As the world shifts its focus away from military action, the economic realities once again take center stage to present the coming global crisis.

Winning the Russian Game

February 13, 2017

Scott Carlson

 

The “Russian Game” is a chess opening first popularized in the mid-19th century by chess master Alexander Petrov, a symmetrical strategy that allows attacking opportunities for both sides. After gaining tempo, one side gains the upper hand through a well-placed Knight. The Russian Game alternates between offense and defense, offering both sharp (symmetric) and blurred (asymmetric) lines of attack. Victory results in as little as six moves.

Viewing European politics as a chess game, Mr. Putin is certainly aligning the board to his advantage. His diplomatic, informational, military and economic strategy demonstrates how the Russian game can be won. The West, comprised of NATO and its allied partners, must outsmart Putin’s diplomacy, win the battle for the narrative in the information campaign, outsmart Russia’s military moves, and unite against his economic assault. If it can outmaneuver these four Putin moves, the West wins.

 

Smart Diplomacy

Mr. Putin arm wrestled his way into greater regional influence with friendships in surprising corners. Alliances with both Islamic (Turkey) and Jewish nation states (Israel) upped his game and increased regional influence. Mr. Putin’s “turning of the cheek” to Mr. Obama’s eviction of 35 Russian diplomatic staff, modeled constraint-through-kindness to US counterparts and leveraged an even more positive image to the world. Pro-Russian election victories in Belarus and Moldova further legitimatized Mr. Putin’s Game. Add to this a newly rediscovered Western European populism with potentially European Union-destabilizing elections in Italy, France, the Netherlands, and Germany. Should the European chessboard suffer the loss of vital members, Germany is left as the last bastion of traditional European liberalism. The West must stick together, prolong, and win the diplomatic game.

 

A Focused Information Campaign

Despite the ongoing debate over Russian denials of hacking the US election process, Mr. Putin’s information capabilities are much greater than singular, repeated cyber attacks. Russia’s slick 24-hour news and information source RT (Russia Today), complete with legitimatized Western reporters and foreign correspondents reporting from the “field,” is prime-time showmanship for his informational “battle for the narrative.” Judging from its popularity with Western audiences unaware of its propaganda value, Mr. Putin leverages his Russian game through professionally delivered, tidy sound bites. Mr Putin’s media slant has thousands of eager listeners in the ethnic Russian populations in former Soviet Baltic, Black Sea and the Balkans breakaway Republics for whom Western cultural and economic reforms proved wanting. The West must up its information game, overcome Russia’s battle for the narrative, and win the media war.

 

A Strategic Military

From subs in the suburbs of Stockholm to air raids in Aleppo, the Russian Game is certainly on the offensive. An increase in Russian military activity is noted along Russia’s western flank as well as a military buildup in Kaliningrad, the tiny Russian Republic sandwiched between Poland and Lithuania. Yet the West’s response has been neither fast nor strong. Cat and mouse-like, in the Russian Game Mr. Putin makes a move, NATO reacts. Mr. Putin rattles his sabers in the Baltics. NATO garners a show of force through allied and partner exercises in the region. Mr. Putin bombs Aleppo, emptying half of the country in the form of European migrants, advancing asymmetric power across other real estate on the board. NATO responds appropriately but too lethargically, from the 2014 Wales Summit (Eastern European assurance) to the 2016 Warsaw Summit (Russian deterrence). The West must earn bonus clock time by completing its “military Schengen zone” efforts and speed-of-assembly initiatives to win on the military front.

 

A Calculated Economy

With the two-punch combo of Western sanctions and low worldwide demand for gas and oil exports, theoretically Russia’s economy is crippled and Mr. Putin contained. Yet does this limit the Russian Game? Certainly not. If Mr. Putin cannot outright win the game, he can still force a draw. His Syrian strategy emptied half of the country. Conversely, Western Europe struggles from negative interest rates, lethargic economic growth, and high unemployment. On top of this, the economic burden of two million migrants pouring through its open borders. Millions more wait not-so-patiently for Turkey to open the gates.  Small stress fissures on government support systems are likely to crack infrastructure, breaking apart an already overwhelmed system. The West’s Queen is taken, the noose is tightened and the remaining players struggle to cover the King: Check. Conquering and dividing, the Russian Game continues to knock the European chessboard further off balance. Intelligence estimates could declare the winner. One to three percent of innocent migrants are likely to become radicalized, increasing Europe’s terrorist population by10,000 to 30,000. After recent attacks and the rise of populist politicians, the European Union will most likely look smaller and more fractured as 2017 draws to a close. At this point the West’s King could very well be boxed in: Checkmate.

