Grading Gerasimov: Evaluating Russian Nonlinear War Through Modern Chinese Doctrine

Grading Gerasimov: Evaluating Russian Nonlinear War Through Modern Chinese Doctrine

V. Morris

“Wars are not declared, and having begun, proceed to an unfamiliar template,” stated General Valery Gerasimov, the Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, during a closed speech at the Russian Academy of Military Sciences. The primary topic of this speech was “The Role of the General Staff in the Organization of the Defense of the Country in Correspondence with the New Statute about the General Staff Confirmed by the President of the Russian Federation.”

This speech given in late 2013 was crucial because it enumerated and elucidated the strategies that would develop Russian nonlinear military doctrine in 2014, which is known as “Gerasimov Doctrine”. Russian Foreign Policy Reviews, State Security Strategies and “Gerasimov Doctrine” combined with Russian political views codify nonlinear war as the emergence of a new kind of war. This new form of warfare is facilitated by 21st century technologies and multiple actors employing combinations of conventional and unconventional instruments. In short, “the very rules of war have been fundamentally changed” and, according to General Gerasimov, non-military means have surpassed the power of force to achieve strategic and political goals. The current situation in Ukraine and, to some extent in neighboring former Soviet republics (primarily Baltic States), highlights the application of nonlinear war.

Is it working?

In order to adequately assess current and future threats to European security and the methods to counter such threats, this article intends to “grade”, or evaluates, specific applications of nonlinear war in Ukraine based on Chinese military doctrine, geopolitical strategies and conflicts in Europe.

Russia’s Road to Nonlinear War: Cold War, 1979-Present

Unrestricted war is a war that surpasses all boundaries and restrictions. It takes nonmilitary forms and military forms and creates a war on many fronts. It is the war of the future.

-Colonel Qiao Liang and Colonel Wang Xiangsui, Unrestricted War, Beijing, 1998

“Gerasimov Doctrine” contains particular similarities to the Chinese doctrine outlined in Unrestricted Warfare published in 1999, and historical roots in previous Russian doctrine. Both strategies involve using proxies, or surrogates, to not only exploit vulnerabilities in low intensity conflict, but to also prepare for future operations, which may involve high intensity conflict. Other strategies involve applying both low and high tech asymmetrical means, and also engaging in several forms of war. For example, Unrestricted Warfare describes 13 forms of “total war” and methods to consciously mix “cocktails” on the battlefield, or to employ combinations of forms of warfare in order to find innovative and effective approaches. In Ukraine, the notion of consciously “mixing cocktails” to produce effective nonlinear strategies highlights the unpredictable effects that these tactics may have on the organs of government. Regardless of the particular nonlinear strategies applied, destabilization and exploitation of vulnerabilities are the results. Therefore, the assessment tool for this article is the effective application of warfare combinations in four categories to reach specific long-term political outcomes.

In continuing to approach this assessment within an academic metaphor, this article imagines Russia as a student. Russia has studied nonlinear war since the Cold War (called Active Measures) and Afghanistan through the 1980s, and continued these studies with interventions in Moldova and Lithuania in the early 1990s. Furthermore, from 1994 to 2009, Russia double majored in nonlinear war during the First and Second Chechen Wars. While completing Undergraduate degrees, Russia entered the workforce by engaging Georgia with espionage in 2006, conducting cyber attacks against Estonia in 2007, and completing “counterterrorism” campaigns in Chechnya in 2009. The Russo-Georgian War in 2008, however, is an exemplary case first, of the evolution of nonlinear or hybrid capabilities; secondly, of the application of indirect instruments in order to destabilize a country; and thirdly, of the volatile effects of such tactics that persist until today. Moreover, during and after this conflict, Russian tactics also combined cyber warfare with both informational and conventional means. Currently, through the lens of this article’s academic metaphor, Russia is further developing its nonlinear war practices by pursuing a Master’s Degree in Ukraine. This program involves subjects like gaining and maintaining popular support, military mobilization, refinement of nonlinear approaches to war and preparation for future unconventional conflicts.

21st Century Warfare

What we see in Russia now in this hybrid approach to war, is the use of all the tools that they have to reach into a nation and cause instability.

-General Philip M. Breedlove, Munich Security Report 2015

“New generation, ambiguous, hybrid, nonlinear, unrestricted, irregular, unconventional and asymmetric” are all terms associated with 21st century warfare. Warfare is typically defined in two general forms: Traditional and Irregular, where the latter can apply hybrid threat strategies to reach mutual benefitting effects. Irregular Warfare is defined as a violent struggle among state and non-state actors for legitimacy and influence over the relevant populations.  Irregular Warfare favors indirect approaches and asymmetric means. A central component of Irregular Warfare is unconventional warfare, which employs “activities conducted to enable a resistance movement or insurgency to coerce, disrupt, or overthrow a government or occupying power by operating through or with an underground, auxiliary, and guerilla force in a denied area”.  Another definition of Irregular Warfare outlines the achievement of “strategic objectives by avoiding an adversary’s conventional military strength while eroding an adversary’s power and will, primarily through the use of indirect, non-traditional aspects of warfare.” The former application of unconventional warfare relies on external parties aiding indigenous actors against governments. Some examples of aid involve training, equipping, advising and employing kinetic action to seize terrain or increase the advantage of irregular forces. The term “irregular forces” refers to State and non-State military or paramilitary forces. Nonlinear warfare directly or indirectly employs non-military and military instruments through the following means: diplomats, intelligence agencies, professional soldiers, special operations forces, insurgents, guerillas, extremist groups, mercenaries and criminals.

Contemporary hybrid warfare, hybrid threat and hybrid aggression have all been used to describe potent and complex variations of warfare in the 21st century. Although this type of warfare is not new, contemporary threat actors are redefining the application by employing 21st century technologies and combinations of diplomatic, intelligence formation, militaristic, economic and humanitarian means, and in various domains to include cyberspace. What further complicates this form of warfare is the persistent fluctuation and manipulation of political, informational and ideological conflict-- key aspects of hybrid warfare which extend past traditional coercive diplomacy and unconventional war. This article utilizes the term “nonlinear war” in the same way as defined by Russian military doctrine: as a means to reach desired strategic orientation and geopolitical outcomes primarily using non-military approaches.

Making the Grade

Today’s wars will affect the price of gasoline in pipelines, the price of food in supermarkets, and the price of securities on the stock exchange. They will also disrupt the ecological balance and push their way into every one of our homes by way of the television screen

-Alvin Toffler

As previously outlined, the grading process considers the effectiveness of warfare combinations and their ability to reach their intended outcomes. In the case of Ukraine, probable intended outcomes are summarized first, as destabilizing both the region specifically and the European Union as a whole and secondly as preventing NATO military infrastructure near Russian borders, and thirdly as preventing NATO membership expansion. Political ideology involving Eurasianism and dividing the west are also possible objectives. The following assessments are based on how well the Russian Federation conducts various operations in conflicts with regard to four combination categories as outlined in Chinese unrestricted warfare doctrine: supra-national, supra-domain, supra-means and supra-tier.

Supra-national Combinations are a synthesis of national, international and non-state organizations.  In the 21st century, global powers must borrow multinational and non-state powers in order to expand their own influence. One of the most recent examples of this combination involves the creation of the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) and its competition with Ukrainian European integration, which eventually led to the 2014 Ukrainian Revolution. This union operates through supranational and intergovernmental institutions which include a mutual defense alliance. Possible Russian objectives for the EEU involve growth into a powerful, supra-national union of sovereign states analogous to the European Union in order to form a unilaterally beneficial bridge between Europe and Asia. Intermediate competitive objectives may involve enlarging the Customs Union to post soviet states, which could eventually involve breakaway regions of Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine whose parent countries have already signed association agreements with the European Union. Ukraine is strategically important because it has the second largest economy of any of the 15 former republics of the Soviet Union. The EEU is the probable mechanism for waging current and future non-military forms of warfare with regard to international law, finance, economics and resources. This fact is made evident by the recruitment efforts of the EEU on one side, imposition of sanctions, northwestern European defense cooperation, and oil production by Middle Eastern States, on the other.   

Another example of the concise application of supra-national combinations is the perceived manipulation of the world’s largest security intergovernmental organization, known as the Organization for Security Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). This organization is responsible for monitoring ceasefires in Ukraine, including the Minsk Protocol which collapsed in early 2015, and the ceasefire currently in effect. Historically, the Russian Federation has accused the OSCE of being a tool for Western states to advance specifically western economic and political interests. Recently, allegations have surfaced that the OSCE has a pro-Russian bias, which explains the organization’s failure to monitor the Minsk Protocol and the subsequent ceasefire and subversive combat operations. This view is consistent with the fact that International Warfare’s objectives are to subvert and sabotage the rule of law. Grade: D

Supra-domain Combinations involve employing or merging combinations beyond the domains of the traditional battlefield. Russia’s ability to overlap all domains to include activities in cyberspace to create political and military effects offers a prime example. The combinations that Russia has employed under this model involve: Media and Fabrication, Cultural warfare (defending compatriot diasporas abroad and leveraging historical memory), Psychological warfare, and Network warfare (dominating or subverting media). Additionally, Russia has emphasized influence operations in the informational domain to reduce the requirement for military forces, which is exercised through: subversion, disinformation campaigns and false narrative control, English and Russian language propaganda, protests and disruptive “trolling” and Twitter.com activities online. Although disinformation campaigns erode over time, employing a whole of government approach using information operations and attacks in the cyber domain supports the overall nonlinear, destabilization efforts in Ukraine as a key component of this type of new warfare. Grade: A

Supra-means Combinations unite aspects of military and non-military means to reach desired objectives. This category can be directly applied to the initial destabilization of Ukraine and the annexation of Crimea. The Crimea operation was a decisive application of nonlinear warfare for a variety of reasons. It illustrates nonlinear warfare phases involving initial destabilization, deception, information operations and limited military intervention, all with local population support. Supra-means Combinations are also visible in the current conflict in Eastern and Southeastern Ukraine involving pro-Russian conventional, irregular and special operations forces that employ blended tactics supported by a malicious information campaign. This initial assessment alone, however, does not adequately address the applications and compounding effects of the more complex combinations in this category. Combinations of technological, resource and economic aid warfare must also be assessed. The technological assessment focuses on having an advantage that involves superior conventional military equipment and weapons of mass destruction capabilities; Russia currently has both. Conversely, pro-Russian separatists currently do not have full control of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of Ukraine and Sea of Azov access. Therefore, it is clear that this group is not completely successful in combining militaristic, cultural, resource and economic aid warfare at that level. This particular lack of success in turn affects the same combinations on the supra-national level, but with a different degree of intensity. These intermediate objectives involving territorial control may be further met through cease-fire agreements giving concession to separatists, or overt deployment of military forces into the Donbas region if recognized as a Russian State.

