More than a month ago, a referendum was held, as a result of which Crimea and Sevastopol became part of the Russian Federation. During this time, a huge number of various statements were made regarding the legality of the referendum and its results. Nevertheless, official Moscow and the recently annexed subjects of the federation are not going to abandon their decisions. This serves as an additional reason for new unfriendly statements and actions, although the results of this whole situation are already clear. Meanwhile, domestic and foreign experts are analyzing the events of recent months. Foreign experts are forced to admit that Russia's actions in the current situation were competent, original and unexpected.
The opinion of several foreign experts is quoted by the New York Times in its publication Russia Displays a New Military Prowess in Ukraine’s East (“In Eastern Ukraine, Russia has shown new military prowess”). An analysis of recent events shows that the Russian armed forces have mastered the "tactics of the 21st century." Thanks to this, they managed to seize the initiative from the Western countries and implement their plans. It is noted that Russia actively used well-trained special operations forces, an energetic information campaign and some methods of the so-called. cyber war. The result of all this was what we see now.
The New York Times quotes retired US Navy Admiral James J. Stavridis, who served in senior positions in NATO for several years. He notes that the current situation clearly demonstrates a shift in the way Russian troops approach their missions. The admiral is forced to admit that the Russian military "played this game gracefully."
The skills and tactics demonstrated by Russia may be interesting not only in the context of the Ukrainian crisis. Such things can be viewed from the security point of view of a number of countries that emerged after the collapse of the Soviet Union, as well as some NATO members from Central Europe.
American journalists note how much the working methods of the Russian troops have changed. In 2000, the armed forces fought separatists for the capital of the Chechen Republic, the city of Grozny. In this battle, various artillery and strike aircraft were actively used. During those battles, the civilian population was severely affected, and a considerable part of the infrastructure was destroyed. The latest events in Crimea are completely different from the operations at the beginning of the last decade.
Jamestown Foundation Senior Fellow Roger McDermott believes Russia has made the most of the time since then. In order to strengthen its position in the surrounding regions, official Moscow began to modernize its armed forces, creating new weapons and equipment, as well as developing new strategies. High priority in this matter was given to the rapid reaction forces - special forces, airborne troops and marines. This system, created in recent years, has been tested in Crimea.
At the same time, McDermott noted that the Crimean events cannot show the real state of the Russian armed forces. The successful result of the work of special forces in Crimea is due not only to the good training of the troops themselves, but also to a number of other factors. These are covert operations, intelligence, as well as the weakness of the current Kiev leadership and the poor state of the Ukrainian armed forces. All this contributed to the successful completion of all operations. Nevertheless, the results of actions in Crimea, according to McDermott, cannot be considered an indicator of the state of all Russian armed forces. The bulk of Russian servicemen are conscripts, and therefore the expert believes that they cannot compete with the American army with modern equipment and good training.
Stephen J. Blank, a former United States Army War College expert on the Russian military and a fellow at the American Foreign Policy Council, believes recent events are a good indication of the evolution of the Russian army and Russian military science. Over the past years, Russian military leaders have been developing the army, and the results of this have been shown in Crimea.
The New York Times quotes General Philip M. Breedlove, Commander of the Allied Forces of NATO in Europe, about the sequence of actions taken by the Russian military. Under the cover of exercises near the western borders of the country, the military prepared and arrived in Crimea. Well-trained fighters without any markings quickly occupied all important objects. For example, in the early stages of the operation, the units took up the communication channels of the Ukrainian armed forces and quickly cut off the Crimean units from the command.
After gaining control of Crimea, Moscow launched a campaign aimed at information support for its actions. Despite protests from foreign countries, Russia continued to promote its ideas: the Russian population of Crimea needs protection. The result of all actions was a referendum and the emergence of two new subjects within the Russian Federation.
Further actions of Russia led to the fact that foreign states actually recognized the annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol: in a joint statement following the results of recent talks in Geneva, this topic is not mentioned. A much bigger problem for Kiev and its western allies is now the events in the eastern regions of Ukraine.
While politicians are trying to solve pressing issues and promote their point of view, experts analyze the events of recent weeks. The New York Times notes that the strategy used in Crimea can be used in other regions as well. According to former NATO chief adviser Chris Donnelly, any country in the post-Soviet space, where there is a large number of Russian population, can become a platform for using such a strategy. This segment of the population can provide support to the military, with corresponding consequences for countries.
The countries most susceptible to such actions, Donnelly called Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Moldova and the states of Central Asia. From this point of view, the Baltic countries are less risky, although they may be under pressure.
Admiral J. Stavridis agrees with K. Donnelly that the new Russian strategy will be effective in the case of countries with a large number of sympathetic citizens. For this reason, the NATO leadership should carefully study the latest Russian actions and draw appropriate conclusions.
Russia Displays a New Military Prowess in Ukraine’s East:
