Deterring the “Remote” Adversary

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Air Force Core Functions
Advertisements

Building a Strategy for Combating Terrorism. “We have to fight terrorists as if there were no rules, and preserve our open society as if there were no.
Overview An emerging challenge A belated response Debating the alternatives – Air-Sea Battle – A distant blockade – Maritime denial Conclusions.
Special Operations Center of Excellence
Chapter 9: Canada’s International Roles. Foreign Policy Tools – Non Military Diplomacy Canada uses its diplomatic contacts with other nation-states and/or.
Major power intervention in international crises, Paul K. Huth.
Making Strategy  War is an extension of politics by other means. - Carl von Clausewitz - Carl von Clausewitz.
Addressing Terrorist Use of the Internet, Cyber Crime and Other Threats: National Expert Workshop Forging a Comprehensive Approach to Cyber Security Richard.
Nuclear Weapons: From the Cold War to the Present Dr. Adam B. Lowther Research Faculty Air Force Research Institute The views expressed are solely those.
Word Wall Cold War. Period of conflict, tension and competition between the United States and the Soviet Union and their respective allies from the mid-1940s.
ADP 1 The Army.
Away from NATO Expansion By Sasha Filippova. Benefits from NATO expansion are limited Promoting and maintaining democratization Reducing conflict among.
GROUP 9: ALEX TRACOSAS, HENRY SPALDING &NEEKI ZOHADI RUSSIA AND THE CRIMEA.
U.S. HISTORY 1302 Unit 8. World War II Aftermath  Germany divided into four zones, one controlled by the U.S., U.S.S.R., France, and Britain  Immediate.
Warfare in the Napoleonic Era
Introduction to Military History. What is War? How do we define war? What distinguishes it from other forms of armed conflict?
Air Force Doctrine Document 2-5.4: Public Affairs Operations.
1. 2 USAF CONOPS & AIR AND SPACE POWER REVIEW Chap 23 & 24.
Cold War It was "cold" because there was no large-scale fighting directly between the two sides.
INTO Lecture Dr Frank O’Donnell RUSSIA FOREIGN AND SECURITY POLICY PERSPECTIVES AND APPROACHES.
NATO was first founded after World War II ended. At that time, large numbers of Soviet troops remained in Eastern Europe as occupation forces. Governments.
Can North Korea Build More Nuclear Weapons?. A North Korean People’s Army naval unit tests a new type of anti-ship cruise missile in this undated photo.
Defense Policy Making You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.
Analytical point Mainly interests – but also a little bit of domestic politics and institutions Substantial Arctic is largely isolated from Ukraine crisis.
123 Go To Section: 4 World War I and World War II Chapter 17, Section World War I The United States entered World War I after continued.
Introduction and Overview.  When two countries oppose each other politically and economically, but do not actually participate in a full military conflict.
UNCLASSIFIED 6/24/2016 8:12:34 PM Szymanski UNCLASSIFIED Page 1 of 15 Pages Space Policy Issues - Space Principles of War - 14 June, 2010.
VA and US History The Cold War Korean War Lecture Notes: Unit 8 Lesson 1 Standard VUS.13b.
GOVT Module 16 Defense Policy.
Cold War Containment Policies
Containment in Europe.
U.S. Nuclear Strategy toward China
“Existing world order is being redefined.” Henry Kissinger Jan 2015
Discussion of What Drives Corporate Inversions? International Evidence
The Russian Way of War TEFOR G-27
Name of the idea Description and Military Application Maturity
Missile Defense and the SDI
Name of the idea Description and Military Application Maturity
Key Q 1: How did USA react to Cuban Revolution?
Current Event Brief!.
Modern world today There are a lot of internal and international conflicts all over the world. Force methods are often used and have high effectiveness.
Cuban Missile Crisis.
January 22nd, 2018 Kyle Beardsley and Victor Asal: Winning With The Bomb Matthew Kroenig: Nuclear Superiority And The Balance Of Resolve: Explaining.
Postwar Outcomes The end of WW II found Soviet forces occupying most of Eastern and Central Europe. Germany was broken into East (communist) and West Germany.
The COLD WAR: A state of tension between the USA & Soviet Union
Final Speeches - teams Date:
Shape of the Day Hook: Enemy at the Gates
Nuclear entanglement:
Assessing Deterrence Options for Cyberweapons
The Unsettling View from Moscow
Organization Theory and Nuclear Proliferation
The Early Cold War Years
World War II.
Why is it called the Cold War
CSIS – PONI Winter Conference December 10, 2015 Making the Case for Preserving the INF Treaty A European Perspective Anna Péczeli, PhD Research Fellow,
Opportunities and Limitations for the INF Treaty
Kang JIANG, PhD candidate
The Cold War.
Kazuto Suzuki Hokkaido University
Expanding U.S. Nonstrategic Nuclear Weapons: Enhancing or Undermining U.S.-NATO Relations? James McKeon
THE ORIGINS OF WORLD WAR I
Notes # 10 War in Europe.
SWBAT examine the impacts of the political reforms of glasnost and perestroika within the Soviet Union, on the Soviet communist bloc, and in the world.
Cold War- A 45 year period of tension between the United States and the Soviet Union
Cold War Containment.
Why was Appeasement popular in the 1930s?
CYBER SECURITY SPACE OPERATIONS AND RESILIENCY.
Cold War Tensions.
Introduction to the Cold War
Director - Mr. Wayne Raabe
Presentation transcript:

Deterring the “Remote” Adversary Anticipatory Strikes in Russian Military Thought Alexander Velez-Green

The Center for a New American Security does not take institutional positions on policy issues. Accordingly, all views, positions, and conclusions expressed in this brief should be understood to be solely those of the presenter.

Agenda Why a Russian anticipatory strike doctrine? What would Russian anticipatory strikes look like? When would the Russians even do something like this? Why should this matter to the United States? What can the United States do?

Why a Russian Anticipatory Strike Doctrine? Russian military thought leaders are exploring the potential merits of an anticipatory strike doctrine. Russia would need to act first in crisis. Consideration is driven by (3) beliefs about the future of warfare. The opening blows of a conflict will be decisive. If Russia loses the initiative, it loses the war. Russia must get the first step in a conflict with the United States and NATO to prevent or defeat further U.S./NATO aggression.

What Would a Russian Anticipatory Strike Look Like? Many Russian anticipatory strike advocates frame anticipatory strikes as an intra-crisis deterrent mechanism. Object.: Inflict “unacceptable damage” on the U.S./NATO. Convincing Western leaders and publics that the costs of continuing to fight > any plausible benefits. This is an extension of the escalate to de-escalate logic for early war termination on terms favorable to Moscow.

What Would a Russian Anticipatory Strike Look Like? Others frame it more in military-operational terms. They focus on the Russia seizing the strategic initiative first. Deterrence-by-denial? Achieve outright military victory? Authors sit on both sides of this divide.

What Would a Russian Anticipatory Strike Look Like? Anticipatory strikes would strike explicitly military targets—including space, cyber, and terrestrial assets. Some authors argue they would also hit economic targets. Russian thinkers are clear that strikes would necessarily engage targets deep into enemy [read: U.S./NATO] territory.

When in the World Would the Russians Even Do Something Like This? War between Russia and the United States and NATO remains a real possibility. In the event of war, the evidence suggests that Russian policymakers are considering employing anticipatory strikes.

Why Should this Matter to the United States? Russian adoption of an anticipatory strike doctrine would increase the chances of war between the United States and Russia. It would exacerbate the very condition responsible for their adoption of the doctrine: the loss of time. Increases chance of premature or imprudent Russian action. Increases chance of premature of imprudent U.S./NATO action. It would also limit the tools available to the United States and NATO to deter Russian adventurism.

Why Should this Matter to the United States? Potential triggers for a Russian anticipatory strike remain unclear. This raises the possibility of inadvertent escalation. Anticipatory strikes are more likely to elicit an escalatory rather than de-escalatory response.

What Can the United States Do? Deter Russian adoption of an anticipatory strike doctrine. Anticipatory strikes would be unnecessary, futile, and costly.

What Can the United States Do? Unnecessary Reduce “first use” pressures on Russia. Futile Cyber resiliency to fortify U.S. battle network in Europe. Space resiliency and endoatmospheric back-ups. Disperse long-range strike and counter-battery assets. Undersea missile pods, upwards falling payloads, and other hard-to-target and/or highly-survivable strike assets. Costly Declaratory policy defining escalatory behavior. The United States is ready and willing to match Russian aggression tit-for-tat.