Defense and foreign policies of the global and regional actors in middle east and north Africa and its impact on the Eu’s turbulence: the cases of Syria and Yemen in 2011-2017

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

FEDERAL STATE AUTONOMOUS EDUCATIONAL

INSTITUTION FOR HIGHER EDUCATION

NATIONAL RESEARCH UNIVERSITY

HIGHER SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS

Faculty of Social Sciences

Defense and Foreign Policies of the Global and Regional Actors in Middle East and North Africa and Its Impact on the EU's Turbulence: The Cases of Syria and Yemen in 2011-2017

Zarochintcev Sergei Vyacheslavovich

master thesis

Scientific supervisor

Assistant professor

Sanjay Rajhans

Moscow 2018

Introduction

In recent years, we can see difficult situation with growing influence of modern warfare on a civilian sector. It means that states (global powers) try to use both military (or conventional) and non - conventional tools and strategies and it is very hard to divide military aggression and assault from the similar processes. Public policies have already involved in hybrid warfare and we should solve this problem in the context of use of different policies and institutions for providing global processes of liberalisation, democratisation, transparency, and globalisation. In this case it is very important to answer on the question, what is the influence of hybriity as a new characteristic (and an element of exogenous factors) of modern warfare in a turbulent world on public sphere and how we can use comprehensive public policies in the processes of globalization and democratization in the context of the new generation of war? Particularly, Middle East and North Africa today are the most difficult region with many wars and conflicts that influence on the whole development of the world. It has not only the hardest social and economic situation but huge political crisis, events of 2011 (Arab Spring) are important factors for current hybrid warfare in the region.

For this purpose we should identify changed geo-economics and security policies of regional and global powers in the context of post-Arab Spring world. The main idea of the research on the methodological level is to show differences between politics and policies and process of interpenetration for them, in according to the Lasswell's vision of policy as an important decision process. This research contains four general tasks:

1) To determine the contours of the new generation of war.

2) To identify actors of Yemeni and Syrian conflict.

3) Clarification of the hybridity as an element of globalization and its penetration inside modern warfare and global strategy.

4) To create comprehensive public policies for the regional and global security and changing global order (particularly, in migration and population spheres with implementation of global citizenship concept).

Yemeni and Syrian crisis, on the one hand, can be described in terms of hybrid warfare and use of military sources for providing security policies of regional powers - Iran and Saudi Arabia, on the other hand, there is another side of the conflict that depends from social and economic parameters. Today wars are happened not only because of foreign policy, security or sovereignty of a state, they are about statehood, governance and status of nations within states that is well explained by Edward Azar as protracted social conflict. Also, these conflicts usually have fragility of a state and ongoing revolutions as results of economic collapse and social failure. It is very symbolic that wars keep step with revolutions in its typology, the nations are becoming major actors of warfare, when opposing states try to destabilise political situation of each other using economic, informational tools with irregular and asymmetric military actions.

military geopolitical migration legal

1. Contours of the new generation of conflict

1.1 Typology of war

War is a social and political phenomenon, the special condition of society connected with sharp change of the relations between states with transition to application of the armed violence for achievement of political goals. A state of war comes from the beginning of military operations and stops with their termination. Along with armed struggle, which makes the main content of war in wartime and the previous period economic, diplomatic, ideological, information and other “non - military” means, which in military time accept more fierce character can be also applied. Wars can be subdivided:

1) on scale - depending on the number of the participating states and on spatial scope (on world, regional and local);

2) on the military-political purposes and international legal legitimacy - on fair (defensive, directed to defense of the country) and unfair wars;

3) on the applied means - with or without use of nuclear weapon.

Let it show on some examples.

1. Local war is limited with the purposes and scales from the point of view of interests of great powers and a global strategic situation. For the small countries and the victim of aggression such war becomes general. Local war is waged with participation of two or several states in borders of their territories, as a rule, with direct or indirect support of large powers.

2. Regional war is the war with participation of two or several states (groups of the states) which is conducted within the region by national or coalition forces for achievement of the important military-political purposes with application of both usual, and nuclear weapons of mass-destruction. This war can be result of escalation of local war or armed conflict and have large-scale character.

3. World war is the global armed conflict between the coalitions (the unions, blocks) of the states, covering the most part of the countries of the world and the infringing interests of all world communities or the leading powers. In world war the main world powers will set the radical military-political purposes and use for their achievement all types of the fight (armed, political, economic, ideological, information, etc.). World war can be waged on several continents, having captured number of continental and ocean (sea) military theatres and near-earth space. It will be characterized by high probability of development into nuclear war with the mass victims and destructions, catastrophic consequences for humanity.

