The World Will Hold Its Breath

This article discusses the serious, ongoing and quickly evolving crisis between Russia, its bordering neighbors and the United States, and the possible military responses the US and NATO can implement as a containment strategy to stave off future aggression by Russia in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus.

US Foreign Policy and the Need for a New Containment Strategy in Eastern Europe

Russia’s immediate goals are very clear; political and economic hegemony in Eastern Europe and the Caucuses and preventing the establishment of pro Western democracies along its borders. In other words; Russia wishes regain the former Soviet Republics and create a new Russian Empire by whatever means necessary to accomplish that endeavor. The current rise of Russian Nationalism is more reminiscent of the rise of Nazism in Germany in the early 1930’s, than the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917. Russia’s current political regime is primarily made up of elements that once comprised the former KGB of the Soviet Union and its replacement; the FSB and SVR, headed by former President and now Prime Minister Vladimir Putin; himself a former KGB Colonel (1). The KGB was the most powerful, dangerous and ruthless political entity in the history of the modern world (2). Many Western amateur observers during and after the Cold War, inaccurately drew a moral equivalence between the KGB and the CIA; a view that was perpetuated by the American Left and Hollywood. Russia has always been a blunt instrument. When the Kremlin does not get what it wants by standard bullying tactics, they resort to things like assassination, economic warfare, cyber warfare, political subversion and military invasion; like it did in Hungary in 1956, Czechoslovakia in 1968, Afghanistan in 1980, Chechnya in 1994, and Georgia in August 2008. And, this will not be the end of Russia’s ambitions and military incursions in Europe.

Make no mistake about it, if the Georgian government falls under the weight of the Russian Bear, the Ukraine, a nation of over fifty million people, will be next on theshort list of countries to be subjected to SVR and FSB subversion, propaganda and disinformation and threat of Russian military invasion. Putin has played his cards correctly with the Georgian invasion and will continue to exploit his advantages while he can. Bad Vlad has had President George Bush’s number for some time and could expect an even greater return with the possibility of an Obama Presidency in 2009.  The political climate between the West and Russia, have been ripe for Putin’s exploitation. With the US bogged down in the Middle East, Europe bogged down in complacency and energy dependence from Russia, the Kremlin has a perfect opportunity to press its case against its neighbors.

In reality Putin’s actions towards Russia’ neighbors were and have been wholly predictable when one considers the small window of opportunity afforded by Europe and the United States. With Europe already exploring ways to wean themselves from Russian energy and the US drawdown of forces in Iraq in the upcoming months freeing themselves for actions elsewhere around the world, Putin, more than likely, had to act now or never; especially while sitting on over 750 billion in cash reserves (3). If Russian energy were to take a tumble from a change in demand and market prices while Moscow rapidly rebuilds its Army, Navy and Strategic Forces, that surplus could erode fast.  While the strong possibility for an Obama Presidency exists; a prospect that would no doubt delight Putin, a McCain Presidency would on the other hand, be problematic as McCain has been one of the few US politicians that has been very suspicious of Russia and Putin in particular.

John McCain, like Ronald Reagan, has always recognized Vladimir Putin for what he is; a modern day Yuri Andropov. Premier Andropov, a former head of the KGB, died (in 1983) before his ruthless reputation could be implemented long term in Soviet Foreign Policy in the 1980’s (4). McCain has always been outspoken regarding Putin and probably no doubt believes that President Bush’s amicable disposition toward Putin in the past was either naïve or misguided. There are whispers and rumors about backdoor dealings last month between Putin, the Saudis and President Bush in regards to a mutual agreement about containing Iran in exchange for Russia’s free hand in Georgia; indicating a “Munich” style sellout. Let us hope this is not an accurate description of what happened for it would send the wrong message to our allies and force them to submit to Russian intimidation.

The Bush Administration’s obsession with the Middle East at the expense of ignoring Russia and China makes John McCain’s stance on foreign policy a key point of separation between himself and the soon to be former President. With McCain’s numbers rising in recent polls, certain governments in Asia are probably nervous, including China, North Korea, Iran and Russia. The last thing the Russians want is a McCain Presidency; so they will act while they still can. Which leads us to the Ukraine; possibly the flashpoint of the next continental conflagration,

Ukraine in 2008, like Poland in 1939, lies on a geopolitical fault line between Russia and the European Union. Ukraine is bordered by four NATO countries and was viciously exploited by Stalin before during and after WWII; resulting in the deaths of millions of its citizens (5). In recent years, Ukraine has made friendly overtures to the West and is politically split on joining NATO. Much of the dissension toward NATO membership has been the result of Russian intimidation and bullying tactics. The Putin government, more specifically the FSB (Federal Security Bureau), was implicated in the poisoning of Ukraine’s democratically elected President Yushchenko in 2004. Ukraine is currently being threatened with being cut off from oil and natural gas this coming winter if their pro Western behavior continues.  Russia is basically saying “We will give you the same as Georgia if you do not fall in line with us”. With friends like these, who needs enemies?

