The implications of the hybrid war on the geopolitical pillars of the parties involved. The case of the occupation and annexation of the Crimea from Russia.

Postgraduate Thesis uoadl:2337655 889 Read counter

Unit:
Κατεύθυνση Γεωπολιτική Ανάλυση, Γεωστρατηγική Σύνθεση και Σπουδές Άμυνας και Διεθνούς Ασφάλειας
Library of the Faculties of Political Science and Public Administration, Communication and Mass Media Studies, Turkish and Modern Asian Studies, Sociology
Deposit date:
2018-01-14
Year:
2018
Author:
Katsonis Loukas
Supervisors info:
Ιωάννης Θ. Μάζης, Καθηγητής, Τμήμα Τουρκικών Σπουδών & Σύγχρονων Ασιατικών Σπουδών, ΕΚΠΑ.
Original Title:
Οι επιπτώσεις του υβριδικού πολέμου στους γεωπολιτικούς πυλώνες των εμπλεκομένων μερών. Η περίπτωση της κατάληψης και προσάρτησης της Κριμαίας από την Ρωσία.
Languages:
Greek
Translated title:
The implications of the hybrid war on the geopolitical pillars of the parties involved. The case of the occupation and annexation of the Crimea from Russia.
Summary:
This bachelor's thesis concerns the allegedly novel method of hostilities, the so-called hybrid warfare, which achieves results without the use of extensive violence but by the use of technological, psychological, communicative and other covert coercive methods.
Obviously, the effects of the geopolitical agent in question, of the hybrid warfare, that is, affect the pillars of power of the parties involved, usually in an asymmetrical way: This is not a zero sum game because the damage of one does not necessarily equal the benefit of the other. In order to reliably study these effects, the methodology of Geopolitical Systemic Analysis was used as described by Dr. Ioannis Th. Mazis in his book "Meta-Theoretical Analysis of International Relations and Geopolitics" and in other of his texts.
For this work to be not only theoretical, it was considered appropriate to use the relatively recent example of hybrid warfare in the Crimea, a peninsula that until March 2014 was part of the territory of Ukraine and, after Russia's aggressive actions, was annexed to Russian Federation.
Thus, both the geopolitical system, i.e. the Russian-Ukrainian complex, and its subsystems, namely Russia, Ukraine and the Crimea, are considered separately. We are also studying the potential dynamics in the hyper-system, in this case, the EU, the US, Russia and Turkey.
The initial losses of Ukraine are obvious: It was defeated in war, lost ground and population, and thousands of its citizens were subjected to violence. However, when the war in the east is over, Ukraine will be more homogeneous and more committed to its goals. Politically it will be more democratic and pro-Western as the pro-Soviet South-Eastern populations will be controlled or gone. So, at some point, the next Ukrainian governments will be able to implement the necessary reforms and move faster towards the EU and other international institutions. The Ukrainian economy will then be more open to foreign direct investment and will improve significantly.
Russia's profits are also obvious: Winning a lossless war, and land consolidation˙ reinforcing its international standing and its perceived ability to intervene˙ improvement of the internal political climate and consolidation of the regime. However, nothing comes at no cost. For example, in 2013, the Ukrainian government distributed through the state budget about $ 5 billion in the Crimea and five other provinces in the east. Now that money should be given by the Russian budget, further exacerbating its deficits.
Also, although Russia has a range of tools to exert regional influence, support for separatist movements remains its strongest weapon. But by interrupting internationally recognized states and deploying troops in breakaway regions, Moscow is burdening the Russian economy and gathering international criticism. Worst of all, gradual separatist movements reduce Russia's overall influence as the non-breakaway regions of the states that are a Russian target, and along with other former Soviet republics that fear that at some point there will be their turn, they seek the security can only find themselves in Western institutions.
The use of hybrid warfare provides three very important advantages over other forms of hostilities. First, it is much less bloody, which has multiplier benefits for the economic, political and moral position of that acting party. Second, with the use of relatively few resources, it achieves comparatively enormous results, particularly at the commercial - financial and cyber - security levels. Third, it remains below the limit of the actions under international law, and so the attacker of the hybrid war avoids significant international reactions and maintains an international legitimacy.
Modern states, in order to be safe, should be protected from espionage, propaganda and misinformation that undermine their foundations. More strategically, they should anticipate future threats and build the appropriate defenses to deal with them. At the same time, they should prepare countermeasures that are equivalent to threats and within the framework of international legitimacy.
Main subject category:
Social, Political and Economic sciences
Keywords:
Hybrid war, geopolitical power pillars, Systemic Geopolitical Analysis, geopolitical synthesis, geopolitical trends
Index:
No
Number of index pages:
0
Contains images:
Yes
Number of references:
33
Number of pages:
61
Λουκάς-Γ.-Κατσώνης-Διπλωματική-ΕΚΠΑ.pdf (2 MB) Open in new window