4. Armed conflict is limited scale between the states (the interstate armed conflict) or the resisting parties within one state (internal armed conflict). Both the regular, and irregular armed formations can be involved in armed conflict. It is characterized by a high involvement and vulnerability of civilians, conducting sabotages. At the same time, war is not declared, and transition to the wartime mode is not carried out. Interstate-armed conflict can develop into local war, internal armed conflict - in civil war. Forms of armed conflict are the armed incident, the armed action, counter-terrorist operation, the border conflict. In addition, civilization approach is applied to a research of wars.

In other words, this is an armed conflict between rather isolated historical and cultural communities of ethos's, nations, people, the states united by unity of history, religion, the main values, a steady conduct of life, mentality. The civilization approach proceeding from the analysis of communication of wars with civilizations, their relations, distinctions and contradictions.Intercivilization wars are waged by the states representing concrete civilizations as civilizations, being cultural, but not political integrity, are not capable to do in what the governments, including construction of civilization army are engaged though something similar arises in the European community today. Civilizations, if it is not the certain states such as China, India and Russia, cannot prepare and wage wars, sign contracts, etc. The western sociologists allocate eight civilization wars in the past:

1) Alexander of Macedon's campaigns (4th century BC) setting as the purpose to expand the Hellenic civilization from Greece to Iran, from Egypt to India.

2) The gain of Ancient Rome, which led to creation of the huge empire.

3) Attila (443, 447--452) wars in which victories of Huns and Germans led to fall of the Roman Empire.

4) Campaigns of Muhammad and his Islamic followers (the VII--VIII centuries) which created the Arab caliphate.

5) Creation of “The Sacred Roman Empire” (middle of the 10th century);

6) Gains of Vikings (the IX--XI centuries) from Northern Europe to America;

7) Crusades (the XI--XIII centuries) which issued the Catholic Church world;

8) Hundred Years' War between England and France (1337 -- 1453).

The short review of types of wars allows us to see tendencies in formation of the mechanism of warfare that is necessary for better understanding of essence of changes in generations of wars.

1.2 Mechanism of warfare: origin and reasons

In this research the analysis of hybrid warfare was based on the most significant theories of an origin of war:

1) Concept of natural determinism.

2) Social and Darwinist theories (“zones of fight for existence”, “natural selection”).

3) Geopolitical theories (“lack” of the territory, “safety of natural borders”).

4) Psychological theories (“eternal instincts”, “an initial psychological cycle”).

5) Neomalthusian theories (“population explosion”).

6) Neoracist theories (“natural exclusiveness” of a certain race or nation).

7) Behaviouristic theories (absolutization of influence of the nature).

9) The concept of social violence (war as a determinism form), the theory of violence (war is internally inherent in society).

10) Sociohistorical theories (war as one of phases of eternal circulation, war is absolute, and the world is the relative and temporary phenomenon).

11) Social and economic theories (war as result of fight for property).

12) Socio-political theories (absolutization of a role of policy, ideology, social institutes in emergence of the situations leading to war).

13) Theories of “political realism” (fight for the power, for hegemony).

14) Theories of “national sovereignty” (the independent states, independence, sovereignty as basis of emergence of wars).

15) Theories of “ideological disagreements” (spiritual contradictions, ideological disagreements generate war).

Representatives of various philosophical schools see the reasons of wars differently - in economy, in policy, in psychology of people, in shortage of living floor space, resources, and raw materials. All these views play an important role in formation of concepts of the reasons of wars. At the heart of emergence of wars are:

1) property, inequality of people in society, aspiration of the person to property;

2) hostility of people, rivalry, mistrust, thirst of glory are the main reasons for wars;

3) war grows from policy;

4) emotions and will of certain people.

The category “source of war” was always tool of politicians and partly military. A source of development is the contradiction (from the dialectic point of view). Nowadays, most often it is about the use of a source as reason synonym by search of responsible for initiation of war. A source and the reason are not identical concepts. The category “source” focuses attention to entities of a subject or phenomenon, their origin, i.e. about emergence for the first time as that. The category “reason” means emergence of a concrete look (version) of this subject or phenomenon, i.e. it is about emergence of a subject or phenomenon again, in each case. At the same time, “source” and “reason” are the interconnected concepts. The source can be considered as the root, deep cause of change and development of a subject or the phenomenon. The source and the reason are components of the uniform general mechanism of relationships of cause and effect. Basic distinctions between a source and the reason the following:

a) the source always precedes the reason;

b) the source is connected with essence of a thing, and the reason - with its contents (the source leads to emergence of necessary properties and communications, and the reason only alters all properties and communications, including essential, without eliminating, however, the last);

c) action of the reasons is connected with change of quantity, and the source generates new quality;

d) time having arisen, the source exists constantly together with a subject or the phenomenon (at least while there is a source, there is also a subject), and the reason can be absent (if there is no change and development of a subject or in certain conditions of emergence of a subject does not occur though in principle it not it is excluded);

e) action of a source to a lesser extent depends on specific conditions, than action of the reasons. At the same time, the source and the reason have relative character: the same phenomenon can be at the same time the cause of change and development of one subject or the reason of another. It occurs when action of the reason leads not only to quantitative, but also to high-quality changes (to jump) as to result of accumulation of quantitative changes.

