After the Fall of Berlin Wall, the events on global geopolitical scene, have been speeding up, dramatically. We have witnessed the changes in international relations, that were unimaginable not only to general public, but also to a number of political analysts. The stage that was set up after the WWII, exploded right in our faces at the end of the past and at the beginning of the New Millennium, changing life of millions. The "New World Order", "post-modern states", the "jungle of the countries still living in XIX century" (cit. Sir Robert Cooper "The post-modern state and the world order"), all the geopolitical strategic points of view promoting the international relations based on double standards, force, preemptive attack, deception, and most of all limits on states sovereignty imposed by "post-modern" states to "jungle" countries are our everyday life, now. The "new" view appears to be an old one. Second millennium, at its very start, reintroduced the relations known at the start of previous one. There is The Rome, and the barbaric world outside of its limes. In that uni-polar World, the Rome had all the power to impose its will on barbarians using the methods listed above, in the name of "civilization", but in real, grabbing resources, and melting or destroying other societies.
That modern invasion is called "globalization". The real driving wheel of that motions are corporations, struggling to established global corporate world. The first victim was USA of 60's. The freedom loving people in the States, helped by the movements all over the World fought the fight they simply could not win. Dear "flower children", Jimi, Joan, Janis, Jim, and many, many other young Americans you gave your lives in the first trench trying to stop the force that is fighting, now, to oppress the World the way they had done to America of yours. Vechnaya pamyat!
In a next few days, LG is going post the text of Mr. Andrew Korybko, political analyst and journalist of Sputnik International, who has just published the book "Hybrid Wars: The Indirect Adaptive Approach To Regime Change". Corporation globalism advances in several columns. Since corporations have no need to develop structure suitable for war fighting on the global scale, they are using post-modern countries they have created to fight the war for them. That is the first column. The second column are "international" trade and financial organizations like WTO, IMF and World Bank. Mr. Korybko is analyzing the mode of operation of the corporations via post-modern states, called Hybrid war.
Hybrid Wars, according to the author, is formed as a strategy of USA, combining Color Revolution and Unconventional Warfare strategies to create a toolkit for bringing down and controlling regimes in targeted states. Hybrid War changes the order of events that had been characterized warfare of yesterday. Up to hybrid wars, the main strike was coming from the outside, from direct aggression. So called, "the fifth column", was an auxiliary force helping the aggressor from within. Hybrid wars work upside down. Where ever, and when ever is possible, the targeted victim is attacked by the "fifth column" from within, first. That is the main strike. That is "Colored Revolution". The Unconventional war is commonly used to soften and to prepare the victim for the inner destruction. That unconventional attack combines intelligence boring, media confusion, NGO manipulation, different levels of economic pressures from embargoes to all kind of sophisticated market and financial games, as well as, localized military strikes of different level, preferably airstrikes, only. Though, The High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) seems to many as conspiracy theory supporters paranoia, the HAARP is potentially a very powerful weapon of ionospheric layer manipulation with consequence to weather, communications, state of peoples mind, etc. There are strong indications that HAARP could be used in an Unconventional war attack, and has been used!
This text could be very interesting, not only for the people out of post-modern world - Balkans and other Slavic countries that are under attack, and still standing and fighting back, Serbs, Russians, Belorussians, Malorussians, for deeply respected Arab people, Iraqis, Tunisians, Libyans, Egyptians, people in Iran, Afghanistan, India, all over Asia, but also for all the freedom loving people in post-modern states.
Here we go .....
The Intro by LG
The grand objective behind every Hybrid War is to disrupt multipolar transnational connective projects through externally provoked identity conflicts (ethnic, religious, regional, political, etc.) within a targeted transit state.
Russia’s Eurasian integration objectives and China’s Silk Road projects are the targets of the US’ global Hybrid War strategy, and this accordingly opens up a wide range of geographic battlefields. Andrew examines the Greater Heartland, the Balkans, ASEAN, transoceanic Africa, and Latin America in identifying the vulnerabilities that each of the relevant transit states has to this revolutionary type of asymmetrical warfare.
His unique methodology incorporates the variables of ethnicity, religion, history, administrative boundaries, physical geography, and socio-economic disparity in crafting comprehensive analyses that demonstrate each country’s Hybrid War weaknesses. The objective of the work is to illustrate the means that the US could predictably employ in destabilizing these targeted states, thereby giving decision makers and the public advance notice so that they can be better prepared to deal with certain preplanned scenarios as they arise.
Please visit us to follow the updates of the “Hybrid Wars” series due to be released every Friday starting today.
The Law Of Hybrid Warfare
Hybrid War is one of the most significant strategic developments that the US has ever spearheaded, and the transitioning of Color Revolutions to Unconventional Wars is expected to dominate the destabilizing trends of the coming decades. Those unaccustomed to approaching geopolitics from the Hybrid War perspective might struggle to understand where the next ones might occur, but it’s actually not that difficult to identify the regions and countries most at risk of falling victim to this new form of aggression. The key to the forecast is in accepting that Hybrid Wars are externally provoked asymmetrical conflicts predicated on sabotaging concrete geo-economic interests, and proceeding from this starting point, it’s relatively easy to pinpoint where they might strike next.
The series begin by explaining the patterns behind Hybrid War and deepening the reader’s comprehension of its strategic contours. Afterwards, we will prove how the previously elaborated framework has indeed been at play during the US’ Wars on Syria and Ukraine, its first two Hybrid War victims. Next part reviews all of the lessons that have been learned thus far and applies them in forecasting the next theaters of Hybrid War and the most vulnerable geopolitical triggers within them. Subsequent additions to the series will thenceforth focus on those regions and convey why they’re so strategically and socio-politically vulnerable to becoming the next victims of the US’ post-modern warfare.
