsored cyber activity, supporting Russia’s military operations and strategic objectives in Ukraine. CyberBerkut employs a range of both technical and propaganda attacks, consistent with the Russian concept of “information confrontation.” Since emerging in March 2014, CyberBerkut has been implicated in multiple incidents of cyber espionage and attack, including distributed denial of service attacks against NATO, Ukraine, and German government websites. More recently, it has focused on the online publication of hacked documents, ostensibly obtained from the Ukrainian government and political figures’ computers. CyberBerkut uses information gained through these hacks to discredit the Ukrainian government. The intent is to demoralize, embarrass, and create distrust of elected officials.

  • Trolls. Russia employs a troll army of paid online commentators who manipulate or try to change the narrative of a given story in Russia’s favor. Russia’s Troll Army, also known as the Internet Research Agency, is a state-funded organization that blogs and tweets on behalf of the Kremlin.304 Trolls typically post pro-Kremlin content and facilitate heated discussions in the comments sections of news articles. Their goal is to counter negative media and “Western influence.” While the goal of some trolls is to simply disrupt negative content, other trolls promote completely false content.
  • Bots. Another way Russia manipulates the information space is through the use of bots. Bots are automated pushers of content on social media. These bots vary in sophistication and can continuously push content or imitate real life patterns. Bots can drown out unwanted content or push a specific message. Bots have the ability to overwhelm the information space and discourage readers from looking for real content.

Electronic Warfare

Based on authoritative military academic writings, the Russian military views electronic warfare as an essential tool for gaining and maintaining information superiority over its adversaries. Russia’s world-class electronic warfare forces support denial and deception operations and allow identification, interception, disruption, and, in combination with traditional fires, destruction of adversary command, control, communications, and intelligence capabilities.

In addition to technical disruption, effective use of electronic warfare can confuse adversary commanders and decision-making at any or all levels, demoralize opposing troops, and allow Russian forces to seize the operational initiative. Russia has fielded a wide range of ground-based electronic warfare systems to counter GPS, tactical communications, satellite communications, and radars. Further, military academics have suggested that electronic warfare fuse with cyber operations, allowing electronic warfare forces to corrupt and disable computers and networked systems as well as disrupt use of the electromagnetic spectrum. Russia has aspirations to develop and field a full spectrum of electronic warfare capabilities to counter Western C4ISR and weapons guidance systems.

Power Projection

Moscow continues to prioritize modernizing its military forces, viewing military power as critical to achieving key strategic objectives and global influence. Russian acquisition plans for its ground, air, naval, and missile forces are designed to enable the ability to conduct out of area operations during peacetime and to contest U.S./NATO military superiority in the event of a regional conflict. The rebuilt Russian military includes modernized, agile general purpose forces, vital to limited out-of-area power projection.

Underground Facilities

Russia inherited a vast underground facilities (UGFs) program from the Soviet Union, primarily designed to ensure the survival of the leadership and military command and control in wartime. This program involved the construction of underground bunkers, tunnels, secret subway lines, and other facilities beneath Moscow, other major Russian cities, and the sites of major military commands. Although the majority of these hardened facilities are near-surface bunkers, many critical sites are built deep underground and, in some cases, are hundreds of meters deep.

Deep underground command posts both within and outside of Moscow are interconnected by a network of special deep subway lines that provide leadership a quick and secure means of evacuation. The leadership can move from their peacetime offices through concealed entryways to protective quarters beneath the city. A deep underground facility at the Kremlin and an enormous underground leadership bunker adjacent to Moscow State University are intended for the National Command Authority in wartime. They are estimated to be 200–300 meters deep and can accommodate an estimated 10,000 people.

The leadership can remain beneath Moscow or travel along the special subway lines that connect these urban facilities to their preferred deep underground command posts outside the city, and possibly to the VIP terminal at Vnukovo Airfield, 27 kilometers southwest of the Kremlin. Two of the most important underground complexes for the National Command Authority and General Staff are located some 60 kilometers south of the city.

