Search

Begin New Search Topic Military Strategy

301. Belarus’s Weaponization of Migration Should Make Us Reevaluate the Extent of Crimes Against Humanity and Human Rights

Author:
Peter Pinto
Publication Date:
12-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Council on International Policy (CIP)
Abstract:
Facing temperatures below freezing and bitter winter conditions, thousands of Middle Eastern and African migrants currently remain trapped between the tumultuous borders of Belarus and its EU neighbors. Many humanitarian groups have warned of imminent danger to the migrants if this humanitarian crisis, which has seen nearly 30,000 migrants attempt to illegally cross the Polish border since August, is not quickly resolved. Despite genuine reasons for their journey, the migrants have become unsuspecting pawns in an ever-growing political chess game between Belarus and its EU neighbors. More specifically, Belarus and its President Aleksander Lukashenko are being accused of facilitating and weaponizing such migration in an attempt to punish their geopolitical rivals in the EU. The accusations are relatively well-founded considering the litany of different immigration policies adopted by Belarusian authorities in recent months, including granting visas to migrants upon arrival and escorting migrants to the Polish border. Furthermore, many view this targeted influx of migrants as political retaliation for EU sanctions against Belarus for election fraud and repression of civil rights. Perhaps in hopes of destabilizing his enemies or deterring future sanctions, President Lukashenko is using migrants and their pursuit for safety as weapons in his geopolitical war against the West. Despite his already lackluster record in humanitarian governance, this blatant indifference for migrant safety represents an escalation in his disregard for human rights. If we are to deter other authoritarian leaders from employing such inhumane tactics in the future, then we must recognize the weaponization of migration streams as a crime against humanity and a violation of human rights.
Topic:
Military Strategy, Crimes Against Humanity, Humanitarian Crisis, and Migrants
Political Geography:
Europe and Belarus

302. Belgian Troops for Takuba: What’s at Stake?

Author:
Nina Wilen
Publication Date:
12-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
Abstract:
Belgium is once again considering a significant troop contribution to one of the French-led military operations in the Sahel region – this time Task Force Takuba. Recent years’ discussions have stimulated debate about the risks and benefits linked to such a deployment but failed to result in any political consensus. Against this background, this brief answers the questions: What? Why? and So What? Belgium is once again considering a significant troop contribution to one of the French-led military operations in the Sahel region – this time Task Force Takuba. Recent years’ discussions have stimulated debate about the risks and benefits linked to such a deployment but failed to result in any political consensus. Against this background, this brief answers the questions: What? Why? and So What?
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Military Strategy, Military Intervention, and Humanitarian Crisis
Political Geography:
Africa, Europe, Belgium, and Sahel

303. Relaunching Negotiations over Western Sahara

Author:
International Crisis Group
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
International Crisis Group
Abstract:
The fighting in Western Sahara, which broke out again in November 2020, remains of low intensity. Yet outside powers would be wrong to assume that it will not escalate. With U.S. support, the new UN envoy should pursue confidence-building measures that could facilitate negotiations.
Topic:
International Cooperation, United Nations, Military Strategy, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Africa and Sahara

304. Can Russia live with an ongoing conflict in Syria? Mapping out Trends Among Russian Foreign Policy Elites

Author:
Andrey Baklanov and Leonid Isaev
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
September 30, 2020 marked five years since the start of the Russian Aerospace Forces operation in Syria. This was the first military operation Moscow launched far from its own borders since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Today Russia is not only militarily involved but is deeply invested in the conflict as it seeks to shape the course of the negotiation process and the post-conflict socio-political development of Syria. Russia’s grand strategy in Syria continues to evolve as it assesses its actions and goals in the light of current realities. In this paper we look at how the Russian academic community and diplomatic circles see the outlook of the Syrian negotiation process. We conducted in-depth interviews with representatives of these groups in order to understand their perspective on the Geneva process, the prospects of the Astana format, and the impacts on Russia of an ongoing conflict scenario in Syria.
Topic:
Military Strategy, Hegemony, Conflict, and Intervention
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Middle East, and Syria