Conversely, the result may be a sustained de-centralized insurgency or “frozen conflict” with ineffective mission command from Russian military and political actors further destabilizing both countries economically. International military aid and assistance to Ukrainian security forces and internally displaced persons are also possible long term outcomes creating further instability in the region. Operating through the entire depth of the enemy territory is one of the specified objectives included in “Gerasimov Doctrine”, which ultimately results in territorial defense related political objectives. Grade: C

Lastly, Supra-tier Combinations melds all levels of conflict in each campaign. For instance, the Ukraine campaign for Russia melds tactical, strategic and operational levels of conflict in the region. This category’s assessment is based on “beyond-limits” war in Unrestricted Warfare, where both decentralized and man-machine combinations perform multiple functions. These functions span regional ground tactics to international political level effects. Conventional and unconventional operations involving naval fleets, commercial airliners, armed civilians, tanks, air defense and artillery weapons employment, drone operations, abductions, assassinations and electronic warfare are all examples of how, in Eastern Europe, tactics from this category continue to blur the traditional lines of war. Grade: B

Report Card Conclusion

The above grades are a snapshot in time or “academic term”, and undoubtedly fluctuate based on measures taken by domestic and international partners to counter nonlinear war in both Ukraine and in neighboring countries. This assessment is designed to highlight the approaches and combinations employed during nonlinear war, and more importantly, how these tactics are evolving to become more innovative and effective. By no means, does the article downplay the severity of the conflict in Ukraine and loss of life as a result.  If Russian doctrine and military modernization programs continue to evolve based on nonlinear war experience and limitation assessments, international actors will be presented with an increasingly unconventional threat in future conflicts. In order to counter nonlinear and unconventional approaches to war, and identify vulnerabilities, one must first understand and assess these approaches to preempt crippling and irreversible political effects.

References

  1. Unrestricted Warfare
  1. Counter Unconventional War White Paper (USASOC)
  1. Munich Security Report 2015
  1. JP 3-26 Counterterrorism
  1. TC 7-100 Hybrid Threat
4
Your rating: None Average: 4 (1 vote)

Comments

To all readers of this particular article as it goes to the core of where I am heading these days....personally and professionally...

I have been reading SWJ since 2004 when I first became aware of it…and I have since then contributed a few articles to it as well as FP…

But since the Russian military annexation of Crimea…their unleashing of non linear warfare with cyber and information warfare as it’s core and then their military invasion of Ukraine and their adventure into Syria in the name to defeat IS which we all know is a farce……

During the last two years I have posted roughly 30,000 posts on these two areas (Ukraine/Syrian threads) and then starting posting more and more information on Russian infor and cyber warfare and responding to this particular article.

Alone on the Ukrainian thread Views have in the last two years climbed to over 980,000 …the Syrian thread climbed in the same time to over 360,000. I also noted that in the last two months the Russian disinformation and hacking has climbed over 8,000 Views.

While it is hard to see if readers were looking/researching or just skimming through I am happy that they “viewed” anything as I have seen that basically a lot of what I posted never did make it into US MSM or if it did…then days later.

During this process I have learned the value of social media OSINT and the ability of conducting excellent information warfare using social media….and took pains to show how Russian info warfare was being conducted both in Ukraine and Syria….and developed along the way a working relationship with @bellingcat one of the best social media OSINT types going these days..actually produces better quality open reporting than anything I have previously seen in the IC which also uses OSINT...

Along the way I have bashed the Obama WH for basically changing the entire ME in the desire to tilt fully to Iran and for their apparent lack of a solid strategic strategy on virtually anything…and they walked away from engaging in the Ukraine…..the Obama WH was great smoke and mirrors machine and the US MSM never really challenged that…

We then transitioned to the Trump WH….and suddenly and truly we are seeing for the first time the somehat serious political theory of “Wag the Dog” in it’s full glory being applied to cover up for a total lack of any strategy on anything other than “tweets” being used as a FP……using "on a whim and a prayer" as FP....

I learned a long time ago after VN if one does not ever speak truth to power things get worse….and in my work career that was a principle I held to which cost me sometimes, but I always learned even then you in fact move forward…because some along the way respected that.

The posting has led me to fully “see” and “understand” the intertwining of a lack of US FP built on well thought through strategies and allowed me to see at the same the interesting development of the Russian non linear warfare which is pushing their political war with the US….and they do view it as an actual war…somehow we do not…

BTW I have posted many comments on this concept of “seeing” and “understanding” something that drives me in all these years as I learned long ago ground reality “does talk to you..if you are willing to listen”….

After being recently chastised and sidelined for three days “for being on a soap box” that not many were willing to actually share…..even though reading and then responding by cut and pasting comments….I have decided it is now a good time to withdraw from SWC…it has been a great ride , the knowledge I gained in the postings has flowed into my company in a far different way than I even imagined and is openly up a startling new realm in integrating hacking defense with customers demanding now how to counter the everyday info war they are in….

It has been one heck of a long ride and I really enjoyed it…will comment on occasions if an article interests me…….

The killing in eastern Ukraine and Syria will just continue until someone stands up in the US and truly leads….and leads not by tweets….but by the realization of what Putin’s geo political goals really are guided by a strategic strategy...finally.....

Based on evidence I have had the opportunity to be shown/review the person tweeting might not be in office much longer IF treason counts for anything these days in the US…

Gerasimov’s Fifth Speech at the Academy of Military Science

OE Watch Commentary: On 4 March, Russia’s Chief
of the General Staff Valeriy Gerasimov made his yearly
presentation to the Academy of Military Science. His
speeches to the Academy over the years have offered some
of the best insights into Russia’s overall military approach
to contemporary warfare and this one was no different.
The accompanying excerpts from the speech point out
that Gerasimov urges the Academy of Military Science to
prioritize the study of new forms of interstate warfare and
effective methods of countering them.

Gerasimov notes the importance of the “formation of
scenarios and long-term forecasts of the development of
military-political and strategic situations in the world’s
most important regions.” He also invites the Academy
of Military Science to play an active role in a roundtable
which will “discuss the problems of contemporary wars
and armed conflicts and their characteristic features and
peculiarities.” The roundtable will take place within the
framework of the scientific and business program of the
international military-technical forum Army 2017, which
will be held in August 2017.

In 2013, Gerasimov had discussed tendencies, forms and
methods of warfare; in 2014 the role of the General Staff;
in 2015 the organization of the Russia’s defense under
contemporary conditions; in 2016 the West’s use of hybrid
methods and how to counter them; and in 2017 (the official
title of the presentation has still not been made available)
the requirement to develop the proper forms and methods
of warfare.

Thus he has returned to a topic he first stressed
in 2013, indicating its ongoing importance. A “form” is the
development of military organizations (joint, interservice,
special operations, etc.) and a method is composed of
weapons (tanks, hypersonic, reflexive control, etc.) and
ways to employ military art (indirect and asymmetric
operations, principles of war, etc.). End OE Watch
Commentary (Thomas)

The terms "form, method and ways" bring to mind center of gravity and critical factors analysis. Ways and means to exert a development model that does not conform to western declarations (objective). Defining the essence of war continues........

Lithuania Foreign Minister on Russia's actions: "This war already is taking place, a cyberwar, an information war"
https://www.rferl.org/a/lithuanian-fm-nato-deployment-commitment/28442889.html 

Russian and French Twitter Mobs in French Election push
Analyzing two hashtag campaigns ahead of the French election

One Russian and one French
https://medium.com/dfrlab/russian-and-french-twitter-mobs-in-election-pu...

THIS is exactly why the analysis of botnets is so important......especially the discovery of and then the shutdown of their control servers......

QUOTE
Bot amplifiers
As with so many political flashmobs, the #dislikeMacron drive appears to have been boosted by automated “bot” accounts. This can be established by looking at the broader behavior pattern of the accounts which amplified #dislikeMacron most actively.
The account called @CHRISTINA2A12, for example, was one of the top 50 amplifiers of the #dislikemacron hashtag, tweeting it four times between 19:00 and 04:30. This is a relatively low figure; but in a separate scan of tweets posted by those top 50 amplifiers from April 14–20, @CHRISTINA2A12 tweeted 3,176 times, at an average rate of 453 a day. Of those tweets, 3,122 were retweets, a rate of 98 per cent.
The account’s avatar image is a photo of actress Sandra Bullock, apparently taken from the French edition of Elle magazine. Taken together, this combination of anonymity, activity, and amplification indicates that this is a bot account.
The same can be said of other top-50 amplifiers. The account @gariondescale posted nine tweets on the #dislikeMacron hashtag on April 20. This account first tweeted on March 18, according to a timed Twitter search; by the evening of April 20, 34 days later, it had posted 10,000 tweets, for an average of 294 a day.

This is exactly why Gerasimov is "winning"......

I had posted on the Ukrainian thread an interesting article written in March by Gerasimov and actually rather short for him....which if one looks closely at it he has swung full circle and is back to tank on tank conventional as he perceives the threat now from say NATO which is the closest "enemy" to the Russia border to be a rearming and restructuring NATO defense posture on all his fronts with a reengaging US military in Europe...

This was not a view for him in 2013 and 2014 when he and Putin were looking at Crimea annexation and the eastern Ukraine invasion...

During his non linear warfare phase he was focusing on the non conventional threats he thought he was seeing being employed by the US against Russia in the form of the "color revolts" with Maidan standing out like a harbor beacon...and those of the Arab Springs....

And that thought still prevails with Putin and his inner circle with Putin's speech last week concerning Russia's determination to not allow any "color revolts" to go on inside CTSO member states...

In some ways this depicts just how the Russians are evolving on their doctrinal thinking yet not abandoning non linear warfare...as the core means going forward....

I find when reading a lot of Russian articles...this helps one stay focused.....

"To see what is in front of one’s nose needs a constant struggle."

-- George Orwell

Many times it is clear what they are saying...it is just that we do not want to believe it....

Actually right now it is far easier to understand what the Russians are doing VS our own President....remember this famous tweet of his.....

Well today is Day 90....and that promised report is where????

Donald J. Trump‏
Verified account
 
@realDonaldTrump
released by "Intelligence" even knowing there is no proof, and never will be. My people will have a full report on hacking within 90 days!

AND remember Giuliani was place in charge....nothing from him as well....

You're back!

Azor....

If ....

1. cyber warfare
2. information warfare

Are the critical cornerstones to Russian non linear warfare used to support their "political war against the US".....then the mechanism to push that information war are in fact massive botnets controlled and designed/directed from a central source.....

I posted extensive charts in the 2015 Ukraine thread that depicted bot research from StopFake.org showing just how a narrative was pushed and who the main pushers were.....

Here is an article from them out of 2015 well worth reading...WHY because I took a number of their bot research tools...had them refined and that is now what we use in our tracking....

IF and I truly mean IF Americans who voted from Trump were able to see that actual link analysis of their social media that they were using to make their decisions to vote for him...THEY might actually understand what the FBI Director stated about that information being from a "troll farm"....

Social Network Analysis Reveals Full Scale of Kremlin’s Twitter Bot Campaign
http://www.stopfake.org/en/social-network-analysis-reveals-full-scale-of...

And another just released great analysis article from Stopfake.org this time 2017...notice the pattern of the dissemination process is the same just a different tactic...
Small time propagandists
http://www.stopfake.org/en/small-time-propagandists/

We then take all of what we have found and crank the literally thousands of data points into a great professional link analysis tool called Palantir used by the US IC and Army and then use a set of algorithms developed by a Berlin start up big data company and presto....similar in some aspects to IBMs AI Watson...but we think far better....