Denial and Deception

The Russian military relies on extensive use of denial and deception (maskirovka) to obscure intentions and conceal military movement. The family of capabilities that composed traditional maskirovka includes camouflage, deception, denial, subversion, sabotage, espionage, propaganda, and psychological operations.

Moscow employed maskirovka at the beginning of the 2014 conflict in Ukraine, when media reported on the presence of “little green men” in Crimea who strongly resembled Russian soldiers although they wore uniforms without insignia identifying their origins. President Putin insisted they were “self-defense groups” or “volunteers.” By the time Moscow admitted to the presence of Russian troops in Crimea, this deception had created enough confusion to forestall significant international intervention in the conflict, and the ground reality was irreversibly tipped in Russia’s favor.

Outlook: A Modernizing Force

Recently, Russian forces have been involved in conflict in Ukraine and conducted an expeditionary deployment to Syria, providing experience in combat operations, and employing new tactics and advanced weapons systems. This more flexible and modern Russian force did not spring up overnight but is a result of years of concentrated effort to develop and field an improved military force.

Russia is rapidly fielding a modern force that can challenge adversaries and support its “great power” aspirations.

Categories
Quick Analysis

U.S. Reviews Russian Military Power

The U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency has just issued its report on Russian military Power.  The New York Analysis of Policy & Government has examined the report, and summarizes key points in today and tomorrow’s articles.

U.S. REVIEW OF RUSSIAN MILITARY POWER

The U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency has released its 2017 report on Russian military power .  The New York Analysis of Policy & Government has reviewed the document, and presents key excerpts.

Russia Resurgent

The resurgence of Russia on the world stage—seizing the Crimean Peninsula, destabilizing eastern Ukraine, intervening on behalf of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, and shaping the information environment to suit its interests—poses a major challenge to the United States.

Moscow will continue to aggressively pursue its foreign policy and security objectives by employing the full spectrum of the state’s capabilities. Its powerful military, coupled with the actual or perceived threat of intervention, allows its whole-of-government efforts to resonate widely. Russia continues to modernize its extensive nuclear forces and is developing long range precision-guided conventional weapons systems. It is manipulating the global information environment, employing tools of indirect action against countries on its periphery and using its military for power projection and expeditionary force deployments far outside its borders. Its ultimate deterrent is a robust nuclear force capable of conducting a massed nuclear strike on targets in the United States within minutes.

Within the next decade, an even more confident and capable Russia could emerge.

DEFENSE BUDGET

Russian government spending on national defense has generally grown over the last decade and in 2016 reached a post-Soviet record. This increase in defense spending was enabled by both a general increase in the size of Russia’s GDP and a political decision to increase the defense burden—the share of national wealth devoted to defense. The 2016 budget is 4.5% defense burden on GDP. [U.S. spends approximately 3.5%.]

Russia’s commitment to building its military is demonstrated by its retention of the draft. All Russian males are required to register for the draft at 17 years of age and all men between the ages of 18 and 27 are obligated by law to perform one year of military service.

CORE RUSSIAN MILITARY CAPABILITIES

Nuclear Weapons

Moscow plans to spend about $28 billion by 2020 to upgrade the capacity of its strategic nuclear triad.