The analysis of contradictions allows to identify sources and reasons of wars in a complex. Contradictions are considered usually in philosophical concepts as the sources, internal impulses moving the beginnings of any development. G. Hegel considered a contradiction as fundamental principle of any development. The contradiction acts as a source of emergence and development of the phenomenon of objective reality including war as social reality. Emergence of a source of wars needs to be considered as a result of all system of the public relations. The basic concepts opening the mechanism of emergence of wars are:

-- contradictions;

-- sources;

-- reasons;

-- prerequisites;

-- occasions;

-- conditions,

-- driving forces;

-- responsibles.

The source of wars works and functions not directly, and only through certain people or their groups. The source of wars can be found only in actions and acts of people, in activity of social communities and institutes, in communications and relationship, which developed in society. Activity of people in its various manifestations and the relations in human community generate the reasons of concrete wars. If there is a source of wars, therefore, there is also a danger (opportunity) of emergence (unleashing) of war. However, in concrete time point cannot be immediate causes and conditions for war, i.e. the basic possibility of war does not mean its actual (valid) emergence (beginning) in any concrete time point yet. As a source of wars it is possible to consider objectively existing, constant, deepest contradictions lying in the basis of dissociation of mankind (first of all, economic dissociation), capable under certain conditions to generate the reasons which are directly generating wars and armed conflicts. In this case social, political and ideological contradictions are also important in the analysis of process of emergence of war, but they are secondary and generated by action of a source of war.

They act only as activators of concrete wars, when for this purpose there is a basic reason, resulting from existence of the general source of wars. This ineradicable, objectively existing contradiction between individual and collective in the person (in wider plan - between biological and social) constantly generates war. This contradiction at first led to reduction of armed conflicts in primitive society (overweight collective, social), and then - to formation of class society and emergence of the wars characteristic of this era (overweight individual, biological). Contradictory needs of various separated groups of humankind (tribes, classes, layers) that generate war in general and serve as the most important reason of emergence of each concrete war, including modern wars. Distinctions of interests at the separated groups of people are imposed on shortage of resources (food, clothes, etc.). There is a contradiction between these groups, which cannot be authorized without application of violent means. The war source (as well as a source in general) is directly connected with its essence, and the reasons - with the concrete content and concrete types and kinds of wars. The known formula ofK. Clausewitz, that war is continuation of policy by other means, plays a serious role and today. He considered that war as the social phenomenon is multidimensional, it has many sides and cuts. The most important of them are:

a) consideration of war through the contrast - the world, its ratio with the world;

b) judgment of war through wider concept, i.e. through society, as its peculiar, specific state;

c) consideration of war through history of development of humanity as one of phases of social development;

d) the analysis of war through concrete system of the contradictions, conditions and occasions (including political) which are directly leading to its emergence.

War can be considered as: 1) the means used by politicians for achievement of the purposes; 2) armed struggle of two and more resisting social subjects; 3) a certain condition of society in all its measurements which is characterized by a dominant of the armed violence and the ways and means corresponding to it.

War and process of its emergence are at least subordinated to action of regularities of policy, armed struggle and society in their interrelation and interdependence. Let us give the main definitions of war which allow to provide knowledge of its essence:

1. War is the large-scale application of the armed violence in political goals, connected with transfer of economy and all life of society to a military harmony, broad and universal mobilization of the population to armed forces, expansion and reduction to full fighting readiness all of them groups both the legal act of the announcement of a state of war heads of states and legislative authorities.

2. War is a special conflictual condition of society, the contradictory public relations at which political goals of the states, the people and separate social groups and communities are reached by active counteraction with massive application of means of the armed violence.

3. War is the form of social violence, which is implemented in activity of the states and social communities.

Thus, it is possible to select several significant characteristics of war:

a) war is the social phenomenon, rather independent area of public life, specific social reality;

b) presence not less than two subjects with the opposite purposes and tasks, and also a lack of certain resources for achievement of the planned purposes;

c) existence of means of the armed violence, an opportunity and readiness of their application for achievements of the objectives and the solution of problems of subjects (the states, social communities);

d) mass and large-scale application of means of the armed violence;

e) active counteraction of subjects each other;

e) legal act of the announcement of a state of war heads of states and legislative authorities.