We now clearly and concisely "see" and fully "understand" the ongoing current Russian information/influence operation in 3D...and now are capable of in virtually near real time to track the subtle narrative changes....and the target audience.

Our consumer group is impressed to say the least....

BTW...it is a war regardless of the lack of a "information war definition"...and the US led by Trump and his lack of understanding maybe because he is wrapped up as a participant....is causing the US to not even be in the fight.....

Actually I am amazed just how the Europeans as a whole now "get it" and are getting aggressive in pushing back...and the US just "swims around debating the problem"...

BTW..and suddenly the ties to Russian crime groups and Russian Intelligence Services in this information war..clear and concise...and we can actually 3D the connecting points....

QUOTE
“We have the best of both worlds: From Russia we have strength and safety, and in Europe we have wealth and comfort.”
Retired (he says) Russian criminal, 2016

NOTICE this Russian criminal tie in to the recent IED bombing of the BVb bus....and Russian spetsnaz and eastern Ukraine.

My sources are saying he definitely was Russian trained Spetnaz...experienced in eastern Ukraine having arrived in Germany in the last year and has a residence permit as do many Russian expats living in Germany....

German police on Friday arrested the suspected perpetrator of a bomb attack on Borussia Dortmund's team bus, the public prosecutor's office said, indicating his motive was financial and not terror-related.
Police commandos working on behalf of the federal prosecutor's office "have arrested a 28-year-old German-Russian national, Sergej W.," a statement said.

It said the suspect was hoping to profit from a drop in the football team's share price as a result of the attack.

REMEMBER if a Russian can prove even a 1/100th of an ounce of Jew heritage they get an automatic residence permit and that has led to a massive counterfeit program inside Russia cranking out such documents...which are actually very good and the Russia government has refused to assist German BKA to find the source...

James Comey: 'People need to be aware of the possibility that what they're reading has been shaped by troll farms.'
http://apne.ws/2orZtZw

On how the Russian government recruits local hackers: “It’s a knock on your door and maybe a knock on your ass."
https://www.buzzfeed.com/sheerafrenkel/inside-the-hunt-for-russias-hackers?utm_term=.jllrmb0OeP#.fqVKABMan4 

Experts say automated accounts sharing fake news ahead of French election
http://reut.rs/2p1uIwY
25-28% of all social media accounts pushing election narratives are fake.....being driven out of Russia....

MIT Tech Review

@techreview
Russia gets “the true nature of the battlefield” in a way the West does not. The power lies in information.
http://trib.al/7ibtNhY

This white nationalist was one of Trump's biggest supporters and especially read on social media during the campaign...and was to be the main speaker at CPAC until his interview where he favored pedophilia with younger boys...kinda killed his career at Breitbart.com..

Mediaite‏
Verified account
#EXCLUSIVE: Milo Yiannopoulos Breaks With Trump on Syria: ‘Not Why People Voted for Daddy’
http://bit.ly/2oaLoRH

WHO the heck is "Daddy"........?????

With a vengeance and definitely on a soap box...have been far to right the last two years....the war is deepening in eastern Ukraine...Russian troop buildup along the Ukrainian border has reached pre2014 invasion levels and is still growing and Russian destruction of the Syria Sunni population which is sinking under the massive weight of Russia incendiary cluster munitions and thermobaric 500lb bombs.....

Five individuals in and around Trump and his WH are under FBI treason investigations and the German local radio stations every morning use Trump tweets as jokes...

AND the response out of the Trump WH FP is what...bluff...on a whim and a prayer.....and you think I bashed Obama unfairly and am bashing Trump even worse?

BLUF.......

Gerasimov is winning and we are handing it to him....simple as that....

BTW...was busy....have finally nailed a major control server for a 400K botnet driving proTrump disinformation into the US....server sat in St. Petersburg Russia and has been functioning as a control server since 2009...only took us 8 months to find the darn thing...still on the hunt for the backup server.....

So you've been too far right or far too right? Not that they're mutually exclusive...

So no Western services run botnets?

Now that you have opened this thought...far right....

Go back and check the last two years of postings on the Ukrainian thread and you will that I have been virtually the only SWC commenter who even posts about the US far right...European far right and Russian far right.

AND right now do not think for a moment that Russian information warfare has forgotten them as well as the far left again from US to Russia....

To include the two Russian far rightist conventions held in 2015 and 2016 which far right and neo Nazi US groups attended...

Anyone that is stupid enough to be used for Russian information warfare are targets for it...Russia is not adverse to work with both if it drives their narrative of the moment....

When I was 18....white and from Houston Tx in 1964....I experienced the KKK up close and personal with their cross burnings and white robe meetings in deep Louisiana and Mississippi for the summers of 1964/65/66...every Saturday night like clock work....

I have never forgotten that....and now to watch how they crawl out of the woodwork and are now assumed to be "in within MSM" because they openly and aggressively supported Trump...AND BTW there is not a single Trump tweet putting distance between himself and them.....ever....not a single definite tweet stating just what I said...distance clear and concise....

NOW if you were following my posted German comments on the recent triple IED attack on the BVB bus which was a false flag right wing attack designed to look like IS before the coming elections.....

You will notice a comment on that the fact that the KGB often supported German neo Nazi's as they did the far left....actually in the mid/late 60s...KGB sponsored both groups and got them into PLO guerrilla training camps in the ME....

AND today...wow..suddenly the German BKA is pointing to a key individual in that bomb attack....a Russian with neo Nazi leanings as being the bomb maker...

BTW the only Russians capable of being really good bomb makers are GRU Spetsnaz.....

NOW tie that into the current ongoing Russian information war and tell me that Gerasimov is not winning....

Western Services do in fact run botnets...but for a far different reason than the one I and others where tracking...and if you noticed after the arrest in Barcelona of a top Russian hacker ..the FBI took down most but not all of his network...

Parts of it was Russian criminal...parts of it were Russian Intelligence Services...that part...was in fact pointed straight at the US in what BND personnel I talk to openly state.."were a part and parcel GRU run active measures influence operation of a quality and depth not previously seen in use by the GRU directed straight into the US".....AND now Germany and France.

I work the principle of if it smells like a rat..looks like a rat..walks and talks like a Russian rat...call it a Russian rat...while others especially some in the US literally refuse to call it even a mouse or worse a duck....

Go back to the Gerasimov eight phases of his non linear warfare and that is what we are discussing here and reread phases one through five and then try to explain to me that;.....

1. cyber warfare
2. information warfare

Are not part of it...

They are in fact the two critical cornerstones of that doctrine..without effective active measure influence operations Russia cannot engage using the Gerasimov concepts....

THEN using the Russian concept of reverse mirroring in judging anything that comes out of Moscow..reverse mirroring in statements is also part and parcel of information warfare THEN read every single Russian/Lavrov/Putin statement coming out of Moscow on any subject in the last two years THEY claim to not have done and suddenly you find they have in fact done what they blame others of doing...

So let's use the terms correctly...reverse mirroring is a core deflection tactic inside information warfare.

THEN let's jump straight into comments coming out of the Trump WH who still steadfastly refuses to accept that the Russians are running a massive influence operations against us...and as of yesterday they are still at it....

In every single comment and or tweet coming out of Trump and any of his merry band of brothers who attempt to defend whatever he tweets...misstates or actually says in an interview the Russian propaganda principle of the 6 Ds is fully and completely being used BUT WAIT how can that be because they are Americans not Russians....?

Propaganda is propaganda regardless of who uses it....is there any difference between the Russia 6Ds and Trump's 6Ds....none whatsoever.....

Russian 6Ds....

Deflection...Distort....Distort....Dismay ALL designed to create Doubt and
Distrust...

NOW take that set of propaganda principles and use it to analyze anything Putin/Lavrov says and or what Trump tweets/says/misstates.....and now tell me that there are differences....

Back to botnets...the Russian one we took offline being controlled out of Macedonia run by a Russia Macedonian and funded out of Moscow as there was the only bank account they had.... generated before ...after and even when we took it down proTrump narrative messaging geared first at Trump voters....evidence we are sitting on shows extensive messaging into voters of six key states that went to Trump....of all of say twitter messaging in those states that was proTrump...Macedonia accounted for 42% of it...AGAIN aimed straight at US individual voters....

All the more interesting is that in countless Trump voter interviews they were adamant that they did not trust MSM and relied on social media...FOX...Breitbart and Infowars for all of their information....AND still largely do.

Then they went proTravelBan......THEN in the latest push...mainly #Syrianhoax...that was first generated in Russia..driven into the US via Infowars...Breitbart.com and three other right wing twitter accounts....AND even made it in a US Congresswoman's twitter account as a retweet.

Now tell me Russia influence operations against the US have stopped?

BTW when not being a proTrump operation they flipped to spamming and phishing.

Now tell me Gerasimov is not winning...he is as there is absolutely no push back on the cyber side and or information warfare side coming out of this WH....DoD or even DoS.

EVEN Trump lies....and no one holds him accountable...REMEMBER he promised his cyber plan in exactly 90 days....well yesterday was the 90th day...and did you see it?

Now go back to the Russia propaganda thread and read the great article done on Russian crime/Russian mob worldwide operations and how they are used by the RIS...

I see it every single day..you do not...simple as that.

Off the soap box...

NOTE:
How the Kremlin uses Russia’s criminal networks in Europe | by @markgaleotti
http://buff.ly/2pP343g

AND by extension into the US

"I graduated with a degree in philosophy and didn’t know where to turn." So s/he joined a Russian troll factory.
https://themoscowtimes.com/articles/...n-troll-57754#

Another Kremlin troll factory whistleblower: apparently workforce being cut back to only include true believers.

.@Twitter bots in action - #Russian #informationwarfare methods designed for "easy exploitation - high impact"
http://bit.ly/2p3b30p

One really does wonder if the Trump WH is in fact actually supporting Gerasimov's non linear warfare?

In addition to no Dep Secs at State and Pentagon, also no Undersecretaries or Assistant Secretaries. In other words, no FP team in place at all.

Trump's been in office 3 months & hasnt even NAMED (let alone confirmed) a Dep Sec for Defense or State. That is crazy. BUT 886 tweets later he is still tweeting hard and heavy.

Issuing a lot of tough talk threats on North Korea, Syrian/Russia and Iran is not a FP.

Hopefully they have though a secret plan where tough talk is in fact a new form of FP.

All boils down though to simply "creditability".....and right now Gerasimov is way ahead in that category.....

Seriously challenge any SWC reader or commenter to prove this Gerasimov comment above differently....

Perfect example of this FP failure on the part of the Trump WH...

Sec. Tillerson: Iran nuclear deal "fails to achieve the objective of a non-nuclear Iran. It only delays their goal."
http://abcn.ws/2orRHxi

So as SoS just what is his stated strategy that he should be repeating publicly that comes from the National Command Authority...Trump....?

There is none....

So what is Russia via Gerasimov doing in relation to Iran right at this moment in a non linear way?

Perfect example of the Gerasimov non linear warfare hard at work.....

Currently there is nothing but confusion coming out of the Trump WH...we have countless comments by SecDef...comments by SoS..comments by UNSC Ambassador....BUT nothing from the NCA Trump and Russians are using this confusion to push further along their "political war" both in Ukraine and against the US in general....

Putin Quietly Detaches Ukraine's Rebel Zones as U.S. Waffles
by Henry Meyer , Ilya Arkhipov , Stepan Kravchenko , and Yuliya Fedorinova

April‎ ‎20‎, ‎2017‎ ‎4‎:‎00‎ ‎AM‎ ‎CEST

Russia building trade links after Kiev imposes blockade

White House seems ‘uninterested,’ Russian diplomat says
Vladimir Putin is seizing on mixed signals from the U.S. to quietly tighten Russia’s grip on two rebel regions of Ukraine, burying hopes for a European-brokered peace deal and relief from sanctions anytime soon.
While the Kremlin continues to publicly back the accord that Germany and France oversaw in 2015, Putin’s real strategy in Ukraine is to fully separate the two border areas known as the Donbas through incremental integration with Russia, three people close to the leadership in Moscow said. He has no plans to recognize or annex the territories, they said.
Russia has been moving gradually, using a blockade by Ukrainian activists as political cover to take over key economic links with the separatist zones. Last week, Russian Railways slashed rates for shipping coal and iron ore to points near the rebel areas, where the metals industry provides most jobs. That will allow Russia to replace Ukrainian supplies halted by Kiev and ensure that steel plants continue to function, according to two people in the industry.
“A step has been taken toward detaching Donbas -- there’s no doubt about that,” a senior lawmaker in the ruling United Russia party, Konstantin Zatulin, said by phone from Moscow. Like other officials, Zatulin blamed Ukraine for forcing Moscow’s hand through the blockade, an allegation Kiev rejects.
Zatulin’s assessment of the Kremlin’s plans was confirmed by Alexei Chesnakov, a former Kremlin staffer who now advises Putin’s administration on Ukraine policy, and a senior government official who asked not to be identified.
Russian Citizenship
Earlier this year, Putin angered his Ukrainian counterpart, Petro Poroshenko, by signing a decree recognizing passports and other documents issued by the separatist governments in Luhansk and Donetsk, which have already declared the ruble their official currency. The Kremlin is also considering making it easier for the 2 million residents of the regions to become Russian citizens, which would dramatically complicate any attempt by Kiev to reassert control.
Moscow is implementing the so-called “Transnistria scenario,” according to the deputy head of Poroshenko’s administration, Kostiantyn Yelisieiev, referring to the breakaway region in the former Soviet republic of Moldova, which hosts Russian troops but has no citizenship agreements with Russia.
Russia supports a string of separatist regions in former Soviet republics, using them as leverage over pro-Western governments in what it considers to be its sphere of influence. In 2008, Russia sent troops into Georgia to secure two such areas that are now essentially Kremlin protectorates. Last month, Russia absorbed some of the militias there into its regular army.
“We don’t have peace for one reason: Russians are not interested in reaching peace,” Poroshenko said in a speech in London on Tuesday. “They are interested in exerting control.”
Putin’s moves in Ukraine pose a challenge to the U.S. and the European Union, which publicly support the 2015 Minsk accord that calls for Ukraine to regain control of the Donbas. A collapse of the deal would be a major blow to German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who’s spent a lot of political capital trying to end the worst violence Europe’s seen since the the Balkan wars of the 1990s. The three-year conflict has killed 10,000 people and displaced 2 million more.
President Donald Trump’s administration, on the other hand, has sent mixed signals on its stance and even appears to be “totally uninterested” in the conflict, as one senior Russian diplomat put it. Trump has taken a tough line rhetorically, though he hasn’t made his position clear and the White House seems focused on issues it considers more pressing like Syria and North Korea.
While Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has questioned Ukraine’s importance for U.S. taxpayers, he’s also insisted that sanctions be maintained on Russia until the Kremlin respects its commitments to restore peace. Previously, the new U.S. administration had only pledged to keep the less onerous penalties that were imposed in response to Putin’s annexation of Crimea.
‘Always Ready’
Putin’s strategy involves developing levers that can be used to strengthen the Kremlin’s control over the Donbas on short notice, two Western diplomats in Moscow said, an assessment confirmed by former Russian officials.
Retaliatory measures “are always ready,” said Chesnakov, the Kremlin adviser on Ukraine. “Every time Ukraine gives us an excuse they are implemented.”
In January, Ukrainian nationalist war veterans blocked off cargo links with the rebel-held east. Two months later, Poroshenko formalized the blockade even though it’s costing his country’s economy about 1 percent of output because of the cut-off of key raw material supplies including coal.
Poroshenko has said the ban on trade will be lifted once separatist authorities reverse their seizure of Ukrainian enterprises. Donetsk and Luhansk in March took control of about 40 Ukrainian companies, including billionaire Rinat Akhmetov’s steel-making and electricity assets.
This reflects the financial component of Putin’s policy, according to Andrey Margolin, an economist at the Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration. After two years of recession, Russia can scarcely afford to continue subsidizing the Donbas, so it needs to incorporate Donetsk and Luhansk commercially to help offset the expense, he said.
“The less this economy is integrated with Russia’s, the higher the costs will be,” Margolin said.
Frozen Conflict
With the Minsk accord now basically at a dead end, the Donbas is drifting into a frozen conflict that may last decades.
As for Poroshenko, his hands are tied, just as Putin likes it, according to Volodymyr Fesenko at the Penta research institute in Kiev.
Domestic opponents are preventing Poroshenko from granting wide autonomy to the rebel regions, as required under the peace agreement, while two other contentious issues mandated by the accord -- a full cease-fire and a return of border areas to Ukrainian control -- are also no closer to being fulfilled.
“This lets Russia strengthen its hold on the two republics,” Fesenko said.

Realizing the term "Gerasimov Doctrine" has been misconstrued in some cases and wrongly assessed, there are still points to be made. There was also a lot of experience and wisdom associated with the aforementioned articles and speeches.

RUSSIA AND HYBRID WARFARE – GOING BEYOND THE LABEL

"Although the term ‘hybrid warfare’ was not mentioned in the article, Gerasimov was later identified as ‘the face of the hybrid war approach’, for example, in Maria Snegovaya’s article on Russian information warfare published in 2015.19 The idea that Gerasimov outlined a new ‘hybrid warfare’ doctrine that later served as the basis for Russia’s aggression against Ukraine is the result of a selective and hindsight-based interpretation of the article. In fact, discussing the Arab Spring and NATO’s intervention in Libya, Gerasimov outlines his views on general trends in Western and US approaches to warfare going back to the 1991 Gulf War. In his view, the increasing importance of non-military tools in conflicts, including political, economic, informational and humanitarian measures, is an important element of change in the current operating environment."

NONLINEAR SCIENCE AND WARFARE: CHAOS, COMPLEXITY AND THE US MILITARY IN THE INFORMATION AGE:

"Doctrine often serves as a formalized embodiment or reflection of the dominant military theory within a military organization. It expresses the military organization’s official understanding of the nature of warfare and the general requirements for victory in warfare. It also serves as a statement of organizational identity, specifying and formalizing the organization’s understanding of itself, including the organization’s roles and missions, its main methods of accomplishing its mission, and its relationship to other military organizations and elements of national power. It serves as an official, common understanding of these matters for members of the organization. It also outlines, in a general way, how the military organization will conduct itself during times of war. In the United States, each service has its own set of doctrinal manuals, which are typically organized hierarchically, with the top-most manual dealing with the service’s general understandings of the nature of warfare, requirements for victory, and the service’s mission and means of accomplishing the mission. There are typically a number of lower, more specific doctrinal statements covering more specific issues such as command and control, strategy, logistics, etc.

Uniformed military professionals themselves typically write doctrine. But, like military theory, the twentieth century has seen more participation and greater influence by civilians in the process of doctrine writing. Doctrine is and has been created in various institutional locations depending on time-period and service branch. In general, however, doctrine is usually closely associated with institutions of professional military education, such as command and general staff colleges or war colleges.4 Military professional journals, usually published by institutions of professional military education, often serve as forums for debate about matters of theory and doctrine.5 Doctrine is not the same as strategy. While doctrine formalizes general understandings of the nature of warfare, the requirements for victory, and the general means that a service will use to achieve victory, strategy is a more specific application of those general understandings to a particular situation. For example, while doctrine might specify that the employment of a “maneuver style” of operations is generally more likely to lead to victory, and hence is the officially preferred method, there could be any number of strategies that combine various weapons, tactics, formations, etc. in a specific way, to meet a specific challenge, but which are still consistent with a “maneuver style.”6 Of course, it is possible for strategies to be developed and implemented that do not reflect official doctrine, just as it is possible to have doctrine that does not reflect dominant theory. In general, however, the employment of weapons and forces on the battlefield reflects the official embodiment of a service’s understandings of itself and its world found in doctrine. Military theory, doctrine, and strategy form an integral part of what some have called “security imaginaries,” which is “that part of the social imaginary that deals with the understanding of the security world and in turn makes security practices possible” (Pretorius 2008: 117). It is about how “security and insecurity
10 Nonlinear science into U.S. military discourse (or threat) . . . are constructed through the fixing of meanings to things, an identity to ‘the self ’ and others, and the relationships that are thus instituted” (Pretorius 2008: 100). Military organizations and associated security professionals in and out of uniform engage in the production of military imaginaries through the production of theoretical knowledge about war, which can provide a sense of shared awareness about the military organization’s position within the wider environment. As military organizations and practices – as well as the larger social, political, and economic environments in which they operate – are increasingly affected by rapid changes in technology and the natural sciences, it is appropriate to classify Western military imaginaries as a form of “technoscientific imaginary” (Marcus 1995: 3–4), the study of which involves paying particular attention to “how people shape and are shaped by complex technical, social, and political-economic systems” (Fortun and Fortun 2005: 44).

In short, this book draws out U.S. military understandings of itself in its world that shape the conduct and outcomes of warfare, all with an eye on the role of concepts and metaphors from the sciences in these understandings."

IMHO this is the key sentence in all of any of the articles written about Russian non linear warfare....I use this term simply because that is the correct translation of the Russian term not the fancy PR term "hybrid".

QUOTE
In his view, the increasing importance of non-military tools in conflicts, including political, economic, informational and humanitarian measures, is an important element of change in the current operating environment."

The key cornerstones of this Russian non linear warfare are;
1. cyber warfare
2. information warfare

These two cornerstones are used to drive in a "soft fashion" and one step under actual open warfare...."political warfare" where Putin views the US as the leader in the neo liberal world he is confronting....

Out of this "political war"...Putin focuses on obtaining a "win" in these three core geo political strategic areas.....

1. damage and discredit NATO
2. damage and discredit EU
3. fully disconnect US from Europe and ME leaving Russia as the main actor in these areas thus gaining a "sphere of influence" free from US actions.

