Journals / Gazi Akademik Bakış / 2015 / Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 17

Hybrid Warfare Studies and Russia’s Example in Crimea

Hibrit Savaş Çalışmaları ve Kırım’daki Rusya Örneği

Pages
261–277
Publication Date
2015-12-17
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Russian activities, which have been based on surprise, ambiguity and deniability, presented a unique example for hybrid warfare studies.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Although Hybrid Warfare is an old concept, theoretical studies in the western countries mainly began in the post-Col War era, focusing on asymmetrical threats against conventional superiority of western countries such as USA or Israel.
📊
Key Findings & Data:September 11th attacks and 2006 Israel-Lebanon war played important roles for the evolution of hybrid warfare theories.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Russian activities, which have been based on surprise, ambiguity and deniability, presented a unique example for hybrid warfare studies.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2006 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Karma Savaş · Rusya · Kırım

Abstract

Although Hybrid Warfare is an old concept, theoretical studies in the western countries mainly began in the post-Col War era, focusing on asymmetrical threats against conventional superiority of western countries such as USA or Israel. September 11th attacks and 2006 Israel-Lebanon war played important roles for the evolution of hybrid warfare theories. However, there has not any consensus among scholars on a exact or unique definition of hybrid warfare. Hybrid warfare became one of the main security issues for the West and especially for NATO after the Russia-Ukraine crisis. Russian military strategies, called “hybrid warfare” by the western countries, resulted in the successful annexation of Crimea and, caused a serious security problem for the West resulting important structural and functional changes for the military system of NATO. Russian activities, which have been based on surprise, ambiguity and deniability, presented a unique example for hybrid warfare studies.

Özet

Karma Savaş eski bir konsept olsa da batılı devletlerde bu konuya yönelik teorik çalışmalar esas olarak Soğuk Savaş sonrasında ABD ya da İsrail gibi Batılı devletlerin konvansiyonel üstünlüğüne yönelik asimetrik tehditleri esas alarak başlamıştır. 11 Eylül saldırıları ve 2006 İsrail-Hizbullah savaşı karma savaş teorilerinin gelişiminde önemli rol oynamıştır. Bununla birlikte akademisyenler arasında karma savaşın tanımı konusunda bir uzlaşma sağlanamamıştır. Rusya-Ukrayna krizinin başlamasından sonra karma savaş batılı devletler özellikle de NATO için en önemli güvenlik sorunlarından biri haline gelmiştir. Batılı devletler tarafından “karma savaş” olara nitelendirilen Rus askeri stratejileri Kırım’ın başarılı bir şekilde ilhakı ile sonuçlanmış ve NATO’nun askeri sisteminde önemli yapısal ve işlevsel değişimlere yol açacak şekilde batılı devletler için çok önemli bir güvenlik sorunu ortaya çıkarmıştır. Sürpriz, belirsizlik ve inkara dayalı Rus askeri faaliyetleri karma savaş açısından emsalsiz bir örnek teşkil etmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

EROL, M., OĞUZ, Ş. (2015). Hybrid Warfare Studies and Russia’s Example in Crimea. Gazi Akademik Bakış, Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 17, 261–277. https://ajindex.com/articles/156350

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (3)

  1. “A Secure Europe in a Better World. European Security Strategy”, Brussels, 12 December 2003.
  2. BERZINS Janis, Russian New Generation Warfare Is Not Hybrid Warfare, Ed. (in) Artis Pabriks and Andis Kudors, The War in Ukraine: Lessons for Europe, Konrad Adanauer Shiftung, The Centre For East European Policy Studies Uni- versity of Latvia Press, Riga, 2015. BLOMFİELD Adrian, “Russia ‘distributing passports in the Crimea’”, The Tele- graph, 17 August 2008. COALSON Robert, “Top Russian General Lays Bare Putin’s Plan for Ukraine”, Huffington Post, 09 February 2014, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert- coalson/valery-gerasimov-putin-ukraine_b_5748480.html “Die Russen nutzen alle Werkzeuge”, Die Zeit, 29 January 2015. GERASIMOV Valery, „New Challenges need to rethink the forms and methods of warfare“, http://www.vpk-news.ru/articles/14632. Grand Strategy: A View form Oregon, Hybrid Warfare, 7 October 2014 https:// geopolicraticus.wordpress.com/tag/georgii-isserson/ GROBE Stefan, “Stoltenberg: NATO massively stepping up military presence in Europe”, EURONEWS, 25.03.2015, http://www.euronews.com/2015/03/25/ stoltenberg-nato-massively-stepping-up-military-presence-in-europe/ HEDENSKOG J. - R.L. Larsson, “Russian Leverage on the CIS and the Baltic States”, Swedish Defence Research Agency, June 2007, Stockholm, http://foi.se/Re- portFiles/foir_2280.pdf, p.30-37. HOFFMAN Frank G., “Hybrid Threats: Neither Omnipotent Nor Unbeatable”, Foreign Policy Research Institute, Elsevier, Summer 2010 p. 442. HOFFMAN Frank G., “Conflict in the 21st Century: The Rise of Hybrid Wars”, Potomac Institute for Policy Studies, December 2007, http://www.potomacinstitute. org/images/stories/publications/potomac_hybridwar_0108.pdf HOFFMAN Frank G., “Hybrid Warfare and Challenges”, JFQ, Issue 52, 1st Quar- ter, 2009, p.36. HUBER Thomas M., Compound Warfare: That Fatal Knot, Fort Leavenworth, Army Command and General Staff College Press, 2002. JONES Sam, “Ukraine: Russia’s New Art of War”, Financial Times, 28 August 28 2014.
  3. JOHNSON David E., Hard Fighting: Israel in Lebanon and Gaza, Santa Monica, RAND Corporation, 2011. LEE Dave, “Russia and Ukraine in cyber ‘stand-off’”, BBC, 05 March 2014, http:// www.bbc.com/news/technology-26447200 LOHR Eric, “What can passports tell us about Putin’s intentions?”, The Washing- ton Post, 04 March 2014. MACFARQUHAR Neil, “Putin contradicts claims on annexation of Crimea”, The New York Times, 09 March 2015. MCCULLOH Timothy - Richard Johnson, “Hybrid Warfare”