Tag Archives: Military Doctrine

At last, the long awaited new military doctrine.  It’ll take a bit to digest it.

The new doctrine doesn’t hem and haw in an introductory section the way the old one did.  It just jumps right in to General Propositions–what the doctrine is and what it’s based on.  Unlike its predecessor, it gives 11 key definitions of terms ranging from military security to military planning.

It defines military danger as a condition of interstate or internal state relations characterized  by an accumulation of factors, capable under certain conditions of leading to the rise of a military threat.

It defines military threat as a condition of interstate or internal state relations characterized by the real possibility of the rise of a military conflict between opposing sides with a high degree of readiness of some state (group of states), of separatist (terrorist) organization for the employment of military force (armed violence).

Section II. covers Military Dangers and Military Threats.  The new doctrine sees a world somewhat changed.  Gone is the unipolar world of a lone superpower and it now describes a world of reduced economic, political, and military influence of single states (or groups of states) and alliances and the corresponding growth of influence of other states, aspiring to all-around domination [are we talking China here?!], of multipolarity, and of globalization.

Unresolved regional conflicts near the Russian Federation remain a problem and the existing architecture (system) of international security doesn’t provide equal security to all states.  This is much gloomier on the U.N. than the old doctrine.

Now, the list of 11 Fundamental External Military Dangers…(the old doctrine addressed only threats, not dangers):

1. NATO’s globalization and expansion to the RF’s borders.
2. Destabilization of states and regions and the undermining of strategic stability.
3. Deploying or building up foreign military forces on territories or in waters adjacent to the RF.
4. Development and deployment of strategic missile defense systems which undermine strategic stability and upset the missile-nuclear correlation of forces, space militarization, and deployment of strategic nonnuclear precision weapons.
5. Territorial claims on the RF and interference in its internal affairs.
6. Proliferation.
7. Violations of international arms limitation or reduction treaties.
8. Use of force on the territories of states adjacent to the RF or its allies.
9. Presence or rise (escalation) of military conflicts on the territories of states adjacent to the RF or its allies.
10. The spread of international terrorism.
11. The rise of interethnic or interconfessional tensions, the presence of international armed radical groups near RF borders, territorial disputes, and the growth of armed separatist (religious) extremists in regions of the world.

Then there are just three Fundamental Internal Military Dangers:

1. Forceful attempts to change the RF constitutional order.
2. Undermining the RF’s sovereignty, violation of its unity and territorial integrity.
3. Disruption of the functioning of the RF organs of state authority, important state, military facilities and information infrastructure.

These were a little different in 2000.  The RF’s unity and territorial integrity were explicitly threatened by extremist nationalist, religious, separatist, and terrorist movements.  There were three additional ones as well–the establishment of illegal armed formations (a la Chechnya), illegal arms trade on RF territory that abets sabotage and terrorism, and large-scale organized criminal, terrorist, and contraband activities.

The new doctrine lists 5 Fundamental Military Threats:

1. Sharp aggravation of the military-political situation (international situation) and creation of the conditions for using military force.
2. Impeding the work of the system of RF state and military command and control, disturbing the functioning of its strategic nuclear forces, missile attack warning system, space monitoring, nuclear weapons storage facilities, nuclear power, chemical industry, and other potentially dangerous facilities.
3. The establishment and training of illegal armed formations, their activity on RF territory or that of its allies.
4. Provocative demonstration of military force in the course of exercises on territories adjacent to the RF or its allies.
5. Activities of armed forces of other states to mobilize partially or fully, transfer state and military command and control to wartime conditions.

The old doctrine didn’t deal with dangers, giving just 11 Fundamental External Threats (in very abbreviated form):

1. Territorial claims on the RF, interference in its internal affairs.
2. Armed conflict near the RF.
3. Building up troops near the RF or its allies.
4. Expansion of military blocs.
5. Presence of foreign troops adjacent to RF territory.
6. Creation of military formations near RF territory with the aim of using them on RF territory.
7. Attacks on RF facilities abroad.
8. Attacks on RF government or military systems, strategic forces, missile early warning, missile defense, space monitoring, or nuclear storage.
9. Hostile information operations.
10. Violations of the rights or RF citizens abroad.
11. International terrorism.