After Putin has demonstrated his abilities in meddling in US elections and hacking US organizations in this non linear war.....and supported by a massive info war which is still ongoing and with the backing of a current US President that still believes Russia did nothing wrong......

In the current cyber and information war the US is losing badly and or not even in the fight......

HECK even this US President has basically undertaken actions that actually support the current IS propaganda narrative...

Gerasimov...was correct and is currently "winning"....

AND what has the current US President done to counter any of this...."lost his NK threat armada which we now know went in the wrong direction from his own statements"....eaten chocolate cake while firing TLAMs at Sri Lanka until corrected in a major interview...in order to protect "those beautiful babies" which are now under massive incendiary cluster munitions and thermobaric bomb attacks....ALL violations of International Humanitarian Law

AND suddenly they are no longer "beautiful babies" as it would require again actions on his part....

Sad....

Until Americans wake up and truly realize just how deeply the Russian influence operation in meddling in the US election went and that it is still continuing....

Gerasimov is winning.........

BUT many it seems really do not care.....

Lost in all the chatter around the FBI Russian connection investigation was this comment last week from the FBI Director..."Americans must slowly realize that what they though was "true" during the election is not what it seemed to be"....

Yesterday European media released an article that got picked up in the US MSM that the US information/cyber meddling in the US election was driven by Russian think tank that answers only to Putin and led by a former high ranking FSB General...

And two critical documents out of that think tank that outlined and confirmed the influence operation were acquired and passed to US intelligence by Europeans...

That is why when one really follows FBI statements...they had come to the conclusion that Putin was actually informed and had approved the plan....

THEN suddenly we see this also again out of European sources today being reported.....

Putin's 2016 US election sway drafter Reshetnikov was also key operational figure on ground in Montenegro coup.
https://twitter.com/christogrozev/status/854804488095494144 

Russian SVR Gen. Reshetnikov openly admitted to Bulgarian media he proposed Rumen Radev candidacy to BG parties.
https://twitter.com/vits2014/status/802086043004653568 

Fun fact - Russian General Reshetnikov lost his position as head of NGO Strategic Study after failure of Montenegro coup.

He was replaced by the current head of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service...SVR...

RISS/RISI used to be a professional foreign intelligence think tank until it became a laughingstock under Reshetnikov (2009-2017)

How many Americans were actually aware of this actual Russian coup plot in Montenegro designed to stop them from joining NATO and EU....by killing the proWest leader???

Gerasimov's non linear warfare hard at work......

In order to understand this below one must fully understand exactly what the former KGB and GDR MfS Stasi mean with the term of "influence operations" WHICH means that there are very very few US grey beard types left alive that fully understand and have experienced that period of the COLD War and understand what and how the Soviet Union and GDR used "influence ops in those days"...so critical in understanding exactly what Russia is now doing.

US intel report: Vladimir Putin "ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election"
http://cnn.it/2il3jQj

There are two major German books that would contribute greatly to this debate ....one by a GDR Stasi COL who actually ran the GDR MfS "influence operations Department X" for over 25 years and one written by a former MfS Stasi officer a Major who was recruited and worked for the German BND before he was extracted in a day time op to bring him to the West...AND who led and recruited 25 West German economic espionage agents...9 who were arrested in a single day and another 15 who fled back to the GDR....

The exact same "influence ops TTPs" of the 80s is exactly what we are seeing today just updated due to the IT technology of social media...internet and hacking.....and a 24 hour news cycle coupled with "fake news and fake news sites"....

AFTER more Trump tweets today referencing WLs and Russian hacking being a "witch hunt"...it is important to bring back up comments taken from a 1992 German published book which concerned the GDR Stasi COL who headed the GDR Disinformation Warfare Dept X for over 25 years......

Stasi's highly secretive "Department X" in charge of active measures [aktive Maßnahmen] was first presented internally in Belzig in 1986

Book in German
Auftrag Irrefuerhung
Wie die Stasi Politik im Westen machte
Publisher Carlson

Auftrag: Irreführung. Wie die Stasi Politik im Westen machte - Amazon.de
https://www.amazon.de/Auftrag-Irreführung-Politik-Westen-machte/dp/3551850038

Fits nicely with the Trump tweets.....

Stasi: "Conspiracy was widely practiced—most widely concerning the existence and responsibilities of the Active Measures Department [X]"
—‘Embarrassment’
—‘corrosion’ [Zersetzung]
—‘incitement’
—‘disruption’
—‘influence’
—‘discrediting’
"even combined into one active measure"

Stasi covert operator: "Active measures directed against [Western] intelligence agencies in Bonn were code-named JUNGLE"

Stasi memoirs: "[KGB] black propaganda used camouflage and deception in order to penetrate deep into the political structures of the West."

Stasi, 1980s: "Black and white propaganda were not divided by some firewall. They were more like twins: information and disinformation"
Perhaps the most remarkable historical novelty when comparing 1980s Active Measures to the 2010s: this recurring tenet is no longer valid —
MEANING..in the 80s if the active measure was detected they would back off...NOW Russia in fact doubles down more.

A few details on how Russia's KGB and East Germany's Stasi cooperated on active measures and covert influence operations

"In the 80s we increased our support for the West German peace movement—at the same time we fought the pacifists in our own country"

Stasi HVA, 1989: "Western intelligence agencies simply didn’t have such a fine-grained disinformation apparatus in Europe."

"We [Stasi] eventually learned that psychological warfare did not favor peace"

One of the most amazing details from an amazing book: Stasi active measures & disinformation targeted famous Nazi-hunter Simon Wiesenthal
Always amazing what Stasi covert Active Measure operators said about Western journalists—not dissimilar assessments probably going on today

This is what I mean by being now in a true "war"..."a war on the invisible front" common phase during the Cold War used by GDR Stasi....KGB and GRU spies inside the West.....as well as Polish SB and the Czech BtS agents.

Major GDR Stasi operator: "Our 'battle on the invisible front'—that is inside the West—was unencumbered by moral constraints vis-a-vis the 'enemy.'"

GDR Stasi: "The disinformation we engaged in far surpassed everything that [Western] intelligence agencies did—in character, extent & intensity"

QUOTE
Stunning section—eg: "Among many journalists prejudices against their own intelligence agencies were predominant—thus facilitating our work"
UNQUOTE

QUOTE
Note that op isn't over—it simply entered its next phase. Trump is inadvertently prolonging this active measure, making it *more effective*
UNQUOTE

"What would active measures be without the journalist?" asks Stasi's head of active measures, reflecting on his trade after 25 years in 1986

Stasi: "journalism and intelligence have objectively entered a kind of marriage. Both complement each other and can’t let go of each other."

"The press, radio, and TV are the ideal battleground for a Stasi operator focused on active measures."

Stasi memoirs: "Active measures are a Soviet invention that didn’t just imply a 'war of words,' but also a specific intelligence structure"

"Often the truth served the lie."

GDR Stasi active measures operator, 1992
Couple this mindset now with cyber/info warfare....and you have the "war" I am talking about....

Cyberwar for Sale

After a maker of surveillance software was hacked, its leaked documents shed light on a shadowy global industry that has turned email theft into a terrifying — and lucrative — political weapon.
By MATTATHIAS SCHWARTZJAN. 4, 2017
http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/04/magazine/cyberwar-for-sale.html

BTW...if you have been following me on the Ukrainian thread since Crimea you would have seen me post a tons of comments around this particular Italian software company....Hacking Team....they had a massive hack and millions of Megs of data..emails...sales contracts....actual hacking tools/software viruses and malware software was placed on the common internet...

I downloaded all 800M of their data and am still going through it for my customers especially the hacking tools side of the house and all Microsoft problems they spotted and successfully used when MS did not know they even existed..........they sidestepped EU export regulations when they sold their tools and software...

AND our new incoming President being as smart as he claims he is should have known all of this if he fully understands hacking as he claims he does....

This is from 1986 and from the major GDR Stasi officer mentioned above.....RECOGNIZE anything?????

Stasi, 1986: "For the man on the street it is getting harder to assess [news stories]. This is where we come in as an intelligence agency."

East Germany's Stasi created 'active measures' Department X after receiving KGB instructions to do so during a visit to Moscow in ~1961

THIS GDR Stasi officer was the master craftsman of his tradecraft....active measures for over 25 years ...ie information warfare and disinformation.....

Stasi's Wagenbreth: "A powerful adversary can be defeated only by carefully and methodically exploiting every crack within its own society"

NOW does everyone fully understand what drives the Russian non linear warfare at it's core....
1. cyber warfare
2. information warfare including disinformation

AND this is what the former General Flynn and Trump seem to want to fully forget......WHY is that....simply put...both are fully and completely compromised by visits to Moscow and what occurred there...

QUOTED references are in German from the German book...English translation
MISSION: DECEPTION—amazing, eerily topical 1992 book on Stasi active measures in the West, by two former operators, one from "Department X"
Stasi's highly secretive "Department X" in charge of active measures [aktive Maßnahmen] was first presented internally in Belzig in 1986

Large number of confirming documents reside in the German Federal MfS Stasi Document Center here in Berlin and is open for researchers of that period..

A second book on GDR Stasi Economic Espionage that I highly recommend since I debriefed Stiller in a record timeframe shortly before he departed Berlin as he was being extracted via the BND out of East Berlin to Munich....after his extraction the West German government arrested 9 GDR economic espionage agents and 15 fled back to the GDR....virtually wiping out in a single move the entire GDR Stasi HVA economic espionage department.

He carried out of East Berlin with him over 40,000 microfiche from the Stasi safe of his Department Chief a COL.

Stiller went on to be moved to the US under witness protection until the Wall fell and now he is back in Germany as he had been sentenced to death in absentia by the MfS.

Book:
In the Center of Spying
Werner Stiller
Im Zentrum der Spionage von Werner Stiller (Autor)
Broschiert – August 1994
In German

WITHOUT fully understanding both books one truly cannot understand and appreciate Russian information and cyber warfare as part of their political warfare aimed at the US.....

Actually has not stopped since the 80s when one thinks about it....

The interesting fact in all of this is ...and the incoming administration seems..actually no...appears to not believe what Russia conducted was in fact non linear warfare....

While we have seen that the IC concludes Russian hacking occurred and was directed from the level of a Putin...what is not so clear is did in fact the hacking actually change votes..only a thorough analysis of the hacks on the three State databases and comparing paper ballots against digital counts is the only sure way to answer this....

BUT we do know and can prove as very effective information war was being driven as well and that did in fact change votes.....if we take one analysis....from a very good poller....the hammering on the Clinton emails tied to the FBI sudden investigation and the emails being released COST the Clinton campaign a sudden swing of 23-31% and that shortly before the election...

We also have proven that 33% of all proTrump English produced tweets came from a Russian owned Macedonian troll factory....

THIS does not include the massive fake news sites and the magnification of that fake news by alt right and neo conversation blogsites and websites..numbering in the hundreds..

And this by @maxseddon, the first reporter to dive into Russian troll operations in the US
https://www.buzzfeed.com/maxseddon/documents-show-how-russias-troll-army-hit-america?utm_term=.qb26RA29e#.aceO7BNMG 

In some aspects information warfare is far more dangerous than hacking as it attempts through a number of varying narrative all previously placed into play via Moscow to change the views of the general public...

QUOTE
1/06/2017 — 
WASHINGTON, DC -- U.S. Senator Jack Reed (D-RI), the Ranking Member of the Armed Services Committee, issued the following statement today after the release of a declassified intelligence report highlighting Russian hacking and interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election:
“Our elections should be decided by American citizens, not foreign hackers, heads of state, or their propagandists.
This report shows that Russian operatives actively manipulated our presidential election.  They left cyber fingerprints and the U.S. intelligence community unanimously concluded that Russia intervened with the intention of undermining Hillary Clinton and helping Donald Trump.  The report clearly states: 'the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him.'
Regardless, as Senator McCain points out: this was an attack on all Americans because it undermines our democracy.
We know that Russia continues to engage in similar cyber campaigns and we need to take corrective action to put a stop to it.
This declassified report is a start, but it is not enough.  The American public has been given a glimpse of a few pieces of a much larger puzzle.  They deserve as much information as can be provided without putting our intelligence assets and techniques at risk.  And the most effective way to achieve that goal is through an independent, select committee to investigate Russian interference with our election. 
There is hard evidence and broad consensus from U.S. intelligence officials on this matter, and there ought to be bipartisan consensus and action from Congress, too. 
This is not about embarrassing the President-elect; it’s about protecting our democracy.  I realize this may be an uncomfortable situation for President-elect Trump, but the American people and the strength of our democracy should come first.”

At the heart of Russian non linear warfare are the two key cornerstones...cyber and information warfare......and Russia played these two very well during the US campaign and election....

SUPPORTED by the now President elect with his unending number of twitter storms....

Fun fact! The last time the President-elect held a press conference, he encouraged Russia to actively hack Secretary Clinton's emails MAYBE that is why he holds no more press conferences.

Just a reminder that, if you were paying attention, Trump's Russia links were perfectly clear last summer
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/how-a-trump-presidency-could-destabilize-europe/2016/07/21/9ec38a20-4f75-11e6-a422-83ab49ed5e6a_story.html?utm_term=.70633ddaa0a6 

Also, Trump's use of Russian narratives has been evident for many months
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/globa
l-opinions/why-is-trump-suddenly-talking-about-world-war-iii/2016/10/28/be44cc0e-9d24-11e6-a0ed-ab0774c1eaa5_story.html?utm_term=.6714df96c8c2 

Use of "secret" information plus trolling has been standard Russian tool, used in European elections for years
http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/anne-applebaum-russia-does-its-best-to-elect-president-trump 

On a scale of one to five with one being the best score..Russia's one is "winning" right now....

"Given the fact that Russian non-linear warfare is not so much directed at
winning wars but at undermining societies and political systems, Western strategy
should focus more on strengthening the resilience of post-Soviet countries."

March 2016

file:///C:/Users/575222/Downloads/klein_russiamilitary_feb16_web.pdf

http://www.stratcomcoe.org/online_library

"Given the fact that Russian non-linear warfare is not so much directed at
winning wars but at undermining societies and political systems, Western strategy
should focus more on strengthening the resilience of post-Soviet countries."

March 2016

file:///C:/Users/575222/Downloads/klein_russiamilitary_feb16_web.pdf

http://www.stratcomcoe.org/online_library

Unrestricted Warfare Author on Geopolitics 2016....

Source: Qiao Liang, “Major General: How Should China Contend Against the US,”China Military Online (in English), 6 January 2016.

To effectively contain the United States, other countries shall think more about how to cut off the capital flow to the US while formulating their strategies because that’s the way to control America’s lifeblood. Why could the 9/11 in 2001 hit the US so hard? Apart from political and mental impact, a much heavier blow was that it drove more than US$300 billion out of the country within a month.

If we connect and analyze all kinds of geopolitical events in this way, we must have a deeper understanding of geopolitics and currency-politics instead of simply emphasizing the importance of the former but ignoring the latter’s decisive influence on the world.

The US is the first financial empire in the world, and will be the last one as far as I’m concerned. There will be no more empire or financial hegemony after the US because the Internet age has arrived, in which currency has become highly electronic and online consumption and remote transaction are driving away paper money.

Then what is China faced with in a world when geopolitics and currency-politics still exist? I think it’s an age when the US dollar, Euro and RMB will all play a part. After that, currency will be replaced by a new model of denomination.

In this process, China should follow the trend and seize opportunities to realize its own interests. From geopolitics to currency-politics and to the current age that we can hardly name yet, only those who can adapt to changes will be the final winner.

History, doctrine, SOF employment, State as a System analysis, propaganda mechanisms, and Effects Based Operations.

http://sprotyv.info/en/news/10597-russian-hybrid-warfare-what-are-effect...

Russian Priorities of Warfare

1. Methodological priority: World view and methodology – changing the worldview and methodology of the individual as a means of warfare method (how a person sees the world) is the most potent from the sustainability point of view. That is why the Russian Orthodox Church and the creation of the “Russian World” as an all-encompassing worldview is of utmost priority for Russia in order to achieve its long-term goals.

2. Chronological priority, the warfare of history – to distort history and chronology in order to justify claims on new territories both for external and internal users as well as to brainwash external and internal victims with propaganda for them to regard Russian claims as legitimate.

3. Priority based on facts and their interpretations: ideology, technology, methodology. The examples: Russian Doctrine, ideology of Russia as Third Rome,AlexandrDugin’s ideology and hisEurasianism,Panslavism based on distorted historical interpretations (see above – 2nd chronololgical priority).

4. Economics priority: eсonomics and finance warfare (example – trade wars against Ukraine, use of the unjustified gas price as an instrument of war against Europe and Ukraine, Russian banking and finance system as warfare tool against Ukraine, currency speculations and throw-in of counterfeit local currency in order to destabilize Ukrainian currency and the Ukrainian monetary system, strategy to buy sovereign debt of victim country and then to request immediate debt re-payment etc.)

5. Ecological priority, “Genetics” warfare (alcohol, tobacco, environmental pollution e.t.c.) – to promote in the victim country a tolerance to abuse of alcohol, narcotics, to support environmental pollution, deliberately destroying the infrastructure and industrial capacities of the victim county e.t.c. In line with this priority Russia is making efforts to destroy the infrastructure of Donetsk and Luhansk Oblast. The terrorists mined the Stirol chemical plant, threatening to cause an environmental catastrophe in the Donetsk Oblast.

6. Military priority: conventional warfare. Military warfare was used by Russia in a new form of an undeclared hybrid war with a wide application of newly created Special Operation Forces (SSO) in combination with use of local residents brainwashed by the ‘higher’ priorities of warfare described above.

As we can see that information and network operation strategies are key and cover 5 priorities of 6 (Methodological priority, Chronological priority, Priority based on facts, Economics priority, Ecological priority) and only one priority is a conventional military priority.

Article was published in Euromaidan Press on November 5th, 2014










Victor,

I found your analysis interesting, but your grading criteria for the Russian doctrine too kind. Russia at best has developed a doctrine that gave them an "initial" edge in Ukraine, but now what? The conflict is looking more and more conventional to me, whether the combatants wear uniforms or not.

Theoretically this doctrine could be employed in other countries bordering Russia that have discontented Russia populations, but where else? I agree it gives them the advantage in the initial phases of the conflict, but then what? And since their hand has been exposed it would be much more difficult to pull this off in the future. To get a grade of C, much less an A, I would need Russian theorists to explain to me what they accomplished beyond inadvertently strengthening NATO, weakening the Russian economy,and making Russia an international pariah state. Hopefully they could provide something beyond increasing their nationalist, which is a sword that cuts both ways. Doctrine in the end should enable military and other forms of power to achieve the state's policy goals. Is it really doing that?

To me Russia seems to be in a bit of a quagmire in Ukraine. Perhaps this is why they're sending more conventional military support to Assad? Do they need a perceived win somewhere? I guess a win in this case would be anything that allows them to poke the West in the eye and get away with it? That is a pride win, not a long term interests win. However, we must recognize that pride can be dangerous, and proud men don't always make what we consider to be rational decisions.

In Europe their new doctrine would probably fail "if" NATO pushed back, which is why it is being executed under a nuclear umbrella to deter NATO from pushing back. So the real risk isn't their non-linear doctrine, but the risk that non-linear warfare could intentionally or accidentally lead to nuclear warfare. In many respects this form of warfare isn't all that new, nor has it proven to be overly effective. Little green men without big green men and their armor and their nukes behind them would accomplish little in Europe beyond creating some instability. The advantage Russia enjoys is that the West desires to stay in the gray zone. They're exploiting what they see as our political weakness, but only time will prove if NATO is weak or wise.

Also it is a bit of a stretch to confuse two Chinese COL's writing an article on what they called unrestricted warfare as Chinese military doctrine. China may think about these things, but what we know is they're modernizing their military to include their cyber capabilities. That would indicate that non-linear, unrestricted, and other forms of warfare executed by powerful state actors will still be dependent on credible conventional and nuclear capabilities to deter those targeted from quickly crushing the unconventional aspects of their doctrine.

The third off set strategy seems to be largely focused on high end technology, which will certainly be needed, but we'll be remiss if it doesn't address the irregular warfare aspect of war also. Despite claims to the contrary, the last decade of war really didn't make us better at it. Also we'll lose whatever skills we did gain if they're not continued to be taught and practiced. This goes back to what Secretary Gates told DOD, they need to maintain a balanced portfolio of capabilities that isn't too heavily slanted one way or the other.

Bill M,

Thanks for the comments and critiques. The "academic snapshot" has definitely changed in the last six months. I'll re-visit some of your main points later, but just want to briefly address the "Chinese doctrine" comments. The revised version of this article referenced Unrestricted Warfare as unoffcial doctrine and highlighted China's three warfare concepts which alot of other authors here have mentioned/analysed recently. Those concepts are: Psychological, Media and Legal. I agree with you that those concepts mutually support cyber, conventional and nuclear warfare.

Kudos on a very fine article, particularly the illumination of the connection between the Chinese approach to unrestricted warfare without boundaries, and the Russian implementation of the same idea, what the Americans and NATO are now calling hybrid warfare.

I am so very sad to say that I conceptualized all of this in 1989 for General Al Gray's article, Global Intelligence Challenges of the 1990's as published in the American Intelligence Journal (and easily found online by searching for the title).

In particular I distinguished between the Conventional Threat and the Emerging Threat as shown below, and called for "peaceful preventive measures" as a major aspect of integrated national security strategy.

Conventional Threat
Governmental
Conventional/Nuclear
Static Orders of Battle
Linear
Rules of Engagement (ROE)
Known Doctrine
Strategic Warning
Known Intelligence Assets

Emerging Threat
Non-Governmental
Non-Conventional
Dynamic or Random
Non-linear
No constraints (ROE)
Unknown doctrine
No established I&W net
Unlimited 5th column

Typically then, and still today, no one wanted to listen. Conventional war is profitable for the few, peace is profitable for the many, and intelligence is irrelevant to how Washington makes decisions. Our military is a spending machine, nothing more. Viet-Nam and Iraq were about "using up" our military so we would have to buy it again. Until we can establish the primacy of intelligence (evidence-based decision support to strategy, policy, acquisition, and operations) and restore integrity to counterintelligence (enabling the FBI to nail the known financial, religious, and ideological traitors in senior positions across the board) we will continue to be a corrupt ineffective nation unable to assure the security and prosperity of our public.