Wars can be classified and systematized on various bases of causality and presented in the form of various schemes and models. Level of the general, or radical, reasons. They are similar for all wars irrespective of specific conditions of unleashing, features of various stages of historical development of society. These reasons lie in society, in society per se, in each specific person. On the essence war is the phenomenon social. From here, the general (radical) reasons of wars need to be looked for in society in general and,firstly, in policy and economy of the state. At the same time, it is necessary to consider psychological, ethnic, national, religious and other factors. Moreover, their action (a source and root causes) is shown in any war. These reasons can be connected with contradictory results of activity of people in limited living conditions of human society. The following level of causality is specific, or special. They express a dialectic ratio of this society and specific historical conditions. Both the war source, and the general reasons of wars exist constantly. However, wars are not inevitable, fatal. Only when maturing the reason to a certain crisis situation works, gives an irreversible impulse of emergence of war. The concrete situation, expressing degree of sharpness and a maturity of root causes of war, is capable to lead directly to war or allows avoid it. The specific reasons of wars represent a peculiar manifestation of a source and root causes in this situation, in these historical conditions.

Actions of persons, social groups, special circumstances, sometimes even the casual moments are capable to brake or accelerate, weaken or strengthen action of sources, root and specific causes. The general reasons are shown in single - in activity of political leaders, heads of the states. The single reasons serve as a further specification of the general and special reasons of war. Both the general (radical), and the specific (special) and private reasons of wars work not in itself, not separately, and in total, in unity. Their ratio and manifestation in each concrete war is always peculiar and unique that allows tell about a specific set (package) of the reasons of each separate war. Manifestation of all groups of the reasons is expressed in activity of the socio-political forces interested in war. Contradictions in which an opportunity and inevitability of concrete war is embodied are not resolved and do not arise by itself, automatically. Therefore, wars do not arise spontaneously, and are consciously prepared by certain social forces. It is accepted to call these social groups and groups driving forces of war or responsible for initiation of war. Let us note that the source of war is probably much wider, more large-scale. It characterizes a condition of society in general, but not its any part, even if also the most aggressive. The source of war is connected with war emergence in general, per se, i.e. with its essence, and influence of immediate causes - with scales, scope, existential characteristics, the number of use of means of armed struggle, i.e. with the content of war. Sources and the causes of war should be distinguished not only from the social forces, interested in war, but also from reasons for initiation of war. It is known that the occasion represents external, often casual event, which directly precedes other event, does possible its emergence, but does not generate and does not define it. Usually, the occasion is used by social forces for direct initiation of war. Moreover, as an occasion the pretext represented as a prerequisite or motive can be considered often, and it is frequent also justifications of an aggressor. The war cause represents a circumstance (a case, the event) used for initiation of war. As an occasion, the aggressive states quite often use specially prepared provocations (we will remember Sarajevo, the Sudetes, Gulf of Tonkin incident).

Any war is generated not only by the reasons, but certain conditions, set of the circumstances. Fundamental difference of the reasons from conditions of emergence of war consists that the reasons possess the making action and define war, its birth and existence. Conditions (as well as an occasion) do not possess the making action, they create favorable or unprofitable alignment of forces to start war, more or less convenient alignment of forces for conducting combat operations, etc. The reasons of wars have deeper, steady character, and conditions -- are more mobile and changeable. The reasons determine the main content of process of emergence of war, and a condition -- its concrete form. The reasons are actively operating factors, directly hold the investigation (war), and conditions serve as material for emergence of this investigation. It is possible to carry the following to number of the conditions providing preservation of possibility of wars:

-- existence of large groups of armed forces in various states;

-- the certain appliances prepared for warfare;

-- readiness and ability of economy to fulfill military requirements;

-- existence of necessary human resources;

-- presence of the social forces interested in incitement of war.

Conditions of emergence of wars on value and role can be necessary and sufficient. Only when the reasons of wars connect to all set of conditions, war becomes as fact. Set of all conditions for action of the reasons of wars also act as sufficient. The last just also defines transformation of a possibility of war into reality. Having the general nature, conditions and the reasons of war definitely correspond with each other. The reasons can enter set of conditions, and conditions can turn into the reasons. All other circumstances, which create an opportunity for action of the reasons, will be conditions. In that case, when the condition gains big stability and independence, it can become the reason. Conditions and the reasons, unlike an occasion, having caused war, do not disappear completely.

War grows from politics. In a general view, politics and war are connected by the fact that politics defines the purposes, means, ways, armed struggle scales, the list of participants, an orientation and the nature of preparation of the state and society for concrete war, social character, features of action of army and all population, the front and the back. As for economic factor in war emergence, the property, its shortcoming, and aspiration to receive it is the major incentive motive, one of the main reasons for preparation and initiation of war as much as possible. It should be noted, that the economy influences the organization, forms and means of armed struggle, strategy, expeditious art and tactics. It exerts impact on technical equipment of armed forces, defines the course and the result of war, its scales, duration and consequences. In what consists and how the war emergence mechanism operates? This mechanism represents interaction of objective and subjective factors. Objective factors (sources and root causes) in itself automatically do not generate war, and create only an objective possibility of its emergence. The active beginning putting the war preparation mechanism in action - a subjective factor, namely: the activity of certain persons, social groups and groups caused by objective factors, societies in general as subject on preparation and initiation of war. As a result of such activity, the centers of war, a condition and reasons for its beginning are created. The center of war is the state (the coalition of the states) from which the threat of war proceeds for other countries or the world in general. At the same time, there can be several centers of war or the military conflicts of various degree of relevance and danger. The mechanism of formation of the center of war is connected with transformation of economic, moral, political, scientific, technical and actually military preparation for war into the main direction and content of activity of the state (coalition). Such state (coalition) gradually turns into “the state of war” and has special characteristic of it:

-- militarization of public life;

-- excessive growth of scales and rates of production of arms;

-- course towards creation of military superiority over the potential opponent;

-- political reaction;

-- preparation for war, strengthening brain washing of public opinion within the country and outside;

-- violation of international legal norms;

-- provoking of the military conflicts and aspiration to an aggravation of a military-political situation.

“The state of war” purposely creates the tension centers, provokes the military conflicts and involves in them other people, proceeding from the national interests and political goals.

The source creates potential, possible danger of emergence of war, but it does not work, does not function directly. The source of wars causes war through the reasons and by means of the reasons. In the general view of the reason of war as the major element of the mechanism of its emergence is represented by the phenomenon, processes or events which are directly generating war and preceding it on time. They are necessary conditions, a prerequisite and a basis of emergence of war as specific social reality of rather independent phenomenon of public life. Proceeding from the factorial theory of development of society and the idea of multicausality of war, it is necessary to talk not about the reasons or group (set) of the reasons of war, and about their system (set). Classification of the reasons of wars can be based on various factors and levels of the reasons of wars:

Variant 1: 1) general (radical) - similar for all wars; 2) specific (special) - for a certain group of typical wars; 3) single (private) - unique for separate wars.

Variant 2: 1) main or radical (economic basis), characteristic of all wars; 2) direct (political, ideological), inherent to a certain historical era or even period; 3) additional, individual.

Thus, the mechanism of emergence of war can be considered from two points of view (in two measurements) and is presented in the following form:

a) source of wars - of the reason of wars - conditions - occasions and pretexts - subjects - activity of subjects (including political, economic and actually military) - the decision - war;

b) source of wars - source of military danger - the war center - the tension center - armed conflict (an incident, an action, provocation) - war.

In this case, we deal with the classical mechanism of emergence of war, which explain its development throughout last generations. At the same time, today under the influence of processes of globalization, increase of the international competition, migration we see deleting of borders between war and non-military means. Many characteristics of war become less urgent, though, international law keeps silence. It is possible to tell with confidence, that humanitytoday observe development of a new generation of warfare.

1.3 Modern warfare

Last seventy years we live without big wars that is natural result of thr World wars and formation of a new international system. The possession of nuclear weapon constrains the world powers from conducting operations of strategic scale, promotes development of other receptions and ways of armed struggle, new forms of battle. Events of last decades show us that today we observe not extinction of wars, but their evolution, change of intrinsic filling and display forms. In other words, there is a fundamental change of character of wars: socially - political and military - strategic characteristics.