NATO and its allied partners must remain united, encourage open borders, and promote free trade to win the economic war.

The Marines say: “Hope for the best and plan for the worst.” The Russian Game, as in chess, allows for countless potential diplomatic, information, military and economic interactions and outcomes. Hoping for the best means the West stretches out the game to outright win the match. Planning for the worst means declaring a draw. It certainly beats losing a game after four moves.

 

One in three Germans worry that tensions between the West and Russia over Crimea, Ukraine and Syria could lead to a military confrontation, according to an opinion poll by the respected Forsa institute published on Wednesday.

The survey found that 32 percent of 2,504 Germans polled believe it is possible that war could break out between Russia and the European Union and its allies in the United States. But a majority of 64 percent said they did not share those fears.

Fears of war traditionally run high in Germany, a country sensitive to tensions that could lead to conflict after the devastation of World War Two and the partition of the nation into West Germany and East Germany during the Cold War.

The survey found supporters of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party were especially worried, 63 percent of them telling Forsa that war could break out.

Some 41 percent of all those polled said relations between Russia and the West were poor, 51 percent not good and only six percent said relations were good.

Chancellor Angela Merkel met in Berlin last week with Russian President Vladimir Putin and French President Francois Hollande about Syria and Ukraine.

© REUTERS TV/Files A still image taken from a video footage and released by Russia's Defence Ministry on August 14, 2016, shows a Russian Tu-22M3 bomber dropping off bombs near what the ministry said is the city of Deir ez-Zor

Merkel and Hollande pressed Putin to extend a pause in air strikes on rebels in Syria and halt the "criminal" bombardment of civilians, and said four-way talks aimed at ending violence in eastern Ukraine made some progress.

Russia Looks to Egypt to Boost Its Resurgent Presence in the MENA Region

July 25, 2016

Daniel Urchick

 

Russia continues to seek to increase its influence in the Middle East region’s power-brokering structure to a level it believes to be appropriate for its traditional great power status. As one Russia-watcher recently described, “Russia seeks the same level of say in the global system as it had at the Yalta conference of 1945.” It is important to look at Russia’s broader moves in the Middle East, like in Egypt, and not just Syria to properly understand the evolution of Russia’s resurgent great power foreign policy.

The Russian leadership’s disregard for what the West prefers in the Syrian peace process is the most visible example of this desire. Russia has been continuously marketing itself as the stronger, more consistent and more beneficial ally to have in the region today. This strategy has included taking the pragmatic-realist approach in helping countries combat domestic strife, terrorism, and regional pressure; compared to the United States’ emphasis on democratic values and better governance. One of Russia’s most blatant spearheads is Russian engagement with Egypt. Forty-four years after President Anwar Sadat expelled Soviet advisers from the country, Russia’s influence is on the rise once again.

It has not been an entirely smooth reengagement for Russia and Egypt. The October 2015 downing of Russia’s Metrojet 9268 over the Egyptian Sinai Peninsula still serves as a point of tension between the two countries. A travel ban was put in place by Russia soon after the crash, and a public disagreement over the cause of crash as well as a slowdown in once hot joint anti-terror exercises have all been noted. However, these issues have become nearly inconsequential in the larger geopolitical relationship between the two countries. Egypt is Russia’s second doorway into the region and it is unlikely to be a fleeting relationship.

Wikistrat experts in a December 2015 simulation pointed towards Russia’s heavy engagement with Sisi’s Egypt, while simultaneously conducting its Syrian campaign, as an important example of Russia’s renewed attempts to insert itself into the region with its pragmatic-realist approach. The large volume of military arms sales between Egypt and Russia is a high profile and highly successful example of Russia’s influence-building efforts. These arms sales have been augmented by the 2015 landmark nuclear infrastructure development deal, and numerous counter-terrorism exercises, and Russia’s attempts at engaging Egypt in the Syrian conflict. All of these actions are indicative of Russia’s attempts to create the perception that it is a growing viable alternative to the United States as a partner for Egypt.

