The Putin's art of posturing: Mark Galeotti: Don't buy the hype: Russia's military is much weaker than Putin wants us to think - Vox
- Get link
- X
- Other Apps
Today is Defenders of the Fatherland Day in Russia, a public holiday and a celebration of all things military: triumphalism about the latest weapons, about operations in Syria, about the seizure of Crimea. Meanwhile, from the West we hear bloodcurdling warnings about the threat posed by the Kremlin’s war machine.
Perceptions matter, though: Arguably being thought to be dangerous is actually a more powerful geopolitical asset than actually being it. So long as the West believes Russia could surge into Ukraine, escalate in Syria, or even roll into the Baltic states, it inevitably feels a greater pressure to make concessions and invite Vladimir Putin to the table.
No one seems willing to question just how formidable Putin’s new military really is — and he seems to be counting on that.
Ever since he first strode into the Kremlin, at the end of 1999, Vladimir Putin has been pouring money into his military. But he was trying to modernize a military that was in a truly catastrophic state after not just years but decades of underfunding and neglect. It had performed abysmally in the first Chechen War. Draft dodging, embezzlement, and corruption were rife.
In order to send naval squadrons flying the flag across the globe, Moscow has to accompany them with tugs for when they break down
Certainly Russia’s military has lifted itself up from this pitiful state, but it’s still very much a work in progress.
Today, Russian military might as we know it is halfway between a fact and a psychological warfare operation.
Russian special forces seized Crimea in February 2014 with respectable precision and discipline, and looked the part of cutting-edge soldiers. But they were among the very best Moscow can muster, and faced no opposition.
Russia has been able to turn the tide in Syria — and the politics of that war — with its bombers. But in order to keep up the tempo of operations in Syria, Moscow has had to send its best pilots, and even buy old Turkish ships to supply them. Besides, bombing a disorganized rebel force with no meaningful air defense is hardly much of a test of the new Russian air force.
In Ukraine, where Russia has had units deployed since summer 2014, Moscow has had to send improvised "battalion tactical groups" patched together from the best companies of soldiers across the country. After all, almost half of Russia’s soldiers are conscripts serving just a single year. Russian officers speaking off the record admit that between their training and their final demobilization month, the majority are only usable for maybe three months of that year.
In order to send naval squadrons flying the flag across the globe, Moscow has not only to accompany them with tugs for when they break down, it then has to put the ships in dock for months after fixing them. And while Russia had great plans for new warships, the gas turbines most would have used came from Ukraine, and so it’s back to the drawing board.
In other words, so far, we have seen the very best of the Russian military in the ideal conditions but not the rest of the force, or how they would cope facing a real threat. It is a little bit like assuming you can judge all of US education by visiting Harvard, or its health care from the Mayo Clinic.
As a result, we mistake Russia’s still large but overstretched and only partly reformed armed forces for a terrifying threat to the West and to the global order as we know it — and we (over)react accordingly, giving the Kremlin far more leverage than it actually deserves.
So why is the West so worried? In part, this is the usual human habit of overcompensation. After Crimea and Syria showed unexpected Russian capabilities, assessments, once more measured, swung to the other extreme.
There are also vested interests at work. Industries talking up the Russian challenge as a way to justify more defense spending and new weapons systems. Front-line nations wanting to assert their pivotal role, their need for support. Military establishments, whose job is to think of worst-case scenarios and prepare accordingly.
This is all understandable. From Tallinn in Estonia, for example, it is hard to be sanguine about Moscow’s capabilities and intent, when Russian commandos have kidnapped one of your security officers across the border, when Russian bombers buzz your airspace, and when Russia stagessnap exercises clearly wargaming a potential invasion on your border.
But the problem is that this also plays into Putin’s hands. His calculation appears to be that the scarier he seems, the more political traction he has.
After all, on most objective grounds, Russia is hardly a great power. It has nuclear weapons, but ultimately these are of little practical value. Continued rearmament depends on money, and Russia’s economy is dependent on oil that is now selling for bargain-basement prices. Russia’s economy is the 13th largest in the world, just between Australia and Spain, about half the size of France’s, about a fourteenth of the USA’s. Even before the value of the ruble collapsed, Russian military spending was around one-seventh of America’s.