1.4 The philosophical bases

In the fundamental work «Philosophy of War» A. E. Snesarev puts forward the thesis, some kind of law, on a continuity of wars. It is necessary to answer not only questions of how to be at war, but also why to be at war and for what. Approximate and practical answers to these points are formulated in last edition of the Military doctrine of the Russian FederationВоенная доктрина Российской Федерации, «Российская газета», 30 декабря 2014.. Particularly, the explanation of the reasons of possible wars is resulted in sub items 9, 10, 12, 13, 14 through definition of the basic military dangers and threats. From the philosophical point of view, as it is represented to me, the specified reasons lie in a plane of one main problem - increasing rupture between scientifically - technical progress of a society and it spiritually - moral, cultural development. As a whole, this point is developed today by various geopolitical concepts: from Neomarxist theories of dependence to theories of “rich North” and “poor South”, “world center” and “world periphery”. If to consider «systematic variables»Rose, Gideon. «Neoclassical Realism and Theories of Foreign Policy», World Politics, 51 (October 1998), pp. 144 - 172. neoclassical realism, for example, perceptions, sensations and intentions of the states applying for world influence we will receive «strengthening of a global competition, intensity in various areas of intergovernmental and inter-regional interaction, rivalry of valuable orienting points and development models, instability of processes of economic and political development at global and regional levels against the general complication of the international relations … redistribution of influence in favour of the new centres of economic growth and a political attraction» П. 9 Военной доктрины Российской Федерации.. And last analytical materials Pedro Olinto, Kathleen Beegle, Carlos Sobrado, and Hiroki Uematsu, The State of the Poor: Where Are the Poor, Where Is Extreme Poverty Harder to End, and What Is the Current Profile of the World's Poor? The World Bank, Economic Premise, October 2013 (Number 125); A Measured Approach to Ending Poverty and Boosting Shared Prosperity: Concepts, Data, and the Twin Goals, The World Bank, 2015; Staying the Course, World Bank East Asia and Pacific Economic Update, October 2015. [6] of the World bank in the empirical calculations confirm our well-founded fears, showing objective character of arising economic contradictions. For example, the fast-growing countries of East Asia and Pacific region, providing forward growth of gross national product at level 6,8 - 7 % in 2014 and 4,3 % in 2015 (and increasing the share in world gross domestic product), on - former remain one of the poorest on many indicators Staying the Course, World Bank East Asia and Pacific Economic Update, October 2015. P. XVII - XX.. Moreover, for variety of the countries there is a danger of hit in “Malthusian trap”Законы истории: Математическое моделирование и прогнозирование мирового и регионального развития / Отв. ред. А. В. Коротаев, Ю. В. Зинькина. Изд. стереотип. - М.: Издательство ЛКИ, 2014. С. 60 - 84. that is not so characteristic for the developed countries. Thus, rupture between “center” and “periphery” reaches level of insoluble contradictions. In view of activity of the USA in different regions through «navigational freedom» (FON - Freedom of Navigation) and providing Pacific partnership (Trans - Pacific Partnership) and growing ambitions of the Peoples Republic of China on domination in Southern - the Chinese sea, it is quite possible to conclude ideas of the economic union that, despite all assurances of authorities of the states, all of them can get so called “Thucidides trap”. It is rather remarkable, what exactly A.E.Snesarev in domestic military thought has formulated for the first time understanding of the reasons of war and problems of military command, when wrote that the modern strategist should be both the military man, and the politician, both the economist, and the financier, both the all-round technician, and the persevering propagandistСнесарев А. Е. Гримасы стратегии / Афганские уроки: Выводы для будущего в свете идейного наследия А. Е. Снесарева. - М.: Военный университет, Русский путь, 2003. С. 293 - 301.. This approach logically continues A.A.Svechin ideas about establishment under strategical economic base instead of former geometrical or spatial. Really, historical process confirms today theses of century prescription of our outstanding thinkers. Today's seats of tension bare deep socially - economic contradictions of social development spaces of an antagonism: information, stock market, trade relations and the international networks of communications.

Analyzing last wars and structuring them on several generations, we thereby allocate the most intrinsic lines inherent in their character. Today's economic and financial crises interfaced to use of new technologies of indirect action in aggregate with special understanding of value of wars at the given stage of development of a society and generate contours of forthcoming wars. More precisely, throughout last several decades we observe separate displays of such wars together with application of “traditional” armed forces. For this reason, it is extremely important as it is possible to reorient more effectively state defense, according to new calls and to develop, on the one hand, receptions and ways of wars of new generation, to give them the formalized character, and with another - to provide effective protection against similar technologies from other states.

1.5 Military and strategic characteristics

As it appears from materials of mass media, the Ministry of Defense of Russia sped up recently work on carrying out of basic researches in sphere of counteraction to terrorism and extremism, economic safety of the countryhttp://www.kommersant.ru/doc/2753508. Modern threats demand actual answers, which should not be reduced only to army “internal function”, and changes of approaches to understanding of modern problems of military and operative art, strategy and tactics concern. Reconsideration of approaches to “to the higher doctrine about war” (as named A.E. Snesarev philosophy of war and the higher areas of military art and strategy), based on comprehension of inevitability of its most fact, leads us to thought that conducting wars does not provide in a due measure of national interests. Our visible military theorist G.S. Isserson fairly marked that all experience of last wars is rich in the tactical relation, hides under cover of uncertainty genuine character of the future operationИссерсон Г. С. Эволюция оперативного искусства. М.: Государственное военное издательство Наркомата обороны Союза ССР, 1937. С. 9.. This thesis is quite actual and now.

First of all, the space of an antagonism of the states has changed. Actual geographical characteristics, features of a landscape of district continue to influence only tactical level, in strategic, global scale of war are conducted on absolutely new “fields”. Most significant of them are informational and communicational technologies, financially - economic sphere and international trade. Such essential changes of ontological characteristics of war are connected with acceleration of scientifically - technical progress and perfection of means of defense and attack. An important point here is also change of a role of concentration at carrying out of military operations as it follows from F. M.Morz and J. E. Kimbell researchМорз Ф. М., Кимбелл Дж. Е. Методы исследования операций. М.: Издательство Советское радио, 1956. С. 148 - 172., which rather actual and today. Authors, using the equations of Lanchester, show how it is possible to use methods of mathematical modelling with reference to the analysis of military operations and policies. Value of the given approach, despite special reservations of use of the differential equations, consists in possibility of monitoring of operations, proceeding from the set characteristics. In other words, laws of Lanchester allow to define, how there was a development of operations if conditions of conducting these operations, defined by the accepted characteristics, remained invariable. By way of illustration, we will result the following table:

Table 1

Lanchester'slinearlaw	Lanchester'ssquarelaw
dn/dT = -1/(1+E), dn/dT = -E/(1+E), m = m?-T/(1+E), n = n?-TE/(1+E), dn/dm = E, n?-n = E(m?-m).	dm/dt = (-n/(1+E)ЧG(t), dn/dt = (-mE/(1+E)ЧG(t), dm/dn = n/mE, n?2-n2 = E(m?2-m2).

The linear law shows us that armed forces of two belligerent parties are equivalent, if the relation of initial quantity of their battle units to equally parity of losses E. Hence, the concentration of forces does not bring side benefits. At the same time, as a result of arms evolution (in particular, creations of long-range fire-arms) we cannot divide battle between armies into individual battles any more (that was characteristic especially for a feudal stage) as each participant of battle can deliver fire on any opponent. Therefore, as a time variable in the square-law law of Lanchester uses serial number of all battle, supposing that in t - an ohm battle one fighter of the dark blue party can put out of action on the average (E/1+E) ЧG (t) fighters of the red party, and one fighter of the red party on the average (1+E) ЧG (t) fighters of the dark blue party. Then we see advantages of a concentration of forces as effective force of each of the parties is proportional to the efficiency of the weapon taken in the first degree, and a square of quantity of the fighters participating in battle.

Thus, it is obvious that the importance of a concentration of forces at a certain stage of historical development is not a constant, battle becomes more important that means not only defeat possibility one participant of any number of opponents by means of the modern weapon, but also increase of a role of other forms and ways of struggle. Occurrence of new technologies and receptions of indirect influence demands considerable reconsideration of a question on concentration with the account of actual realities. Namely, there is a question on a parity of combatant forces of the battling parties (i.e. those m and n). If Morz and Kimbell tried to correlate approximately the battle ships and armies, submarines and planes before us, there is the challenge consisting in comparison of actual military forces and economic information. The decision of the given problem just also is directed on judgement of “irregular military operations”, “hybrid wars” or “unlimited military operations” (as in the military doctrine of the Peoples Republic of China) which today, besides religious and political aspectsАрзуманян Р. В. Стратегия иррегулярной войны: теория и практика применения. Теоретические и стратегические проблемы концептуализации, религиозные и военно-политические отношения в операционной среде иррегулярных военных действий / Под общ. ред. А. Б. Михайловского. - М.: АНО ЦСОиП, 2015., include means of informational and economic warfare as well as the state propaganda and brain washing. It is quite right noticed, that “irregular actors use hybrid approaches, mixing irregular tactics, conventional combat training and discipline, hi-tech weapons systems, terrorism and criminal activity for achievement of objects in view and problems”Арзуманян Р. В. Стратегия иррегулярной войны: теория и практика применения. Теоретические и стратегические проблемы концептуализации, религиозные и военно - политические отношения в операционной среде иррегулярных военных действий / Под общ. ред. А. Б. Михайловского. - М.: АНО ЦСОиП, 2015.C. 277..

In the fundamental work “War on a Sea” admiral and commander I. M.Kapitanets, besides military - sea questions, described classification of wars. Really, allocation generation of wars on a basis of formations the approach quite corresponds to a course of historical process and helps us to track occurrence of new ways of struggle at changes of economic basis. At the same time, latest developments testify the change of the sixth generation of wars, which can lead further to structural shift in the phenomenon of war. Defining the basic lines of the sixth generation of wars, I. M.Kapitanetsabsolutely fairly marks prevailing value of systems of the high-precision weaponКапитанец И. М. Война на море. Актуальные проблемы развития военно-морской науки. - М.: Вагриус, 2001. - Гл.II., which application we can observe nowadays in Syria. Last trends in the field of receptions and ways of struggle use of means of indirect action concerning information and financially - economic spheres. We should investigate especially a question of influence of share institutes on national defence. As shows experiment of the Moscow stock exchange, the damage from crash of certain financial indicators is quite comparable to rout of the whole army. It is remarkable that the western military thought welcomes for a long time use of economic and financial receptions of struggle on global arena. Such known American commanders as James Mattis and Stanley McChrystal after resignation in their works openly write that armed forces of the USA should provide interests of businessMattis, James. «A New American Grand Strategy», Defining Ideas, February 26, 2015; McChrystal, Stanley. Team of Teams: New Rules of Engagement for a Complex World, 2015.. It is necessary to notice that financially - economic means of strife are used without simultaneous application of receptions of information war. Such situation is connected with full legal uncertainty concerning an admissibility of application of indirect influence. Danger irregular military operations interfaced elements of economic and information war. There is no any international legal regulation, but there are many works of CCD COE and other institutions of NATO that provide us with researches in cyber - security and non-traditional spheres of a battlePodings K., Stinissen J., Maybaum M. 2013 5th International Conference on Cyber Conflict: Proceedings. NATO CCD COE Publications, 2013)..