The question is “What can Ukraine and the West do” The answer is simple; make a Russian invasion so terribly expensive in Russian lives, resources and political capital, it would not be worth the cost. Georgia failed, not because it was weaker; and it certainly was or because its people are less brave; they certainly are brave. The reason Georgia lost was because of its lack of preparedness and trying to go toe to toe with the Russian Giant. Neither Georgia nor Ukraine can go head on in a conventional battle plan against Russia.  Georgia neither has the numbers nor the resources to engage the Russian regular army. Georgia can however exact a price on Russia and at the same time preserve their independence and be a bulwark against further Russian expansion in the future. The answer is “Go Unconventional” and start preparing to fight asymmetrical war rather than fighting Western style, which is how the US military trained the Georgians as well as all their other allies. The US does a disservice to its deserving allies like Georgia by selling them second hand military “junk” while providing America’s enemies such as Saudi Arabia and Palestinian Fattah terrorists with up to date military hardware and training.

From a purely military standpoint, Georgia and Ukraine need to take a page from the Chechens and Hezbollah who effectively defeated the Russian and Israeli military respectively and decisively. The Russians have always patterned their military after their Western counter parts in the US, Great Britain etc; heavily dependent on technology and fire power superiority. All the Chechens had in their arsenal was machine guns, land mines, sniper rifles and RPG’s. The deciding factors  in the outcome of the engagement was the Chechens use of  decentralized small unit tactics combined with an urban defense posture which took out 4,800-6,000 Russian soldiers and roughly 150 tanks and armored vehicles in the first 72 hours after the Russian invasion of Groznyy. The Chechens allowed the Russians to have free reign outside the city but engaged them at close range in the urban thickets of Groznyy, where Russian artillery, tanks and air power were not only useless but also a liability (6). The Russian’s could not use their aircraft and artillery to its advantage in the city and their close quarter engagement skills were deficient in many areas and could not meet the challenge.

Hezbollah performed effectively against the Israelis who copy their US counter parts by relying on superior firepower and technology. By utilizing an efficient human intelligence (HUMINT) system, highly mobile independent “true” light infantry units, complimented by an entrenched defensive posture and extensive and elaborate tunnel systems similar to the North Vietnamese at Hue in the 1960’s, Hezbollah inflicted considerable casualties without suffering serious losses to their own ranks(7). Hezbollah also elicited heavy handed responses from the Israelis which resulted in damaging Lebanon’s infrastructure as well as human collateral damage. As a result of this damage, Hezbollah, who started the conflict, gained political popularity in the government as well as enhancing its image to the Lebanese people as well,

In regards to the Chechens, they drew the overconfident Russians into the city where they were ambushed by snipers, machine gun crossfire, and RPG’s launched at ground level from basement windows, roof tops and buildings. Even when the Russian soldiers regrouped from these ambushes, they rarely found the enemy rebels who had evaded direct confrontation and escaped through preplanned routes and relocated ton safe houses nearby (8). The Russians suffered very heavy casualties and had to soon leave the city. Referring to the earlier stated casualty figures, had the United States lost 6000 soldiers in a week under similar conditions, the Commander in Chief on down, would have been impeached for gross negligence and incompetence.

While the Russian government has never had a problem with their military taking on heavy casualties and committing tremendous collateral damage as they did in Chechnya, it would be concerned if they knew that their military would be bogged down in a guerilla infested quagmire and eventually humiliated as they were in Afghanistan. Georgia’s one advantage is that they do have tanks and artillery and some aircraft which can be utilized in a defensive configuration at key strategic locations throughout the country. Utilizing their regular and irregular troops as independent combined action platoons (CAP) equipped with tank killer squads, the Georgians could wreak havoc and heavy casualties among the Russian invaders.