What the Kremlin does have is the will to take risks, ignore the rules, and hope that the other side is more sensible, more cautious, more willing to make concessions than it is to call Russia's bluff.
In the main, this has worked so far. But Putin’s bad-boy geopolitics and military postures are wasting assets already beginning to prove to be liabilities.
The Russian defense budget as it stands is unsustainable. Already this year it has been cut by 5 percent, and a range of future projects are being quietly scaled down or pushed back.
Even with the cut, the defense budget is bleeding the Kremlin of resources needed for economic diversification and the public services needed to pacify an increasingly disgruntled population.
Russia has squandered its "soft power," its moral authority in the world, by which it once might have claimed to be an alternative to the Western-led order. It is now more unpopular than ever; only in Vietnam, Ghana, and China is it seen positively.
Precisely because Putin has been so successful at talking up his unpredictability and aggressive capabilities, NATO is now more united than it has been for a long time; defense and security spending in Europe, long neglected, is now beginning to be addressed, due to rise on average bymore than 8 percent this year.
Of course, NATO needs to take the Russian challenge seriously. But that also means not giving Putin more credibility and authority than he deserves.
We are giving Putin greater global clout than the leader of a declining, impoverished, underpopulated country deserves
Every time some new alarmist statement appears — such as when Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey said "Russia presents the greatest threat to [US] national security" — not only does Moscow’s propaganda machine get a new headline, but Putin must feel a certain satisfaction.
Rightly or wrongly, as far as Putin is concerned, it is only fear that gets the West talking to him and paying attention to Russia’s interests. So far, we seem to be validating that view.
By our panics and hyperbole, not only are we in effect encouraging him to consider more adventures, we are giving him greater global clout than the leader of a declining, impoverished, underpopulated country stuck between a prosperous Europe and a rising China deserves. At present, the West is Putin’s PR team.
Were we to be more laid back, less inclined to jump every time he rattles his saber, in the short term it might infuriate him, encourage some new act of brinkmanship, although he has few safe options now and faces powerful states and alliances alert to his usual tricks. But in the long term, if he finds himself being treated not as a fearsome threat but an annoying (and sometimes even laughable) upstart, he may come to realize that his current antics are not a shortcut to great power status.
After all, even Putin is not a lunatic or a fanatic, and the people around him are in the main selfish pragmatists. Ultimately, not giving in to the hype, not letting Putin shape the geopolitical agenda with that saber, might be the most effective response to his tantrums.
Mark Galeotti is a professor of global affairs at New York University and a visiting fellow with the European Council on Foreign Relations. He blogs at In Moscow’s Shadows and is on twitter as@MarkGaleotti.
Read the whole story
· · · · · ·
Kerry says Syria truce may not lead to political solution
Daily Mail - 29 minutes ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — Secretary of State John Kerry told Congress on Tuesday that he can't be sure the cease-fire agreement in Syria will work and lead to a political resolution in the war-ravaged country. But in testimony before the Senate Foreign ...
@dwnews - Russian troops in Syria?
Deutsche Welle - 1 hour ago
Despite doubts from the Syrian government, a new peace deal has been agreed upon to end the country's civil war. At the same time, the UN has accused the Assad regime of perpetrating war crimes indiscriminately.
Syria conflict: Truce, cessation or ceasefire?
BBC News - 2 hours ago
The US and Russia have announced a plan for a "cessation of hostilities" in Syria. Samir Puri of King's College London explains how it differs from a truce, a ceasefire or an armistice. The cessation of hostilities is due to come into effect across ...
Damascus Agrees to Uphold US-Russia Ceasefire Deal for Syria – Deputy FM
Sputnik International - 2 hours ago
MOSCOW (Sputnik) — The Syrian government on Tuesday decided to uphold the ceasefire deal brokered by Moscow and Washington, Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal Mekdad said. "Damascus has agreed to stop military operations. This decision was taken ...
