Suchergebnisse

Russian annexation of Crimea and the subsequent air campaign over Syria took the world by surprise. The capabilities and efficiency of Moscow's armed forces during both operations signalled to the world that Russia was back in business as a significant military actor on the international stage. In this cutting-edge study, Bettina Renz provides an in-depth and comprehensive analysis of Russia's military revival under Putin's leadership. Whilst the West must adjust to the reality of a modernised and increasingly powerful Russian military, she argues that the renaissance of Russian military might and its implications for the balance of global power can only be fully understood within a wider historical context. Assessing developments in Russian Great Power thinking, military capabilities, Russian strategic thought and views on the use of force throughout the post-Soviet era, the book shows that, rather than signifying a sudden Russian military resurgence, recent developments are consistent with longstanding trends in Russian military strategy and foreign policy.

For much of the post-Soviet era there was a widespread belief that improving capabilities required for dealing with local small wars and insurgencies was the central focus of Russian military reforms. As a result, Moscow's military assertiveness and return to geopolitical rivalries since 2014 came as a surprise to many in the West. The article argues that small wars were never the major focus of Russian military transformation and reforms. Tracing the country's experience of war and conflict regionally and internationally since the end of the Cold War, and the impact this had on Moscow's views on what kind of armed forces it required, the article shows that the Kremlin's military ambitions started to diverge dramatically from western expectations as early as the mid-1990s. Russia never really saw armed forces geared towards small and 'new war'-type scenarios as sufficient for upholding its regional and international status ambitions. Moreover, the Kremlin's growing preoccupation with internal order and regime stability has increasingly reinforced the rhetoric of a hostile West, which is used to justify the increasing centralization of domestic politics. Russia's military revival has been long in the making and poses serious challenges to its neighbours and to the West.

For much of the post-Soviet era there was a widespread belief that improving capabilities required for dealing with local small wars and insurgencies was the central focus of Russian military reforms. As a result, Moscow's military assertiveness and return to geopolitical rivalries since 2014 came as a surprise to many in the West. The article argues that small wars were never the major focus of Russian military transformation and reforms. Tracing the country's experience of war and conflict regionally and internationally since the end of the Cold War, and the impact this had on Moscow's views on what kind of armed forces it required, the article shows that the Kremlin's military ambitions started to diverge dramatically from western expectations as early as the mid-1990s. Russia never really saw armed forces geared towards small and 'new war'-type scenarios as sufficient for upholding its regional and international status ambitions. Moreover, the Kremlin's growing preoccupation with internal order and regime stability has increasingly reinforced the rhetoric of a hostile West, which is used to justify the increasing centralization of domestic politics. Russia's military revival has been long in the making and poses serious challenges to its neighbours and to the West.

Die gesteigerten Fähigkeiten der russischen Streitkräfte haben Befürchtungen vor weiterer militärischer Aggression und Expansionismus ausgelöst. Allerdings bestehen weiterhin erhebliche Beschränkungen für Russlands Fähigkeit, seine militärische Stärke auf globaler Ebene zu projizieren oder einzusetzen. Bei der Abschätzung der Implikationen, die ein modernisiertes russisches Militär für die internationale Sicherheit hat, sollte sich die Aufmerksamkeit eher auf mögliche Absichten der russischen Führung hinsichtlich des Einsatzes von Gewalt richten, denn auf die militärische Stärke per se.

Die gesteigerten Fähigkeiten der russischen Streitkräfte haben Befürchtungen vor weiterer militärischer Aggression und Expansionismus ausgelöst. Allerdings bestehen weiterhin erhebliche Beschränkungen für Russlands Fähigkeit, seine militärische Stärke auf globaler Ebene zu projizieren oder einzusetzen. Bei der Abschätzung der Implikationen, die ein modernisiertes russisches Militär für die internationale Sicherheit hat, sollte sich die Aufmerksamkeit eher auf mögliche Absichten der russischen Führung hinsichtlich des Einsatzes von Gewalt richten, denn auf die militärische Stärke per se.

© 2016 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. In the aftermath of the Crimea annexation in March 2014, the idea of 'hybrid warfare' quickly gained prominence as a concept that could help to explain the success of Russian military operations in this conflict. Although the concept continues to enjoy widespread popularity in both scholarly and policy circles, its utility as an analytical tool is also heavily contested. This article adds to the literature critical of the 'hybrid warfare' concept. It argues that in addition to the fact that what is now described as a 'hybrid' approach to war is nothing new, the problems pertaining to its utility for the study of contemporary Russia go deeper than this. 'Hybrid warfare' inadequately reflects the direction of Russian military modernisation and as such has led to a skewed understanding of Russian military capabilities. Moreover, the tendency to use 'hybrid warfare' not only to conceptualise developments in the Russian military, but in the country's foreign policy in general, can lead to serious unintended consequences.

The revival of Russian military power poses certain challenges to NATO and to the West. However, the exact nature of these challenges is not straightforward. This article discusses why Russia is reviving its conventional military power and argues these developments are not limited to the intention of preparing for offensive action. NATO's and the West's policy responses to recent changes in Russian defense policy need to be based on a realistic and nuanced understanding of Russian motivations because ill-considered responses could have serious unintended consequences.