Russia continues to retain a sizable nuclear stockpile even after several decades of arms reduction treaties. Russia has a large nuclear weapons infrastructure and a production base capable of producing large numbers of new nuclear weapons annually.
The experts stated that kamagra tablets work in the body? You may be wondering that how a tablet can be effective treating male sexual problems like low libido, premature ejaculation, ED, ED is one of the most widely used and accepted drug for the treatment of sexual generico levitra on line disorders in men. Kamagra, the miraculous medicine can be obtained through an online cialis generic price service provider. It is your opportunity to get things right again. levitra 60 mg The capsule lends cheapest viagra generic lots of time to make certain their female partner is happy.
According to Russia’s New START Treaty data provided on 1 April 2017, Russia declared 1,765 warheads on 523 deployed ICBMs, SLBMs, and heavy bombers.215 Russia currently has an active stockpile of approximately 2,000 non-strategic nuclear weapons. These include air-to-surface missiles, short-range ballistic missiles, gravity bombs, and depth charges for medium-range bombers, tactical bombers, and naval aviation, as well as anti-ship, anti-submarine, and anti-aircraft missiles, and torpedoes for sur – face ships and submarines. There may also be warheads remaining for surface-to-air and other aerospace defense missile systems.

Biological & Chemical Weapons

In 1992, then-Russian President Boris Yeltsin admitted having an offensive biological weapons program and publicly committed to its termination. Subsequently, the Russian government reversed itself and now claims neither the Soviet Union nor Russia has ever pursued an offensive biological weapons program. In 1997, Moscow declared the world’s largest stockpile of chemical agents and munitions—40,000 metric tons of agents—under the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC). The declared inventory consisted of a comprehensive array of traditional chemical warfare agents filled in munitions such as artillery, bombs, and missile warheads, as well as stored in bulk.

As a state party to the CWC, Russia is obligated to destroy its chemical weapon stockpile. As of January 2017, Russia had destroyed 96.4% of its declared chemical weapons stockpile, according to press reporting.  Russia intends to complete destruction of its remaining declared stockpile by 2020. Moscow has completed destruction activities and closed the facilities in Gornyy, Kambarka, Maradykovskiy, Leonidovka, Schchuch’ye, and Pochep and continues destruction of its remaining chemical weapons stockpile at a facility in Kizner. Russia used chemical incapacitants to resolve the Dubrovka Theater hostage situation in 2002 and may consider using them in other counterterrorism actions.

Information Operations

Information operations are seen as a critical capability to achieve decisive results in the initial period of conflict with a focus on control of the information spectrum in all dimensions of the modern battle space. Authors often cite the need in modern warfare to control information—sometimes termed “information blockade” or “information dominance”—and to seize the initiative early and deny an adversary use of the information space in a campaign so as to set the conditions needed for “decisive success.” Russia continues to emphasize electronic warfare and other information warfare capabilities, including denial and deception as part of its approach to all aspects of warfare including Anti-access/area denial (A2/AD.)

Strategic Air Operations

Russian doctrine continues to emphasize that strategic objectives can be achieved with mass aerospace strikes early in a conflict with victory achieved without the seizure and occupation of territory by forces.

Russian doctrine places a great deal of emphasis on aerospace defense as a key component in its overall A2/AD strategy. Though still in development, Russia’s 21st century integrated air defense system will be designed to integrate future and existing systems around a central command structure that is designed to promote the interaction of all air defense forces and weapons. Capabilities optimized against cruise missiles are key to this defense component, not just those optimized to target aircraft.

Russia continues to develop a variety of sea and aerospace-based programs that offer a variety of offensive and defensive capabilities that could enable the implementation of its integrated A2/AD strategy. These include the continued production and deployment of coastal defense cruise missiles, air/surface/ sub-surface-launched anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCMs),249 submarine-launched torpedoes, and naval mines, along with Russian fighter, bomber, and surface-to-air missile capability.

Precision Strike

Russia was unable to achieve real progress in the development of precision strike until the first decade of the 21st century, when it was able to create a viable state armaments program that allowed prioritization of certain key components of 21st-century warfare. Between 2010 and 2015, Russia’s strategic forces, space and aerospace defense platforms, and precision-guided munitions such as ISKANDER, KALIBR, or KH-101 were defined as priorities, and system development, production, and testing occurred. The effectiveness of precision-guided munitions are being tested in a variety of settings, as well as operationally against targets in Syria beginning in 2015.

The Report concludes tomorrow.