Syrian regime agrees to peace deal but doubts persist
Daily Mail - 2 hours ago
Syria's regime agreed Tuesday to a ceasefire deal announced by the United States and Russia, but there were widespread doubts it could take effect by the weekend as hoped. The truce agreement, announced Monday, does not apply to jihadists like the ...
|
Read the whole story
· ·
Vox |
Don't buy the hype: Russia's military is much weaker than Putin wants us to think
Vox Russian President Vladimir Putin (C) reacts after a wreath laying ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier by the Kremlin wall to mark the Defender of the Fatherland Day in Moscow on February 23, 2015. KIRILL KUDRYAVTSEV/AFP/Getty Images. Despite Declining Economy, Russia Shows No Signs of Slowing Military SpendingUSNI News all 45 news articles » |
— Washington, D.C.
Politico |
Sanders once urged abolishing CIA
Politico The CIA is “a dangerous institution that has got to go,” Sanders told an audience in Vermont in October 1974. He described the agency as a tool of American corporate interests that repeatedly toppled democratic leaders—including, he said, Iran's ... Bernie Sanders Once Advocated Abolishing CIA, Calling It a “Dangerous Institution'ticklethewire.com all 2 news articles » |
WTOP |
Exclusive: Deputy CIA director: U.S. faces urgent challenges
WTOP In this file photo, David Cohen arrives to testify to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee when he was Treasury undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence in 2014. Now deputy director of the CIA, Cohen reflects on his first year at ... US Intelligence Collection 'Improves,' More Spies Needed to Fight DaeshSputnik International all 2 news articles » |
Next Page of Stories
Loading...
Page 2
Daily Beast |
Bernie Sanders Wanted to Abolish the CIA
Daily Beast Forty years ago, a 29-year-old Bernie Sanders called for abolishing the CIA. He was at the time running for U.S. Senate as a member of the Liberty Union Party, which called the military's draft “a modern form of slavery.” Sanders told an audience in ... |
Press TV |
Pentagon, CIA Chiefs Don't Think Russia Will Abide by Syria Cease-fire
Wall Street Journal WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama's top military and intelligence advisers don't believe Russia will abide by a just-announced cease-fire in Syria and want the administration to ready plans to increase pressure on Moscow by expanding covert support ... US leaving CIA-trained militants at Russia's mercy: Ex-Obama aidePress TV all 1,970 news articles » |
President Obama botched the name of the Boston Marathon bomber on Tuesday while making a statement laying out his plan to close the military detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, which holds enemy combatants considered extremely dangerous to American interests and security.
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was convicted last spring of planting bombs with his brother, Tamerlan, at the Boston Marathon on April 15, 2013, which resulted in the deaths of three people and wounded hundreds more in an act of terrorism on U.S. soil.
Obama mispronounced Tsarnaev’s first and last names, as can be seen in the above video, while making his pitch for the closing of Guantanamo, arguing that the Boston bomber and others were “all convicted in our Article Three courts and are now behind bars here in the United States” rather than being sent to the military prison.
The Tsarnaev brothers were reportedly motivated by extreme Islamist ideology to carry out the attack and harm civilians.
Obama made the flub while announcing his plan to Congress to close Guantanamo by moving many of the remaining detainees to foreign countries and transferring the rest of the suspected terrorists, who cannot be moved as they are considered too dangerous, to be relocated to a secure facility in the United States.
The president said keeping Guantanamo open goes against American values and serves as a recruiting tool for terrorists.
Gen. John Kelly, who recently retired as head of Southern Command and was responsible for running Guantanamo, told reporters earlier this year that detainees there receive the best possible treatment.
Critics of Obama’s plan argue there is little mention of Guantanamo in jihadist propaganda and that the facility is necessary to hold and get information from enemy combatants who are members of al Qaeda and other terrorist groups.
They also cite that the recidivism rate for those released to return to the battlefield is 30 percent, although some administration officials believe that number is too high.
While it is currently illegal to transfer the Guantanamo detainees to U.S. soil, the president is hoping Congress will enact legislation to change that so he can implement his plan.
The Pentagon is looking at the federal Supermax prison in Florence, Colorado; the military prison in Leavenworth, Kansas; and the Naval Consolidated Brig in Charleston, South Carolina as possible facilities to house the detainees.
