Russian evolution – The Statesman

As early as in 2014, strategic thinker Anthony H Cordesman stressed the need to understand rival views of grand strategy and military developments or, to quote a British military expert, the other side of the hill. Cordesman was writing in the immediate aftermath of Russias annexation of Crimea as he observed a range of Russian and Belorussian military and civil experts present a very different view of global security and the forces behind it from that of the Wests at the Russian Ministry of Defences Third Moscow Conference on International Security in May 2014. The standout point of his published paper was the laser sharp focus he brought to bear on the role of what Russian analysts termed the Colour Revolution in the evolving security situation.

The Kremlin saw a clear link between the Rose Revolution in Georgia (2003), Orange Revolution in Ukraine (2004), and the Tulip Revolution that took place in Kyrgyzstan (2005). The regime changes that followed these protest movements in the erstwhile Soviet republics caused considerable consternation, and even alarm, in Moscow. Russia tied the term Colour Revolution to what it saw as a new American-European approach to warfare that focused on creating destabilising revolutions in other nation-states as a means of serving their security interests at low cost and with minimal casualties. It was seen as posing a potential threat to Russia (in its near abroad), to China, and to Asian states not aligned with the USA. Understanding this context is key to making sense of President Vladimir Putins decision to invade Ukraine in February this year.

Russia-watcher Timothy Fryes recently released book, Weak Strongman: The Limits of Power in Putins Russia, examines the roots of Mr Putins power and its implications for the countrys foreign policy. He underlines that Moscows more assertive foreign policy and the trade-offs being made ~ and largely being accepted by the Russian people ~ between security and economic growth seem here to stay. Scholar Andrew Monaghan iterates in his review of the book that the Russian leaderships longstanding concerns about a Colour Revolution have not only been a dominant feature of the security debate in Moscow but also relate to the direction of its personalist autocracy.

The Kremlins understanding of the evolving international affairs landscape ~ how it envisages a post-West world including a Pacific 21st century, its prioritisation of the Arctic, its worries about growing competition over the global commons, and the geoeconomic competition that Moscow sees as intensifying and driving conflict over the coming decade ~ will dictate not just the Wests relationship with Russia but also impact how the new cold war thesis plays out globally. As Monaghan writes, a discussion on Russias calculus behind its measures of war is now unavoidable. An honest engagement with the issue, however, could throw up uncomfortable questions for the West.

A version of this story appears in the print edition of the August 29, 2022, issue.

See the article here:

Russian evolution - The Statesman