Hybrid war “a Russian strategy since Mongol times”, blogger says

Genghis Khan

Genghis Khan 

2014/10/19 • Russia

Many in Moscow and the West have seen Russia’s campaign in Ukraine as something new, but in fact, a Russian blogger says in a post that has been republished in the Moscow media Russia has been using “hybrid warfare” with enormous success for centuries.

Ardzhil Terner, a face name for a Russian blogger said living in Canada, argues what Vladimir Putin is trying to do in Ukraine is to prompt the West to intervene there by using irregular forces to destabilize the situation, something that would cost the West any chance of winning and guarantee that Russia would come out on top.

Such a strategy, he says, has been part of Russian foreign and domestic policies for centuries. In Terner’s telling, it involves tempting outside powers to intervene in what they believe is a position in which Russia is weak and then exploiting that intervention to generate support for the Russian leadership by allowing it to pose as the defender of the country.

“However paradoxical it may sound,” he continues, “every time when the West falls for such provocations, it has suffered crushing defeat,” and the same thing is in prospect in the case of southeastern Ukraine where a Western intervention would produce exactly the opposite effect that many think: a smashing victory for Moscow.

Unlike the West which has “always preferred the path of honest and open military aggression,” he writes, “Russia in a fashion which is rooted in its role as an heir of Byzantiu, hs preferred to use what are in truth barbaric means of conducting war, never attacking first but rather forcing the opponent to do so and presenting itself as an innocent victim of aggression.”

According to Terner, that was the case in the Russian-Polish war of 1610-1612, which Poland first appeared to win and then completely lost, in the Swedish war of the early 18th century, of the campaign against Napoleon in the early 19th, and the Russo-Japanese war in the early 20th in which Japan’s acquisition of debt put it at risk of later defeat.

Terner argues that “the two Russian revolutions [of 1917] and the civil war which followed them again showed the high effectiveness of the methods of Russian ‘hybrid war,” in which the Russians first destroyed the empire thus tempting outside intervention and then used that intervention to rebuild the empire under a new name.

Moscow used similar tactics against Hitler, first positioning itself to appear weak and thus tempting German intervention and then turning on the Germans and winning an overwhelming victory, Terner says.

And in 1991, the Russians “destroyed the Soviet Union,” prompting the US and NATO, neither of which was led by people who knew history, to celebrate and move eastward. “At the same time, Russia artfully attracted them into various conflicts in the Middle East and Yugoslavia and besides this prompted the expansion of NATO” eastward.

That looked like an overwhelming Russian defeat, but Terner says, “it should have been perfectly clear to any idiot that this was the latest shameful provocation of the Russians who in this way sought to force the United States and NATO to repeat the errors of their predecessors” and get involved near or in Russia in ways that would secure their defeat.

Ukraine is the latest act of this drama, Terner says. The Russians “provoked the West to organize the Maidan, to overthrow President Yanukovich, and then give the order to Kyiv to begin military operations in the Donbas.” If the West now intervenes as the blogger seems to think likely, then things will play out to a Russian victory after an apparent defeat.

There are obvious problems with this analysis. On the one hand, Terner’s definition of “hybrid warfare” is hardly the same one that many others are using. And on the other, his argument implies a degree of Russian calculation far greater than was in fact the case. In sum, he makes an intentional virtue what was a forced response.

But his commentary is important for the following reason. It may not be accurate either of the past or in the future, but it provides a narrative many Russians will find both convincing and evidence of their own cleverness and sophistication compared to their opponents in the West.

And that in turn will give them more reasons to support Putin’s increasing use of provocations against the West, provocations that many Russians will see not as a dangerous threat to their own wellbeing but as necessary steps to the ultimate defeat of the West and their own ultimate victory.

Source: windowoneurasia.blogspot.com

Tags: ,

  • Dirk Smith

    The muscovites were only able to turn the tables on Nazi Germany due to Lend-Lease and Mother Nature. To say the early German successes were a planned tactic by Stalin is ludicrous. Prior to Lend-Lease and the bad weather, the strategy was to sacrifice millions of Ukrainians’ lives in order to protect Mother third-world Russia. Usually by sending them into machine gun fire or to fight the German unarmed. Russia’s military ineptitude is the reason why Ukraine’s loss of life during WWII nearly equaled Poland & Russia combined.

    • Milton Devonair

      And the USA destroying the German war machine, thus leaving Germany and their allies in the east without supplies to fight a war.
      Tragic error in the history of mankind that soviet russia was left standing after WWII.
      Hundreds of millions have died because of it.