I appreciate the comments and SWJ's continued professional and support. This article was written in early May (before my first trip to Ukr) and a lot has undoubtedly changed since then. I'm in Ukraine now, so I'll try and add to the discussion later. I'd like to address tactical level hybrid formations and mission command systems on both sides. I agree with a lot of your recent assessments highlighting past non-linear wars and how quickly it has adapted and transitioned recently.

Additional Notes: 8 Phases of New Generation/Non-linear war doctrine
1-2.Non-military asymmetric warfare
3. Combination of steps 1-2
4. Arrival of polite green men
5. Indirect military action
6. Employment of direct military measures
7. Combination of targeted campaigns
8. Destroy points of resistance and surviving enemy units

Vicrasta----if you are in fact in the Ukraine--then get as much info as the UAF will feed you on the following;

1. use of Spetsnaz as a led attack unit vs the perceived role as a SOF unit--but since this current ceasefire they have gone back to their original SOF role as sabotage, sniper and recon units AND heavily involved in the training of proxy sabotage units
2. integration of Russian officers in the C&C of the proxy mercenary units
3. gain all available experience of the UAF in a totally Russian controlled EW environment
NOTE: social media has reported that in the current largescale Russian exercise Center 2015--the Russians are deploying and using a fully automated EW system.
4. all UAF experience in a total denied airspace environment meaning no air/helio support of any kind
5. UAF workarounds in a total comms jammed environment
6. UAF experience in weathering massive shelling attacks both from artillery and MLRSs
7. counter battery success or failures--most of the time the UAF did not return fire out of fear of being accused of violating Minsk 2--but when they did social media has carried a number of reports on actual successes in stopping Russian fire
8. gain as much info as possible on the Russian heavy use of drones and how the drones were used to direct arty fire as well as surveillance--there were days of 25-30 in the air at one time.
9. how is the Ukrainian State Security layering the deep sabotage/terror fight that has been accompanying the ground fighting
10. gain everything possible on the Russian tactical battle groups--ie at the Company and BN levels---meaning TO&E and tactics--that is where they are maneuvering well and that is the future direction their are heading in
11. gain anything on any new weapon or weapons systems as the Russians have been liberally testing all their new equipment in battlefield conditions--it is as almost as if they do not care if we see them

As for MC---there has been virtually no reported MC coming back down from the UAF General Staff--actually the two major defeats--August 2014 and Debeltseve were detected by ground commanders who asked to pull out prior to the encirclements but were held in place by the GS. The ground fighting commanders have actually been rather good in the face of what is ongoing across from their units.

There is though one interesting note---during the early stages of the UAF ATO campaign in 2014--even as a rag tag group the UAF ground commanders broke into a shoot and scoot mindset and ran with it with no instructions from a totally incompetent UAF GS---in some aspects similar to Guerderian and ended up in August 2014 having almost beaten the mercenaries by enveloping them a number of times--this triggered the Russian invasion to rescue their proxies.

Question would be--was this actually MC as they knew their President's intent--defeat the mercenaries and protect the Ukraine, was it just battlefield instinct and Us war movies or did it come out of their Russian doctrinal training days????

Also critical to look at is ----has the UAF actually stalemated the Russian army and her mercenaries as the current Russian doctrine is really still focused on a deep fight developing out of encirclements.

During this summer offensive which it was regardless of what the MSM/WH/Obama/Kerry say--the Russian forces led by Spetsnaz were stymied at every attempt to break through---this is critical-- can in fact the Russian deep fight doctrine be stopped with a very early and aggressive attack on the one or both of the enveloping elements--meaning stop one and the other hesitates out of fear they have created a counter break through point and vice versa allowing the defender the chance to regroup and defend well.

Layered over all of this is a very aggressive weaponization of information war that is still very active and from our side--we have never been in the game--we have nothing similar to it--ie 700M USD invested for next year alone in their TV/radio global reach not counting their internet troll army.

Since you are from the JMRC--then you know that there is currently no DATE scenario that fits perfectly the Ukrainian environment--WHICH must become the standard if the training centers really seriously want to counter non linear warfare.

Even the one recently run at the NTC came nowhere close to it--they did not run it under total comms blackout/jamming, they did not have a massive enemy EW environment, they did not replicate the extensive and very heavy arty/rocket shelling 24 X 7 estimated at times to be over 200 tons fired at them daily, they did not replicate a denied airspace and or SEAD ops etc.

THEN on top of all of that one must factor in the now six single points of failure inside the Russian version of non linear warfare and at the same time factor in their adaption to these single points of failure in order to fully understand what is now ongoing in Sept 2015.

Then and only then will any US Army training scenario truly replicate the Ukrainian environment.

If you can succeed in replicating say 90% of the above then you have a scenario to be proud of--anything under 90% is failure in my eyes.

Let's not even get into the current Iranian non linear version.

We claim for ourselves that the US Army is adaptive and agile--but the Russians are actually showing us that even in their structured top down system --yes it can be equally as adaptive and agile as well.

Having worked with them in Atlas Vision 2012/2013--that actually is a surprise for me as they in all the planning sessions in Germany and Moscow never did show us that side of them.

Outlaw 09,

Good rundown and I'll see what I can do this week.

Remember this is all after the Russian non linear warfare crosses a known international border--I posted here awhile ago an interesting article from a NYC Professor who is extremely knowledgeable on the Russian military about what he called "non linear defense"--meaning what can a targeted country do when it sees non linear warfare building --meaning what does it do internally prior to combat ops to counter it from a legal, economic and political sense.

In some aspects this is extremely important--meaning can the target country defend itself in the build up phase that would block the aggressor before the fact.

An interesting concept----

BTW--we talk as if non linear warfare is a one way street--but what if the aggrieved nation decides to flip it but in a non violent manner.

Even after a one year of war with Russia the Ukraine has not blockaded the Crimea--the Tartars who have suffered badly since the take over have started a non violent blockade of all roads leading into Crimea---the average daily food shipments were around 4-7 tons of food needed daily.

If that stopped CAN in fact Russia step in and provide that same services?

How does Kremlin handle #CrimeaBlockade while at the same time focusing on Syria? Which it is supplying via...Crimea https://twitter.com/olliecarroll/statuses/645543375698010112

THAT is one heck of non linear flip in progress--meaning can the Russian adventure into Syria be forced to come to a stand still due to having to focus on a non violent food blockade over their treatment of the Tartars in Crime????

Meaning the Ukraine can say to Putin--we are not behind this--it is your fault for your treatment of the Tartars so work it out with them--plausible denialability can be played two ways.

Km-long line of trucks at checkpoint in Kalanchak #Kherson region on entry to #Crimea @krymrealii pic.twitter.com/IvUjuUMmqJ

In all the articles written and published here in SWJ on the subject of Russian non linear warfare or the Chinese, Iranian and IS UW strategies we as readers seem/appear to have simply forgotten two critical items so necessary in the conversation--we act as if they are in fact there BUT and this is critical they are not there by any means.

1. the necessary and completely total whole of government approach needed to counter non linear warfare regardless of flavor of the month-simply stated we as a country, government and political/military leadership do not do whole of government well actually if AFG and Iraq are the best examples we have--then not at all. We talk a great game but when the rubber hits the road daily--nothing to be seen.

2. in order to fully counter all flavors of non linear warfare one must have a WH, NSC, DNI, DoD, DoS that has in fact developed a C-UW strategic national level strategy that is clear and concise that allows then one to implement a counter concept regardless and this is key regardless of flavor of the month or yes even multiple flavors of the month as we now see with Russia and Iran in Syria.

Sorry to say this President, his entire 700 person NSC staff and his DNI are not capable of creating one and they have actually had over three years to do it--as even social media saw this coming at them that long ago.
At least DoD has begun the discussion and formulations of one--but the political side and DoS are missing in action.

As proof that we have not even a single coherently stated foreign policy built around any strategic strategy here are a few examples of day to day reality this current WH has not even begun to address other than via tap dancing--so all the theoretical discussions on UW and or C-UW are a collective waste of time.

Wait, you mean eroding NATO forces has consequences? “The conclusion was that we are unable to defend the Baltics.” http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/09/18/exclusive-the-pentagon-is-preparing-...

As usual, the #Kremlin is not aware of anything. More vacationers, tourists and volunteers.
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/a5f5117e-5e03-11e5-a28b-50226830d644.html...

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s senior military advisor says Russia is in sync with Iran regarding Syria http://www.criticalthreats.org/iran-news-round-september-18-2015

Syria: #Russia|n selfie soldiers' locations @ProtestSPb pic.twitter.com/muEs6IpGPK

Russia's soldiers aren't only in Latakia & Tartus. Their selfies geolocated to Aleppo, Hama, Homs, Damascus. #Syria https://twitter.com/loogunda/status/644726066012143616

OR has any SWJ reader here seen a publicly debated US C-UW strategy come out of this WH in say the last 6 or so years--if it did I must have been sleep walking.

https://de.informnapalm.org/mark-gal...inearer-krieg/

While this is in German—highly recommend reading it as Mark is one of the leading global SMEs on the Russian military and his blog "In the Shadows of Moscow” is worth following----and he has just released a thorough book on the Russian Spetsnaz.

Mark Galeotti: Die „Gerassimow-Doktrin“ und Russlands nicht-linearer Krieg

Der Autor, Dr. Mark Galeotti erforscht russischen Geschichte und Sicherheitsfragen seit den späten 1980er Jahren. Seine Ausbildung absolvierte er an der Universität Cambridge und der LSE. Heute ist er Professor für Global Affairs am „Center for Global Affairs“ der „School of Professional Studies“ an der New York University und ein assoziiertes Mitglied der NYU für Geschichte, Russisch und Slawistik. Bis 2008 war er Leiter der „History in the UK“ sowie Leiter der Abteilung für die Erforschung der „Organisierten Kriminalität in Russland und Eurasien“ an der Keele Universität.

Wie auch immer Sie es nennen, ob „nicht-linearer Krieg“ (was ich bevorzuge), „hybrider Krieg“ oder „spezieller Krieg“, die russischen Operationen, zunächst auf der Krim und im Osten der Ukraine, haben gezeigt, dass Moskau sich in Zukunft verstärkt auf neue Formen der Politik konzentriert. In vielerlei Hinsicht ist dies eine Erweiterung dessen, was ich an anderer Stelle als Russlands „Guerilla- Geopolitik“ bezeichnet habe. Sie geht von der Anerkennung der Tatsache aus, dass neue Taktiken benötigt werden, die sich auf die Schwächen des Gegners konzentrieren und direkte und offene Konfrontationen vermeiden. Um in einer Welt bestehen zu können, deren internationale Ordnung vom Kreml zunehmend als lästig empfunden wird und in Anbetracht der Mächte und Allianzen mit größerer rein militärischer, politischer und wirtschaftlicher Stärke. Um ehrlich zu sein, sind dies Taktiken, gegen welche die NATO – noch immer in letzter Konsequenz eine Allianz zur Bekämpfung und Abschreckung einer mit massenhaftem Panzereinsatz geführten sowjetischen Invasion – weder Wissen noch Erfahrung hat, damit umzugehen. (In der Tat könnte man den Standpunkt vertreten, dass das gar nicht Aufgabe der NATO ist, was allerdings auf einem anderen Blatt steht.)