Patterning The Hybrid War
Geostrategic-Economic Determinants:
Before addressing the geo-economic underpinnings of Hybrid War, it’s important to state out that the US also has geostrategic ones as well, such as entrapping Russia in a predetermined quagmire. The “Reverse Brzezinski”, as the author has taken to calling it, is simultaneously applicable to Eastern Europe through Donbass, the Caucasus through Nagorno-Karabakh, and Central Asia through theFergana Valley, and if synchronized through timed provocations, then this triad of traps could prove lethally efficient in permanently ensnaring the Russian bear. This Machiavellian scheme will always remain a risk because it’s premised on an irrefutable geopolitical reality, and the best that Moscow can do is try to preempt the concurrent conflagration of its post-Soviet periphery, or promptly and properly respond to American-provoked crises the moment they emerge. The geostrategic elements of Hybrid War are thus somewhat inexplicable from the geo-economic ones, especially in the case of Russia, but in making the examined pattern more broadly pertinent to other targets such as China and Iran, it’s necessary to omit the “Reverse Brzezinski” stratagem as a prerequisite and instead focus more on the economic motivations that the US has in each instance.
The grand objective behind every Hybrid War is to disrupt multipolar transnational connective projects through externally provoked identity conflicts (ethnic, religious, regional, political, etc.) within a targeted transit state.
This template can clearly be seen in Syria and Ukraine and is the Law of Hybrid Warfare. The specific tactics and political technologies utilized in each destabilization may differ, but the strategic concept remains true to this basic tenet. Taking this end goal into account, it’s now possible to move from the theoretical into the practical and begin tracing the geographic routes of various projects that the US wants to target. To qualify, the multipolar transnational connective projects being referred to could be either energy-based, institutional, or economic, and the more overlap that there is among these three categories, the more likely it is that a Hybrid War scenario is being planned for a given country.
Socio-Political Structural Vulnerabilities:
Once the US has identified its target, it begins searching for the structural vulnerabilities that it will exploit in the coming Hybrid War. Contextually, these aren’t physical objects to be sabotaged such as power plants and roads (although they too are noted, albeit by different destabilization teams), but socio-political characteristics that are meant to be manipulated in order to attractively emphasize a certain demographic’s “separateness” from the existing national fabric and thus ‘legitimize’ their forthcoming foreign-managed revolt against the authorities. The following are the most common socio-political structural vulnerabilities as they relate to the preparation for Hybrid War, and if each of them can be tied to a specific geographic location, then they become much more likely to be used as galvanizing magnets in the run-up to the Color Revolution and as preliminary territorial demarcations for the Unconventional Warfare aspect afterwards:
 |
| CANVAS leader Srdja Popovic, with the logo of "OTPOR". Color Revolution in Serbia (source) |
* ethnicity
* religion
* history
* administrative boundaries
* socio-economic disparity
* physical geography
The greater the overlap that can be achieved among each of these factors, the stronger the Hybrid War’s potential energy becomes, with each overlapping variable exponentially multiplying the coming campaign’s overall viability and ‘staying power’.
Preconditioning:
Hybrid Wars are always preceded by a period of societal and structural preconditioning. The first type deals with the informational and soft power aspects that maximize key demographics’ acceptance of the oncoming destabilization and guide them into believing that some type of action (or passive acceptance of others’ thereof) is required in order to change the present state of affairs. The second type concerns the various tricks that the US resorts to in order to have the target government unintentionally aggravate the various socio-political differences that have already been identified, with the goal of creating cleavages of identity resentment that are then more susceptible to societal preconditioning and subsequent NGO-directed political organizing (linked in most cases to the Soros Foundation and/or National Endowment for Democracy).
To expand on the tactics of structural preconditioning, the most commonly employed and globally recognized one is sanctions, the implicit goal of which (although not always successful) has always been to “make life more difficult” for the average citizen so that he or she becomes more amenable to the idea of regime change and is thus more easily shepherded into acting upon these externally instilled impulses. Less known, however, are the more oblique, yet presently and almost ubiquitously implemented, methods of achieving this goal, and this surrounds the power that the US has to affect certain budgetary functions of targeted states, namely the amount of revenue that they receive and what precisely they spend it on.
The global slump in energy and overall commodity prices has hit exporting states extraordinarily hard, many of which are disproportionately dependent on such selling such resources in order to satisfy their fiscal ends, and the decrease in revenue almost always leads to eventual cuts in social spending. Parallel with this, some states are facing American-manufactured security threats that they’re forced to urgently respond to, thus necessitating them to unexpectedly budget more money to their defense programs that could have otherwise been invested in social ones. On their own, each of these ‘tracks’ is designed to decrease the government’s social expenditure so as to incubate the medium-term conditions necessary for enhancing the prospects of a Color Revolution, the first stage of Hybrid Warfare. In the event that a state experiences both limited revenue intake and an unexpected need to hike its defense budget, then this would have a compound effect on cutting social services and might even push the Color Revolution timeframe forward from the medium- to short-term, depending on the severity of the resultant domestic crisis and the success that the American-influenced NGOs have in politically organizing the previously examined identity blocs against the government.
Andrew Korybko is the American political commentator currently working for the Sputnik agency. He is the post-graduate of MGIMO University and author of the monograph “Hybrid Wars: The Indirect Adaptive Approach To Regime Change” (2015). This text will be included into his forthcoming book on the theory of Hybrid Warfare.
Source: Oriental Review - Open Dialog Research Journal
No comments:
Post a Comment