Russia was also keen to bring Egypt to the table regarding Syria, if even symbolically. Those efforts have gone a long way towards inflating Egypt’s sense of being a major regional power with even greater power backing; something Egypt no doubt greatly appreciates. Russia has also refrained from criticizing Sisi and his government’s less than democratic tendencies while supporting harsher domestic repression in the country in the name of security. The United States on the other hand has been a keen critic of President Sisi and the failures of other governments to embrace the Arab Spring’s democratic theme. While the United States’ criticism may only have been to save domestic face, Egypt has not forgotten it and is wary of it happening again.

Russia’s resurgence in Egypt was made possible by the United States’ July 2013 decision to limit its military aid to the troubled government after a military coup ejected Mohammed Morsi. Dissatisfied with Egypt’s progress toward reinstating a democratic government, the U.S. announced that it was freezing a sizable portion of the $1.5 billion it provides to Egypt each year. The aid being withheld included 10 Apache helicopters (at a cost of more than $500 million), replacement M1A1 tank kits, and Harpoon anti-ship missiles. The U.S. also suspended the delivery of four F-16 fighter jets and canceled bi-annual US-Egyptian military exercises. The decision to freeze aid lasted until April 2015 and angered many key officials in Egypt. These officials are not likely to soon forget the sudden retraction of vital U.S. defense aid as it faced instability in the Sinai on one flank and instability in Libya on the other.

Egypt responded to the United States’ aid freeze by promptly signing arms deals with Russia worth up to $5 billion by 2015. The agreements included 50 MiG-29Ms, Buk-M2E (SA-SA-17 Grizzly) and Antey-2500 (SA-23 Gladiator/Giant) missile systems and 46 Ka-52K helicopters for Egypt’s new Mistral-class assault ships. The first MiG-29M Fulcrum aircraft are expected to be delivered by the end of 2016. These systems are crucial components for an Egypt that is looking to maintain its regional power status. The assault ships are a crucial component to any regional power projection strategy. They could serve as Egypt’s spearhead in future expeditionary ventures, like Yemen. The Mistral-class assault ships were originally supposed to be built for Russia by France. After a well-publicized injunction and rescinding of the deal, the ships were sold to Egypt. Russia wisely did not protest this sale but scored a major relations coup when they negotiated deals with Egypt to supply the systems inside of the ships and the Ka-52K naval variant scout/attack helicopters to give it teeth.

Looking into the future, it is not unreasonable to watch for these growing military ties between the two nations result in a more concrete Russian presence in Egypt. The technicians helping maintain KA-52Ks and MiG-29Ms as well as the Russian advisors and scientists involved with the 2015 nuclear infrastructure deal could serve as the initial impetus for a security presence. However, Russia’s ambitions may be even greater than a simple security complex with a small rapid reaction force. The Egyptian government has previously stated that it was ready to have Russia build a military base either in the Red Sea or the Mediterranean. Russian President Vladimir Putin has stated that Russia would seek to maintain a permanent naval presence in the Mediterranean, a region that is considered a core national interest. Experts have largely agreed that the naval facility at Tartus cannot provide sufficient support for a large naval presence in-line with Russia’s geopolitical ambitions. The facility is just too small for large ships without a major and costly expansion. “Tartus is vulnerable and not good enough and the Egyptian ports are perfect for the Russian navy,” the Times of Israel reported, quoting an unnamed Israeli defense source. An Egypt-based facility, if placed on the Mediterranean coast, could serve as a larger, more secure Tartus-like port for Russian ships. This facility could also garrison Russian military personal protecting the advisors assisting in the construction of Egypt’s nuclear infrastructure along with the personal servicing Egypt’s brand new Ka-52K helicopters for their Mistral-class assault ships and eventually their 50 new MiG-29M Fulcrums.

Through continuing and meaningful no-strings-attached security cooperation, Russia and Egypt appear to be willing to work towards developing a long-term close security relationship despite major disruptions. No matter the trials the Russia-Egyptian relationship face, arms sales and the boost they give to Egypt’s quest to be a regional power seem to keep the two close and moving forward. For Russia, Egypt is a second rail for building regional influence and offers the possibility of an eventual a tangible military facility. The relationship between the two is likely to only get stronger, not weaker as other regional analysts have suggested.