In order to really drive a dagger into the Big Bad Bears heart, Ukraine and Georgia could receive open military aid approved by the US Congress and advisors from the US and NATO, all the while conducting an unconventional war in such a way, the Russians know they can’t win; either on the battlefield or in the court of public opinion. Russia would be politically isolated and militarily ineffective.  It would also behoove the West in preparing the Baltic States of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania for unconventional war and bolstering the counterintelligence services in those countries to rid their governments of   spies and influence from the Kremlin. The US Defense Establishment and Intelligence Community has acquired a treasure trove of knowledge and experience in the area of unconventional warfare since 9/11 and could leverage those resources to our Eastern European allies.  Establishing a fast track path to NATO membership for Georgia and Ukraine is paramount presenting itself as a “tripwire’ that would automatically enlist a US and probably British military respone; something that even the confident Putin does not want. The Russian Army would not fare well against US conventional forces. The US military would find the Russian’s Western tactics easier to counter and neutralize than the unconventional guerilla type insurgencies found in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Blood, Toil Sweat, Tears and a little Common Sense

These kinds of efforts take a great deal of political courage and resources from the West to implement. The US has placed most of their “eggs” in the Middle East “basket” and has little left for other contingencies. From a conventional military perspective, America has no options; however an unconventional response is not only monetarily practical but also has the best chance for success. The American people don’t mind supporting those who are willing to fight for their freedom, however there will have to be a trade off somewhere along the line, as we cannot afford the tremendous costs of funding Iraq at the current rate. The Georgians and Ukrainians will give a much higher rate of return than those we have supported in the Middle East. It is debatable whether a viable democracy can exist in the Middle East anyway which is primarily due to culture and social practices. Engagement with Iran’s nuclear ambitions has taken front and center on the US geopolitical stage. But if you think the Iranians are bad, try dealing with a confident Russian dictator, flush with nearly three quarter of a trillion petro dollars in surplus cash plus its strategic nuclear capability. The US government will regret not confronting Mother Russia now because she will grow bolder by the month and continue its aggression in Eastern Europe. If the Russians get away with the Georgian occupation, even if they partially vacate later, they will not be content with those gains; Ukraine and possibly Poland, who was recently threatened by Russia with serious military consequences for agreeing to host a US ballistic missile defense system, will be next. It will be 1939 all over again

The real problem lies in the difficulty in getting the Europeans to take any kind of serious economic or military action. Despite the façade of the European Union, the ethnic and political divisions are still there as well as the mass complacency due to the decades of Socialist nanny state economic policies. What can I say; Western Europe is …well…Western Europe. You are not going to get the Germans and the French to fight for the Georgian Slavic peoples; hell they would have a hard enough time getting themselves up to defend Western Europe. I hate to say it but confrontation with Russia is inevitable. The time is past where our prevailing attitude is “Let’s not offend the Russians” The Russian leaders of today, like Joseph Stalin before them and other kindred spirits such as Ho Chi Mihn, Mao Tse Tung, and Adolph Hitler, can sense weakness, appeasement and aversion to confrontation from their enemies, and like sharks attracted to the smell of blood, pursue their prey with ruthless and relentless ferocity. America must once again lead the fight, negotiate from strength and respond quickly and decisively. The best place to start is by helping those such the Georgians and Ukrainians who will help themselves and like our British brethren in the Second World War, provide aid in their “darkest hour’ Paraphrasing a great Englishman Winston Churchill, giving the Ukrainians and Georgians, who are not complacent, the tools and guidance to “finish the job”, might just be the ticket to keeping the Russian Bear in his cage and on his best behavior. Until then, the world will hold its breath.

End Notes

(1) Early, Peter, 2007, Comrade J: The untold secrets of Russia’s master spy in America, New York, Putnam Adult

(2) Andrew, Christopher, 2005, The World was Going Our Way: The KGB and the battle for the Third World, New York, Basic Books,

(3) www.stratfor.com online archive, membership required

(4) Andrew, Christopher, 2005, The World was Going Our Way: The KGB and the battle for the Third World, New York, Basic Books

(5) Encyclopedia Britannica, Reference listing; Ukraine, online archive, accessed 08/20/2008 (member ship required) also see Wikipedia reference on Ukraine

(6) Poole, H. John, 2007, Dragon days: Time for Unconventional Tactics, NC, Posterity Press

(7) Poole, H. John, 2001, Phantom Soldier: The enemies answer to US firepower, NC, Posterity Press

(8) Poole, H. John, 2004, Tactics of the Crescent Moon, NC, Posterity Press

James Morris is finishing a Master’s Degree in Strategic Intelligence from American Military University and has a Bachelor’s of Arts & Science Degree in History/Social Studies Education from West Virginia University His article’s, touching on a variety of subjects including National security, US Politics and Education, frequently appear in the NEW MEDIA JOURNAL