305. Reconciliation Initiatives in Daraa: A Testimony for Histor

Author:
Haytham Manna
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
The southern city of Daraa was the birthplace of the peaceful Syrian uprising that started in March 2012. This genuine Syrian movement was met with accusations of conspiracy and vandalism by the Government of Syria (GoS), whose aggressive responses provoked similar reactions from local population. The Houranian people (Daraa city residents), who are known for their peacefulness and sensitivity towards strangers, detested the militarization of the uprising, and they resisted the increasing presence of foreign armed elements (Hezbollah, Nusra Front, ISIS). The feeling of loss of their identity and space to outsiders was acute. The reconciliation with the GoS came about through negotiations with the Russians in mid-2018. Houran people took it as an opportunity to avoid a costly military confrontation with the GoS, restore peacefulness, and expel the foreign militias. This author was part of the negotiations and involved in deliberations at many junctures, and this testimony was prepared in consultation with the principal members of the reconciliation negotiations with the Russians and the GoS.
Topic:
Military Strategy, Conflict, Peace, and Reconciliation
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Middle East, and Syria

306. The Concept of “Forward Defence”: How Has the Syrian Crisis Shaped the Evolution of Iran’s Military Strategy?

Author:
Hamidreza Azizi
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
Over the past decade, Iranian officials have repeatedly referred to “forward defence” or “offensive defence” as the foundation of Iran’s military strategy. While the concept implies the inclusion of offensive aspects into Iran’s military strategy, which used to have an overwhelmingly defensive nature, it is also increasingly used to justify Iran’s military presence beyond its borders. This paper begins with a historical overview of the evolution of Iran’s military strategy, especially since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, showing how the concept of “deterrence” has become the cornerstone of its strategic military planning. It also discusses the crucial concept of “strategic depth”. Understanding these basic concepts is essential to be able to analyse the forward defence strategy, its main elements, and the domestic, regional, and international factors contributing to its formation. The paper also explores how the Syrian crisis has affected Iran’s military strategy in both conceptual and instrumental terms, leading to the formation and consolidation of the forward defence. Conceptually, Iran has justified its direct military presence far from its borders as necessary for confronting threats at their source before they reach Iranian territory. From an instrumental point of view, Iran’s involvement in the Syrian crisis has led to the development of Iran’s regional network of non-state allies and proxies, while adding a new layer to Iran’s deterrence vis-à-vis Israel. The main argument is that forward defence is not a new military doctrine but an evolved and updated form of “deterrence”. The paper also identifies Iran’s ballistic missile and drone programmes, its support for non-state actors across the region, and its focus on developing cyberwar capabilities as the main elements of its forward defence strategy, rooted in its perception that it is located in an increasingly insecure regional environment. Finally, the paper suggests that, for the United States to reach an agreement with Iran on these missile and regional issues, Washington and its regional allies must make reciprocal concessions to alleviate Iran’s sense of threat to its security and survival. In this case, Iran might be ready to make concessions on its allied and proxy militias in Yemen and Syria, although the more complex security and political situations in Iraq and Lebanon leave Tehran with comparably less leverage. While Iran is not expected to agree on considerably limiting its missile programme, an agreement on the range of its ballistic missiles could be achievable.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Military Strategy, Missile Defense, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Iran and Middle East

307. Reducing Military Risks through OSCE Instruments

Author:
Naomi Egel
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
CBMs for AWS would make a significant contribution to reducing the military risks posed by AWS and - equally important - are a realistic goal. Although agreement within the OSCE cannot be assured, its strong history of developing CBMs and its ability to make progress towards reducing military risk even in a climate of geopolitical tensions makes the OSCE uniquely well positioned to develop AWS CBMs. The growing proliferation of AWS and their increasing importance in military operations means that risk reduction is an urgent priority. Given the numerous challenges to arms control and cooperative security measures in other international organisations, OSCE CBMs offer one of the best opportunities for making progress in reducing the military risks of AWS. Moreover, they would provide a foundation for further governance of AWS by other international organisations. The CBMs proposed here would provide greater transparency regarding states’ capabilities and intentions regarding AWS, and in doing so, would reduce the risks of miscommunication, miscalculation and inadvertent conflict escalation that these systems pose.
Topic:
Security, Science and Technology, Military Strategy, and Peace
Political Geography:
Global Focus