Wie so oft weist uns die späte Einsicht eines raffiniert-scharfzüngigen Besserwissers dringend darauf hin, dass wir das hätten erwarten können wegen eines zu seiner Zeit unbemerkten Artikels des russischen Chefs des Generalstabs Valery Gerassimow. Der Fairness halber sei angemerkt, dass er in der Zeitschrift „Wojenno-promyshlenny kurier“, also dem Kriegsindustrie-Kurier erschien, den zu lesen nur wenige Menschen in der Welt das Vergnügen haben. Nichtsdestotrotz, stellt er die beste und am höchsten autorisierte Aussage dessen dar, was wir, zumindest als Arbeitsbegriff, die „Gerassimow Doktrin“ nennen (was nicht heißen soll, dass es notwendigerweise seine Erfindung war). Ich und jeder andere an diesen Entwicklungen Interessierte verdanken es Rob Coalson von RFE/RL, der diesen Artikel bemerkte und in Umlauf gebracht hat. Die folgende Übersetzung stammt von ihm (Dank an Rob für seine Erlaubnis, es zu benutzen) versehen mit meinen verschiedenen Kommentaren und Interpretationen.

Military-Industrial Kurier, 27. Februar 2013

(Die Kommentare des Autors sind eingerückt. Die Hervorhebung durch Fettschrift im Gerassimov-Text stammt ebenfalls vom Autor)

Die Bedeutung der Wissenschaft für die Vorhersage

General Valery Gerasimov, Chef des Generalstabs der Russischen Föderation

Continued……..

https://de.informnapalm.org/mark-gal...inearer-krieg/

While this is in German—highly recommend reading it as Mark is one of the leading global SMEs on the Russian military and his blog "In the Shadows of Moscow” is worth following----and he has just released a thorough book on the Russian Spetsnaz.

Mark Galeotti: Die „Gerassimow-Doktrin“ und Russlands nicht-linearer Krieg

Der Autor, Dr. Mark Galeotti erforscht russischen Geschichte und Sicherheitsfragen seit den späten 1980er Jahren. Seine Ausbildung absolvierte er an der Universität Cambridge und der LSE. Heute ist er Professor für Global Affairs am „Center for Global Affairs“ der „School of Professional Studies“ an der New York University und ein assoziiertes Mitglied der NYU für Geschichte, Russisch und Slawistik. Bis 2008 war er Leiter der „History in the UK“ sowie Leiter der Abteilung für die Erforschung der „Organisierten Kriminalität in Russland und Eurasien“ an der Keele Universität.

Wie auch immer Sie es nennen, ob „nicht-linearer Krieg“ (was ich bevorzuge), „hybrider Krieg“ oder „spezieller Krieg“, die russischen Operationen, zunächst auf der Krim und im Osten der Ukraine, haben gezeigt, dass Moskau sich in Zukunft verstärkt auf neue Formen der Politik konzentriert. In vielerlei Hinsicht ist dies eine Erweiterung dessen, was ich an anderer Stelle als Russlands „Guerilla- Geopolitik“ bezeichnet habe. Sie geht von der Anerkennung der Tatsache aus, dass neue Taktiken benötigt werden, die sich auf die Schwächen des Gegners konzentrieren und direkte und offene Konfrontationen vermeiden. Um in einer Welt bestehen zu können, deren internationale Ordnung vom Kreml zunehmend als lästig empfunden wird und in Anbetracht der Mächte und Allianzen mit größerer rein militärischer, politischer und wirtschaftlicher Stärke. Um ehrlich zu sein, sind dies Taktiken, gegen welche die NATO – noch immer in letzter Konsequenz eine Allianz zur Bekämpfung und Abschreckung einer mit massenhaftem Panzereinsatz geführten sowjetischen Invasion – weder Wissen noch Erfahrung hat, damit umzugehen. (In der Tat könnte man den Standpunkt vertreten, dass das gar nicht Aufgabe der NATO ist, was allerdings auf einem anderen Blatt steht.)

Wie so oft weist uns die späte Einsicht eines raffiniert-scharfzüngigen Besserwissers dringend darauf hin, dass wir das hätten erwarten können wegen eines zu seiner Zeit unbemerkten Artikels des russischen Chefs des Generalstabs Valery Gerassimow. Der Fairness halber sei angemerkt, dass er in der Zeitschrift „Wojenno-promyshlenny kurier“, also dem Kriegsindustrie-Kurier erschien, den zu lesen nur wenige Menschen in der Welt das Vergnügen haben. Nichtsdestotrotz, stellt er die beste und am höchsten autorisierte Aussage dessen dar, was wir, zumindest als Arbeitsbegriff, die „Gerassimow Doktrin“ nennen (was nicht heißen soll, dass es notwendigerweise seine Erfindung war). Ich und jeder andere an diesen Entwicklungen Interessierte verdanken es Rob Coalson von RFE/RL, der diesen Artikel bemerkte und in Umlauf gebracht hat. Die folgende Übersetzung stammt von ihm (Dank an Rob für seine Erlaubnis, es zu benutzen) versehen mit meinen verschiedenen Kommentaren und Interpretationen.

Military-Industrial Kurier, 27. Februar 2013

(Die Kommentare des Autors sind eingerückt. Die Hervorhebung durch Fettschrift im Gerassimov-Text stammt ebenfalls vom Autor)

Die Bedeutung der Wissenschaft für die Vorhersage

General Valery Gerasimov, Chef des Generalstabs der Russischen Föderation

Continued……..

This is the perfect example of why we must get way, way past the theoreticial discussions on non linear warfare.

Even with the single points of failure it is morphing and adapting faster than we could have anticipated---in their UW strategy we have forgotten and or did not truly realize that UW is adaptive and agile.

We saw non linear warfare unfold in Crimea, then we saw the creation of a hybrid army in eastern Ukraine created after a conventional invasion.

NOW in Syria we are seeing a non linear war evolved via a hybrid invasion using now a hybrid army carrying out conventional warfare against a anti Assad force that in itself has evolved out of UW at initially the civil society level with a radical Islamist twist.

Here we are seeing a new form of hybrid warfare ie hybrid invasion on top of an hybrid army--BUILT via the experiences gained by the Russian military in eastern Ukraine----and we assume the Russians are slow at adapting???

1000 #Iran(ian) Marines Join #Russia(n) Troops in Jablah Base to Fight #Syria(n) Rebels http://www.ibtimes.co.in/syria-1000-...-report-646283 … pic.twitter.com/DyPQVFDHhv

Russia will consider #Syria’s request to send troops if Damascus asks http://syria.liveuamap.com/en/2015/18-september-russia-will-consider-syr... … via @Conflicts

I think this is a good assessment and answer to a question that was posed a few months ago when the article was written: "If Ukraine is the Master's Program, what will Phd studies involve?" Syria may be a large part of the answer.

I would argue that currently the Russian nonlinear warfare is experiencing five specific single points of failure and the eastern Ukraine is not a frozen conflict as many seem to think which should drive a serious rethink as we see Russian military expansion into Syria.

In some aspects the Russian non linear warfare has now moved into conventional warfare which should have been at phase eight of their doctrine.

Secondly, the conversation must get back to the simple fact that all current UW strategies being used by Russia, China, Iran and yes even the IS have great similarities---as it is UW--but driven by the different cultural and historical aspects.

Right now there are two critical cornerstones of all the various UW strategies ---weaponization of information and cyber warfare/cybercrime that the West is absolutely losing.

Added to this cornerstone mix is the new use of refugees --ie how to create them and how to use refugee flows.

We urgently need to get to an analysis of the failures in the Russian UW strategy as that will reflect on the UW strategies of China, Iran and IS.

Solid work by Mr. Morris. His perspective from JMRC provides keener insights than the average observer. Having endured many wet autumns at Hohenfels myself, I became very attuned to the security concerns and undercurrents in the European continent as we trained US and European allies at the Training Center.

I would submit a few additional areas for grading to Mr. Morris report. Following the theme of Supra-national and Supra-tier combinations. The first one is within the context of Putin's previous annexation of Georgian territory as a rehearsal for Crimea and other parts of Ukraine. He leveraged Economic Diplomacy/Blackmail against a disjointed Europe with the threat of long winters without Russian Crude and natural gas to meet European countries heating needs. He compounded that via rhetoric and carefully manipulation of the fuel supply, as well as by obfuscating any alternative pipeline alternatives. He clearly used the Economic and Information elements of national power to fix his competitors and isolate them in both military and political terms. Because this approach has still worked until today, I recommend a B+ or A-.

The second area that merits a closer look is the use of maneuver or kinetic force as a supporting effort to the overall cognitive/informational effect. The annexation of Georgia and Crimea, with relative no cost to Russia was clear example of this. The fact that he could move Russia to do decisive military action; albeit at a level below the necessary threshold to "merit a significant response" from Europe, the US, or NATO certainly achieves a far greater cognitive effect in the perceptions of the Eastern, Central, and even some Western European audiences. A loud message intended to create doubt (Question more?)about the resolve, and capability of EU, and NATO to be a viable security and economic partner. After all; hadn't the US and Russia "guaranteed" the security of Ukraine through the Budapest Memorandum of Assurances" upon Ukraine's relinquishing it's nuclear arsenal? Well the past two years had been clear witnessed to the contrary. Russia, one of the guarantors became the aggressor, and the US, well?! So in this area, Russia seems to have also a passing grade. They get a B- as they have to endure some economic backlash and internal grumblings.

Russian and Chinese tactics; while fascinating, making terms like "Hybrid Warfare" envogue, are not necessarily new. Genghis Khan is well known for employing a variety of options, often in escalating fashion, or by massing them to target the Chinese and then the Islamic Kingdoms all the way to the gates of Baghdad. He employed hit and run raids, made brutal examples of those threatening to oppose to dishearten dissent, pitched the white, gray, and black tent as part of his psychological ultimatum during sieges, and even catapulted dead bodies as a crude biological attack. Not to mention the economic activities that he did by interdicting commerce or by marrying his chieftains and sons to gain access and lines of communications. Alexander also used a mix of conventional and non-conventional approaches to meet his overall objectives. Even in the 20th Century, Western government and intelligent agencies used similar combination of tactics to a varying degree of success. The difference is that both the Russian and Chinese are able to do so through a centralized style of command and control that allows them to operate well within the decision model of their competitors. Democracy and consensus are great, but do not necessarily mobilize nations to be able to conduct warfare, particularly total warfare, as sometimes it may be required to do so.