The post Obama Appears Not to Know the Name of Boston Marathon Bomber appeared first onWashington Free Beacon.
Read the whole story
· ·
Secretary of State John Kerry says he can't be sure the cease-fire agreement in Syria will work and lead to a political resolution in the war-ravaged country.
February 23, 2016, 7:45 PM (IDT)
A “major incident” with casualties was declared as British police and emergency services rushed to the Didcot Power Station in southeast England Tuesday as reports of a loud explosion are investigated. Six ambulances are at the scene and one air ambulance.
.
Drone users can be fined nearly $30,000 for failing to register with the government, according to rules that can even apply to toy drones.
Beginning Feb. 19, all owners of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)—commonly known as drones—must be registered with the Federal Aviation Authority, if they own any drone weighing between 0.55 and 55 pounds. Individuals must pay a $5 fee to register, plus a $5 renewal fee every three years.
Owners with unregistered drones can face hefty fines and jail time. The fines were first reported byThe Hill.
“Failure to register an aircraft may result in regulatory and criminal sanctions,” the agency said in afact sheet on the registration policy. “The FAA may assess civil penalties up to $27,500. Criminal penalties include fines of up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment for up to three years.”
The agency said drone users must be listed in a federal database because “federal law requires aircraft registration.”
The Federal Aviation Authority insists that it is not requiring most toy drones to be registered. However, some drones meant for kids must be registered due to their weight.
“Most ‘toys’ the FAA has identified at a purchase price of $100 or less have been determined to weigh less than 250g,” the agency said, thereby exempting these drones from the rules.
Registration applies to owners of the Hubsan X4 H107C, which retails for $40, because it weighs 1.1 pounds. The toy drone is described as “one of the best drones for kids and beginners.”
As of January, 295,306 drone users had registered with the government. Paying $5 apiece, the agency would have made $1,476,530, though individuals who registered within the first 30 days had their money reimbursed.
Registration and fees could apply to the roughly 1 million drones that were purchased for Christmas gifts last year.
The post Feds Can Fine Drone Users $27,500 For Failing to Register With Gov’t appeared first onWashington Free Beacon.
Next Page of Stories
Loading...
Page 3
Dozens of people have gone on trial in Istanbul accused of being part of the Islamic State group's Turkish network.
Secretary of State John Kerry acknowledged Tuesday on Capitol Hill that neither he nor his staff uses a private email server because of the “vulnerability of our system” in “today’s world.”
Sen. Ron Johnson (R., Wis.) questioned Kerry about the issue, evidently to spotlight the improper use of a private, unsecured server by Hillary Clinton, Kerry’s predecessor.
“Would you allow any of the members of your staff to use a non-official, non-secure server for transmitting classified information?” Johnson asked.
Kerry bristled at the question, but Johnson stayed on him, demanding a yes or no.
“We have very specific procedures in place in the department,” Kerry said. “I brought in an inspector general. I wrote a letter to the inspector general asking him to review our entire process. In today’s world, given all that we’ve learned and what we understand about the vulnerability of our system, we don’t do that, no.”
Clinton’s usage of one and her transmission of classified information over it has triggered a federal investigation that has clouded her presidential campaign.
Full exchange:
RON JOHNSON: So you don’t use, you don’t allow yourself to use a private server. Would you allow any of the members of your staff to use a non-official, non-secure server for transmitting classified information?JOHN KERRY: Look.JOHNSON: Just yes or no.KERRY: Senator–JOHNSON: Just yes or no.KERRY: We have very specific procedures in place in the department. I brought in an inspector general. I wrote a letter to the inspector general asking him to review our entire process. In today’s world, given all that we’ve learned and what we understand about the vulnerability of our system, we don’t do that, no.JOHNSON: So the answer’s no.
Read the whole story
· ·
JERUSALEM—Less than a week after Israel was reported to have rocketed Syrian army outposts in the Damascus area despite the Russian presence as defender of the Syrian regime, Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon said Monday that both Russia and the United States recognize Israel’s “freedom to act and to defend our interests” in Syria.