      • Corrado Cattani

        Stfu. Only error lol. Only error is there is nothing you can do about it. You never could. Tiny poor Russia can hold off and crushed many an empire in its 1000 year history. You can keep blabbering but one day those oceans will no longer protect you. Untill then we will wait… And time is always on our side

        • Milton Devonair

          lmao!!! Humans have always been protected from the apes living in russia because, well, apes don’t do anything but feed upon themselves, so we’re safe. Any technology/material they have has been stolen from humans elsewhere.
          Humans are safe unless they are unfortunate enough to live by the cesspool called russia…or have the diseased russians amongst their population. Then they are in danger, only if unarmed as that’s what russia and russians specialize in, the rape, looting and murdering of unarmed women and children. Like you said, it’s what russians do, it’s who russians are.
          Humans need to erect gates to keep russians out, keep them from spreading their disease:


          • Corrado Cattani

            Sorry to upset you but many of the barbarian Rssians are already in your stupid country working on its demise

    • Artem Grigorenko

      Well, first of all, the Soviet Union wasn’t Russia (or Muscovites as you call them). It was a mix of different “nations” including Ukraine. The leadership was also a mix of ethnicities many of which (from what I’ve read in the past) weren’t even Slavic. So it’s hard to blame Russians for “everything” as I’ve seen fellow Ukrainians do frequently, especially when Russians were one of the main victims, if not the largest ones, of the USSR.

      Secondly, ethnic Ukrainian loss of life was not close to the collectivized ethnic Russian and Polish losses, let alone the losses experienced by ethnic Russians. You should probably do a basic search on google just see what’s generally said about a certain topic mate! :) For example, even though Wikipedia gets a bad rep it’s still a fairly decent place to understand the gist of what is said about a certain topic. Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties_of_the_Soviet_Union#The_estimates_and_their_sources
      As you can see from Vadim Erlikman’s estimates Ukrainians lost about 7 million while Russians lost about 14 million. Looking at military deaths Russians lost close to 7 million while Ukrainians lost around 1.5 million. Civilian deaths however were more closer for both parties. Ukrainians lost 5 million civilians and Russia lost 7 million. This makes sense as Ukraine faced a high level of destruction during the war (many groups were responsible for this) probably more destruction than most countries (inc. Russia) at the time and was occupied by German forces for a longer period of time early on in the war against the USSR meaning USSR leaders wouldn’t be able to obtain as many Ukrainians to fight for them.

      • Milton Devonair

        russians have always been the most prolific murderer of russians. Just like muslims have always been the biggest killer of muslims, so nothing new there.

        russia is the epicenter the disease (bolshevism) and any “convert” in other countries were a tiny minority of those people in countries that were overran by the russian bolshevik ape hordes. Just like islam.

        And when russia invades another country, once they’re through with their raping, murdering and looting, they move into the people’s houses/farms there and give the original owners a choice, ‘leave or die’. Thus the ’empire’ of russia expands and now they can say “this is russia!”.

        russia is ebola.

      • Dirk Smith

        Stalin, Beria, etc slept every night and operated in Moscow. Your comparison exonerates Hitler from Germans since he was Austrian.
        I’m not going to debate body counts, especially from Wikipedia (lol), but we all understand the German army engulfed all of Ukraine, which is the largest country in Europe.
        Who is Vadim Erlikman?
        The only insanity the last 100 years emanates from Moscow. Nazi Germany’s former ally and Iran/Syria/N Korea’s current ally.

  • Milton Devonair

    Gennady Tyundeshev (Kharlamoos), a scholar at the Institute of History and Law at Khakhas State University, published a book entitled “The Great Khan Baty – Founder of Russian Statehood”

    Tyundeshev argues, according to the Tolkovatel blog, that “the administration of Russia up to now is carried out according to a System set up in the Golden Horde” and that this involves a
    combination of the values of “Confucian legality” and “submission to the Boss”


    The only empire larger than the russian one that the bolsheviks stole from the tsars was the mongol empire.

  • Danny Smith

    Western countries did not organize the Maidan, it was the Ukrainian people that did it.

    I keep reading that it was US led, this is untrue and it usually comes from Russian trolls or their useful idiots

    • http://support-ukrainian-independence.rallycongress.com/ gleng2

      I agree with this comment. The strategy described above is interesting and perhaps partially true but oversimplified.

    • Milton Devonair

      100% correct in both sentences.

      So, is the USA organizing the demonstrations in Hong Kong or are the people there just wanting to be free of the repression and corruption that comes with yet another bolshevik style forced governance?

      The problem with russians is they think that humans are as ignorant as they are, so we’ll believe in the same absurdities that they do…..

  • Paul P. Valtos

    Well someone has to be blamed. Russia does not want the onus on them. Hell no. As pure as driven snow. Actually I think they have made a grievous mistake and they forget tangling with Orientals in 1905. If China gets to trap Russia in financial obligations they also can pull the plug. That would be the end of Russia as a European power. The next ruler of China will have a name like Chaing. Ahh soo.