308. Understanding Russia’s Endgame in Syria: A View from the United States

Author:
Mona Yacoubian
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
Inherently unstable, Russia’s “spheres of influence” endgame strategy will result in a fractured and volatile Syria. Neither Russia nor Turkey appears likely to withdraw from Syria in the near term. Iran will remain an important player, albeit without holding a territorial sphere of influence. Balancing against Moscow, Tehran will exploit opportunities where possible, deepening its influence through informal and covert efforts. In this endgame, Russia’s prickly partnership with Turkey in Syria likely will endure. As a Russian analyst noted, “Turkey and Russia need each other strategically.” While Moscow may acknowledge that Turkey’s presence in Syria is a long-term problem, Russia’s “spheres of influence” endgame strategy nonetheless accommodates the reality of a lasting Turkish presence.
Topic:
Military Strategy, Hegemony, Rivalry, and Intervention
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Middle East, and Syria

309. US-Russia interactions in Syria and the future of the conflict in 2021

Author:
Nikolay Surkov
Publication Date:
03-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
The future for Syria in 2021 looks bleak from the Russian perspective. Though the conflict entered a low-intensity phase of armed confrontations that characterised 2020 will likely continue in 2021. The temporary negotiated solution for north-western Syria reached in March 2020 is likely to hold but there exists a high probability of renewed fighting between the SAA and various Islamist groups. There will also be bickering between Russia, Turkey, Syria, and Iran due to their different visions for Idlib’s future. Tensions will likely also continue to grow in northern and north-eastern Syria, where US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces sporadically clash with pro-Turkish groups. Occasional US-Russian encounters on the ground are also highly likely in the region. Additionally, confrontations between Israel and Iran/Hezbollah forces stationed in Syria will likely continue and might escalate.
Topic:
Military Strategy, Hegemony, Conflict, and Rivalry
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Iran, Turkey, Middle East, Syria, North America, and United States of America

310. Syria and Libya’s Contributions to the Evolution of the Turkish “Forward Defence” Doctrine

Author:
Nebahat Tanriverdi Yasar
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
In the last decade, there have been considerable changes in Turkey’s regional policies, especially in terms of the increasing use of hard power. Such changes are largely in response to regional rivalry, refugee flow from Syria and the revival of Kurdish issues, as well as strained relations with Turkey’s traditional allies, such as the United States and the European Union, among other factors. In the first decade of its rule, the AKP government moved away from Turkey’s traditional approach to foreign policy by adopting soft power in its relations with the states in the Middle East region. However, following the Arab Spring, and especially 2016, the AKP government embraced a “forward defence” doctrine, reminiscent of the security policies of the 1990s. At the end of the Cold War, Turkey reoriented its defence posture around a security-oriented approach due to its geostrategic location. This defence posture was based on the belief that Turkey has an unstable but strategically important location and hence needs powerful armed forces to employ hard power to protect its interests and security. Naturally, security threat perceptions reached their peak in Turkish foreign policy and Turkey came to the brink of using military force against several states such as Greece, Cyprus and Syria. Modernisation of armed forces and development of national defence industry were among the policies adopted during this era. The forward defence doctrine is key to Turkey’s policy in Syria and Libya. Given the dominant role played by Turkey in Syria, AKP has intensified its military activities beyond the Syrian border with the aim of preventing the expansion of the YPG and advance of the Syrian army into Idlib, which would trigger a large influx of refugees. Maritime disputes between Turkey, Greece and Cyprus in the Aegean Sea and Eastern Mediterranean intertwined with geopolitical tensions and rivalry between Turkey and its regional rivals such as France, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates. In response to its regional isolation and to block these developments, Turkey signed two Memoranda of Understanding, on maritime delimitation and on security cooperation, with the UN-backed Government of National Accord (GNA) in Libya. The recent shift in Turkey’s security policy is in line with the basic principles of the AKP government’s grand strategy, which seeks to reposition Turkey as a central state in the international and regional system.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, International Cooperation, Regional Cooperation, and Military Strategy
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, Middle East, Libya, and Syria