Yaalon did not confirm or deny the rocketing, reported by the generally reliable Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, based in England. But his assertion of Israel’s freedom of action, at least up to a limit, underlines another level of complexity in the international free-for-all in Syria.
Immediately after the beginning of the Russian intervention in Syria last September, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and senior military officers flew to Moscow to meet with President Vladimir Putin and arrive at ground rules—in fact, aerial rules, that would avoid unwanted confrontations in Syrian skies. A coordinating committee was set up consisting of senior officers from both sides. The rules they arrived at appear to have been met thus far by both parties, which are in ongoing contact.
Israel will not lightly tweak the Russian’s nose and the Russian appear to respect Israel’s strategic needs—particularly the prevention of advanced weaponry reaching Hezbollah from Syrian territory. Although it is possible to concoct scenarios in which the two sides come close to confrontation—if Russian warplanes attack moderate rebel groups close to the Golan border, for instance—the likelihood is remote. Neither side has yet issued a public statement criticizing the other.
Yaalon said this week that Israel has no interest in getting involved in what is happening elsewhere in the Middle East. “We do not intervene in the conflicts in Lebanon, Syria, Yemen or other places. We just protect our interests.”
However, he said Monday, Israel is prepared for a conflict closer to home—with Hamas and its more radical allies in the Gaza Strip. “We’re enjoying unprecedented quiet,” he said. “Hamas hasn’t fired a bullet. But it’s growing in strength. We didn’t think otherwise.”
Hamas is preparing for the next round with Israel, he said, but it is encountering problems building up its rocket armory. “It’s having difficulty importing rockets (because of a blockade imposed by both Israel and Egypt) and there is a shortage of materials with which they could manufacture rockets themselves. They’re trying to improvise and, of course, building defensive and offensive tunnels (the latter, into Israel). We are not fooling ourselves to think they aren’t.”
Israel is prepared for the possibility that the situation in Gaza will again erupt into armed conflict. “We’ll have to deal with it,” he said. “We’re not stagnant. We will operate with both defensive and offensive measures.”
Yaalon was speaking aboard the American destroyer, USS Carney, which is in Haifa as part of a joint Israeli-American anti-missile exercise. The American ambassador in Israel, Dan Shapiro, accompanying the Israeli defense minister, noted that the United States is involved with Israel in finding technological solutions to locating and destroying tunnels extending from Gaza into Israel.
Read the whole story
· ·
Apple’s battle with the FBI is not about privacy v security, but a conflict created by the US failure to legitimately oversee its security service post Snowden
The showdown between Apple and the FBI is not, as many now claim, a conflict between privacy and security. It is a conflict about legitimacy.
America’s national security agencies insist on wielding unaccountable power coupled with “trust us, we’re the good guys”, but the majority of users have no such trust. Terrorism is real, and surveillance can sometimes help prevent it, but the only path to sustainable accommodation between technologies of secrecy and adequately informed policing is through a root-and-branch reform of the checks and balances in the national security system.
Continue reading...
As U.S. intelligence agencies say the number of Islamic State fighters in Iraq and Syria has dropped, the group’s ranks in Libya have roughly doubled.Russia Wants Closer Look From Above the U.S.by By ERIC SCHMITT and MICHAEL R. GORDON
Russia has requested to upgrade the cameras it uses on sanctioned surveillance flights across the United States, which are part of a treaty.
Next Page of Stories
Loading...
Page 4
Mr. Hayden, a former director of the C.I.A., gives his opinions and settles some scores in his new book.
A retired Marine colonel analyzes how a partition of Iraq could come about. Readers are invited to respond.
The cease-fire is to begin Saturday, but officials acknowledge that obstacles remain in getting the Syrian government and the armed opposition to comply.Italy: American Drones to Get Base, Official Saysby By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Italy has agreed to allow American armed drones to take off from an air base in Sicily to fight Islamic State extremists in Libya.
Relying Again on an Unreliable Mr. Putinby By THE EDITORIAL BOARD
The Russian president, eager to restore glory to his nation, holds many of the cards in Syria but should not confuse that for respect for his power.
President Bashar al-Assad and the umbrella group of opposition and rebel groups in Syria- Get link
- X
- Other Apps
Comments
Post a Comment