In his new book, Yevhen Mahda identifies the causes of Russia’s hybrid aggression against Europe, focusing on conflict in Ukraine. He not only conducts historical analogies and informs the inhabitants of Europe about the dangers that the Kremlin carries, but also offers options for counteraction. The book is intended for policy-makers, specialists in the field of international relations, political scientists, and all who are not indifferent to changes in the modern world and the fate of Ukraine

This book offers a descriptive analysis of the Soviet/Russian wars in Afghanistan, Chechnya, and Georgia, as well as an in-depth exploration of the ways in which these wars are framed in the collective consciousness created by global popular culture. Russian and Western modalities of remembrance have been, and remain, engaged in a world war that takes place (not exclusively, but intensively) on the level of popular culture. The action/reaction dynamic, confrontational narratives and othering between the two “camps” never ceased. The Cold War, in many ways and contrary to the views of many others who hoped for the end of history, never really ended.

This book examines the ways in which Russia and Belarus use disinformation, "weaponised" historical narratives, and the politics of memory for domestic and foreign policy purposes, utilising these factors to justify aggressive foreign policy in defensive terms and, domestically, for legitimating local ruling elites, consolidating the states’ propaganda machines, and mobilising both societies around national power centres. Besides analysing Russian and Belarusian disinformation, geopolitical narratives, and policies, the book also assesses the effectiveness of these measures and discusses how the West can counteract the geopolitical narratives disseminated by Russia and Belarus that attempt to undermine Western democracies and weaken the resilience of its societies.

An informed modern plan for post-2020 American foreign policy that avoids the opposing dangers of retrenchment and overextension Russia and China are both believed to have "grand strategies"--detailed sets of national security goals backed by means, and plans, to pursue them. In the United States, policy makers have tried to articulate similar concepts but have failed to reach a widespread consensus since the Cold War ended. While the United States has been the world's prominent superpower for over a generation, much American thinking has oscillated between the extremes of isolationist agendas versus interventionist and overly assertive ones. Drawing on historical precedents and weighing issues such as Russia's resurgence, China's great rise, North Korea's nuclear machinations, and Middle East turmoil, Michael O'Hanlon presents a well-researched, ethically sound, and politically viable vision for American national security policy. He also proposes complementing the Pentagon's set of "4+1" pre-existing threats with a new "4+1" biological, nuclear, digital, climatic, and internal dangers.

During the last decade, 'Hybrid Warfare' has become a novel yet controversial term in academic, political and professional military lexicons, intended to suggest some sort of mix between different military and non-military means and methods of confrontation. Enthusiastic discussion of the notion has been undermined by conceptual vagueness and political manipulation, particularly since the onset of the Ukrainian Crisis in early 2014, as ideas about Hybrid Warfare engulf Russia and the West, especially in the media. Western defense and political specialists analyzing Russian responses to the crisis have been quick to confirm that Hybrid Warfare is the Kremlin's main strategy in the twenty-first century. But many respected Russian strategists and political observers contend that it is the West that has been waging Hybrid War, Gibridnaya Voyna, since the end of the Cold War. In this highly topical book, Ofer Fridman offers a clear delineation of the conceptual debates about Hybrid Warfare. What leads Russian experts to say that the West is conducting a Gibridnaya Voyna against Russia, and what do they mean by it? Why do Western observers claim that the Kremlin engages in Hybrid Warfare? And, beyond terminology, is this something genuinely new?

Whether it is the conflict in Syria, the Winter Olympics in Sochi or the crisis in Ukraine, Russia dominates the headlines. Yet the political realities of contemporary Russia are poorly understood by Western observers and policy-makers. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, dominantpolitical narratives have focused on the theme of historical progress towards democracy, and more recently, on the increasing turn towards authoritarianism, and the major obstacle posed by President Vladimir Putin to Russia's development and reform.In this highly engaging book, Andrew Monaghan explains the importance of "getting Russia right". This book reflects on the evolution of Russia studies since the end of the Cold War, offering a robust critique of the mainstream view of Russia. It goes on to place the Ukraine crisis within a broaderhistorical framework and considers the ongoing evolution in Russian domestic politics. By delving into the depths of these difficult questions, the work offers a more dynamic and complex model for interpreting Russia.Exploring in detail the relationship between the West and Russia, the book charts the development of relations and investigates causes of the increasingly obvious sense of strategic dissonance. Monaghan examines the election year 2011-12, contextualizing the protest demonstrations and addressing theresponses of the authorities, and introduces the reader to the evolving Russian body politic: both present influential figures and those who are forming the leadership and opposition of the future.This book makes a significant contribution to public policy and academic debate and is a essential reading for students and scholars of Russian politics.

This edited volume focuses on the links between the ongoing crisis in and around Ukraine, regional diversity, and the reform of decentralization. It provides in-depth insights into the historical constitution of regional diversity and the evolution of center-periphery relationships in Ukraine, the legal qualification of the conflict in Eastern Ukraine, and the role of the decentralization reform in promoting conflict resolution, as well as modernization, democratization and European integration of Ukraine. Particular emphasis lies on the securitization of both regional diversity issues and territorial self-government arrangements in terms of Russia’s support for self-proclaimed Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics. The volume captures the complexity of contemporary “hybrid” conflicts, involving both internal and external aspects, and the hybridization and securitization of territorial self-governance solutions. It thus provides an important contribution to the debate on territorial self-government and conflict resolution.

This report assesses the annexation of Crimea by Russia (February–March 2014) and the early phases of political mobilization and combat operations in Eastern Ukraine (late February–late May 2014). It examines Russia’s approach, draws inferences from Moscow’s intentions, and evaluates the likelihood of such methods being used again elsewhere.

This report considers the various possible forms of hybrid aggression in the Baltics and concludes that the major vulnerability of the Baltics is to conventional aggression.

" ... Paper provides an authoritative analysis of national security thinking in Moscow, as well as some pointed suggestions on how to improve relations between Russia and the West. To assist readers who may want more details from official documents, as opposed to the opinions of an individual scholar and parliamentarian, we have also included extracts from the current Russian Military Doctrine and National Security Concept."--Forward.