Thus, it is quite possible to approve that today we observe formation of essentially new approach to conducting war, which will define a geopolitical picture of the future. The interactive library guidebook of the NATO characterize approaches for understanding of ways of conducting of hybrid wars, described as uncertain, unconventional, nonlinear, political, informational, asymmetric, irregularhttp://www.natolibguides.info/hybridwarfare.

1.6 Administrative, organizational and geopolitical conclusions

Active use of hybrid ways of conducting wars demands the special organisation of defense of the state, process of acceptance of strategic decisions and accurate geopolitical policy-making. First of all, a distinctive feature of new generation of wars is its conducting in uncertainty of space: at decision-making military - political command and an estimation of possible counteraction.

Situation analysis is well described by our experts - foreign affairs specialistsПримаковЕ. М., ХрусталёвМ. А. Ситуационные анализы. Методика проведения. Очерки текущей политики. Выпуск 1. М.: Научно - образовательный форум по международным отношениям, МГИМО МИД России, 2006., it is necessary to improve its formalized systems of the analysis of the data with application of possibilities National Center of Defense of the Russian Federation. Its realization on a constant and continuous basis for the prevention of threats for security will be distinctive feature of the given analysis with a view of military management. We will allocate analysis stages:

· Realization of round-the-clock monitoring of world conditions with use of information technology on two blocks: military - political, financially - economic;

· Allocation of potentially dangerous (“strange”) situations from the general file on the basis of the developed criteria and schemes - typologies on each block separately;

· The analysis of dangerous situations in a complex and their differentiation on risk groups (risk - orientated approach), an establishment for groups of risk of modes of constant control with increase in its periodicity in process of risk growth; in case of the termination (intensity recession) situations there is a reduction of periodicity of its tracing to gradual transfer in a mode harmless/irrelevant;

· Selection of situations of limiting danger, the immediate report to the Chief National Center of Defense of the Russian Federation with the subsequent reports to the Chief of the Joint Staff and the Minister of Defense in process of a deterioration in the situation;

· Decision-making by the Supreme commander in chief on measures of reaction after the report of the Minister of Defense;

· Carrying out of complex operation of advancing influence on a crisis.

Important elements of the given process are the choice of the most suitable strategy and interaction process. During process of decision-making each subject should start with the presented quantitative characteristics of a situation, which probably describes in a matrix kind within the limits of target calculated models. It is necessary to organize such system of interaction between National Center of Defense of the Russian Federation and other bodies to provide uninterrupted reception of the financial, political, economic and statistical information for realization of the high-grade analysis with a view of state defense.

1.7 Some strategic charasteristics of hybrid threats

Recently, despite the lack of large-scale world wars, we can observe their evolution, change of character and forms of manifestation: socially - political and strategic characteristics. In this regard, the phenomenon of hybrid threats about which it is quite a lot told both in domestic, and in foreign military thought is represented actual. Moreover, hybrid ways of war more and more get into separate regulations of NATO, defining this phenomenon as part of the military doctrine of the block.

In the Declaration of 2014 following the results of the summit of NATO, member states in the Wales (NATO Wales Summit Declaration) DETERMINED hybrid methods as “wide enough number of the obvious and latent military men, the semi military and civil measures applied in a uniform complex plan”. It is obvious, that the made determination is rather approximate and more likely puts before us set of questions, than gives answers to them. However, the subsequent analysis of separate documents of the block, statements of its management within the limits of a meeting of Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the countries of the NATO in December 2015 allows to allocate some trends in the renewed strategy of the NATO concerning hybrid threats. Particularly, interesting thesis about a simultaneous combination of conventional and non-conventional means of an antagonism as characteristics of hybrid threatNATO countering the hybrid threat, NATO Act, 23 September 2011.. Really, if to consider a phenomenon of a hybrid antagonism in a historical context, perhaps, it is possible to agree with such approach with reference to conflicts of the last century. F.Hofman Frank G. Hoffman, Conflict in the XXI Century: The Rise of Hybrid Warfare.gives us exampes of the Irish revolts 1919-1920 -s, actions of Mojaheds in Afghanistan, the summer company of Israel against Hezbollah in 2006. At the same time, development of hybrid methods of a battle sees in two aspects. Firstly, use of the given mechanisms will occur under the state control as basic subject of a world order. Secondly, conventional means will reduce the share in a general kit of hybrid methods. It is remarkable that the western military doctrine fulfils moving of great strengths on a long distance.

...